Thinnest functional bladestock for a general use folder
Thinnest functional bladestock for a general use folder
The ladybug, Dfly, Chappy, Centofante, etc are perennial favorites in part because the blades are so dang thin. Thin stock slices better, so I wonder if even thinner knives have a place in Spyderco's offerings. As far as I can tell, for locking folders, the thinnest available currently is 2mm. I wonder how thinner stock would perform as a general use knife.
Would even thinner stock be feasible, and if so, desirable? Spyderco has gone thinner in the past with speacialized models like the Catcherman (1.8mm, I believe), so we know it is at least feasible. I assume that 2mm is the goldilocks thinness of slicing well while not being too fragile, but is this necessarily the case? What are the limitations of ultra thin stock, and is there a market for them?
Some thoughts and limitations:
One limitation I can think of is needing more thickness on the tang where the lock interfaces. I suppose this could be remedied by machining down thicker stock everywhere but the tang, but this seems costly and time consuming.
Would the blade become too flexible or brittle? Bending and/or snapping are obviously not desirable, so I suppose the steel selection and heat treat might need extra consideration in very thin stock.
I know the obvious answer for many will be to just look at currently offered hollow grind models that are really thin behind the edge instead, but there is still something to be said about FFG when cutting through something like a carrot.
Would even thinner stock be feasible, and if so, desirable? Spyderco has gone thinner in the past with speacialized models like the Catcherman (1.8mm, I believe), so we know it is at least feasible. I assume that 2mm is the goldilocks thinness of slicing well while not being too fragile, but is this necessarily the case? What are the limitations of ultra thin stock, and is there a market for them?
Some thoughts and limitations:
One limitation I can think of is needing more thickness on the tang where the lock interfaces. I suppose this could be remedied by machining down thicker stock everywhere but the tang, but this seems costly and time consuming.
Would the blade become too flexible or brittle? Bending and/or snapping are obviously not desirable, so I suppose the steel selection and heat treat might need extra consideration in very thin stock.
I know the obvious answer for many will be to just look at currently offered hollow grind models that are really thin behind the edge instead, but there is still something to be said about FFG when cutting through something like a carrot.
Re: Thinnest functional bladestock for a general use folder
Many companies have been making knives in thinner stock for practically 100 years, just look at almost anything Case makes.
All SE all the time since 2017
~David
~David
- VooDooChild
- Member
- Posts: 2617
- Joined: Wed Feb 21, 2018 1:29 am
Re: Thinnest functional bladestock for a general use folder
Razor blade.
"Rome's greatest contribution to mathematics was the killing of Archimedes."
Re: Thinnest functional bladestock for a general use folder
I would be very happy to see even thinner folders. I have a .044” stock full flat ground folder in M2 by Walter Wells and it cuts like a laser.
Some of the high toughness, high hardness, fine grain steels Spyderco uses (CruWear would be a good example) can support very thin edges without undue chipping/rolling.
My firm hope is that the 2020s usher in an era of ultra-thin knives. Geometry is king!
Some of the high toughness, high hardness, fine grain steels Spyderco uses (CruWear would be a good example) can support very thin edges without undue chipping/rolling.
My firm hope is that the 2020s usher in an era of ultra-thin knives. Geometry is king!
Re: Thinnest functional bladestock for a general use folder
Very true, I should elaborate, I mean Spyderco in particular making locking modern folder with modern steels. There is a lot of charm to a older style slip joint pen knives with thin blades, don't get me wrong, but they tend to be made from older more economical stainless steels like 420hc or heaven forbid, 420j2. Or the occasional 10xx carbon steel out of a maker like GEC. Nothing wrong with those at all, but I'm interested in the idea of an ultra thin Spyderco with their usual assortment of specialty steels. Can an ultra slim production folder be made out of high carbide steels? The Catcherman example I mentioned is made of pretty tough H1 that has no carbides at all to speak of. Could, for example, a K390 Delica with 1.5mm stock be made, or is that just not reasonable with the properties of the material used?
Maybe a better way of phrasing all this, is is 2mm the functional limit of blade stock made of modern high carbide PM steel?
Re: Thinnest functional bladestock for a general use folder
I see your point, but I think a razor is around 0.3mm. I was thinking somewhere in the 1.75 to 1mm range. Thin, and perhaps fragile, but not disposable.
Re: Thinnest functional bladestock for a general use folder
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.brancron wrote: ↑Fri Jan 21, 2022 10:17 pmI would be very happy to see even thinner folders. I have a .044” stock full flat ground folder in M2 by Walter Wells and it cuts like a laser.
Some of the high toughness, high hardness, fine grain steels Spyderco uses (CruWear would be a good example) can support very thin edges without undue chipping/rolling.
My firm hope is that the 2020s usher in an era of ultra-thin knives. Geometry is king!
Re: Thinnest functional bladestock for a general use folder
I can answer that. In trying to make the 'Performance Delica' in K390 we were told that the maker couldn't grind the K390 that thin without issues. So it was switched to VG-10.Toucan wrote: ↑Fri Jan 21, 2022 11:01 pmVery true, I should elaborate, I mean Spyderco in particular making locking modern folder with modern steels. There is a lot of charm to a older style slip joint pen knives with thin blades, don't get me wrong, but they tend to be made from older more economical stainless steels like 420hc or heaven forbid, 420j2. Or the occasional 10xx carbon steel out of a maker like GEC. Nothing wrong with those at all, but I'm interested in the idea of an ultra thin Spyderco with their usual assortment of specialty steels. Can an ultra slim production folder be made out of high carbide steels? The Catcherman example I mentioned is made of pretty tough H1 that has no carbides at all to speak of. Could, for example, a K390 Delica with 1.5mm stock be made, or is that just not reasonable with the properties of the material used?
Maybe a better way of phrasing all this, is is 2mm the functional limit of blade stock made of modern high carbide PM steel?
-Matt a.k.a. Lo_Que, loadedquestions135 I ❤ The P'KAL
"The world of edges has a small doorway in, but opens into a cavern that is both wide and deep." -sal
"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
-
- Member
- Posts: 6147
- Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2015 10:30 am
- Location: Unfashionable West End of the Galaxy (SE USA)
Re: Thinnest functional bladestock for a general use folder
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.
"...it costs nothing to be polite." - Winston Churchill
“Maybe the cheese in the mousetrap is an artificially created cheaper price?” -Sal
Friends call me Jim. As do my foes.
M.N.O.S.D. 0001
Re: Thinnest functional bladestock for a general use folder
AEB-L was/is used for razors , so that would work here too. Also I think Rex45?
Military/PM2/P3 Native Chief/Native GB2 DF2 PITS Chaparral Tasman Salt 2 SE Caribbean Sheepfoot SE SpydieChef Swayback Manix2 Sage 1 SSS Stretch 2 XL G10
Re: Thinnest functional bladestock for a general use folder
What was the nature of the issue? I do wonder if it is just not feasible to grind away that much K390 from 2.5mm stock. The K390 ladybug is already 20% thinner than the Delica, and is produced just fine. The only difference is the maker is working with stock that was thinner to begin with.ZrowsN1s wrote: ↑Fri Jan 21, 2022 11:18 pmI can answer that. In trying to make the 'Performance Delica' in K390 we were told that the maker couldn't grind the K390 that thin without issues. So it was switched to VG-10.Toucan wrote: ↑Fri Jan 21, 2022 11:01 pmVery true, I should elaborate, I mean Spyderco in particular making locking modern folder with modern steels. There is a lot of charm to a older style slip joint pen knives with thin blades, don't get me wrong, but they tend to be made from older more economical stainless steels like 420hc or heaven forbid, 420j2. Or the occasional 10xx carbon steel out of a maker like GEC. Nothing wrong with those at all, but I'm interested in the idea of an ultra thin Spyderco with their usual assortment of specialty steels. Can an ultra slim production folder be made out of high carbide steels? The Catcherman example I mentioned is made of pretty tough H1 that has no carbides at all to speak of. Could, for example, a K390 Delica with 1.5mm stock be made, or is that just not reasonable with the properties of the material used?
Maybe a better way of phrasing all this, is is 2mm the functional limit of blade stock made of modern high carbide PM steel?
-
- Member
- Posts: 161
- Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2018 1:59 am
- Location: Australia
Re: Thinnest functional bladestock for a general use folder
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.
Re: Thinnest functional bladestock for a general use folder
You may have a good point there. I believe the issue was thinning down the standard thickness stock. Obviously because of the pivot size and lock they have to use the standard thickness stock for the knife to function properly. Then grind the blade thin.Toucan wrote: ↑Fri Jan 21, 2022 11:32 pm
What was the nature of the issue? I do wonder if it is just not feasible to grind away that much K390 from 2.5mm stock. The K390 ladybug is already 20% thinner than the Delica, and is produced just fine. The only difference is the maker is working with stock that was thinner to begin with.
If they made a completely new design that could function with a thinner stock maybe they could take it thinner.
-Matt a.k.a. Lo_Que, loadedquestions135 I ❤ The P'KAL
"The world of edges has a small doorway in, but opens into a cavern that is both wide and deep." -sal
"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
Re: Thinnest functional bladestock for a general use folder
The real question may be what is the thinnest bladestock where the opening hole doesn’t become a liability? 2mm is probably close to that limit imo.
:spyder:
Re: Thinnest functional bladestock for a general use folder
There are several factors to consider for ultra thin blades.
-The length of the blade, where a long blade risks a lot of problems of twisting and therefore breaking
-Hardening, where thin blades risk more deformation and bending in the hardening stage
-The final beveling phase that risks to lose part of the hardening on ultra thin blades
-The possibility of claims for breakage, since someone may do too heavy work for an ultra fine knife.
-etc
Personally, I prefer a knife that is not too thin, with which I can do most jobs without worrying about breakage.
And I think this is also the philosophy of a regular knife manufacturer:
"Fewer manufacturing problems, and fewer post-sale complaints, for a product that will cut fantastically anyway."
-The length of the blade, where a long blade risks a lot of problems of twisting and therefore breaking
-Hardening, where thin blades risk more deformation and bending in the hardening stage
-The final beveling phase that risks to lose part of the hardening on ultra thin blades
-The possibility of claims for breakage, since someone may do too heavy work for an ultra fine knife.
-etc
Personally, I prefer a knife that is not too thin, with which I can do most jobs without worrying about breakage.
And I think this is also the philosophy of a regular knife manufacturer:
"Fewer manufacturing problems, and fewer post-sale complaints, for a product that will cut fantastically anyway."
-
- Member
- Posts: 1390
- Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2021 10:06 am
- Location: Earth probably?
Re: Thinnest functional bladestock for a general use folder
2mm or about .080" is about as thin as I will go for a practical general use knife. The 2.5mm blade stock on a Delica seems just right for me, for a blade of that size. Very thin blade stock knives seem to be for niche uses, for me.
I would rather have 2.5mm ground thin behind the edge than thinner blade stock.
I would rather have 2.5mm ground thin behind the edge than thinner blade stock.
Because desolate places allow us to breathe. And most people don't even know they're out of breath.
MNOSD member #0035
MNOSD member #0035
Re: Thinnest functional bladestock for a general use folder
Some will already guess what comes next :
I am not necessarily for thinner blade stocks, but for making Spydie-blades with / in already existing thin bladestocks just longer
... so "Chapparra XL-ish" in about Endela size (viewtopic.php?t=85342#p1377379)
A blade with the 2mm Chaparral ffg bladestock, but just longer, would normally then get even thinner in its front part anyway due to the usual tapering.
I would not be worried using an endela-sized Chaparral or an Endela or totally new model in 2mm ffg "hard", as long as it comes to "regular" folder tasks.
(And YES, I know that thin bladestock is by far not the only factor that determines sliciness, but it is a good foundation for achieving it)
I am not necessarily for thinner blade stocks, but for making Spydie-blades with / in already existing thin bladestocks just longer
... so "Chapparra XL-ish" in about Endela size (viewtopic.php?t=85342#p1377379)
A blade with the 2mm Chaparral ffg bladestock, but just longer, would normally then get even thinner in its front part anyway due to the usual tapering.
I would not be worried using an endela-sized Chaparral or an Endela or totally new model in 2mm ffg "hard", as long as it comes to "regular" folder tasks.
(And YES, I know that thin bladestock is by far not the only factor that determines sliciness, but it is a good foundation for achieving it)
Top three going by pocket-time (update March 24):
- EDC: Endura thin red line ffg combo edge (VG10); Wayne Goddard PE (4V), Endela SE (VG10)
-Mountains/outdoors: Pac.Salt 1 SE (H1), Salt 2 SE (LC200N), and also Wayne Goddard PE (4V)
- EDC: Endura thin red line ffg combo edge (VG10); Wayne Goddard PE (4V), Endela SE (VG10)
-Mountains/outdoors: Pac.Salt 1 SE (H1), Salt 2 SE (LC200N), and also Wayne Goddard PE (4V)
-
- Member
- Posts: 6147
- Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2015 10:30 am
- Location: Unfashionable West End of the Galaxy (SE USA)
Re: Thinnest functional bladestock for a general use folder
Agreed! I’ll always support more high hollow grinds. Knife makers don’t like them as they take longer and require a bit more skill than FFG.amateur blacksmith wrote: ↑Sat Jan 22, 2022 12:48 amBlade 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.
"...it costs nothing to be polite." - Winston Churchill
“Maybe the cheese in the mousetrap is an artificially created cheaper price?” -Sal
Friends call me Jim. As do my foes.
M.N.O.S.D. 0001
- bearfacedkiller
- Member
- Posts: 11412
- Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2014 1:22 pm
- Location: hiding in the woods...
Re: Thinnest functional bladestock for a general use folder
I think the limiting factor is blade flex. You want the blade thin for cutting ability but not so thin that the blade is no longer rigid.
Spyderco uses a distal taper on many knives and this allows a blade to thin towards the tip while still being rigid. It’s a great way to balance things out.
Spyderco uses a distal taper on many knives and this allows a blade to thin towards the tip while still being rigid. It’s a great way to balance things out.
-Darby
sal wrote:Knife afi's are pretty far out, steel junky's more so, but "edge junky's" are just nuts. :p
SpyderEdgeForever wrote: Also, do you think a kangaroo would eat a bowl of spagetti with sauce if someone offered it to them?
- The Deacon
- Member
- Posts: 25717
- Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 10:33 am
- Location: Upstate SC, USA
- Contact:
Re: Thinnest functional bladestock for a general use folder
I love my Chaparral and would love to see more, even thinner, blades.Toucan wrote: ↑Fri Jan 21, 2022 9:07 pmThe ladybug, Dfly, Chappy, Centofante, etc are perennial favorites in part because the blades are so dang thin. Thin stock slices better, so I wonder if even thinner knives have a place in Spyderco's offerings. As far as I can tell, for locking folders, the thinnest available currently is 2mm. I wonder how thinner stock would perform as a general use knife.
Would even thinner stock be feasible, and if so, desirable? Spyderco has gone thinner in the past with speacialized models like the Catcherman (1.8mm, I believe), so we know it is at least feasible. I assume that 2mm is the goldilocks thinness of slicing well while not being too fragile, but is this necessarily the case? What are the limitations of ultra thin stock, and is there a market for them?
Some thoughts and limitations:
One limitation I can think of is needing more thickness on the tang where the lock interfaces. I suppose this could be remedied by machining down thicker stock everywhere but the tang, but this seems costly and time consuming.
Would the blade become too flexible or brittle? Bending and/or snapping are obviously not desirable, so I suppose the steel selection and heat treat might need extra consideration in very thin stock.
I know the obvious answer for many will be to just look at currently offered hollow grind models that are really thin behind the edge instead, but there is still something to be said about FFG when cutting through something like a carrot.
One way to get around the lock interface issue without the cost and waste of grinding down thicker blade stock would be to sandwich the blade's tang between two pieces of the same steel.
As for flex issues, am sure some idiot will find a way to bend one, but I've done some stupid stuff with a K04 Utility Knife without issue, and its 6.5" blade is a mere 1.3mm thick.
Paul
My Personal Website ---- Beginners Guide to Spyderco Collecting ---- Spydiewiki
Deplorable :p
WTC # 1458 - 1504 - 1508 - Never Forget, Never Forgive!
My Personal Website ---- Beginners Guide to Spyderco Collecting ---- Spydiewiki
Deplorable :p
WTC # 1458 - 1504 - 1508 - Never Forget, Never Forgive!