Stonewashed vs 'Stonewash Polished' (Starbenza) as a user

M

Mark in Oz

Joined
Jan 4, 2012
Messages
173
I just got my first small Sebenza, a Willson Combat Starbenza. I assumed the blade was stonewashed, but it turns out its a 'stonewash polished' finish. To me it kind like satin?

wtk-star-benza-small.jpg

I really like how the scratches I have put in the stonewashed blade of my Large Micarta blend in with the ones that are already there, and was wondering how others have found this 'stonewash polish' finish to wear after a lot of use? Is it available on any other CRKs? As always, photos most welcome.
 
I carry a small WC Sebenza for edc and I don't have any problems with the finish. It's a knife... a tool. It gets used, it's gonna show it eventually. My wife edc's a small dog paw Sebenza with a polished blade. It's about 5 years old now and it gets used for anything amd everything. Her blade does show some scratches, but we left them there when CRK refurbed the knife about a year ago. They're character marks... badges... like grey hair or scars. Her Sebenza earned every one of them. Why take them away?
 
I agree, with use both the steel and ti gain a patina, character, that is increasingly unique, and can't be bought. Although it's not as comfortable to use as my large, (I have XL hands) I got it because it's so pocket friendly, and have already been carrying and using it. I ask not because it's a problem, but because I'm too impatient to wait to see what a well appreciated WC looks like. Got any pics of yours?
 
Let's see if I can make this happen...

View attachment 320390
Side by side, Starbenza on left, 2005 Dog Paw Classic on right

View attachment 320391
Dog Paw EDC by itself,lock side


She's carried this one ever since she got it at Christmas, 2005, so you're looking at 7 years of EDC. You can actually see more scuffs and carry marks in the Ti than you can in the blade, although there are a few in the blade by now. Her blade is polished, The Starbenza blade is stonewashed, then lightly polished (maybe? not sure?), so there is a difference in the blade finishes. My WC won't show much yet. I've only had it a couple of months. It replaced a small micarta 21. I just found that I liked the flat sides and feel of a smal Sebenza without inlays. My large is still a micarta one, although I might swap it for a large WC to match the small one if I ever run across a deal.
 
Ahhh, I know what you speak of and you hit the nail on the head. Perhaps others have confused the "stonewash polished" with a polished blade. They are not the same. I inquired to CRK about this not long ago and they informed me they recently changed their stonewashing technique and the result is more of a finer satin stonewash. It more closely resembles a homeade stonewashing job but on a high quality level if that makes any sense. I agree with you though, I much prefer the original stonewash finish as seen on the first couple of batches of Umnumzaans and all the pre 2011 Sebenzas. They do hide scratches a tad bit better but just make the blade look heavy duty IMHO.

Would be interested to hear if any others have noted this variance in recent stonewash blade finish.
 
Here is a photo of a recent Small 21 blade with new finer-grain stonewash finish. The second photo is of my first CRK, a Large 21 2009 Kind of hard to see from a photo but the difference in stonewash is quite apparent in person.





bilbobaggins.jpg




DSCN4940.jpg






JSMcustoms said:
I would just go with whichever one appeals to you more. :)
Click to expand...



Actually, there is no option as I believe it is the standard finish on all new blades, but could be wrong.
 
Last edited:
UrFrndlyNebrhoodS said:
Actually, there is no option as I believe it is the standard finish on all new blades, but could be wrong.
Click to expand...

Just read the FAQ's Sheet on the CRK website and it seems depending on the model, the blade is either a stonewash or satin finish. But yes, the stonewash is the more common of the two from what I read.
 
Last edited:
I was wondering when this topic would come up, i noticed it in some of the last CRK's i had go through my hands. I was kind of bummed out about it at first, like when i received my last small insingo i was like why does this look different. It almost reminded me of the bead blast finishes of kershaw. I must say though it held up very well, and it seemed to hide scratches just as well as the older stone wash, after a while i did not mind it anymore and it kind of grew on me. If i had to choose though, i would choose the older stone wash look, i just prefer the look
 
Both will perform well as a user. I much prefer the look of the older larger grain stonewash though.
 
The CF Sebenza has the "barely stonewashed" blade. It is odd, it is polished up pretty good then looks like it was tumbled for about 30 minutes. The tumble on my full Ti Seb looks like it was in there for weeks. For a user, I always prefer the heavily stonewashed blade like you'd see on the old BG42 blades. And I always just thought it looked better in general.
 
Glad to see I am not the only one who loves and prefers that original stonewash finish. Sometimes, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" Maybe this thread will make its way to CRK and the return to the old may come about. Here's hoping ......:)
 
Agreed, the original stonewashed is best for a knife that is going to be used. I love that only I know (or look hard enough to be able to tell) which scratches I put in it, and which are the finish, on my 2009 large micarta.

Not sure why CRK would change the 'user' models to be more like the polished blade fancy models, that doesn't make sense to me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top