Why Doesn't BUCK Grow Beyond 420HC?

If 420HC is plenty good enough for the average Buck owner/user, why wouldn't it be good enough for a wall hanger?
 
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?

Maybe an upgrade to AUS 8. How much would that actually add to the price tag of a Buck 110?

To me, it's sort of how when Shun started advertising their kitchen knives are VG-10. Suddenly, a lot of other knifemakers started offering kitchen knives in VG-1, a steel which is nothing like VG-10--but it sounds similar.

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.
 
I'm not so sure most end line users would think it much of an upgrade to go from a USA made steel to a Japanese one even if the Japanese one is better you know? Bu I understand the point made.;)

Unless I read to fast and misunderstood I want to add something. Forgive me if I only think I understand what I read. As for the steel used and the price point for the folder or fixed blade to the end line users I'd say its only dishonest if the steel was "knowingly" sold as one thing and actually another or there is some kind of disguising of facts, numbers, features or other fudging going on by the seller to discieve the buyer.

If the steel is sold as 420HC, plainly labeled as such and that is what the blade is made of and the end line user buys it for whatever reasons I don't think its got anything to do with dishonesty really. Maybe ignorance on the part of the buyer or lack of education on better steels but thats about all I see really. Its very subjective to even suggest the seller knows that the steel is inferior or even has any feelings that way at all. He/she may in fact feel for whatever reasons that it is superior steel to others and even be able to present good arguments as to why they feel that way.

I think the facts show that 420HC is working in the hands of most folks out there buying the knives and they'd be hard pressed to agree they were taken if the thing works as they expect. Not everyone is a steel snob.
 
Silverdagger said:
Real dishonest if you can not read and have a distorted and or wrongly defined sense of honesty.

I think I've heard it all now.
Click to expand...

I suppose it wouldn't seem dishonest if you had a distorted or wrongly defined sense of value.

But then, I know how people on here can get about Buck, and I know there's no sense in arguing with anyone convinced that expecting better steel than 420hc in an $800.00 knife is a "steel snob."
 
Last edited:
Many knife nuts jump to the conclusion that one steel is the bigger better deal over another based on experience but more often than not the published hype out there is what they go by instead of practical use or experience with a particular blade in question. This leaves me thinking that one alloy over another has no more substance than the strength of their own opinions which is then used as evidence. Opinion? Evidence? Keep that in mind. Practical use and experience play into what people buy but more so in what they support and buy repeatedly over time. Many of Buck's end line users are real deal sportsman like professional hunters, fisherman and guides. That has to mean something I think that rises above the steel they use. Why do they support them so if the knives don't perform?

Buck seems to know that you have to make some choices for what is best for the application at hand. Then you have to find a balance between cost, durability, toughness, edge holding, and corrosion resistance to please the end line user(s). Buck and Buck enthusiasts feel they found their answer to what fits the bill best for most end line users in 420HC which offers a fine balance of what is needed. Fortunately they combine this otherwise unimpressive steel on paper into a nice blade geometry and heat treatment that works so well many swear by it and continue to support the products.

Butch Winter used to say something like, 'there are no bad cutlery steels there are just some that fit specific applications better than others." Fact is even if you know or think you know what alloy combines the best of the best for your application there is no guarantee that even if you make it up that it will fit the bill by performing in a way that makes it top shelf because much more comes into play to bring a blade up to superior cutting performance as we mentioned earlier in the fact that edge geometry and heat treatment can and often do mean more than steel chemistry does. I think it was Michael Black that said some years ago in a Knife World Publication, "you have to let each knife demonstrate it's own truth to you" and this again rises above dwelling on what steel chemistry comes together to form the blade." The only question real sportsman are concerned with is this. "Does it work and work well for the application at hand?"

STR
 
Last edited:
Confederate said:
Again, how many Sebenzas could/would CR sell if he offered them for $75 less and made the blades from 420HC? Yes, but people use their Sebenzas, you might say, and so they do, but it's not like they get a massive (or any more than a modest) performance boost. Still, Sebenza owners want the components to be the best, and they're willing to pay whatever it takes.
Click to expand...

Sitting here looking at my Sebenza, and at the 110 I've had since 1975...

Of course the difference is "massive", both in mechanical function and cutting performance. Is it literally an order of magnitude, like the price difference? Who cares?

We're talking about the difference between $385 and $40 = about $345. Huge proportionately, but small as an absolute value. Just get the Sebenza, skip a few dates, and for the rest of your life you have a superior quality knife. Kind of a no-brainer.

Maybe the Sebenza is only twice as good as the 110. That's still easily worth $345. Hell, just the pride of ownership in a product from an American small business that's gone the extra mile easily justifies $345.

On the production side, as a marketing problem, sure, there is a legitimate market for the 110. There are plenty of people who see $40 as a more appropriate price for a pocket knife. I have no problem with that, or with Buck going after that market.

It's a mistake to try to compare the two products on a linear price-point scale, though.
 
It's not a linear comparison we're discussing, nor am I in any way implying that Buck is in anyway dishonest in its advertising.

Certainly, Sebenzas are well made and finely built. I doubt Sebenza owners will get a huge performance boost over other S30V bladed knives, but some feel it's well worth the $$$ because of the overall craftsmanship.

But craftsmanship cannot be the only aspect of a good custom knife. I suppose Buck feels that 420HC is its signature steel, and thus it should be used in its special collectors runs. But there are plenty of upscale Bucks that have better steel blades. I just think the special runs should have superior steel blades. They don't cost that much more and they greatly add to the efficiency of the knife. That they will be assumed to be safe queens shouldn't matter a whit.
 
enderwiggin said:
I suppose it wouldn't seem dishonest if you had a distorted or wrongly defined sense of value.

But then, I know how people on here can get about Buck, and I know there's no sense in arguing with anyone convinced that expecting better steel than 420hc in an $800.00 knife is a "steel snob."
Click to expand...

I just want to point out, of the one hundred and sixty something odd posts here in this thread, and in the literally thousands of Buck posts I have ever read here, or anywhere else, I have never, not once, heard anyone question the integrity or honesty of Buck Knife Company until today.
 
enderwiggin said:
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...

DISHONEST = characterized by a lack of truth

They made a knife.
They labelled the steel.
They sold the knife as being made from that steel.

There is no disception. There is no dishonesty. There is no lack of truth.

You are calling call Buck a bunch liars because they made a knife you personally don't care for.
 
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. Spyderco, Kershaw, and Benchmade could all use very low-end steels on their low-cost knives--420j2, 420hc, 440a and the like--but they've chosen to find the best performing steel they can for those price points.

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.

If you point out the fact that they're using what everyone already agrees is a bottom-of-the-barrel steel, but "heat treating it well," that's acceptable consensus.

If you go on to say that it's dishonest to use the same low-end steel on a knife that costs about 22 times more than those knives, they'll argue that to death. "That's not dishonest! It's not even deceitful! After all, it's an expensive knife. Therefore, it's meant to be a paperweight, so the steel doesn't matter!"

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.
 
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. Spyderco, Kershaw, and Benchmade could all use very low-end steels on their low-cost knives--420j2, 420hc, 440a and the like--but they've chosen to find the best performing steel they can for those price points.

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.

If you point out the fact that they're using what everyone already agrees is a bottom-of-the-barrel steel, but "heat treating it well," which is also the consensus.

If you go on to say that it's dishonest to use the same low-end steel on a knife that costs about 22 times more than those knives, they'll still argue that to death.

After all, it's an expensive knife. Therefore, it's meant to be a paperweight, so the steel doesn't matter!

Give me a break. Buck is a company that uses the cheapest possible steel because it's the cheapest possible steel they can use 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.
Click to expand...

:thumbup: Excellent post.
 
enderwiggin said:
That's not the kind of company I would trust or buy from. Spyderco, Kershaw, and Benchmade could all use very low-end steels on their low-cost knives--420j2, 420hc, 440a and the like--but they've chosen to find the best performing steel they can for those price points.
Click to expand...

Kershaw uses all those steels.
 
Keep in mind that many people to this day still use and carry old carbon blades that don't hold an edge as well as 420HC. Used to be from most of these types that stainless, regardless of the type it was or the name it was given was crap! Stainless meant it didn't cut and thats the way it was. Some still think this way. I just spoke with one referred to me today by Kabar.

For these types the main complaint when they first swayed from their old carbon steel user to a 440C stainless blade which was being advertised as the bigger better deal in its day, they complained about difficulty getting it sharp, much like you hear about with S30V today from some as mentioned earlier. 420HC sharpens easier for these types and is more akin to that carbon blade they are used to and it works on par with that old carbon blade they used all their lives. How many times that has to be pointed out is amazing. But lets look at it another way. If Buck still sold a good carbon blade at 56 Rockwell people would call foul, even though they work in the field just fine and have for many many years. Truth be told some people can't be pleased no matter what you offer them. I'll give you an example and then I'm done here in this thread.

I was witness in the deer camp a few years ago to a guy field dressing and then skinning out a white tail he killed that day. (I know him but I'll leave his name out of it.) He complained about the knife he had on him and what crap it was. I looked it over, it was a fine knife. Certainly something that should work I think. Took a fine edge using my diamond EZELap sharpener but he'd cuss and call it a POS off and on as he worked. When he was still unhappy with it after I touched it up I handed him my White River Skinner by Bob Dozier. This of course is made out of D2 steel. He cut with it a while and it was fine for him at first but before long he was cussing that one too, 'cuz' it ain't no better' than that Gerber he was using before you see. I started watching him work, I mean for this guy even a super steel like D2 was still crap! I had to know why. You know why? Ok, I'll tell you why. I could have done what he did with a Buck 420HC and got through the whole process start to finish with one knife probably not even needing much more than a minor touch up along the way if that to the edge. For that matter I could have done that with his Gerber too. Why?

Because I don't roll the carcass around on the ground in its own blood in sandy soil picking up silica and grit in the hairs. I separate out the hairs and part them so as to not cut any more hair than than is needed as I work. He cuts through the dirt and grit and he doesn't bother to part the hair or take his time and all in all he dulls the blade as a result of stupidity, ignorance and impatience and then gets one leg done and can't figure out whats wrong with that 'crap knife' he is using that can't hold and edge worth a darn! Everything is crap in this gents world you see?

The thing is in the right hands even a cheap steel with good geometry and even fair to moderate edge holding can do all that is ever demanded of it and more. And now you know how so many years went by with people doing all the things they needed to do to survive using bronze cutting tools for weapons and survival. They knew how to make it work to both kill and prepare food or whatever else they needed. Skilled hands and common sense are more often than not every bit as important as the cutting tool or what it is made of. In the right hands a sharpened rock can do all that a knife out of steel can do. Buck offers other steels. If you don't like the steel in the knife no one is twisting arms to make you buy it. If Buck sold it as BG42 and it was 420HC you'd have a legitimate argument. As it is now I don't think your argument holds water. But what do I know. I'm just a backyard mechanic.


STR
 
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. And just how is it that that you "know" what they are thinking?

That's not the kind of company I would trust or buy from. Spyderco, Kershaw, and Benchmade could all use very low-end steels on their low-cost knives--420j2, 420hc, 440a and the like--but they've chosen to find the best performing steel they can for those price points. As shecky pointed out, Kershaw uses 440A and 420HC. They also use AUS6, the equivalent of 440A.

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. Not jealous rage, merely pointing out the consistent lack of logic in your arguments and the "assumptions" upon which you base them, the truth behind which "assumptions" you could not possibly know.

If you point out the fact that they're using what everyone already agrees is a bottom-of-the-barrel steel, but "heat treating it well," that's acceptable consensus. I do not agree 420HC is a bottom-of-the-barrel steel. For many people, it provides the exact blend of performance characteristics that they desire in a knife. But I agree with you that they do heat treat it well. I have a Buck 420HC blade that I measured at 59.7 HRC, Plenty hard enough to give reasonable performance.

If you go on to say that it's dishonest to use the same low-end steel on a knife that costs about 22 times more than those knives, they'll argue that to death. "That's not dishonest! It's not even deceitful! After all, it's an expensive knife. Therefore, it's meant to be a paperweight, so the steel doesn't matter!" I can't figure out what you are saying in this paragraph.

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. See comment in first paragraph. How do you know what anyone else is thinking? Are you psychic?

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...

Actually, I seldom buy Buck knives. Buck excels at hunting knives, and I don't hunt anymore (Would if I could. It's not in the cards for me these days.) And since I know how to sharpen with ceramics etc., if I did buy one of their knives, it would likely be one of their 154CM offerings. But lots of folks still use an Arkansas stone and find that 420HC gives them just the mix of properties that they are looking for in a knife at a price they are looking to pay. A lot of folks are in that category, even if you and I are not.

If Buck chooses to use the same steel for a decorative knife, that is their design decision.

But calling someone dishonest simply because you disagree with their design decision is ridiculous.

And by the by Josh, STR has more practical experience with knives than 95% of the posters in this thread. Listen to him, and learn.

 
Excellent post STR and Knarfing.

I just pulled this quote from Mr. AG Russell himself, and he knows more than 99% of the people here.

"""Would it be OT to ask why there has been no discussion of geometry? Any really good maker can take 440A and make it out-perform 75-80% of the knives on the market with the top 3-4 steels listed. """


http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=605508&page=2

Buck is a good maker. I am fond of them, but fond of every good maker, so I'm not biased, as Enderwiggen suggests some of us are. Again, I've never heard of bucks honesty or integrity questioned, ever, not one time.

Maybe someone from Buck should chime in.
 
enderwiggin said:
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...

How is this dishonest? The only way it's dishonest is if they advertise the knives as having a "premium steel" and it is the standard 420hc.
 
Just a quick comment about 420HC.
I have a couple of the Buck-Strider 889 folders. I've used them around the house, in the yard, and have used them VERY hard.
The blades have held an edge at least as well as other knives with 440C and AUS-8A steel blades, they do sharpen up easily, and the knives are well made.

Did I know these knives had 420HC steel when I bought them? Yes
Was I skeptical that they would function well as a 'hard-use' knife? Initially yes
Am I now 'more educated' and am I very happy with these knives? Yes!

Today's consumer tends to be VERY savvy when considering products to purchase. Especially with today's 'high-tech' devices and society moving at such a rapid pace, people KNOW that they need to review their buying/purchasing options closely and really understand what they are buying.
I don't agree at all that Buck is being deceptive about their knives. Some Bucks have S30V steel, some have the 420HC steel, and some in the past have had 425M steel.
Does Buck hide the type of steel they're using? Absolutely not!!!

All a consumer needs to do is read the specifications of the knife, understand what it is they're buying, and make the decision of whether that product and the purchase price fits their needs and perception of value.
That's it...

A side note about using 420HC steel in collectible knives (and this has probably been mentioned before):
420HC has a decent amount of chromium in it to resist rust if being placed on a shelf, in a cabinet or in a safe. Plus, it does take a much nicer finish and polish than S30V and some other higher-end steels. Many of the custom knives that Buck makes need a fair amount of labor time to finish the handles. Does anyone remember the David Yellowhorse knives? Those took a large amount of custom work to fit each of those stones into the handle. Limited edition + high labor cost to finish usually = high retail price.

Another side note:
I have a few Buck knives that I purchased and received as gifts when I was in my late teens. For almost 20 years, I didn't really buy many Buck knives. However, over the last 5 years, I've 'rediscovered' Buck knives and am very pleased with the products and value that they offer.

That's my two cents...

Regards,
Mike
 
Last edited:
There are a lot of factors that Buck considers when chosing a steel for a particular knife.
I did not read the last 9 pages to find out where the "dishonest" comment came from but I wanted to say that it could not be any further from the truth.
In the case of knives we make for folks like Cabela's, Bass Pro, ect. The steel type effects the price we sell it to them for...which effects the price they sell it for. So they make the decision of steel type based on what they want to list the knife for. Thats a somewhat simplified explanation but I hope it makes the point.
I hear the original point about a higher end or Limited Edition knife using premium steel but I also know that if we did that, it would put the price out of reach to a lot of consumers.
In a perfect world where all steels cost the same, I totally agree...use only the best, it just seems right...right? But since its not a perfect world, thank goodness we have a great option. 420HC and the expertise of Paul Bos to get fantastic results from it.
Is this just a good business decision because most of our customers dont know any better? No. Think about it...if the steel was horrible, would we be able to stay in business using a steel that no one likes? The truth is that the steel works great. For those few that can feel a diference, we do offer quite a few knives in the "premium" steel category, and some are the limited editions.
I've been at Buck now for almost 24 years and I am still too inept to be able to tell the diference between steels anyways. IMHO, it all comes down to the individual and how they use a particular knife.
Ok, starting to ramble here. Hope this contributed to this interesting thread.
 
enderwiggin said:
If you point out the fact that they're using what everyone already agrees is a bottom-of-the-barrel steel...
Click to expand...

420HC is not bottom of the barrel steel...1020 is bottom of the barrel steel...and many Bangladeshi, Indian, and Chinese knives are made of it...I have one here in front of me...advertised as an "M9 bayonet", it cost me $4.99 to purchase online and $20 to have shipped here from China... :rolleyes:

*That's* bottom of the barrel...but it looks cool... :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top