Spyderco vs. Benchmade m4 Which Is Better

C

clockman

Joined
Jan 14, 2009
Messages
3,176
Guys who have BMs and Spydercos in cpm m4...which company makes the best

m4 steel?

Ive got a 760 thats been Kreined and a BM gaucho le cpm m4 and Im not that

impressed with BM cpm m4 steel. Is Spyderco cpm m4 any better?

Which cpm m4 holds an edge better and longer...BM or Spydie?
 
Last edited:
Benchmade lists theirs at 60-62HRC, and Spyderco lists 58-63HRC. Take that for what it's worth.
 
Gator97 said:
58-63? That's way to big for RC range?
Click to expand...

That's kinda what I thought, but finding Rockwell ratings on their site is next-to-impossible. That was taken from their info on the Mule Team sprint runs, talking about the M4 version. Info I found on the Gayle Bradley says ~64HRC, but that's from an earlier post on here, not from Spyderco themselves.
 
You need a Gayle Bradley! Then you can make a back to back comparison.
 
Scott Neelan said:
Benchmade lists theirs at 60-62HRC, and Spyderco lists 58-63HRC. Take that for what it's worth.
Click to expand...

Spyderco doesn't list their M4 at 58-63. They say M4 steel in general works well at 58-63. The exact quote is: "CPM-M4 will provide high edge retention and impact resistance with an Rc of 58-63". I can assure you Spyderco doesn't allow a range that big in a batch of knives. No decent company would (unless you're talking a difference between spine and edge)
 
Having both 760 and mule team plus sharpened a GB or two I can without a doubt say sypderco has the better HT. My 760 burrs more in sharpening, does not finish as clean, and sustains more edge deformations and edge rolling. Other BM's I've sharpened act exactly the same and in general feel "softer" than other makers M4.
 
No, a softer HT on the same steel will result in that pesky floppy burr that you sometimes see in sharpening. My mule team has a edge angle probably half that of my 760 and is still noticeablely better in all aspects.

You don't even need to cut to notice the difference, you can feel it when sharpening.
 
My AFCK steel in M4 is no great shakes, but my Ritter RSK in M4 is incredible steel. The spine on the AFCK is slightly thicker and the blade profile is steeper, but I've profiled the edges of both of them to 30 degrees inclusive. The AFCK will get sharp, but not very, and it doesn't hold an edge all that well. The RSK will take a much keener edge and hold it. It's like two different steels, but they are both Benchmade.
 
I've got 4 benchmades in M4, and 4 Spyderco's ( 2 mules, 2 bradleys). My experience is the same as knifenut1013 regarding sharpening. Another example of higher RC steel of the same kind being easier to sharpen rather than more difficult due to not having to chase burrs etc.

It goes against a lot of common knowledge.

BTW, G.Bradley also posted that he got near RC 65 with his production sample. Good, Good stuff!

The Benchmades had the usual problems (760) blade alignment, sticky unlocking, thick edge, and near 50 degree bevel.

The 710 was better, but still came in at over 45 degrees

The Osbornes were my favorites. They were straight, and could almost shave arm hairs. They were easy enough to sharpen and got more EDC than the more expensive 760 and 710 . I still have them in fact.

The Spyderco's I intend on keeping. They are too nice to not hang on too.
 
thanks guys on this review since all my bradley & mule gave exceptional cutting. i've experienced the same differences comparing kershaw against spyderco with the spydie consistently cutting longer.
 
I agree with Joe. For whatever reason, Spyderco CPM M4 performs better than any of my Benchmade CPM M4 blades.

That's based on 710, 806 and large and small RSKs vs. a Mule and a couple of GB folders.
 
As support for Knifenut1013's observations, my Benchmade AFCK M4 tested out at just 59 Rc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top