Paying a premium for 1095?

[Nix]

Ouch
SAK's have a can opener on them.   

I was doing some testing with this one. In the current Fixie challenge.

Awl in the name of knife science.......

[Dean51]

Ouch
SAK's have a can opener on them.   

I was doing some testing with this one. In the current Fixie challenge.

Awl in the name of knife science.......

I should thank you then. 

[Dean51]

Discussion is not possible with people that are not willing to listen, learn, and heaven forbid admit they were wrong and change their minds......

Guys like Pete at C&A outdoors and Supersteel Steve have even made videos where they address their critics.

I don't get involved in the mess that is youtube comments, but considering the criticisms they address in the videos it would seem many carry the same opinions as expressed here.

I'm a developing knife maker, I want to learn and I do not have the time, knives or opportunity to repeat these tests, so I deeply appreciate what they're doing.

I'm not willing to disregard a whole body of evidence because a few values in a spreadsheet were entered wrong, mistake admitted and corrected.

I fully support their attempts at doing real world testing within limits.....which they both freely admit.

I understand Pete's sarcasm......

I understand Steve's into............


Closer to home, my mentor tuned his Elmax chopper till it could go through just about everything, including nails hidden in tar poles.....
If you think a production knife can compete with what a dedicated maker can get from the same steel, I say good luck......

Nothing against ESEE, but I wonder if any of their knives have ever done the ABS journeyman test?


Price cannot be determined by the steel type, remember that very expensive damascus blade is just 1070 or 1080 combined with 15N20, both those are poorer cousins (as far as % carbon is concerned) to 1095 and cheaper still........

Many GEC's would be a great example of paying a premium for a tiny piece of 1095........

I watched 5 of Super Steve's videos, two were on sharpening.
Now I see why you say “Simple fact is we're mostly talking about production knives, and the information emerging seems to point out that many of these super steels we're paying through the nose for are not heat treated to maximize that potential performance.
Thus, properly heat treated, 1095 could be on the heels of these super steels.”

I am still going to agree to disagree.

To stop a test when a knife will no longer shave is only half a test. And to say “Thus, properly heat treated, 1095 could be on the heels of these super steels.” is only half true and a bit misleading.

Super Steve puts a lot of value on a steel holding a shaving edge, I could care less about a shaving edge. In 50 plus years of knife usage I've never shaved with a knife and I never will. Years ago, OK many many years ago I did a lot of warehouse type work, how long a knife would stay sharp is all that maters to me. At that point where a knife starts to have difficulty cutting paper, it's time to sharpen. The longer it will cut the happier I am.

Super Steve freehand sharpens and there is a huge difference between free handing AUS-8 and S90V, I believe that affects his numbers just a bit. He's needs a guided system to take one more human variable out of his tests. Concerning his AUS-8 vs S90V test, my experience is a bit different. CPM S90V does hold a razor edge longer than AUS-8 but not as long as the steel specifications would suggest. I can cut  easily cut 3 or 4 times the cardboard with S90V vs AUS-8 before loosing the working edge.  The shaving edge doesn't last 4 times l onger, more like 1 ½ times as longer. Don't know why that is, don't care.

“Simple fact is we're mostly talking about production knives” Yes we are and manufactures market to a target audience.  Manufactures often heat treat simple steels softer to aid in sharpening because that's what their target customers want. Case is a good example of that. Queens D2 is another example it's a couple points softer than it could be but fine for the use most traditionals are asked to do.
Or a manufactures may heat treat the newer complex steels softer to protect them selves from the hard use, chop, stab every thing in sight crowd. Customers can be stupid and/or inexperienced.

There are manufactures who do a very good job heat treating.
Manufactures have to build to a compromise, as buyers we need to be informed. Don't like the heat treat don't buy it but manufactures will never change to make me and you happy. The other option is to build your own or go custom, neither of those options are for me.

Both Super Stevie and Pete had to much human error in their tests, when they remove the variables I'll listen.. 
At best steel is a compromise as a general rule add more carbide, vanadium and a higher the HRC the working edge retention goes up and toughness goes down. Simple low carbon steels tend to be tougher at the cost of working edge retention.
There's to much emphasis on heat treat and I still say you can't make a silk purse out of a sows ear.
Simple low carbon steels do what they do and high carbide, high vanadium steels do what they do.

The choices are good.

[Nix]

I've never seen "Super Steve", so my following comments are nothing to do with him, really.

I'd just like to point out that I mostly freehand sharpen. I do have an Edgepro, but that doesn't see much use.

Since I'm a freehand sharpener, it might be the case that someone who tests knives with a freehand edge is more relevant to me. Testing where the edge has been rigorously sharpened on a machine is not so relevant, for me,  though such testing is still interesting.

The controlled sharpening systems create a different edge. I prefer a freehand edge, with tends to be slightly convexed. Therefore, testing that is reflective of my sharpening-style may really be more relevant to me.

 

[Dean51]

I've never seen "Super Steve", so my following comments are nothing to do with him, really.

I'd just like to point out that I mostly freehand sharpen. I do have an Edgepro, but that doesn't see much use.

Since I'm a freehand sharpener, it might be the case that someone who tests knives with a freehand edge is more relevant to me. Testing where the edge has been rigorously sharpened on a machine is not so relevant, for me,  though such testing is still interesting.

The controlled sharpening systems create a different edge. I prefer a freehand edge, with tends to be slightly convexed. Therefore, testing that is reflective of my sharpening-style may really be more relevant to me.

 

Your testing would be more relevant to you.
When you are testing for data that is to be made public variables of freehand should be removed.

[Nix]

I see what you are saying.  However, I'd still still prefer to see data where freehand sharpening is presented.

True, "Super Steve" or whoever will not sharpen the same way I do. He and I will have different edges. But the type of edge will be similar.

The same goes for testing a rain jacket. 

I like learning about how many psi of water pressure a given jacket will withstand in a lab, but I find the data from testers wearing a specific jacket out in the mountains in the rain to be more informative.

I'm just the kind of person who like 'real world' testing over 'lab testing'. 

[Nix]

Same with steel really.

As we've agreed, it is somewhat non-sensical to talk about the virtues of any given steel without taking into account heat-treat and edge geometry.

Boker does a nice job with 440C in real world conditions (according to me). Buck does great with 420HC, but they are the only ones I trust with that steel.  My own handmade 1095 knives are great, but probably not up to Ontario's level of performance.

That's just based on my own 'real-world' experience. You might do you own testing and come to entirely different conclusions. 

I think that's one reason I keep ending up with extra knives: I have to find out how some of these things work for myself.   

[Dean51]

With freehand you get a convex edge that can vary, angles can not be held consistent. Even with two identical knives you could get two results.
When testing two steels that are close that variable will throw off the results.
I guess I'm a lab nerd.

[Nix]

With freehand you get a convex edge that can vary, angles can not be held consistent. Even with two identical knives you could get two results.
When testing two steels that are close that variable will throw off the results.

   Completely agree. 

[Aloha]

I use guided ( Lansky ) and Whet stones.  I sharpen all my blades to hair shaving sharp typically to about the 18-22 ish degree per side range.  The Lansky is not perfect tho there is a great video I posted on how to better dial in the edge angle with it. The gentleman in the video did a great explanation ( wasn't me ). 

So, heat treat, edge angles, fit and finish, and other materials, are we are happy to pay the ( relative/very personal ) price some are asking for 1095?  For me,  No.  YMMV  .     

The discussion is great regarding comparisons, heat treatment, and everything else brought up  .  I don't mind seeing a guy cut endless feet of rope or cardboard for data points.  In ones own usage however these data points are just that, data points.  I'd imagine most of us use our blades on many different materials  .  I would also think many of us also "tune" up factory edges  .     

My LM Charge TTi with S30V, Skeletool CX in 154CM, Spyderco in VG10, my 1095, and my 420HC blades all behave differently as one would imagine at the end of my work day.  I dont know about their heat treatment.  All I can personally attest to is the performance in my work day.  All my blades get "refined" by me and my methods before using them.  I strop to a mirror finish and all will shave hair with no issue.   

I tend to cut a variety of materials tho never endless lengths of any one so the data on edge holding for me is relevant to a point.  I also don't know about any makers heat treatment specifically as I honestly dont look to much into it.  I tend to go by their reputation and what other have experienced with steels I am interested in.  Maybe I'm naive in that sense  .   I can say and have said that my LM S30V is still sharp after a long day of usage, it is currently sharp.  Will it shave hair now?  I don't know actually.  Reason why?  Because it still performs as I need it to, daily, and has continued to perform as "expected" since I've had it.  When they cease to perform as I need or am accustomed to then I'll go ahead and take care of the blade.  When I am not familiar with a certain steel then data points online help, somewhat.  I use these data points subjectively to decide if X steel vs Y steel is worth it to me over what I currently have. 

A good example are ZDP189 and M4 or A2 and O1.  I've seen the numbers and comparisons and IMO ZDP189 is my choice.  Fractions of real world differences don't move me.  YMMV.  I also am not terribly interested in owning every steel variety just for the sake of owning ( ok I cannot afford to  ).  I also just like certain steels for no other reason than familiarity.  With A2 and O1 the differences aren't enough IMO IF one was more expensive that the other to justify the higher cost.  I like both btw even tho they seem to perform same.       

My 420HC and VG10 blades slow in performing much sooner than I care so don't carry these when I know I'll have a busy day.  Or I'll carry them as a secondary option.  I use 1095 harder because I know it performs in that role for me.   I will hack brush limbs when needing to access my work space.  I will tend to use 1095 more for outdoorsy things as well ( I also have O1 and A2 ).  Any "damage" can usually be rectified easily on the spot or later with little effort.  Also its just an a tough steel ( yes when done right ) for what I use it for.  I don't feel my other blades wont perform its more a matter of I prefer to use 1095 in certain roles.   

I want to reiterate, I am not against 1095.  My point was to see who felt as I do that 1095 ( even when done right ) doesn't justify paying YOUR threshold high price.  1095 has its place and will always IMO.  I'm just not personally gonna pay ( my personal threshold ) for a 1095 blade especially in a folder.

 

[SteveC]

 

[Dean51]

Welcome 

[Gerhard Gerber]

I've had what I consider to be success with the Lansky exactly twice 

I disassembled by Kershaw Skyline and put a 17deg edge on it, and it's just lovely.  Been several weeks now, probably my most carried knife and still sharp.

Not having the whole weight of a knife in those pathetic jaws is the trick it seems....

Secondly, and a bit surprising was my Maxamet Mule complete with chips.  Got the chips out and the knife sticky-sharp with relatively little effort.

Cruwear Para3 also gets pocket time, still factory edge and not as sharp as the Skyline, but the steel is obviously tough.




As far as Super Steel Steve is concerned, I appreciate the fact that he free-hand sharpens, that said his free-hand is better that mine and most people's Lansky efforts.

FYI he's now testing till the knife no longer shaves, then carries on till it no longer slices paper.

[Dean51]

As far as Super Steel Steve is concerned, I appreciate the fact that he free-hand sharpens, that said his free-hand is better that mine and most people's Lansky efforts.

FYI he's now testing till the knife no longer shaves, then carries on till it no longer slices paper.

I appreciate th fact that he can freehand but nobody can freehand good enough to remove sharpening as a variable. Super Stevie is no exception to that. When he tests S30V vs S30V his results are questionable because of his variables.
 
"FYI he's now testing till the knife no longer shaves, then carries on till it no longer slices paper. "
I know and that's an improvement.

Cedric admits he is not a good sharpener but still publishes data. That's just wrong. Cedric just recently went to a guided system. I've seen Cedric's results and read discussions on other forums about his results. Sometimes his a bit off  but sometimes his results are just wrong.
Even his testing method by using a saw cut on wood throws his results off. Humans can not reliably apply the same amount of pressure each time and even the condition of the wood is a variable.

If these guys are going to set themselves up as experts then they should be experts before publishing data.
They should know better than to introduce variables in there tests, that's taught in basic science.

If I'm looking for hard data I want accuracy not close enough for government work.
I'm done here and agree to disagree.

[Aloha]

The Lansky can be "improved" but it certainly has its quirks.  I only use it to set the bevel then use strops to keep the edge.  If damage does occur then back to the Lansky or Whet Stones if I feel they would be "easier".

[Aloha]

Here is a good video about the Lansky.  Knowing how to calculate the angles using this system can help keep the bevel more consistent. 

 

Show content

[Dean51]

The Lansky can be "improved" but it certainly has its quirks.  I only use it to set the bevel then use strops to keep the edge.  If damage does occur then back to the Lansky or Whet Stones if I feel they would be "easier".

I started sharpening freehand with a small pocket stone, then bought a 3 stone smiths tri hone. I used that for a very long time, actually still use it for kitchen knives. I tried ceramic V sticks but they seemed a bit slow if the knife was to dull, so went back to the tri hone. I've tried the Lansky once but it didn't work well on small traditional blades so went back to freehand.

When I got the first D2 blade I bought a KME diamond set, that has worked very well for me. In the years I've had that I added 320 aluminum oxide stones for steels like 1095 and 154CM, along with a couple home made strops. I use 600 Silicone carbide for D2. Then 600 diamond and 800 boron carbide for S30V, M390 and S90V.

Sharpening systems can get really fancy and expensive but a simple bench stone or V sticks can work for most people.
Sometimes you got to experiment to find what works for you.

[Gerhard Gerber]

Cedric admits he is not a good sharpener but still publishes data. That's just wrong.

By all means, explain the logic of that statement to me..... 

[Dean51]

Cedric admits he is not a good sharpener but still publishes data. That's just wrong.

By all means, explain the logic of that statement to me..... 

Some of the sharpening systems Cedric has used in his tests.
Work sharp - It's a powered belt system even with the same grit that's a different edge finish than a hand powered stone.

Lansky – Cedric “states it's the least precise because he didn't use an angle cube”  That's a change in edge finish and angles from his previous tests.

Tormek - Won't a round wheel finish an edge different than the previous systems? Now he's using a concave edge. Again angles and edge finish have changed.

KME - Cedric “said he will use it in conjunction with an angle system”  A switch to diamonds, so again a different edge finish and angle.

In the same video the above came from, Cedric stated he did not want to start using a cutting mat instead of wood, because it would affect his data.
Does he not understand that four very different sharpening systems, combined with various angles and finishes has affected his data.

Like I said Cedric has come up before on another knifey forum, the same comments about his methods being flawed were brought up.
If his methods vary wildly so will his results.

I'm not one of them but there are people who make buying decisions based in part on tests like his. If his tests are flawed that's a disservice to his fan base and the companies making the knives he his testing.

As a person I'm sure he's a nice guy, as a steel tester he's very flawed.
I will not comment further, last word is yours.

[Aloha]

While I enjoy the data points, the knife tests are not representative in how I will use a knife.  I don't open as many boxes or break down as many boxes as others.  I also don't cut endless amounts of rope.  Ok ok, I know these tests are to show a given ( starting sharpness ) to and end ( no longer cuts paper or shaves hair ) and the cardboard or rope is the path to get to the end.  I ust don't get too excited about them.  Interesting yes, conclusive for me, not so much.  I do appreciate all the efforts put forth and all the conversations they result in.  I like to watch M Christy but his technique is not something I could produce.  Holding the stones and getting the bevels so uniform plus the sharpness he obtains.     

I do enjoy the conversations that are a result of these and other knife people testing their knives.  We don't have to agree.  What works for one works and what works for another works, so there is no argument. 

Sharpening from one person to the next will differ.  The results from cutting the medium will differ since each person will hold the knife and apply pressure differently.  I keep it simple, my knife is sharp ( will shave hair ), when my knife begins to slow ( or stops cutting material I need cut ), my knife needs to be stropped.  After such experiences with different steels I have, I know what steel to bring when the day will require a lot of use.  I may be over simplifying this but it has worked for me.  So looking at cut test is fine but not conclusive for me since I'll be cutting a variety of materials over a work day.   

Take what you will, determine what you will, test, evaluate, and decide if a certain steel suits your needs.  The test for me don't need to be done in a vacuum and in the end I still wont pay a premium ( my high dollar threshold ) for 1095. 

 

[Gerhard Gerber]

Pete is now referring to his testing as bro-science.

Steve gives his answer at the start of every video.

I'm surprised at all the nit-picks and the preference of no data and ignorance over admittedly less than perfect data......

I've learned so much watching these videos I can only be thankful.

[Aloha]

Pete is now referring to his testing as bro-science.

Steve gives his answer at the start of every video.

I'm surprised at all the nit-picks and the preference of no data and ignorance over admittedly less than perfect data......

I've learned so much watching these videos I can only be thankful.

Bro science, I like that.  I've not watched the other guy.  I appreciate the work done by all testers.  I sure am not going to do it so glad someone is.  Information gathered by any of these testers and I'll lump in reviewers are all fine.  I'll have to check out the other guy as I do like to hear a variety of thoughts on any topic. 

Lastly,  the information given in these type videos is similar to the chit chat we do on the forums.  I do have a question tho, is there anyone doing actual testing using methods that would be considered proper? 

[Gerhard Gerber]

  I do have a question tho, is there anyone doing actual testing using methods that would be considered proper?

Considering some of the findings by SS Steve why would they?

He joked about Spyderco sending a hitman after him, while at a guess Manly and Benchmade got a few sales out of his recent videos........

He's getting some blades tested for hardness, which should add some interesting information.

  I appreciate the work done by all testers.  I sure am not going to do it so glad someone is.  Information gathered by any of these testers and I'll lump in reviewers are all fine.  I'll have to check out the other guy as I do like to hear a variety of thoughts on any topic. 

Exactly 

The Michael Christy review of the Cruwear Para3 pushed me over the edge into buying it.  Thanks to Pete I know what to expect from Cruwear, thanks to Steve I know likely it's not HT'ed to maximum potential, but thanks to all of them I knew it was the one for me.

[Aloha]

So many wonderful factors when deciding which blade to buy.  Or one can simply buy several of each and test on their own  . 

[cody6268]

In my collection is a ton of steels, ranging from what I'd call worse than pot metal on bargain bin specials (which for some reason, I won't throw out), all the way up to super-high end like CPM-154 and VG-10. As well as specialty steels like H-1 that won't rust.  But most are rather "pedestrian", with most being carbon steel, and 420HC, 440A, and 440C stainless (and a couple nineties Bucks with 425M.  And those are the ones I typically carry and use the most. I prefer something that holds a good edge for a reasonable amount of time, but doesn't take hours upon ours and tons of specialty gear (diamond stones; sharpening rigs) to get a good edge on.   Most 1095 knives I have; when available, the SS and CV options were roughly equal. That being said, I wish Case would start making CV a bit more widespread.

This is one knife I will be paying extra to get carbon steel, though inflation included not that much more expensive.   Back in the 1990s, Camillus' One Hand Openers series was about $20-25 a knife, most coming in 420HC.   They made one for Moore Maker, which is still available from MM, called the Roper, based on the existing Medium Sierra.  It's about $40. It's a shame 1095 is not seen on that many one-hand opening knives, let alone lightweight offerings such as this.

[dks]

Had a very quick look through the thread.

For people wanting decent low cost carbon steel fixed blades I would suggest a Mora or a Martiini one.

For those that want something big you can look into Ontario.

D2 sold by Queen is very nice, on slipjoints at least. It is also reasonably rust resistant.

GEC Bullnose is good for a lower cost introduction into premium Carbon steel knives (Look for O1).

 Opinel or RR will also give you low cost  carbon steel knives.

I generally prefer SS.

[Gerhard Gerber]

Unfortunately the language warning applies more than ever 

I don't mind. 

I've learned so much that is relevant to me as a knife maker in the future 

Here we go.......1095 snapping at the heels of the super steels:




  ~    Bad Language Warning    ~

[Aloha]

I finally got around to watching SS and his testing.  As I said earlier, I do enjoy these testers and the data they produce is interesting.  I'll watch the video thanks.  I have to admit I learned a thing or two about how far to take an edge with certain steels.  I don't have said steels however it was enlightening.  I know even amongst the knife community sharpening is highly debatable topic.  Hats off to those who go thru the trouble to do the testing.  They are certainly setting themselves up for a lot of critique. 

[Gerhard Gerber]

I finally got around to watching SS and his testing.  As I said earlier, I do enjoy these testers and the data they produce is interesting.  I'll watch the video thanks.  I have to admit I learned a thing or two about how far to take an edge with certain steels.  I don't have said steels however it was enlightening.  I know even amongst the knife community sharpening is highly debatable topic.  Hats off to those who go thru the trouble to do the testing.  They are certainly setting themselves up for a lot of critique.

Some fascinating insights from this guy.......check one or 2 videos back he addresses (perceived  ) edge retention  using a chef's knife and onions

[Aloha]

Make me miss Dean51.  Having recently acquired a 165OT in what I believe is 1095 I was not surprised the edge on a whetstone 1000 and 3000 followed by white and green strop I got.  I don't know what Schrade heat treat is but goodness they seemed to be spot on ( reading info online ).  My 1000 whetstone did take a bit of pressure and time to create a burr ( my stone is not high quality ) but once it did I was stoked.  I convexed the edge which seemed to have never been actually sharpened  .  When I moved to my 3000 stone I could feel the blade responding.  I'm no expert by any stretch but I've used that stone on a few steels. 

I don't know what these knives cost new and what the price would be in todays dollars but this knife seems well worth the cost.  I'll report back after some use.  All my new to me fixed blades get used in my kitchen and this was no exception.  It performed beautifully but yes its quite thick so not ideal.

RIP Dean51.  Thanks for sharing your knowledge with us.