Why PD#1?

[Josh Crutchley]

There seems to be a lot more discussion on Mule Team sales lately. It's been brought up that its hard to gauge how fast a particular Mule will sell. For example the PD#1 took 3 years to sell out but Spy27 did so in hours. Why would a series that's seemingly selling well just stall out? Here are a few questions I've had lately.

1. How many other Mules have sold out within the first few hours?

2. Did Spyderco wait until the then current Mule sold out before releasing the next?

3.The bit of searching I did it looks like a few people where unaware that the Cruwear Mule was ingot. Of the people that bought the Cruwear Mule how many knew it was the ingot version not PM?

4. How many would you have bought PD#1 knowing it was the PM version of the Cruwear Mule?

5. Did the teething issues of the Cruwear Mule heat treat have an impact on people's perception of how PD#1 would perform?

[TomAiello]

My impression is that, at the time, most people were unaware of the chemical similarities between CruWear and PD#1. It was basically an unknown steel to most people, and they weren't interested for that reason.

If it had simply been labelled 'CPM CruWear' (I'm not suggesting that Spyderco would or should have done that) I'm sure it would have sold like hotcakes.

[yablanowitz]

1) None. Most have taken at least a few days.

2) Not always. There have been as many as four available at one time.

3) I didn't know and didn't care.

4) I bought it without knowing or caring.

5) MT12 was fine after the heat treat got fixed.

I told Sal before MT1 was released that I was in for two of whatever he threw out, and I've held up my end so far.

[Josh Crutchley]

1) None. Most have taken at least a few days.

2) Not always. There have been as many as four available at one time.

3) I didn't know and didn't care.

4) I bought it without knowing or caring.

5) MT12 was fine after the heat treat got fixed.

I told Sal before MT1 was released that I was in for two of whatever he threw out, and I've held up my end so far.

I wasn't implying there was any thing wrong with MT12. If up to 4 where available at a time why the pause at MT27? There seemed to be plenty of new steels out at that time like Rex-121 and Vanax.

[TomAiello]

If up to 4 where available at a time why the pause at MT27?

Because they were sitting around so long. Spyderco had invested substantial time, effort and money in them, and they were just sitting on the shelf for quite a while.

[Cambertree]

Hey Josh,

At the time the Cruwear Mule was made, there was no particle metallurgy version. That came soon after, and Crucible ceased making ingot Cruwear at about the same time.

Yes, there’s obviously a level of hype with ‘new’ knife steels, and some people don’t look past this. We saw this with M390, where people were complaining about not having it available in their favourite knife models, while at the same time CTS-204P, or CPM 20CV knives in the same models were easily available.

I think the same thing applied to the PD1 Mule.

We see a similar thing sometimes with people who are new to knives, but just gotta have a Maxamet blade, based on having heard that it’s the ‘best’ knife steel. When the ‘best’ steel for them, based on a rational assessment of their likely uses, sharpening ability, abrasives available etc, is likely something completely different.

[standy99]

June 2018 there was 3 available
#23
#26
#27
All were still available for several months after this with PD1 lasting the longest

I bought #23 and #27 and asked about them

And got this reply in March 2018 ( how stoked was I :cool: :cool: )

CPM 20CV is one manufacturers version of M390, which is another manufacturers version of CTS 204P. An excellent stainless steel and one of my favorite all time blade steels in whatever version.

PD1 is (as I understand it) a version instead of Cruwear, but made by Carpenter. This is NOT a stainless steel. Don't let that worry you though, this is (Cruwear that is) a highly regarded steel by many people. A great balance of properties and pleasant to sharpen. I have read almost nothing about PD1 specifically, but I think it is safe to expect the same from PD1 as from Cruwear. Be aware of the fact it is non-stainless and enjoy it.

Now what kind of advice were you looking for?

[mikey177]

Maybe the fact that many people were cooped up at home in 2020 and had sufficient time to learn about Spy27 steel contributed to the higher demand for the Spy27 Mule.

I can't speak for anyone else, but I personally only discovered that Mule Team knives existed sometime in 2017. It took me two more years to figure out that they could only be ordered direct from Spyderco. Hence, I was able to get the RWL34 and PD1 Mules one after the other in 2019.

I'm one of those folks that decided to buy the PD1 Mule because I read about it and found out that it was an analogue of CPM Cru-wear.

I also wonder what percentage of Spy27 Mule sales were made by flippers, as I have seen some for sale on Ebay the day after the drop.

[Josh Crutchley]

It seems in the past Spyderco had multiple mules for sale at once. That means they didn't wait until the current one sold out before the releasing the next. They more than likely would have had more than one in development at a time. Why did that change with Pd#1? Was it the development and production of Spy27 that put a pause on the Mule Team? Why not move to another steel to keep peoples interest? I know the long production queue means you can't add things at the last minute. I think there was a lot more involved than the slow sales of Pd#1. It couldn't have been the only reason for the Mule Team hiatus. Regardless I applaud Spyderco for bringing the Mule Team back and Sal for his continued desire for community feedback. This is such a rare thing nowadays.

[Skidoosh]

I think the K390 sold very quickly but PD#1 was an anomaly for how long it was available. It was odd especially with the demand for cru-wear. I think there was a great deal of pent up demand for mules fueled by them being available again. Who knows but I echo the applause of Spyderco for taking another risk.

[JRinFL]

PD#1 is a terrible name for a steel as it said nothing at all about what it is. Even tagging -wear on the end (PD#1-wear or PD-wear) would have let on that it was in the same family as Cru-wear, Z-wear, etc. Not Spyderco's fault, of course.

Naming matters when it comes to sales, even to steel junkies.

[yablanowitz]

Josh, in the past there were multiple Mules available at a time, but not in huge quantities. I suspect a few of the popular steels sold out quickly enough to sucker Sal into making larger runs, and then those runs didn't sell as well. He was faced with declining sales and larger quantities on hand, which he interpreted (rightly in my opinion) as a waning interest in the program.

Then Covid-19 hit. Lots of people stuck at home with nothing to do. "Hey, Spyderco has some bare knives. I think I'll get one and try making handles." "I'm bored. I think I'll read up on steel. Hey, Google says Spyderco made a knife out of that. I want one." Just like that, knives that had been gathering dust for years started selling. Having the SPY27 Mule in the Reveal (supposedly for release within that quarter) and then not seeing it for a year probably helped fuel the sellout.

[Cambertree]

PD#1 is a terrible name for a steel as it said nothing at all about what it is. Even tagging -wear on the end (PD#1-wear or PD-wear) would have let on that it was in the same family as Cru-wear, Z-wear, etc. Not Spyderco's fault, of course.

Naming matters when it comes to sales, even to steel junkies.

Hey JR,

Do you think it would make a difference if the full name Punch Die #1 was used?

It seems to indicate its intended use?

Josh, the Mules were roughly released on a quarterly basis and there were often Mules from previous releases available when new ones were released.

Some models sold out fairly quickly, but none as fast as the SPY27 model.

Waning sales put a pause on the program.

Discussion on this forum, and perhaps others indicated that interest was there for the program to be revived.

[JRinFL]

PD#1 is a terrible name for a steel as it said nothing at all about what it is. Even tagging -wear on the end (PD#1-wear or PD-wear) would have let on that it was in the same family as Cru-wear, Z-wear, etc. Not Spyderco's fault, of course.

Naming matters when it comes to sales, even to steel junkies.

Hey JR,

Do you think it would make a difference if the full name Punch Die #1 was used?

It seems to indicate its intended use?

In this case, no I don’t think it would have helped. The “wear” suffix has a long history going back to Vascowear. Similar steels like Cruwear, CPM Cruwear, and Z-wear all maintained the name structure. Except for PD#1. I do believe that sales would have been better with a different name. Marion Robert Morrison or John Wayne, see what I mean? :D

[Josh Crutchley]

Josh, in the past there were multiple Mules available at a time, but not in huge quantities. I suspect a few of the popular steels sold out quickly enough to sucker Sal into making larger runs, and then those runs didn't sell as well. He was faced with declining sales and larger quantities on hand, which he interpreted (rightly in my opinion) as a waning interest in the program.

Then Covid-19 hit. Lots of people stuck at home with nothing to do. "Hey, Spyderco has some bare knives. I think I'll get one and try making handles." "I'm bored. I think I'll read up on steel. Hey, Google says Spyderco made a knife out of that. I want one." Just like that, knives that had been gathering dust for years started selling. Having the SPY27 Mule in the Reveal (supposedly for release within that quarter) and then not seeing it for a year probably helped fuel the sellout.

Ok so that makes sense quantities where increased on the later mules which led to excess inventory. Hopefully they stay around longer this time.

[Tucson Tom]

PD#1 is a terrible name for a steel as it said nothing at all about what it is. Even tagging -wear on the end (PD#1-wear or PD-wear) would have let on that it was in the same family as Cru-wear, Z-wear, etc. Not Spyderco's fault, of course.

Naming matters when it comes to sales, even to steel junkies.

Well, you have to remember that Carpenter didn't make this steel with the intent of marketing it to knife junkies. For this and many other "exotic" steels, their use in knives is sort of an unexpected niche market. They are made for industrial use, things like plastic molds, machining tools, ball bearings. That is a part of the idea with the mule program. Spyderco spots interesting steels and gives them a whirl as knife steels.

People who didn't know that PD-1 was all but the same thing as Cruwear just weren't paying attention.

[JRinFL]

PD#1 is a terrible name for a steel as it said nothing at all about what it is. Even tagging -wear on the end (PD#1-wear or PD-wear) would have let on that it was in the same family as Cru-wear, Z-wear, etc. Not Spyderco's fault, of course.

Naming matters when it comes to sales, even to steel junkies.

Well, you have to remember that Carpenter didn't make this steel with the intent of marketing it to knife junkies. For this and many other "exotic" steels, their use in knives is sort of an unexpected niche market. They are made for industrial use, things like plastic molds, machining tools, ball bearings. That is a part of the idea with the mule program. Spyderco spots interesting steels and gives them a whirl as knife steels.

People who didn't know that PD-1 was all but the same thing as Cruwear just weren't paying attention.

I don't disagree with any of your points. I was just pointing out that naming matters in sales, despite the product being equal to another. For the record, I have a PD#1 mule because I did do my research. :)

[Cambertree]

PD#1 is a terrible name for a steel as it said nothing at all about what it is. Even tagging -wear on the end (PD#1-wear or PD-wear) would have let on that it was in the same family as Cru-wear, Z-wear, etc. Not Spyderco's fault, of course.

Naming matters when it comes to sales, even to steel junkies.

Hey JR,

Do you think it would make a difference if the full name Punch Die #1 was used?

It seems to indicate its intended use?

In this case, no I don’t think it would have helped. The “wear” suffix has a long history going back to Vascowear. Similar steels like Cruwear, CPM Cruwear, and Z-wear all maintained the name structure. Except for PD#1. I do believe that sales would have been better with a different name. Marion Robert Morrison or John Wayne, see what I mean? :D

Yes, I think you’re right.

The sales of the PMA11 Mule probably suffered from the same thing. If it had been labelled as K294 or CPM10V then people would have been all over it.

An interesting thing about Spyderco is they seem to be more interested in following industry standards, developments and naming conventions, regarding steels, rather than giving their own marketing names and spin to a steel grade, like some other knife manufacturers.

I like that.

They seem to have actually set the standard in the wider knife scene in this regard.

G-2 is the only example I can think of where they gave their own name to an existing steel grade, and I believe that was because of a proprietary agreement between Hitachi and another knife company at the time.

I guess in this day and age, further imformation is easily available for anyone doing a simple internet search or referring to the Knife Steel app. :)

[Josh Crutchley]

Yes, I think you’re right.

The sales of the PMA11 Mule probably suffered from the same thing. If it had been labelled as K294 or CPM10V then people would have been all over it.

An interesting thing about Spyderco is they seem to be more interested in following industry standards, developments and naming conventions, regarding steels, rather than giving their own marketing names and spin to a steel grade, like some other knife manufacturers.

I like that.

They seem to have actually set the standard in the wider knife scene in this regard.

G-2 is the only example I can think of where they gave their own name to an existing steel grade, and I believe that was because of a proprietary agreement between Hitachi and another knife company at the time.

I guess in this day and age, further imformation is easily available for anyone doing a simple internet search or referring to the Knife Steel app. :)

It sound like there might be some legal aspects since a lot of names are trademarked. I think some names are the AISI standard like A11 or D2. Crucible could sue if CPM Cruwear is put on another steel even if they're the same composition.

[Cambertree]

Yes, I think you’re right.

The sales of the PMA11 Mule probably suffered from the same thing. If it had been labelled as K294 or CPM10V then people would have been all over it.

An interesting thing about Spyderco is they seem to be more interested in following industry standards, developments and naming conventions, regarding steels, rather than giving their own marketing names and spin to a steel grade, like some other knife manufacturers.

I like that.

They seem to have actually set the standard in the wider knife scene in this regard.

G-2 is the only example I can think of where they gave their own name to an existing steel grade, and I believe that was because of a proprietary agreement between Hitachi and another knife company at the time.

I guess in this day and age, further imformation is easily available for anyone doing a simple internet search or referring to the Knife Steel app. :)

It sound like there might be some legal aspects since a lot of names are trademarked. I think some names are the AISI standard like A11 or D2. Crucible could sue if CPM Cruwear is put on another steel even if they're the same composition.

Yes, you certainly couldn’t go slapping a trademarked name on just any steel.

But I think Jim may have been referring to the convention of using ‘Wear’ as a suffix for the 7% Cr tool steels.

Vasco started it with Vascowear. Crucible also used it with Cru Wear after Vasco became defunct. And Z-Wear is a Zapp steel.

Cruwear was even nicknamed Mastiff Wear here, after forum member Joe Mastiff’s tireless lobbying for the use of the steel for years. :)

It is an interesting insight into part of the knife buying scene though that certain steels become highly hyped and sought after, whereas virtually identical analogues often fail to gain the same popularity.

Larrin has a cool article on steel naming conventions on Patreon at the moment.