We don't actually need to Magnacut *all* the knives

[Evil D]

The only thing that keeps me from taking a g10 anything fishing (in either fresh or saltwater where I know I'll be wading) or biking is the stop pin and/or liners. They tend to corrode as easily as s30v. At least, that was my experience a few years ago. I'd be curious to hear if this has changed. A salt version of their g10 models would almost certainly be a buy from me. I love the action of my g10 models. I think magnacut would be a nice upgrade in the corrosion department, but I've been happy with the corrosion resistance of 20cv and s110v. My preference is still a hard tool steel and so far, my magnacut mule basically behaves as a stainless cruwear.

Sounds like you need a Caribbean, and if they do them in MagnaCut I'm buying several.

[ladybug93]

i agree with evil d on this one. the caribbean is fantastic.

[dlum1]

Sounds like you need a Caribbean, and if they do them in MagnaCut I'm buying several.

Good point! I had forgotten about that model. I've yet to do a side by side comparison between lc200n and magnacut, but I suspect I'd prefer the higher hardness steel in the end; i.e. magnacut.

[DunninLA]

M390 does have better edge retention according to Larrin's chart:

Larrin's chart is not for true "edge retention", though that is the term he uses. It is really for "edge abrasion resistance", since it uses CATRA, and all the CATRA machine tells you is resistance to edge abrasion in the absence of impact.

I agree that he should call it wear resistance instead of edge retention, but he DOES also talk about "edge stability" a lot on his blog, which is what you're discussing when speaking about how an edge holds up to impacting a cutting board.

However, I have to disagree with your take on this. I seldom ever use a cutting board, or any kind of backing surface. Meanwhile, when I do, it's usually for cooking, and usually a plastic cutting board. That kind of invalidates any testing difference that was caused by a wood cutting board for my uses and that's really the reason why CATRA is used.

It's not a limited test, it's a controlled test.

To put that differently... How do I know that Pete didn't use a very heavy hand, a soft blade of M390 and a hard blade of MagnaCut, and a really hard wood cutting board? Then if I used a light hand, a hard M390 blade and a soft MagnaCut blade, and a soft plastic cutting board, would I see better edge retention for M390?

I don't think the CATRA test was ever actually intended to be a predictive test of which steel would cut longer

Pete has quite a few data points, and I do look at his columns for method of applying the edge, the edge angle, the claimed HRC of the knife he tested, etc.

However, his most useful data is the subset which is devoted to the Mules. Same geometry, known heat treat, same rope, same cutting method, and same wooden cutting board backdrop. And that is why I can confidently say that in cutting through sisal rope, impacting a cutting board, Magnacut's Mule paper slicing edge lasts longer than M390's Mule performance. You're going to have to explain how that is not more relevant than CATRA if you'd like to propose that M390's edge last longer quite a bit longer than Magnacut's.

Pete's method, to me, is more predictive of real world use than the CATRA. Yet Larrin's chart for Edge Retention has M390 at 6.5 and Magnacut at 5... base on what? Based on CATRA! No impact after cut, and very abrasive medium. Pete's chart, if he were to have one, would put Magnacut at 7 and M390 at 6.5, with differences not enough to bother about. That is a significant difference to Larrin's chart. Yet Larrin's chart is the one that nerds and OCD purchasers reference when trying to decide which steal possesses the balance of attributes they value for their next knife purchase. The representations in Larrin's chart then filter down to youtube reviewers, knife retailers, etc. ... to the point where an average Joe knife collector will simply assume that it is "scientific fact" that M390 has much better edge retention in real world use than Magnacut does. It can be misleading.

[shunsui]

...
You're going to have to explain how that is not more relevant than CATRA if you'd like to propose that M390's edge last longer quite a bit longer than Magnacut's. ...

I think he just did.

You're just repeating yourself at this point.

Cutting a mile of rope on a wooden board is interesting, but not particulary persuasive compared to more scientific methods.

Embrace your inner nerd.

[dlum1]

Just my 2 cents, but I think it's important that people not look at these graphs (whether rope test or CATRA) and walk away with a single expected value for something like edge retention. In reality, that single value is more representative of a distribution's mean. I think DunninLA was pointing out (in other words) that this edge-retention distribution has a variance based on usage. For both CATRA and rope tests, the tests are reasonably well controlled and the edge-retention distributions should be quite narrow (making the mean values easier to find with fewer tests). Yet, there still appears to be some overlap based on conflicting reports. In typical usage, these edge retention distributions will be significantly wider and tend to overlap considerably (based on the larger variability of materials being cut) -- until you move beyond m390 and start comparing 15v to magnacut I doubt there's much overlap there

[Ramonade]

Real world use is vast. Sometimes I cut stuff for a month without any "impact" on the edge behind the thing I just cut.