Where's the 3V?

[Xplorer]

The Millie is CPM CruWear

[steelcity16]

The Millie is CPM CruWear

Yeah, I think all of the Spyderco folders have been CPM-Cruwear. When I asked about Cruwear, I was technically asking about CPM-Cruwear. :D

[blues]

@Xplorer Excellent synopsis of various steels and their traits, and the factors influencing those traits.

I will say that I agree with your assessment on the use of "tough knives". While I like them, after a good part of my lifetime devoted to law enforcement, including SRT, mountain and rock climbing, severe winter backpacking, scuba diving, motorcycling, kayaking, canoeing, x-c skiing and other outdoor pursuits, my need for a tough knife to get me out of a difficult situation fails to come to mind.

For many or most of those years, I got by with knives I'd turn my nose up at these days. And so it goes...

[steelcity16]

..One last question (for now)

In one of the above posts you said "if we're going there why not skip it and go to straight 4V or better yet V4E because it a better version of the same concept?". Can you explain the main differences between V4E and 4V? I thought they were pretty much the same composition from different manufacturers? What makes V4E even better than 4V?

I may be misleading you with my bias there. Comparing V4E and 4V is definitely splitting hairs. It should be understood that for the knife buyer there is really no distinguishable difference between the two steels. The differences anyone might experience in use would have far more to do with different heat treat protocols than it would have to do with differences in composition. I have a preference because I am super anal about these things and I also have a slightly different perspective due to the fact that I have to cut, drill, mill, grind and sand these things. Primarily, the difference between 4V and V4E that is important to me is V4E's ability to achieve higher hardness at lower austenizing temps. By achieving the desired hardness at lower temp there is less retained austenite and reduced likelihood of grain growth. In the recent past there have been some anecdotal reports of V4E being better in other ways, but recently we have found that adjustments to the H/T protocol can overcome the previously reported differences, so they're not worth mentioning anymore. This is not important to anyone buying a knife and I would suggest you look at CPM4V and Vanadis 4 Extra as the same thing and pay more attention to what company is doing the heat treating. Spyderco does a very good job with heat treat.

And you mention these steels much more than Cruwear. Can you compare V4E and 4V to Cruwear as well? Are we leaving anything on the table by making a folder in V4E instead of Cruwear? Based on my limited experience with these steels and limited research, I would think Cruwear is more stainless, easier to sharpen, and slightly tougher than 4V, but less wear resistant. Is that your experience?

The most important thing to mention first is that CruWear and CPM CruWear should never be considered equals. CruWear does not provide the toughness or the edge stability that we get from CPM CruWear. The difference is so dramatic that they should have different names if it wasn't for the shared chemistry.

CPM CruWear fits nicely in between 3V and 4V. CPM CruWear is just slightly tougher and has lower wear resistance than 4V, and is not as tough as and has higher wear resistance than 3V. CPM CruWear can achieve high hardness similar to 4V if that is desired but there is significant loss of toughness in the high hardness zones. For people who want real toughness, CPM CruWear should be heat treated no harder than 62 but preferrably HRC 60. At HRC 60 CPM CruWear is tougher than 4V at HRC 58. But, once they both get to HRC62 things start to become more equal. It's also important to remember that edge stability is a result of toughness and hardness. Depending on the design goals and intended use there will be designs and circumstances where CPM CruWear is a better choice and other times when 4V would be a better choice. CPM CruWear has wear resistance just below M2, whereas 4V has wear resistance just below M4....generally speaking. CPM CruWear is a little more corrosion resistant than 4V but I don't really see a difference in practical use. Sharpening is about the same for both but dependent on hardness.

It's important to realize that within the range of parameters I've mentioned for these steels is a huge variation in performance and usability. When factoring in a knife size, geometry and intended application the steel and heat treat protocol can be chosen to best compliment the design and ultimately provide the highest level of performance. There are designs that will be best served by CPM CruWear, others that would be better served by using 4V/V4E and still others that would perform best using 3V.

As a knife buyer I think you can't go wrong with CPM CruWear and it's one the finest tool steels available. One of my favorite Spyderco knives is my CPM CruWear Manix.

There are basically 2 reasons you haven't seen me mentioning CPM CruWear earlier... first, we already have CPM CruWear folders from Spyderco. Second, I find CPM CruWear to be a royal pain in the a$$ to finish. My viewpoint regarding the processing difficulty should be irrelevant to you and anyone reading this.

The extreme toughness of 3V and (relatively) low edge holding capability make it the best choice for large knives that will be swung and/or and must absorb hard impacts and flexing due to the intended use and size of the blade. A parang, a machete, a large bolo or a large kukri would be examples of knives that would benefit the most from the qualities of 3V.
For extreme toughness and a little better edge retention CPM CruWear at HRC 60 is a great alternative to 3V for large knife applications and because of the better edge retention it is a better fit for smaller knives where more edge retention will be a higher priority.
When the application calls for hardness above HRC60 (like 2" - 12" fixed blades and folders) the best edge stability and best edge holding capability of the extremely tough steels comes from 4V/V4E.

Would you both have also chose V4E or 4V over 3V for the Spyderco Tuff? Or do you think that model in particular could benefit from 3V? Do you not think that even the large folders like the Chief, Manix XL, or better yet the original C95 Manix could benefit from 3V over V4E/4V?

Hard to say with the Tuff. I think if you're going to use 3V in a folder, the Tuff design was exactly what a 3V folder should be. Do I think 4V would be better suited for the knife?...well yes...but, if someone said to me that they wanted to design a folder and it had to be made in 3V I would say the Tuff is designed ideally for that steel.
For the others you mentioned I do not think 3V would be a good choice and frankly I would say CPM CruWear and/or 4V would be better than 3V but still a bit of overkill on the toughness side for those knives. For people like you and I who want some extra toughness it would be great, but I would choose something more like RWL34 or S35VN or CTS-XHP or Vanax as the standard steel for those models and 4V and CPM CruWear would be sprint runs for us steel geeks and toughness freaks.

Using one of the extreme toughness steels like those we're talking about in a folder will always be a niche and not the mainstream. I am a backpacker and I have had a passion for wilderness exploration since I was about 13. My interest in knives is influenced primarily by my experiences exploring and living in wilderness areas. I do some rock climbing as a part of reaching summits as well. Knives are on my mind all day, every day, including while I'm in the back-country. Although I'll admit I will allow myself to indulge in knife toughness fantasies like "can I wedge my knife between 2 rocks and use it as a foothold to stand on in order to get over a crux without breaking my knife?" ya' know..?.ways you imagine your knife could save your life that never actually happen :o :D When it comes to making real decisions about steel selections and heat treating I have to come back to reality and make design choices that will actually be appreciated while using the knife the way it will really be used...to cut stuff. When not used in abusive or potentially life saving fantasy ways, the truth is 99% of people don't need more toughness than we get from the great EDC steels like CTS-XHP/RWL34/S35VN/Vanax/Elmax, etc.. I'm not saying there aren't people who's daily lives would benefit from a super-tough knife...I'm just saying there aren't very many. The fact that we can get these special super-tough steel variants from Spyderco is unique and we are lucky they spoil us like they do.

For the record...yes I have built knives that I can stand on :p ...'cause when you're a knife maker who loves using knives...why not? :D

Can I give you Reddit Gold for this post??? I would if I could! :D Thanks for all of the great responses! Very enlightening, especially coming from a fellow tough steel junkie who really understands where guys like me and some of the other forum members are coming from in wanting this steel, whether the practical application is 100% ideal or not.

I am still going to keep fighting the good fight and hope to see a dealer do some CPM-3V exclusive folders soon. But I now have an even greater respect for CPM-4V and CPM-Cruwear and must now start a new thread to push for V4E! :D :D :D

[emanuel]

Are you a knife-maker or in the industry in some regard? I haven't seen too many posts from you but you seem to have a lot of strong opinions on steels and cite pretty specific numbers like "20% more toughness" and "2-3 time the edge strength". I've never seen where in your posts you mention where this knowledge and these numbers come from? I'm not saying that anything you said is incorrect, but I am genuinely curious as to the source of all of these numbers and opinions? Members like Xplorer, Larrin, Deadboxhero (aka BBB), and SurfGringo are well known for their industry experience, scientific research, and real world testing. It would be great to know whether the things you are saying come from your personal research and experience or if you are just repeating things you've seen/heard on the internet. Again, not an accusation, but it just would be good to know how serious to take your answers compared to well known knife-makers and metallurgists here on the forum.

Reasonable questions, don't worry. I'm not a maker by trade but I did make a couple of knives for myself, so I'm not as experienced as Xplorer for example in that particular way. The 20% toughness difference is taken from the CPM website not my own calculations, but I doubt it's not accurate (it could probably even be exaggerated or measured using a very specific heat treatment for marketing); the "edge strength" numbers, particularly resistance to torsion and later impact, I've calculated using a tool at my university a year or so back when I had about 15 steel samples and just tried different edge angles (15 and 20 dps), the number isn't very accurate as you can tell because the heat treatment probably wasn't optimized for a knife blade but the hardness was right, and it was meant to show how much you lose for the extra bit of toughness in this particular steel. It surprised me a bit, even though I've been reading about other people complaining about this same issue right when 4v first appeared and 3v was started to be seen with bad eyes by american makers.

I have the greatest respect for Larrin and the others, they're really dedicated into this and I love reading their findings, while I don't really have the time I would like to put in. I always loved material science, and I might just switch departments and get my master's in something related to it if I'm going to be honest with myself. Sorry for any English mistakes, its not my first language.

Edit: And to see another perspective and how much heat treatment and higher hardness helps a steel like 3v, it looks like Luong has something to say. Now check out what going with a high hardness and improving the strength of 3v does: https://youtu.be/Vkq_9kDHi-I Sadly everyone heat treats it to 56-58 for maximum toughness while disregarding edge strength, which is what I complained about.

[steelcity16]

Thanks for the background into your research Emanuel. :) It seems like you have done a lot of your own work and have a lot of value to add to this topic and the forum in general with your research and knowledge and desire to learn more. I am very interested in these topics, but unfortunately don't have the time to do much of my own research and testing so I rely on folks like you and Xplorer and BBB to do it for me!! :D

My opinion on this topic basically boils down to this. 4V may very well be better suited for a folder, but I don't think that properly heat treated 3V will be a "bad" folder in any way, shape, or form. There are a ton of small 3V fixed blades that are essentially very similar to a folder with a strong lock when you get down to it. These 3V fixed blades are extremely popular, sell by truckload, and people rave about them. A 3V Military, Manix XL, Shaman, or Native would be a GREAT blade. There is no denying that. Would a 4V or V4E blade be even better?? Maybe, it depends on your definition of better. But we won't know until there is a 3V Para 3 than BBB can put head to head in a brass-whittling showdown with the 4V Para 3! :)

I think saying that we should never make a 3V blade because 4V exists is like saying that we should never do another S90V or S110V blade because Maxamet exists. Or never make an S35VN blade because there is S30V and 99.9% of users won't be able to tell the difference in real world use. A lot of people would actually probably agree with this, but there are also plenty of people who enjoy S90V and S110V and S35VN for their slight differences vs other steels and will continue to buy them, so it makes sense to keep making them from a business standpoint and a give the people what they want and keep the customers happy standpoint.

Basically, bring on the 3V, bring on the 4V, bring on the Cruwear. There will never be a lack of buyers for any of these steels until one of them becomes a production steel and can meet the market demands. There is strong demand and literally zero supply at the moment aside from one 4V knife that doesnt appeal to most people due to the grind, price, and scale choice. 3V is a GREAT steel, will make a GREAT folder, and people will take off work and pound the refresh button on their computers to make sure they are able to get one the second they drop. I can assure you of that, regardless of the 3V vs 4V comparisons.

[youmakemehole]

I like to try my best to always be as unbiased as possible, and if there is any bias coming from me it would ideally only be a bias towards objectivity and balance. Therefore if the status quo seems to be pushing right, then I would be pushing left towards what I would subjectively call the center. That being said, if the argument against tougher steels is that it is unnecessary and unneeded, then you can argue that this applies for 90% of everything cool and new that comes out each year from the knife industry, including steels with higher edge retention. True, the toughest steels on the market such as Cruwear or REX45 or M4 are more than tough enough for what most would require, but same can be said for edge retention for steels like S110V and Maxamet. Well now if the market already has the steels that are more than tough enough and more than edge retaining enough, why even bother with new steels? In a profit driven, capitalistic society, a "proper" business isn't just going to give people what they need, its also going to give them what they want.

Also, don't forget that as technology advances, the increased capabilities and conveniences that once were deemed "unnecessary" will slowly become the norm. When smartphones first came out, everyone thought the technology was super extra and represented a convenience and luxury you might want but definitely didn't need. I don't think I need to continue getting this point across, but just think how it could apply to knife steels. One day, folding knives may become so technologically advanced that there becomes no need to have small fixed blades, crow bars, or hatchets. They can all be replaced by one single folder just like smartphones have replaced the PC, telephone, and watch. In the short term, super tough steels may be able to be run at more extreme geometries that might just lend them far superior cutting ability over high edge retaining steels that require more traditional geometries to stay practical. People can pull stats and data and theorize all they want, but without actually doing it live, we won't ever know the full potential this unexplored frontier of tough steels can hold for folding knives.

[Barmoley]

It seems that the main question of this thread has been answered very well by multiple very knowledgeable people. The question as I understood it was "why is 3V not used in more Spyderco models?" The answer seems to be, given that 4v, m4, and cpm cruwear exist and have been used by Spyderco, using 3v in a folder or small fixed blade doesn't make any sense. 3v in the application discussed doesn't offer any benefits compared to the other steels and is deficient in multiple categories. Now, Spyderco could sell a bunch of 3v folders to the "unwashed masses", but people on this forum are enthusiasts and presumable know better, so are we advocating that Spyderco should release an inferior product just because it will sell?

[steelcity16]

It seems that the main question of this thread has been answered very well by multiple very knowledgeable people. The question as I understood it was "why is 3V not used in more Spyderco models?" The answer seems to be, given that 4v, m4, and cpm cruwear exist and have been used by Spyderco, using 3v in a folder or small fixed blade doesn't make any sense. 3v in the application discussed doesn't offer any benefits compared to the other steels and is deficient in multiple categories. Now, Spyderco could sell a bunch of 3v folders to the "unwashed masses", but people on this forum are enthusiasts and presumable know better, so are we advocating that Spyderco should release an inferior product just because it will sell?

I think again, "inferior" is very subjective. You could say S110V, S90V, etc are inferior to Maxamet, but no one is screaming that we need to stop using these steels. M4 could very well be an inferior folder compared to a 3V folder, depending on the use and desired characteristics. In my experience, M4 rusts very easily compared to 3V, is much more difficult to sharpen, and isn't nearly as tough. There are probably 20+ steels now that are used regularly by Spyderco and a lot could be considered inferior to others. It all depends of what you want. If you like Cruwear better than 3V, then buy Cruwear by all means. But oh wait, there is no Cruwear available. So if a 3V exclusive drops in a model you like, why wouldn't you buy it? Are you really going to be able to tell the difference in use? Probably not for most peoples uses.

I saw where you commented in the past that 52100 is a poor choice for a small folder as well. I love the 52100 folders and I would really love a Native with 52100. Many others like the 52100 folders as well for their ability to sharpen to scary sharp with minimal time, effort, and experience as well as the relative toughness of the steel. That is a winning combination in my book. Regardless of edge-holding, corrosion, and other areas that aren't as great.

I think people are more advocating the release of folders in 3V because 3V is a steel that has proven EXCELLENT performance in even small-sized fixed blades, and we would like to try it in a folder so we can compare to steels like 4V, Cruwear, M4, 52100, and Rex45 for ourselves before making same determination as the "unwashed masses" on the other side of the spectrum who just parrot that "3V is dumb in a folder" when a locked Military or Manix XL is essentially no different in use than the thousands of small fixed blades that use 3V outside of maybe batoning, which shouldn't be done with either type of knife. Until there is a Para 3 in 3V that can be compared apples to apples to all of these other steels, no one can say that 3V will offer zero benefits over other steels.

[The Meat man]

Who could complain about more variety? The more steels, the better!

Lots of good info in this thread.

[David R]

Before reading this thread I would very likely have jumped in a 3V Spyderco knife. Since reading I very likely would not.

[Barmoley]

It seems that the main question of this thread has been answered very well by multiple very knowledgeable people. The question as I understood it was "why is 3V not used in more Spyderco models?" The answer seems to be, given that 4v, m4, and cpm cruwear exist and have been used by Spyderco, using 3v in a folder or small fixed blade doesn't make any sense. 3v in the application discussed doesn't offer any benefits compared to the other steels and is deficient in multiple categories. Now, Spyderco could sell a bunch of 3v folders to the "unwashed masses", but people on this forum are enthusiasts and presumable know better, so are we advocating that Spyderco should release an inferior product just because it will sell?

I think again, "inferior" is very subjective. You could say S110V, S90V, etc are inferior to Maxamet, but no one is screaming that we need to stop using these steels. M4 could very well be an inferior folder compared to a 3V folder, depending on the use and desired characteristics. In my experience, M4 rusts very easily compared to 3V, is much more difficult to sharpen, and isn't nearly as tough. There are probably 20+ steels now that are used regularly by Spyderco and a lot could be considered inferior to others. It all depends of what you want. If you like Cruwear better than 3V, then buy Cruwear by all means. But oh wait, there is no Cruwear available. So if a 3V exclusive drops in a model you like, why wouldn't you buy it? Are you really going to be able to tell the difference in use? Probably not for most peoples uses.

I saw where you commented in the past that 52100 is a poor choice for a small folder as well. I love the 52100 folders and I would really love a Native with 52100. Many others like the 52100 folders as well for their ability to sharpen to scary sharp with minimal time, effort, and experience as well as the relative toughness of the steel. That is a winning combination in my book. Regardless of edge-holding, corrosion, and other areas that aren't as great.

I think people are more advocating the release of folders in 3V because 3V is a steel that has proven EXCELLENT performance in even small-sized fixed blades, and we would like to try it in a folder so we can compare to steels like 4V, Cruwear, M4, 52100, and Rex45 for ourselves before making same determination as the "unwashed masses" on the other side of the spectrum who just parrot that "3V is dumb in a folder" when a locked Military or Manix XL is essentially no different in use than the thousands of small fixed blades that use 3V outside of maybe batoning, which shouldn't be done with either type of knife. Until there is a Para 3 in 3V that can be compared apples to apples to all of these other steels, no one can say that 3V will offer zero benefits over other steels.

We all want more models in these excellent steels. Spyderco has limited production capabilities, so if we are advocating for something we should advocate for the best. 3V in a small knife is not that. You can find special cases where 3V would be superior to the other steels mentioned, but over all it is inferior in a small blade. Do you really need every model to be made in every single steel to be able to compare them. Do you really need to have Para 3 in 3V to know that it will be inferior to Para 3 in 4V in the majority of uses? From knowing qualities and attributes of the materials and the expected application we can predict what works better for what. After all we are dealing with the same class of steels. Can you imagine how expensive and wasteful it would be for a company to have to produce every model in every steel just to be able to compare them.

If a model that I liked dropped in any of these steels I would buy it, but this has nothing to do with the original question or my preferences. Your question was why not 3V, the answer seems to be because it is not a good choice for the application in question given availability and use of other steels.

[bluntcut]

* fwiw - my ht is unconventional, so as my opinions - I guess



How do you interpret the result above? Would your interpretation change if removed the steel type label but keep the hrc? Might as well, remove the hrc, then your interpretation? How about only label each with its abrasion wear & corrosion resistance, so the middle one has higher #s than top & bottom one.

For task & result in logical sense, I guess, most will not pick V4E because it has extensive damaged compare to 3V and D6. But wait, this decision contradict the preconceived notion that tougher is better. Ambiguously using 'tough' failed capture this situation, since V4E/4V behaved in ductile manner.

Let's entertain a whatif. Change edge geometry to 12 dps and 0.005" behind edge thickness. 3V would roll but less than V4E. D6 would partially chip (due to high carbide volume, it can't roll/ripple more than certain degrees).

If you want best corrosion and s30v edge retention and plenty tough for folder and small fixed blade, push for 61rc vanax. Crazy tool steel folder, push for 67+rc cpm t-15. 61-62rc 3V & V4E/4V folder would sell well but knife afi might feel something is lacking

[steelcity16]

^^^ Thanks for the additional data points and observations Bluntcut! I would certainly be one of the first in line for a Vanax folder. Hopefully over the coming months and years the price will come down and the supply will increase enough to wear it can become a viable option for a Spyderco production folder. A Native Salt with G10 scales and Vanax blade would really be something and may be the grail knife that never leaves my pocket!

Until then, your observation shows exactly why I am advocating for 3V. I would rather have my blade look like the one in the 3V photo than in the V4E photo after encountering a nail or staple or thick zip ties or thick plastic packaging or cutting the occasional copper wire or wire mesh. I know this is just one example and if you did 9 more experiments at different geometries and heat treats V4E may very well beat out 3V every time. But I doubt that, and that is the reason to bring out some 3V folders right there. There is an observable difference that is valued by some people for exactly that type of behavior.

[The Mastiff]

To me higher abrasive wear does not equate to better quality. I enjoy pretty much all the above mentioned steels and have sample knives in most all steels mentioned in this thread. I think 3V makes great folding knives and I will buy them if they fit my other requirements. 3V gets hard enough to do the things I need ( rc 61-62 is plenty ) and has a good balance of strength, toughness, edge stability and even corrosion resistance. I feel the same way about Cruwear, 4V, as well as a bunch of others. I really can't label one steel "best" except at a specific chore. For instance skinning. Some knives will be suited for skinning and others completely unsuited. Other than comparing them like that I don't get see how one can be best because one is made in 4v and one in 3V.

joe

[emanuel]

I don't think that properly heat treated 3V will be a "bad" folder in any way, shape, or form.

[...]so are we advocating that Spyderco should release an inferior product just because it will sell?

3V is a great steel, no doubt about it. I think some of us have been spoiled by a decade of highly specialized, high wear resistance steels that kind of clouded our minds a bit. Barmoley, for example, a very loved steel, 52100, besides taking a better fine edge, it lags A LOT behind 3V at pretty much everything, from toughness to wear and stain resistance. Is it an inferior steel to 3V? Should it be removed from the steel selector from x and y company? I doubt people wouldn't come out with forks and hatchets at your door if you said yes lol. I do believe 3V has a lot of minuses for getting that extra toughness compared to other offerings, particularly in a relatively small folder, which is why I was going at steelcity's neck like that :D , but it's a great steel and it would make a good folder for sure, but I personally wouldn't buy it for reasons mentioned in my other posts. I would much rather use my limited budget for something in a different steel that feels more worthwhile for me.

[Philo Beddoe]

"Build it and they will come" They already have built it.."it" being all the Cruwear sprints/exclusives that have come out in the last few years.

The ingredients for 3V and Cruwear are virtually the same..I'm not seeing the point of 3V?

They are so close to one another that I seriously doubt anyone could tell a difference between the two in day to day use.

I can tell a difference between s90v and s110v.

[Barmoley]

I don't think that properly heat treated 3V will be a "bad" folder in any way, shape, or form.

[...]so are we advocating that Spyderco should release an inferior product just because it will sell?

3V is a great steel, no doubt about it. I think some of us have been spoiled by a decade of highly specialized, high wear resistance steels that kind of clouded our minds a bit. Barmoley, for example, a very loved steel, 52100, besides taking a better fine edge, it lags A LOT behind 3V at pretty much everything, from toughness to wear and stain resistance. Is it an inferior steel to 3V? Should it be removed from the steel selector from x and y company? I doubt people wouldn't come out with forks and hatchets at your door if you said yes lol. I do believe 3V has a lot of minuses for getting that extra toughness compared to other offerings, particularly in a relatively small folder, which is why I was going at steelcity's neck like that :D , but it's a great steel and it would make a good folder for sure, but I personally wouldn't buy it for reasons mentioned in my other posts. I would much rather use my limited budget for something in a different steel that feels more worthwhile for me.

I agree, 3V is a great steel, for some applications it is better than others, I don’t think anyone said otherwise. A specific question was asked by OP, why 3V is not used by Spyderco in more models, you and many others gave very good, well reasoned answers. That in a small folder 4V or specifically cpm cruwear are better for most cases for most users. We are spoiled and we are splitting hairs, but in the world of limited resources choices need to be made and it makes absolutely no sense for a company like Spyderco to produce the same model in both 3V and cruwear based on performance. They can do it ofcourse because customers want it and will buy, but it wouldn’t be due to 3V being better in a small folder. This has nothing to do with s90v vs maxamet or 52100 or any other steel. The question was asked and answered very well, but it seems that the OP was asking a rethorical question and doesn’t really care about possible reasons why Spyderco might not be using 3V more. That is perfectly fine, when it comes to steels, for many people it is like a religion, they have their favorite and they want it now. There are no bad steels all have their place, but for some applications some are better than others. For a small folder Spyderco already made some great choices in in cruwear, 4V, m4 and others, adding 3V to the mix would be only to sell some more knives to people who specifically want 3V. As a for profit business Spyderco might very well do that, maybe they should, but a tiny group of enthusiasts shouldn’t advocate for it, since we should know better.

Personally I’d rather they released Province already :D instead of wasting resources on yet another flavor of Para 3, but by all means if they can make more money with Para 3 in 3V they should do that.

[steelcity16]

A specific question was asked by OP, why 3V is not used by Spyderco in more models, you and many others gave very good, well reasoned answers.

Yes, my original question of "why not" from when I started this thread a year ago was answered in some respect with regard to perceived hypothetical performance deficiencies in comparing 3V to steels like 4V and Cruwear, but I wasn't trying to rehash that discussion when I bumped this thread. My reason for bumping this thread after a year was to bring to our community's attention that Benchmade has released a 3V production folder, so that is just one step closer to getting the 3V Spyderco folder that so many of us have always wanted (and still want despite a lot of the great discussion in this thread). Looking back, I probably should have started a brand new thread with a different subject line. My bad.

but in the world of limited resources choices need to be made and it makes absolutely no sense for a company like Spyderco to produce the same model in both 3V and cruwear based on performance. They can do it ofcourse because customers want it and will buy, but it wouldn’t be due to 3V being better in a small folder.

My call out was really to the dealers if you notice, not necessarily Spyderco, as I feel our best chance at a 3V folder is a dealer exclusive. Dealers take a huge gamble with their money to invest tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars for a batch of exclusives that may not sell quickly if they do a poor job of gauging the demand for a given combination of model/steel/grind/coating/scale material/scale color/price/coo. Para 3s have already been done in 4V and Cruwear. If I was a dealer I would drop a 3V Para 3 in a heartbeat. It is a guaranteed sellout if they stick to the formula of using regular peel ply g10 scales and do some social media marketing to build up some hype. Who is really being harmed by them making a knife in a steel you don't want? Are we all just mad that it delays the release of a knife in a steel we do want? Should I start shilling all of the Maxamet threads saying no one needs that level of wear resistance when S110V and diamond abrasives exist? There were a TON of people here who said BHQ's Jade G10 scales are ugly and show dirt and why use them when there are other good non-ugly non-dirt showing options. Same answer as here. Despite the vocal minority, there are a ton of people outside our bubble who like things like Jade scales, DLC coated blades, and 3V steel. BHQ sells out exclusive runs with these "ugly" scales in minutes and the buyers loves them (I love them too). DLC isn't very popular in our bubble here either and a lot of people voice strong opinions against it every time there is a poll, but the knife buying public likes it enough to where the blacked out DLC Para 3 and PM2 are the 3rd and 4th most popular Spyderco knives on BHQs website, only behind the recently released Ikuchi and the Para 3 LW preorder. So what people in this forum want isn't always (and rarely is) in line with what the public wants and will buy.

A dealer exclusive is much different than a production folder. It is a fleeting thing that is usually sold out in minutes, and most of the Spyderco owners of the world probably didn't even know about it and never will. So if a dealer releases a 3V folder, it is just a blip in the world of the millions of Spydercos that have already been sold. But the 3V lovers will be happy and we can move on to shilling for Vanax blades!

For a small folder Spyderco already made some great choices in in cruwear, 4V, m4 and others, adding 3V to the mix would be only to sell some more knives to people who specifically want 3V. As a for profit business Spyderco might very well do that, maybe they should, but a tiny group of enthusiasts shouldn’t advocate for it, since we should know better.

Why shouldn't a tiny group of enthusiasts advocate for 3V when the broad market already accepts it? Just because a tiny group of metallurgical enthusiasts doesn't see any benefit in 3V vs other steels (despite research like Bluntcut's photos above showing there are indeed differences and benefits in certain scenarios), doesn't mean that the knife buying public isn't happy with the small 3V blades they own and ready to spend their money on a 3V folder. Small 3V blades are out there already. Bark River makes a 2.5" 3V necker. They sell tons of 2.5"-3.5" 3V blades. They perform great and sell like hotcakes because 3V is a great steel and has been around for a long time and is well known and time tested. Outside of batoning, most people use a 2.5-3.5" folder in the same way they would use a 2.5-3.5" fixed blade.

There are 129 results for 3V vs 8 for Cru-wear and 14 for 4V on Knifecenter's website. I would be willing to bet that a production Para 3 in 3V would sell better to the public than 4V and Cruwear because the knife buying public knows more about 3V and it's legendary reputation and a lot probably have fixed blades in 3V already. So Spyderco should make a 4V knife that might sell poorly to the public because a tiny group of enthusiasts has made up their mind that 3V offers zero benefits over other steels even before there is an actual knife to test? Probably not. And probably why Benchmade chose 3V over 4V and Cruwear as well. I'd also be willing to be that the Fradon Lock 4V Manix would have sold out long ago if it was in 3V.

"Build it and they will come" They already have built it.."it" being all the Cruwear sprints/exclusives that have come out in the last few years.

They are so close to one another that I seriously doubt anyone could tell a difference between the two in day to day use.

The problem is that there are no 4V or Cruwear alternatives to even purchase at the moment. If no one can tell the difference, why wouldn't a dealer choose well-known and well-loved and never before used 3V for their exclusive instead of Cruwear or 4V which has already been done and aren't as well known outside of the Spyderco afi community? 3V will sell better, and you are right that most exclusive buyers won't notice a performance difference when they are flipping their knives on eBay, posing them on handkerchiefs for instagram photos, locking them in safe deposit boxes, or opening amazon boxes. But lots of people will be happy that they now have the affordable 3V folder they have always wanted, and some actually will notice and appreciate the difference.

I'm not saying at all that we should replace Cruwear and 4V with 3V, and I would honestly probably choose Cruwear out of the three for a production steel to be used across all of the Golden models. But in a world where we have exclusives in S90V, S35VN, M390, CTS-XHP, CTS-204P, CPM-20CV, etc all chasing the same thing, I believe adding 3V to the mix of tough steels can only be a positive.

I will buy any pretty much any knife that comes along in 3V, 4V, and Cruwear, but I will certainly continue to advocate for a 3V Spyderco folder.

[Barmoley]

I absolutely agree with you that 3v will sell, but mostly because of lack of knowledge that better alternatives for the specific application exist. I guess I misunderstood the point of your thread. I am surprised you want it, since you clearly know better, but to each his own.