emann said:
I find it kind of strange how the only complaints about S30V that I've read are on this one forum.
Bladeforums is one of the less maker biased forums, you can't seriously consider it an unbiased persepective in forums which are run by makers selling the material and *shocker* aggressively promote the material they are selling as being optimal/superior.
First remove all unsupported comments made by people selling the material, next remove those from people who never have a problem with anything, next remove those from people who never have a problem with the maker/manufacturer of the S30V blades they used.
The list is a lot shorter now.
A Dogs Best Friend said:
As far as I'm concerned, the stuff is great. Don't pay attention to any non-sense to the contrary.
I recently sent a S30V blade to Jeff Clark who is one of the most knowledge people on the forums in regards to sharpening. His perspective on it supported one of the common positions in regards to obtainable sharpness. Calling such comments "nonsense" just underwrites your own arguement.
Stockman said:
I struggle to believe that Benchmade, Spyderco, Chris Reeves, Strider and the list goes on and on, have not done their research, tests and trials and have all got it wrong by using S30V. !!
A list can also be made of makers that didn't switch, Spyderco still offers other steels, they didn't replace the entire line, and if you do some reading you can find people who prefer the BG-42 Sebenza's, VG-10 Spyderco's, etc. .
some magazine article promoting buck said:
S30V's performance can vary widely depending upon the heat treat.
This is true of any steel, it should be less of a factor with S30V based on how it was promoted, not more. This type of arguement is nonsense because it attempts to underwrite the value of complaints as a whole. Be specific and state that certain companies have lower QC in regards to heat treating and then it would be meaningful, but vague statements are useless fo rinformation content and just inflammatory at best.
-Cliff