Why carry a multi-bladed knife

[vwb563]

I also have a tough time understanding how carbon steels can be so inferior as knife blades when in the vast majority of cases it is a carbon blade that wins cutting competitions?

Just dealing in facts rather than supposition.

Sometimes Bastid I think some people forget what a knife is actually made for. You know what I mean? Lol

 

[Gator97]

Not going anywhere with it just correcting some misinformation such as ...
Also Case uses 154CM at times.

Progress ATS-34 was dropped from the charges list. However, 154CM is an argument for the sake of argument... ATS-34 and 154CM are identical in composition, and I am sure you are well aware of that. Next time someone mentions D2 steel, do we have to list all 70 variations from dozens of makers to avoid accusations in misinformation?

So all I am doing is adding facts rather than guessing or making sweeping statements and having to correct them.

From what I can tell, you are picking sentences here and there and then making sweeping corrections as you see fit, e.g. 154Cm vs. ATS-34.

I also have a tough time understanding how carbon steels can be so inferior as knife blades when in the vast majority of cases it is a carbon blade that wins cutting competitions?

Talking about sweeping statements, what is a "carbon steel" in your definition? Subject in this thread was 10xx series. I'm not following cutting competitions, although from what I read on BF, M4 gets mentioned more often. Could you clarify? 10xx won a competition?

 

[Bastid]

I am not the one posting incorrect information in this thread. I did not post that 10xx won a competition.

154CM is not argument for argument sake. Case uses it and it was not included in your list. It is only a fact that you were not familiar with.

You listed the steels case uses and neglected to list 154CM in that list. Now stating that ATS-34 and 154CM are the same so it does not count. It does count. You are not being accurate with what you are posting and then are having to shoot from the hip when the inaccuracies are pointed out. ATS-34 and 154CM do have the same composition, but they are not produced the same way nor are the final steels equivalent in using them or sharpening them with my limited experience.

Nor am I the one having to correct what I am posting in previous posts.


Like I said, I am correcting inaccurate and incomplete information. Yes I am quoting sentences of yours that are incorrect and correcting them with facts.

Another correction. The subject in this thread was not 10xx series. It was stockmen and why should the OP purchase one. Then people started posting mis-information based on bias and incomplete knowledge rather than actual facts.

 

[sodak]

Thank you HH. You more than clarified the whole story with that post. A well made knife is a well made knife no matter the style or configuration. A well made knife with a properly ground and heat-treated blade is a good thing no matter what the materials are.

Bingo. I think there is a tendency for people to want to pick a side, when there really aren't two sides at all. We are fortunate to live in such a golden age to have all of these choices! I'm still waiting for my Opinel in M2 at 66HRC though....

 

[Gator97]

...I did not post that 10xx won a competition.

Correct, you said "Carbon steel", along with the complaints about "sweeping statements". I asked you what was carbon steel in your definition. I have not seen your answer though. If you are so bent on accuracy to complain about missing 154CM, I'd expect more accurate statements from you...

The subject in this thread was not 10xx series...

Not really, 10xx was mentioned in inferior category, and you came with your statement "how can carbon steels be inferior when they win competitions"...
10xx was mentioned as inferior, and you reply with blanket statement about carbon steels in general? Who said carbon steels were inferior?

154CM is not argument for argument sake. Case uses it and it was not included in your list.

Strawman at best Again, if someone uses D2 steel, do you expect/require to list few dozen D2 versions from various makers? How about W1 which is so broad that includes 100 alloys or so?

...I had no idea that that all my slipjoints in 52100, BG 42, ATS-34, CPM 154, 154CM, D2,

If you are so accurate, why don't you list who's 52100 and D2? All of them. Or your accuracy applies only to ATS-34? Composition difference between 2 makers 52100 or D2 is far greater than ATS-34/154CM.

Now stating that ATS-34 and 154CM are the same so it does not count. It does count.

How so? Are you able to tell the difference between ATS-34 and 154CM?

Like I said, I am correcting inaccurate and incomplete information.[/B] Yes I am quoting sentences of yours that are incorrect and correcting them with facts.

Or so you say, but that's not what you do

 

[RiderOnTheStorm]

I think people get a little too anal about steels and locks. Get what you like. If you get a knife that is made by a reputable manufacturer and speaks to you. One that you will carry, admire and enjoy then who cares about the rest? It doesn't matter what some "dude" on BF thinks. They aren't the one spending the money or using the knife. If you like it , get it , enjoy it, use it, if not sell it or better yet give it to someone else.

 

[Bastid]

Sharpen several knives of ATS-34 and 154CM and come back and say the end results are equivalent. yes I can tell the difference when I use and sharpen them. they are not the same. You state they have the same composition and that is true. The process by which they are produced is quite different. The characteristics of the steels are different. I find ATS-34 much easier to sharpen and it does not seem to have the same edge retention as 154CM (but that can varry due to HT).

I have pointed out specifically inaccuracies you have posted.

You have not been able to specifically point out anything I have posted that is not inaccurate.

I know what I did in this thread. I dealt in facts and you have not been able to point out anything I have posted that is false. I wish I could say the same about some of the things you have posted.

Thank you.

Case Closed. The facts are here for everyone to read and decide on themselves who is dealing with facts and who is scrambling to deal with what they have posted. It is quite clear.

 

[crom]

I'd just like to add that one of my favorite knives is a little Schrade 34OT (medium-size stockman pattern) that I found at a garage sale. I was riding my bike a few municipalities away and stumbled across the sale. This guy was probably in his 70's, I checked everything out and thought I'd ask him if he had any old pocket knives to sell. He says "wait a minute, I may have something" and comes out with this Old Timer. He says, "I've had it a long time but I never really used it much". He sold it to me for $3 (whick coincidentally, is all that I had on me) and I have used the hell out of that little knife. The flat ground 1095 blades are screaming sharp and tend to stay that way through lots of use. Touch up is a breeze and it cuts like a scalpel. It sure isn't glamorous but it is indeed a hard use knife in my small and humble collection.

 

[AKC]

Personal edit.... my apologies.

Deviation averted.

Get a Stockman? Why not?

 

[Samael]

Obviously, it needs to be said. There is no place here at any time for personal attacks. Whether AKC gets dinged for that is not up to me. But can we please keep it to at least a modicum of civility here, folks?

 

[kreole]

Here is an interesting thought:

If a knife company was challenged to create a modern knife with multiple blades, what would it look like in the end and how would it function compared to a traditional slipjoint style knife?

It definitely would be a challenge that no company (to my knowledge) has met.

Perhaps it would look like http://paulberetta.com/dyads.htm

edit: another with a more traditional look:

 

[Bastid]

I'd just like to add that one of my favorite knives is a little Schrade 34OT (medium-size stockman pattern) that I found at a garage sale. I was riding my bike a few municipalities away and stumbled across the sale. This guy was probably in his 70's, I checked everything out and thought I'd ask him if he had any old pocket knives to sell. He says "wait a minute, I may have something" and comes out with this Old Timer. He says, "I've had it a long time but I never really used it much". He sold it to me for $3 (whick coincidentally, is all that I had on me) and I have used the hell out of that little knife. The flat ground 1095 blades are screaming sharp and tend to stay that way through lots of use. Touch up is a breeze and it cuts like a scalpel. It sure isn't glamorous but it is indeed a hard use knife in my small and humble collection.

Glad somebody else has actual experience with "inferior steels". :

A knife in 1095 is not expensive. Buy one, use it and then tell us how inferior the knife is. I recommend a case swayback jack in chestnut bone with CV.

Nothing inferior about that knife or its steel at all if you actually use it, one can actually have the experience to make up their mind on what has been presented as truth in this thread.

 

[Gator97]

Sharpen several knives of ATS-34 and 154CM and come back and say the end results are equivalent.

I have, a lot. From the same maker(i.e. with identical HT) it's impossible to tell.

yes I can tell the difference when I use and sharpen them. they are not the same. You state they have the same composition and that is true. The process by which they are produced is quite different.

I suspect you are mixing up 154CM with CPM 154, otherwise clarify please, what's so different about ATS-34 vs. 154CM.

I find ATS-34 much easier to sharpen and it does not seem to have the same edge retention as 154CM (but that can varry due to HT).

Oh, so you do realize it was HT difference? Are you sure in other cases when you saw difference between ATS-34 and 154CM it wasn't HT, but the difference in production methods?

I have pointed out specifically inaccuracies you have posted.

The only specific thing you posted was that I didn't list 154CM while I listed ATS-34, and made a big deal about that. Your - "I can tell the difference between ATS-34 and 154cm" is very dubious.

You have not been able to specifically point out anything I have posted that is not inaccurate.

Actually I have not been able to find anything specific enough in your posts besides missing 154CM complaint. The rest is bunch of blanket statements with very broad terminology, like "how can carbon steels be inferior, when they win competitions". You never even clarified what carbon steels (except for not 10xx) and why it was related to the argument which was about 10xx...

Glad somebody else has actual experience with "inferior steels". :

Please... Get over it, will you? 1095 is not inferior, simply there are other alloys superior to it. I was wrong to call it inferior, my bad...

 

[Shoki]

Well, this thread has been pretty well trashed (thanks Gator97).

OP, I hope you find yourself the perfect traditional... or a dozen perfect traditionals. Please post any issues you encounter with the 'inferior' blade steel and absence of a lock.

 

[vwb563]

Well, this thread has been pretty well trashed (thanks Gator97).

OP, I hope you find yourself the perfect traditional... or a dozen perfect traditionals. Please post any issues you encounter with the 'inferior' blade steel and absence of a lock.

100% agreed!

 

[Samael]

Once again, as much as many of you are my friends, the personal attacks need to stop now. Gator has as much of a right to his opinions as you do. If he's wrong, discuss that. Let's leave the ad hominem attacks out of this. K?

 

[The Government]

Perhaps it would look like http://paulberetta.com/dyads.htm

I should have taken more time wording that post I made. (my apologies)

The dyad is probably the best design for a modern multi-blade on the market, in terms of popularity, usefulness, and design elegance. I feel like it still leaves a fair amount to be desired though, when comparing it to all multi-blade styles.

I guess that when I look at all the current modern attempts to create these things, I always go back to the original multi-blades. They just seem more practical to me to actually use. How much can you add without taking something away? For example, by adding the spyderhole, you get two blades with one hand opening, but the ergonomics are negatively altered. By adding the locks, it makes opening and closing the knife more complicated, which reveals my clumsiness.

I would like to see more attempts to create a better modern multi-blade, I just have not seen one yet that makes me think my stockman is obsolete.

 

[kreole]

I should have taken more time wording that post I made. (my apologies)

The dyad is probably the best design for a modern multi-blade on the market, in terms of popularity, usefulness, and design elegance. I feel like it still leaves a fair amount to be desired though, when comparing it to all multi-blade styles.

I guess that when I look at all the current modern attempts to create these things, I always go back to the original multi-blades. They just seem more practical to me to actually use. How much can you add without taking something away? For example, by adding the spyderhole, you get two blades with one hand opening, but the ergonomics are negatively altered. By adding the locks, it makes opening and closing the knife more complicated, which reveals my clumsiness.

I would like to see more attempts to create a better modern multi-blade, I just have not seen one yet that makes me think my stockman is obsolete.

Ah, sorry, gotcha. Yeah, I would be very interested to see a company do something like that, also. All the creative energy seems to be put towards "modern"/"tactical" folders, and we have so many choices of locks, designs, opening means, etc., whereas the traditional companies take pride in accurate representations of old patterns over new designs or they move towards "modern"/"tactical" (such as the Dyad or even Bucks' BCCI Tactical 110). The stockman is nice, but I've never used the "for flesh only" blade for flesh; some new developments might be nice.

 

[Gator97]

Well, this thread has been pretty well trashed (thanks Gator97).

I assume that's because I didn't join the 10xx hallelujah? Or because I think locks are not only for "inexperienced" users? Or perhaps because I doubt Bastid's ability to tell ATS-34 from 154CM w/o spectrograph and SEM?

...Please post any issues you encounter with the 'inferior' blade steel and absence of a lock.

Really And what's the point, it's gonna be another "trashed" thread.

Alternatively, you might as well try the same traditionals made out of something not 100 years old. I realize because it worked for our ancestors 100-200 years ago it must be damn good, but since then new things were invented that aren't all that bad, locks included. I don't think Glesser, Reeve, Walker, McHenry and others were just having too much time on their hands or concerned exclusively with inexperienced, insecure folks when inventing and refining all those locks.

 

[Samael]

You know, if we dialed down the testosterone level a few notches here, this could be an interesting thread. I'd personally love to see a slip joint made from today's "super steels." How 'bout we discuss that for a while — instead of each other?