Steel Junky's - need opinions

Hi Cliff,

The goal would be to just provide the "stuff" at an affordable cost.

Scientific testing could be done by those smarter with a greater understanding than me.

That's your job. :p

We (the industry) would certainly benefit from such results.

I am aware of the testing that you wish to do and the outline that you presented. I would be happy to try to accomodate your requests, but I couldn't provide different steels at one time.

To try to do a small number of blades (10 - 20) made from different steels would be custom work and would run $200+ per blade, assuming you could get small quantities of the steels.

Assuming 3 blades per lb. of steel, 500 blades (already quite a few) is only 200 lbs of steel. Most foundries won't even talk to you for 200 lbs., much less make a 200 lb. run. So a fair amount of "romancing" might be necessary to be able to get the material. If the steel is $15/lb. like some of the exotics, then we've got $5 in raw steel without shipping / receiving costs.

Different steels have different heat treat requirements. "batch" heat treating cannor affordably be done on 2 or 3 blades. Grinding times are different for different steels based on their abrasion resistance, so batch grinding is also out on small numbers. Set up times are expensive.

We would have to be able to schedule the runs in alongside of our regular work. Sales and distribution details would have to be worked out. Maybe though one person? If you get too many people involved, or profit becomes an issue, the affordability goes away.

We did a run of "swicks" a while back. That was kind of an experiment to see if this type of thing could be done. We provided a "slip" sheath, but even that adds cost.

We could connect you guys to our sheath maker, who could make up slip sheaths in some type of volume to save the costs of custom sheaths and get us out of the middle.

The same could apply to scales. We would provide consistent holes in the handle or skeletonize for fastening or cord wrap, but someone else would provide scales or do the wrap.

It's also possible that there wouldn't be enough interest to warrant the project. We would have to do one to see. We would want to move all inventory on one run before beginning the next.

sal
 
I think it is a great idea, Sal. I wouldn't be interested in the more widely available steels such as VG10 and S30V, but would love to jump in with BG42, 3V, etc. Additionally, I would like to be able to purchase a single set of scales that could be interchanged among the blades. Same with a sheath, but aftermarket wouldn't be a problem. I hope all the details can be worked out.

Jack
 
A simple solution to what Cliff is asking for might be to throw one of each run into a box for him until the run is complete, then send it out when the series is complete. He'd get the knives after other folks have, but that way he'd have them all at one time. A few minutes with a dremel could remove any steel ID you had stamped or etched into the blades.

$.02CDN
 
I like the idea of having the same geometry, shape, thickness etc, and would prefer all the steels to be run at the same Rc values. This may lead to a properly scientific review.

Thanks
Desmod
 
Is the tumbled finish similar to the stonewash on the SWICK? Also, will these be available for regular people like me to purchase?
 
Interesting project. As to keeping it scientific, perhaps instead of marking the blades with the type of steel you could put a mark that lets you identify the steel after testing but doesnt indicate to the user what type he has recieved. Just to stop subconcious fudging of the results based on expectations of how the steel "should" perform.
 
Sal Glesser said:
To try to do a small number of blades (10 - 20) made from different steels would be custom work and would run $200+ per blade, assuming you could get small quantities of the steels.
Click to expand...

I should have been more clear, I meant as the blades are produced with the current intended schedule. I can just have a maker I know buy them, HRC, test them, replace the marking with A,B, C, etc..

-Cliff
 
Me too. Sounds like you thought it out already. Sal, you've never needed any ideas from me to make your way to success. Whatever you decide on will be fine with me. I have some steels I'd like to try and hope they'ed see their way in, but that's even irrelevant. It sounds like fun even and maybe just what a real steel junky needs. BTW, I was always kidding when I said "Bring back vascowear". :') Joe

PS, Some might find themselves surprised at what a good cutting style a wharncliff is. It's wicked with the right steel and grinds.
 
This sounds great. I would definitely like to participate. Sheathless is fine with me. Let's get this done!
 
Sounds like a very interesting idea. I'd like to try out new steels in an affordable package.
 
I'd love a H1 blade and would probably buy one or two in different non-stainless steels to try them out.

Cord wraps are easily done by most users, but sheaths are IMHO more difficult to make.

Sverre
 
Pyromancer said:
I like the idea of having the same geometry, shape, thickness etc, and would prefer all the steels to be run at the same Rc values. This may lead to a properly scientific review.

Thanks
Desmod
Click to expand...


Though I am interested, I would prefer not to have them all at the same hardness. Different steels will naturally have different ideal working hardnesses, and it seems pointless to try testing what the steel can do when you know it was not heat treated to its best potential.
 
How about sending them out unsharpened? Ground thin enough, putting on an edge bevel wouldn't take long, and we love to sharpen, don't we :D I also find ease of sharpening important. It could also speed up response. If you got 2 blades with Spyderco quality edges, in something like AUS8 and D2, and only did very light work for a couple weeks with just simple stropping or passes on the Sharpmaker to maintain the edge-it could be a while before people start weighing in on the sharpening issue.

Of course, we could resharpen finished ones right away, but to me it's a waste of steel when the edges are usually very good OOB.
 
AG Russell has already started this type of production (one knife different steels), but he did it for price and performance reasons not testing. He offers his bird and trout and deer hunter in three types of steel D2, AUS8A and VG10. Why not do the same thing and take the most popular spydreco fixed blade (Moran?) and produce it in different steels?

I wouldn't use the warncliffe shape if you expect "real world" testing. This type of knife is not as utilitarian as others. Points will go pretty quickly due to design not steel type.
 
This sounds very interesting, and I would certainly be interested in testing out some different steels!
David
 
This sounds like a great chance to test different steels. Love the blade design, when can I sign up and where do we send payment? Don't want to miss out on this one. Thanks Martin
 
the possum said:
Though I am interested, I would prefer not to have them all at the same hardness. Different steels will naturally have different ideal working hardnesses, and it seems pointless to try testing what the steel can do when you know it was not heat treated to its best potential.
Click to expand...

I can see your point, but hope that some modicum in Rc compromise is reached for each "class" of steel. i.e, steel groups most capable at ~59-61, are all run at 60, steel groups most capable at 63-65 are run at 64. We can probably assume that Vg-10 at 60Rc, will be smoked in edgeholding by M2 at 64Rc, as they are in a totally different wear resistance, corrosion resistance, AND Rc class. But what about VG-10 at 60, and 8Cr13MoV at 60? If we make an attempt to maintain the steel as the major variable, some of us will be able to compile some very interesting data.

Just a thought.
Desmond
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top