Thinnest functional bladestock for a general use folder

Discuss Spyderco's products and history.
User avatar
brancron
Member
Posts: 144
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2015 6:12 pm

Re: Thinnest functional bladestock for a general use folder

Postby brancron » Sat Jan 22, 2022 8:11 am

Toucan wrote:
Fri Jan 21, 2022 11:11 pm
That is very thin! Is there much flex in the blade, if at all? Yes, Cruwear makes a lot of sense to me. Toughness probably becomes increasingly more important when approaching extreme geometries. I have no expertise in these matters, but it does seem that the balance of properties become much less forgiving in thinner geometries.
There isn't any real flex in normal use, but I feel like it wouldn't be too hard to flex it if I tried. Here's a quick video: https://www.instagram.com/p/B-P04jOjRys/

Vaugith
Member
Posts: 101
Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2021 9:37 am

Re: Thinnest functional bladestock for a general use folder

Postby Vaugith » Sat Jan 22, 2022 8:26 am

For this application I understand you want steels with very fine grain structure. Small carbides. K390 would not be a great choice I don't think. Magnacut has fine grain already and shouldn't need modification to do well here. Cruwear, aebL as already mentioned. To add to this list: sandvik steels, 3v, lc200n, 52100, caldie, z-tuff. Maybe M4 and 4v, but might be pushing it on the carbide content there depending on how thin we're going.

I also agree blade stock is only one variable in the equation. We also need thin BTE measurements. And while we are at it, for a delicate slicer with these steels, let's lower the sharpening angle down to 10-12 DPS! Now you have a true laser.

The problem with doing this is large and prohibitive: the end user. If this model takes off, then a bunch of people buy them who hear they're amazing but don't know how to treat a thin knife will inevitably pick them up. Next thing you know you have a bunch of snapped blades on Instagram and the uneducated masses think all spydercos break super easily. Spyderco can't put a product out that would be able to break even with some degree of abuse. I think we could still handle a 2mm stock with 0.01 BTE in one of these fine grain steels though.

The good news here is you can get this dream laser blade! Regrinds are a thing and are awesome. Krein and BGM are two companies that you can send your favorite spydie out to and have them thin that bad boy down to beautifully slicy proportions.
Last edited by Vaugith on Mon Jan 24, 2022 10:58 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Jim Malone
Member
Posts: 1093
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2005 5:31 pm
Location: Absurdistan E.U.

Re: Thinnest functional bladestock for a general use folder

Postby Jim Malone » Sat Jan 22, 2022 8:38 am

I don't see the benefit of ultra thin blades in knives where the blade doesn't needs to be thin to perform it's duty. The catcherman was thin because the blade needed to flex when cleaning fish. A razor needs to be thin because all it has to do is lie next to your skin and cut. No need for a point or lateral strenth. A pocket knife with a non looking blade needs to be light to carry in your pocket so no need to have a thick blade. But if you design a "light saber" thin slicer people will complaint about tips breaking off and weak blades because they did stuff with it that was not within the parameter of the knife design. Think about the tips breaking off from the Civilian/matriarch models (not designed for EDC) or the tips breaking of say from the Ronin 1. I have a Ronin 1, boy it has a scary tip. Extremely thin and if you would use this as a work knife i suspect the tip won't last long.
So knife companies have to design blades that won't go "pling" the first 5 minutes because the average knife buyer thinks his blade is made from good old tough 420 stainless steel and uses his blade as a prybar. I have had an edge destroyed by non knife users who asked if someone had a knife and then destroyed my edge and tip by using it to free his kid who locked itself in a toilet by using the cutting edge to force the locking part back. I learned my lesson there. It was a VG10 blade so it had some toughness in it. I don't think you could do the same with S90V without snapping the blade. ( Still gives me chills). They could post a warning that the blade could snap when you use it in non knife task, but they included this warning with the Civilian as well and they still had to redesign the bladeshape to make the point sturdier in the new models. And it was not i believe because Spyderco got feedback that another undercover agent popped of his / her point when cutting his or her way out of a life and death survival situation. It was because people saw the blade shape and thought that looks like a good utility hawkbill blade. Some people have the tendency to blame the product and not themself so why risk your good name by producing an ultra thin but fragile pocket knife? Why wouldn't you opt for a boxcutter if that is what you need?

User avatar
ZrowsN1s
Member
Posts: 6292
Joined: Sat Jan 30, 2016 5:08 pm
Location: San Diego, California USA

Re: Thinnest functional bladestock for a general use folder

Postby ZrowsN1s » Sat Jan 22, 2022 1:31 pm

The AFI Performance Delica should answer some of these questions when it gets made. It's on my must buy list with the BBB collaboration.
-Matt a.k.a. Lo_Que, loadedquestions135 I ❤ The P'KAL :bug-red

"The world of edges has a small doorway in, but opens into a cavern that is both wide and deep." -sal "Ghost hunters scope the edge." -sal

FK
Member
Posts: 625
Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 10:33 am
Location: CT USA

Re: Thinnest functional bladestock for a general use folder

Postby FK » Sat Jan 22, 2022 1:44 pm

Thin functional blades = Victorinox Swiss Army

User avatar
ladybug93
Member
Posts: 4322
Joined: Tue May 15, 2018 11:20 pm

Re: Thinnest functional bladestock for a general use folder

Postby ladybug93 » Sat Jan 22, 2022 1:48 pm

one of the things i like about spyderco is that they know how to make a thick blade thin and slicey. take a thick blade stock, cut it into a nice, tall leaf shape, and then sharpen it with a flat grind, and you end up with something that is robust enough to be pushed but thin enough to slice, and also has an even thinner tip for finer work. this is why i love the manix and resilience so much. it even works great with thinner blade stock on smaller knives, as i've experienced with the astute. other blade shapes are great for different reasons, but this is why i like the leaf shape so much.
keep your knife sharp and your focus sharper.
current collection:
C101GBN2, MT35, C211TI, C242CF, C217GSSF, C101BN2, C85G2, C91BBK, C142G, LBK, LYL3HB, C193, C28YL2, C11ZPGYD, C41YL5, C252G, C130G, PLKIT1

User avatar
Matus
Member
Posts: 1232
Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2014 10:48 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Thinnest functional bladestock for a general use folder

Postby Matus » Sat Jan 22, 2022 2:30 pm

Just one thing to mention - the only reason we see a continuous linear distal taper on full flat ground blades is ease of production. However especially on blades made out out thin stock tjis approach is not optimal because it yields a tip that is too weak.

I have reground a Giant Mouse Ace Iona from 3mm stock to a convex grind, non-linear distal taper with spine thickness 1.6mm half way towards the tip. The knife had no problems with flex.

However I do understand that only as much can be done in a production knife before the price explodes. But my point is - if you have a knife you really like, but would prefer a thinner blade one it - then find someone who can make you a custom regrind. I mean an experienced maker, not an amateur like myself. It is not an easy job to make it nice and clean.
... I like weird :bug-red :bug-white-red :bug-white ...

User avatar
Jim Malone
Member
Posts: 1093
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2005 5:31 pm
Location: Absurdistan E.U.

Re: Thinnest functional bladestock for a general use folder

Postby Jim Malone » Sat Jan 22, 2022 6:17 pm

Can anyone tell me where you could need this extreme sliceability ?
Is it in say the need to be able to cut cardboard a lot? Skinning animals? In what field of our hobby or work do we need an ultraslicer that has a very thin bladestock or does things a "normal" knife would fail

User avatar
ZrowsN1s
Member
Posts: 6292
Joined: Sat Jan 30, 2016 5:08 pm
Location: San Diego, California USA

Re: Thinnest functional bladestock for a general use folder

Postby ZrowsN1s » Sat Jan 22, 2022 7:25 pm

Jim Malone wrote:
Sat Jan 22, 2022 6:17 pm
Can anyone tell me where you could need this extreme sliceability ?
Is it in say the need to be able to cut cardboard a lot? Skinning animals? In what field of our hobby or work do we need an ultraslicer that has a very thin bladestock or does things a "normal" knife would fail
Not really a need, it's a want. I carried a knife that wasn't very sharp for a few years and never sharpened it. I could get by muscling and tearing through things, without really "cutting". Did I need a sharp knife? I got by.

But these tasks were easier with a sharp knife. Similarly with a very thin slicey blade, cutting certain things becomes even easier. Less effort required, laser beam cuts. Do we need it? Probably not. Do I want it? Heck yes!
-Matt a.k.a. Lo_Que, loadedquestions135 I ❤ The P'KAL :bug-red

"The world of edges has a small doorway in, but opens into a cavern that is both wide and deep." -sal "Ghost hunters scope the edge." -sal

User avatar
Ramonade
Member
Posts: 1574
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2021 3:45 pm
Location: France

Re: Thinnest functional bladestock for a general use folder

Postby Ramonade » Sun Jan 23, 2022 8:34 am

The Watu is at 2.5mm and still a good usable knife.
Tim Reeves said he bent a Magnacut Sebbie and managed to bend it back with no trouble, maybe a magnacut 2mm stock FFG would be nice.

Recently, I've bought several hollow ground Spydercos and depending on how the hollow grind is made, it can be as slicy as a 2mm stock ffg knife. Depends on how deep the hollow is made.
:respect Owned :respect : S35VN, S45VN, S30V, S90V, S110V, Rex45, M4, SPY27, MagnaCut, 20CV, M390, K390, ZDP-189, Maxamet, CTS-BD1N, CTS-XHP, SRS13, CPM154, 154CM, LC200N, VG-10, D2, 12C27(+mod), 14C28N, 420HC, Nitrox, Victorinox's steel, 440C(and others), 8cr...., the end ?

Robin
. MNOSD member 004* aka Mr. N5s :face-clouds

chronovore
Member
Posts: 113
Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2021 10:07 pm

Re: Thinnest functional bladestock for a general use folder

Postby chronovore » Sun Jan 23, 2022 10:24 pm

JRinFL wrote:
Fri Jan 21, 2022 11:22 pm
Dr. Larrin Thomas has hinted that MagnaCut’s formula can be adjusted to change the attributes, so perhaps we can convince him to make an adjustment specifically for thin blade stock? Otherwise, I’m always happy for more Cruwear. I think Niagara would need to roll it thinner than they do now so that knife makers would not have to grind it so much. Perhaps they already do and it just needs to ordered that way? I don’t know.
Why wouldn't regular Magnacut be good at this?
amateur blacksmith wrote:
Sat Jan 22, 2022 12:48 am
Blade stock thinness is only 1/2 the story. It's the BTE tick/thinness that matters more. Hollow ground knives out perform FFG for this reason (IMHO). For me the Chaparral is a little disappointing even though it has 2mm blade stock. It needs to have more taper to the edge so it's thinner behind the edge. Yes, I too would like thinner blade stock generally but I'd prefer to see more hollow grinds to achieve the BTE thinness that performs.
Sure, thicker stock can be ground to taper out or get thin behind the edge. That leaves me with a burning question. If the goal is to get thin at the edge, why start thick in the first place? Obviously, it depends on what you want a blade to do. Thinking about the everyday tasks I ask of a folding knife, I don't know that I'd ever want to start thicker than 0.125".

Honestly, I wish more modern EDC folders were available in the Chaparral-Delica range of blade thickness.

chronovore
Member
Posts: 113
Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2021 10:07 pm

Re: Thinnest functional bladestock for a general use folder

Postby chronovore » Sun Jan 23, 2022 10:54 pm

Vaugith wrote:
Sat Jan 22, 2022 8:26 am
...
The problem with doing this is large and prohibitive: the end user. If this model takes off, then a bunch of people buy them who hear they're amazing but don't know how to treat a thin knife will inevitably pick them up. Next thing you know you have a bunch of snapped blades on Instagram and the uneducated masses think all spydercos break super easily. Spyderco can't put a product out that would be able to break even with some degree of abuse. I think we could still handle a 2mm stock with 0.1 BTE in one of these fine grain steels though. ...
Sure they can! How about a nice, big, extremely clear warning label (possibly with a hint of salty humor)? Make it part of the marketing campaign. That in turn will drive discussion on social media. Spyderco could further include a little pamphlet that tag teams liability protection with a PSA on how to use and care for a thin blade.

Spyderco would once again be a community hero and the EDC world would be a better place for it.

User avatar
JRinFL
Member
Posts: 4125
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2015 10:30 am
Location: Unfashionable West End of the Galaxy

Re: Thinnest functional bladestock for a general use folder

Postby JRinFL » Mon Jan 24, 2022 8:44 am

chronovore wrote:
Sun Jan 23, 2022 10:24 pm
JRinFL wrote:
Fri Jan 21, 2022 11:22 pm
Dr. Larrin Thomas has hinted that MagnaCut’s formula can be adjusted to change the attributes, so perhaps we can convince him to make an adjustment specifically for thin blade stock? Otherwise, I’m always happy for more Cruwear. I think Niagara would need to roll it thinner than they do now so that knife makers would not have to grind it so much. Perhaps they already do and it just needs to ordered that way? I don’t know.
Why wouldn't regular Magnacut be good at this?
MC is already better than the steel in all my current multi-blade knives (SAKs & traditionals), however there were concerns about broken blades. I assumed that an MC made for thinner stock might be made tougher than the current mix. For my uses, it is already sufficient.
"...it costs nothing to be polite." - Winston Churchill Not every choiless knife needs a choil, not every knife with a choil needs it removed. Not every big knife needs a Lil' companion. Most Nobel Order of the Sock Drawer - Member 0001
Friends call me Jim. As do my foes.
Used to be JR in CT with a much earlier join date.
“Maybe the cheese in the mousetrap is an artificially created cheaper price?” -Sal

James Y
Member
Posts: 5146
Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 10:33 am
Location: Southern CA

Re: Thinnest functional bladestock for a general use folder

Postby James Y » Mon Jan 24, 2022 2:16 pm

Stepping outside of Spyderco for a second and using CRK as an example, their Sebenza model has a tall, thin hollow grind that is actually more hollowed out and slightly thinner in the center of the blade than at the edge, kind of like this: ")(". Their blades are still very durable in use. But CRK's factory edge bevels are convexed, and are ground thicker/ more obtuse than those on Spyderco knives, at least when compared to Spyderco's FFG blades.

Jim

User avatar
Matus
Member
Posts: 1232
Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2014 10:48 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Thinnest functional bladestock for a general use folder

Postby Matus » Mon Jan 24, 2022 2:27 pm

Well, that thicker edge on Sebenza comes with the ')(' grind. You can't really have both at the same time
... I like weird :bug-red :bug-white-red :bug-white ...

James Y
Member
Posts: 5146
Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 10:33 am
Location: Southern CA

Re: Thinnest functional bladestock for a general use folder

Postby James Y » Mon Jan 24, 2022 2:46 pm

Matus wrote:
Mon Jan 24, 2022 2:27 pm
Well, that thicker edge on Sebenza comes with the ')(' grind. You can't really have both at the same time

The edge bevels can be reprofiled and thinned down, which fits the thin primary grind a whole lot better, allowing it to cut FAR more efficiently. So you CAN have both at the same time, just not from the factory.

Jim

User avatar
Matus
Member
Posts: 1232
Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2014 10:48 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Thinnest functional bladestock for a general use folder

Postby Matus » Mon Jan 24, 2022 3:39 pm

I think I did not explain what I mean clearly. One could of course grind the edge under a lower angle , but while that will definitely make the knife cut better, it will not change the thickness behind the edge all that much. And if one would use a grinding wheel to thin the edge and blend it with the original grind, than at some point the thickness behind the edge would be the same (or less) than the 'waist' of the grind, thus the waist would effectively cease to exist, geometrically speaking.
... I like weird :bug-red :bug-white-red :bug-white ...

User avatar
ChrisinHove
Member
Posts: 3507
Joined: Tue Dec 17, 2013 8:12 am
Location: 27.2046° N, 77.4977° E

Re: Thinnest functional bladestock for a general use folder

Postby ChrisinHove » Wed Jan 26, 2022 10:47 am

The hollow ground on the original Starmate has really pleased me, to the extent I’ve now ordered a Centofante 3 to play with.

Shaun’s (BBB) YT video on edge retention as a function of grind also prodded me in that direction.

chronovore
Member
Posts: 113
Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2021 10:07 pm

Re: Thinnest functional bladestock for a general use folder

Postby chronovore » Wed Jan 26, 2022 11:09 pm

JRinFL wrote:
Mon Jan 24, 2022 8:44 am
chronovore wrote:
Sun Jan 23, 2022 10:24 pm

Why wouldn't regular Magnacut be good at this?
MC is already better than the steel in all my current multi-blade knives (SAKs & traditionals), however there were concerns about broken blades. I assumed that an MC made for thinner stock might be made tougher than the current mix. For my uses, it is already sufficient.
I wasn't aware of these concerns? From where do they originate? Are people actually breaking blades and under what circumstances?

MagnaCut doesn't have the toughness of AEB-L, 14C28N, LC200N, or Nitro-V; but neither do most stainless blade steels. It is still significantly tougher than S35VN, Elmax, N690, and other stainless steels used in premium fixed blades. I don't know how thin people are willing to go but I have something on order with 0.10" stock and zero concerns about anything I'd ever ask of it.

User avatar
Toucan
Member
Posts: 208
Joined: Thu Aug 27, 2020 1:51 am

Re: Thinnest functional bladestock for a general use folder

Postby Toucan » Thu Jan 27, 2022 1:00 am

chronovore wrote:
Sun Jan 23, 2022 10:54 pm
Vaugith wrote:
Sat Jan 22, 2022 8:26 am
...
The problem with doing this is large and prohibitive: the end user. If this model takes off, then a bunch of people buy them who hear they're amazing but don't know how to treat a thin knife will inevitably pick them up. Next thing you know you have a bunch of snapped blades on Instagram and the uneducated masses think all spydercos break super easily. Spyderco can't put a product out that would be able to break even with some degree of abuse. I think we could still handle a 2mm stock with 0.1 BTE in one of these fine grain steels though. ...
Sure they can! How about a nice, big, extremely clear warning label (possibly with a hint of salty humor)? Make it part of the marketing campaign. That in turn will drive discussion on social media. Spyderco could further include a little pamphlet that tag teams liability protection with a PSA on how to use and care for a thin blade.

Spyderco would once again be a community hero and the EDC world would be a better place for it.
I don't disagree at all, but any marketing that alienates potential customers is a gamble. The sharpened prybar crowd can, ironically, be a little fragile. It would not be hard to imagine them framing a salty humor warranty sticker as just a company's excuse for weak blades. It could turn that whole crowd off Spyderco altogether. Worse yet, they could make videos/posts about it and scare off uniformed people. The sad thing is, there are lots of videos of people snapping blades for internet clout. The good news is that it seems to be changing. More education about the merits of thin geometry is always good, and I think the average consumer is moving in that direction after years of chonky geometry


Return to “Spyderco General Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Accutron, Bing [Bot], Mikevc, sal, skeeg11, zhyla and 27 guests