Why Doesn't BUCK Grow Beyond 420HC?

enderwiggin said:
I think that's the problem being pointed out here. Buck's "Close Enough" near bottom-of-the-barrel steel.

Will the majority of their buyers ever know they've been deceived? Probably not. But it's still dishonest.

Sort of like using 420hc on an $800.00 knife. Is it "Good enough"? Sure. Is it dishonest? Well, I feel that it is.
Click to expand...

enderwiggin said:
No, I'm calling them dishonest because they've know they are using a low-end steel on a high-end knife, but figure it "won't really matter" to the consumer.

That's not the kind of company I would trust or buy from.

Again, this is pointless to debate, because there are plenty of people who are so attached to Buck, that even pointing out simple facts causes them to fly into a jealous rage.

Give me a break. Buck is a company that uses the cheapest possible steel because it's the cheapest possible steel they can use and their customers generally don't know any better. They are relying on their name, and customer loyalty to the brand, instead of on making superior knives.

But hey, whatever. Buy what you like. I'm never going to change the mind of people who absolutely devoted to the brand. It's just mind-numbing that so many people would choose to support a company that does garbage like this, when there are so many better companies out there.
Click to expand...

well i for one think you have done enough trolling..
you do seem to have a never ending flow of drivel ..
are you one of the steel guru's that is hollyer then tho and have a mouth that is a prayer book...
additionally you seem to have the manners of some one who's mother raised them in a bar or house of ill repute as you keep speaking of thoes that like buck as mindless automatons.. is this the level you are at, a steel snob?
no you jest want to show your low level of thought by trashing a compahny that has a history that is older then you..
btw:
buck was the 1st company to use high quality stainless!!
440c it was NOT cheep then nor is it now,,
there are some that are more expensive ...
some of these other steels are like up grading to speeding cars..
ok but can they haul 4 people or pull your moble home? to each his own..

there is no one perfict steel there are more expensive steels and steels for one kind of use..

that you seem to equate price with quality jest showes your lack of ability to look in to any disscusson of steels and and understand what they are best for...
if you had you would know that nothing polishes up like 440c..
it can look like chrome almost..
i dont know what model knife you were talking of but if you dont want it in 420hc then gee dont buy it !
why belittle those that do want a shiny steel for eye candy..
no one is mocking you for your choice of steel or company that makes your knife...
that you did so jest shows that it could be that you are not mature enough to post in forums with mature knife nuts..
if i were you i would not put to voice those thoughts at a knife show...
 
Certainly, Buck cannot be accused of being dishonest. They are people who build good, hard-working hunting and sporting knives. And yes, 420HC is not the worst steel out there by a long shot. That said, 420HC is an inexpensive, fairly easy to produce and treat steel that is a "good" overall blade material. Using it in high grade custom knives, however, is just being a bit "cheap." To argue that they'll be safe queens is irrelevant. An expensive knife should also be a great knife.

The first thing I think about are those cars built a few years ago. On the outside they were slicked up fiberglass copies of some of the classics of the 50s and 60s. Underneath, however, they were just regular old American-made stock of somewhat average build. All beauty and no performance.

Although that may be okay to some, a knife should be much more than just good looks. For ten bucks I figure that 420 stainless is about par. For thirty bucks I'm expecting some fairly decent 440A; for fifty bucks, I'm looking to get AUS8 and some polish to the blade. At seventy-five bucks and upward, I'm looking for either a kick-ass steel or a very strong frame. At a hundred bucks I'm expecting both. I'd like a lockback design with S30V or VG-10 stainless. And these are, of course, folders.

At four hundred dollars and so, I am not looking for 420HC blade steel at all. I want to see some personalized work and some very good materials. I want to be able to either keep it in a safe or carry it for hard use.

I just bought a couple of Cold Steel Konjo 1s on sale, two for two-hundred dollars. The regular retail is $399, and these knives came with very nice, robust leather sheaths and 5-inch tanto San Mai laminated steel blades polished to mirror brightness. I would never have paid the retail catalog price, but at a hundred dollars a pop, they're very fine knives. One can argue the relative merits of laminated steels, but one cannot argue that they cost more to make. In short, both knives are beautifully hand finished, very well balanced and have razor sharp edges. They combine both beauty and strength and were bargains for their price. And this is how it should be. If you want to sell an expensive knife like this, it should have both craftsmanship and the best of materials. In no way does 420HC meet this criteria.

Perhaps the question can best be settled by asking: If YOU had YOUR choice of a beautiful hand finished knife with a polished 420HC or a polished VG-10 blade, what would YOU choose if the two were placed in front of you? If you answered the latter, let me ask, would you pay ten dollars more for the VG-10 bladed knife, even if you intended to keep it in a safe? (Granted, you shouldn't have to pay more, but just for the sake of argument, would you shell out the extra $$$?)

You see, I would. I would pay the extra money even if it were going to be a safe queen. Why? Because, ultimately, quality does matter—and if it matters, then it ought to be a part of the package. Okay, you may not be one of these people. You may not be willing to pay one cent extra for the better steel, but I have a feeling most of the folks on this board would. Am I wrong?
 
I don't think that there is any problem with the steel used in the aforementioned Buck knife. I consider the 420HC steel from Buck to be completely acceptable for both a low maintenance collector piece and a blade that actually gets used.
I could understand the disappointment if the blade was incapable of being used as a blade, but I have never had a Buck knife that would not take a very fine edge and hold it well.
Different people have a different idea of what is "best", and I wonder if just maybe some people get too caught up in all of it. Even if a "premium" steel were used in these blades, some people would likely be disappointed in some other component of the knife. I know that there are people out there who consider anything without a mastadon ivory handle and damascus fittings to be a pointless waste of money. I'm sure that there are also people out there who feel the same about a knife lacking titanium and carbon fiber.
Does anyone here go through the knives they own and discard the older ones that are made with materials that are no longer in vogue?
Chasing after a mythical "best" seems more likely to make a person weary than it does to make a person happy with anything they own. :)
 
nondescript said:
I don't think that there is any problem with the steel used in the aforementioned Buck knife. I consider the 420HC steel from Buck to be completely acceptable for both a low maintenance collector piece and a blade that actually gets used.
I could understand the disappointment if the blade was incapable of being used as a blade, but I have never had a Buck knife that would not take a very fine edge and hold it well.
Different people have a different idea of what is "best", and I wonder if just maybe some people get too caught up in all of it. Even if a "premium" steel were used in these blades, some people would likely be disappointed in some other component of the knife. I know that there are people out there who consider anything without a mastadon ivory handle and damascus fittings to be a pointless waste of money. I'm sure that there are also people out there who feel the same about a knife lacking titanium and carbon fiber.
Does anyone here go through the knives they own and discard the older ones that are made with materials that are no longer in vogue?
Chasing after a mythical "best" seems more likely to make a person weary than it does to make a person happy with anything they own. :)
Click to expand...

well thought out and very well stated...;)
 
enderwiggin said:
I think that's the problem being pointed out here. Buck's "Close Enough" near bottom-of-the-barrel steel.

How much would it really cost Buck to use higher quality steel in their lines?
Click to expand...

Not to jump on the band wagon here, but if the steel was simply "Just enough" Buck wouldn't have the waranty or reputation they do. I own and have owned knives of all types of steel both custom and production and my grandfathers 110 and the 119 I recieved when I got my Chief Scout's Award hold their own quite well. During University I worked as a landscaper and used my 110 daily and for some days hours on end. It would not only keep its edge well, but sharpen with ease when needed. As it has been debated countless times, just like with knives in general, there is no be all and end all of steels. Each has it's pro's and cons depending on what it is used for. Regardless of the arguments made in favor of one steel or another, the one thing that al would agree on the grade of steel and the heat treat can make the difference between night and day.
Sure Buck uses 420 Stainless, but it is "their" 420 stainless and it underwent "their" heat treat and should not be compared to the 420 used in wall hangers and flea market trash. This does not make them dishonest as they tell you flat out what you are getting. Not only that but they back it up. Would you prefer if they treaked the carbon content of it a little bit, charged 4 times its worth and called it a super steel?
Like I said, I don't mean to jump on the Buck band wagon, but as a long time collector and user of knives I think there is a certain degree of ignorance that needs to be addressed by openly attacking a product that is designed to be used (such as a knife) based on what's written on that packaging and not how it functions.

-Chris
 
I work in the engineering department of a machinery manufacturing company. If I had a nickle for every armchair engineer that tried to tell me how to design a machine I would be rich enough to afford one of those $400 420HC Buck knives.

Buck makes great knives out of 420HC. If you want Buck prices for higher end steel you will need to look elsewhere.

Why does everyone think they should be able to tell a company how to do business or what to sell?

Everyone wants something for nothing.

The customer is not always right.

Like the man said:
"If the steel is letting you down you may need to learn how to sharpen properly" or some such thing.
 
Confederate said:
Certainly, Buck cannot be accused of being dishonest. They are people who build good, hard-working hunting and sporting knives. And yes, 420HC is not the worst steel out there by a long shot. That said, 420HC is an inexpensive, fairly easy to produce and treat steel that is a "good" overall blade material. Using it in high grade custom knives, however, is just being a bit "cheap." To argue that they'll be safe queens is irrelevant.
Click to expand...


What custom knives does Buck produce with 420 HC?

I will answer that for you. None. They are a production manufacturer. Not a custom manufacturer.

The knives you are refering to are more properly limited production runs.

If you go to their "custom" ordering area you can order ala-carte. These are still not "custom" knives as it is defined in the knife industry.
 
Confederate said:
Although that may be okay to some, a knife should be much more than just good looks. For ten bucks I figure that 420 stainless is about par. For thirty bucks I'm expecting some fairly decent 440A; for fifty bucks, I'm looking to get AUS8 and some polish to the blade. At seventy-five bucks and upward, I'm looking for either a kick-ass steel or a very strong frame. At a hundred bucks I'm expecting both. I'd like a lockback design with S30V or VG-10 stainless. And these are, of course, folders.

At four hundred dollars and so, I am not looking for 420HC blade steel at all. I want to see some personalized work and some very good materials. I want to be able to either keep it in a safe or carry it for hard use.
Click to expand...
Well
We know your indifference curve now!! ;)
Not everyone has the same curves
(Maybe I'll get bored and make you a graph!! I think I have all the Cartesian coordinates...above)

Fig.%209.3%20Preference%20Map.jpg



Behavioral economics and consumer theory is kinda complex
The goal is to try and make decisions that will keep the customers happy AND make a profit
Not really an easy thing to do
There are MANY factors
Budget constraints and substitution and income effects
An individual consumer will choose to consume goods at the point where the most preferred available indifference curve on their preference map is tangent to their budget constraint.
Click to expand...
I have FULL faith in Buck's marketing dept to make decisions
I'm sure they do surveys/feedback and MOST importantly===>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost-benefit_analysis

If they don't offer the knife in your preferred steel
Chances are it is for a reason
I.E. not enough projected sales/revenues, the CURRENT price of the desired steel, retooling costs, etc

I will also say that I consider Bucks 420 steel their trademark steel
It is associated with Buck knives to many knife consumers
If I buy a Buck 110
It's worked this long
Why change it?

In an ideal world you could "make" your knife
Like the Buck CS web page
http://www.buckknives.com/index.cfm?event=customKnife.build
They could list EVERY available steel and the added cost per knife
But, I have a feeling the retooling, steel inventory, and other production factors prevent that

I never knew the Buck 420 steel was considered crappy until very recently :confused:
My father often wore a Buck 110 on his belt when I was growing up
So I eventually bought one (I lost it camping about 1988!!!! :mad:)
I did notice it was a little harder to sharpen
No big deal
Just a little more elbow grease with the whetstone :D
 
emperorwang- You may have stopped posting in the other thread as promised but you certainly haven't stopped trolling.

do not question the almighty buck! or the peasants shall revolt!
Click to expand...
 
emperorwang, please remember where you are. Behavior expected in W&C can really be considered trolling here. In a serious discussion, your sarcasm stands out as an attempt to derail the discussion. Don't .. do .. that.

The rest of you, please DFTT.
 
enderwiggin said:
their customers generally don't know any better.
Click to expand...

Well emperorwang, I now see that your offending post in the other thread wasn't even an original thought. Heck, you even stole enderwiggin's language.

But two wrongs don't make a right.

Plenty of knowledgeable consumers here still use and enjoy Buck knives in 420HC.
 
esav-roger that. i will curb my sarcasm.

guyon, i didn't steal enderwiggin's language or thoughts. we just happen to be in somewhat of an agreement when it comes to the buck thing.

i don't think buck knives are shitty. i think they are adequate for most folks. i personally am very underwhelmed by them.

i have some truly shitty knives that are actually totally sufficient for what i would need a knife to do on a given day. actually, i could probably get by on most days with one of those plastic knives that you buy in packs. but i happen to have something of a knife fetish, so i try to get the awesomest knife i can for a particular price.

when it comes to the 110, i don't like the ergos or the lock, and i've noticed some blade play in a few, even when new. and, i don't really like the steel. adequate steel, yes. but i prefer others.

it's also my personal impression, and this seems to be what really gets people's goats, is that many diehard buck users are really enamored with the brand itself. it was their first knife, or one carried by a beloved elder, etc. i just can't buy that people think that it is really, truly, the best knife for the money.
 
When you can't stand that someone would express a negative opinion about something you happen to like, why state your reasons when you can just call them a troll?

If you prefer low-end blade material, that's your personal prerogative. But the point I was trying to make is that it's insulting to the average american consumer for a company like Buck, knowing they can rely on their brand name, to produce knives at all price points with one of the cheapest blade steels they can find.

You may not agree with me. You don't have to. The world is not going to end if I continue to hold an opinion that differs from yours.

However, I don't think I'm the only one who thinks Buck using 420HC steel on a majority of their models is ridiculous.

When people stop arguing with you, it doesn't mean you're right. It often means they're just tired of arguing with you. In this case, they're tired of being called names--like troll--because people can't relax and discuss points of view without becoming flabbergasted by dissenting points of view, and reacting as if someone insulted their mother.

Really, I expected more. One of the things I really love about this board is that all different types of people can come and discuss differing opinions in a civil manner, and that even if the discussion becomes spirited they're able to maintain enough distance to continue the discussion objectively, even if people are saying things they don't like.

But all I'm seeing here is a lot of finger-pointing and calling for the moderators to silence dissenting opinions.
 
Last edited:
The point that is still being made is that most people consider the plain cheap 420HC Buck steel to be very acceptable for most blades, myself included. I can understand that some people don't think that it is good enough but that is one of the variables in different peoples' opinions. And with any opinion there will always be disagreement.
You can continue to cry foul about a company selling a product that is incredibly popular and keep saying that they should change what they are doing to make it better, but I don't see how you can be surprised that so many people disagree with your viewpoint. :)
For what it is worth, I would be happy if Buck decided to switch to an old lowtech carbon steel like 1095 or perhaps something newer like CPM-D2 as their default steel but I also understand that what I like better is not necessarily what will sell as well or work as well for other people.
I can also put aside my personal preferences and acknowledge the fact that the 420HC Buck steel makes a good blade and is preferred for a variety of reasons by the manufacturer and the vast majority of the buying public.
 
enderwiggin said:
But all I'm seeing here is a lot of finger-pointing and calling for the moderators to silence dissenting opinions.
Click to expand...

Perhaps then people should chose their language with greater care.

Accusations of dishonesty are inflammatory.

Implying that people here "don't know any better" is inflammatory.

You reap what you sow.
 
I do not understand.

If you do not like the steel Buck uses at the price they sell it at then don't buy it.

Other knife consumers like Buck's steel at the price they sell it at so they buy it.

Enough buy it so that Buck is profitable and can stay in business.

Buck is not Spyderco, Benchmade, Victorinox, CRKT, some custom maker...

There isn't enough to debate to keep this discussion going this long.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top