Snowdog
Member
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2002
- Messages
- 4,608
I'm looking to buy a "clone" for my aging-yet-lively Benchmade Stryker that I have carried for years. Over the years, I have grown incredibly comfortable with this knife, almost as if it’s an appendage of my own hand. Ever since I got my first Buck knife as a little kid, I’ve always carried a knife on me to fulfill any cutting tasks that might arise.
The Stryker was my 2nd Benchmade and unlike any knife I’ve ever owned (and that would be many), this was the only knife to surprise me into feeling like it were tailored just for me as soon as removing it from the box.
As improbable as it is, I have a fear that in the future, after year upon year of new and flashier knife designs with “automatic” this and “tactical” that having been fielded, I would lose my Stryker and find myself unable to replace it with another… instead having to “upgrade” to a newer design that I wouldn’t feel as comfortable with.
Therefore, I would like to have two, if only just to make me feel more comfortable.
So enough of all that, here’s the question: The Benchmade I currently have was advertised during the time of purchase as having a blade made from ATS-34, which I understand is somewhat respectable steel and that I find holds an edge well, even if it does take a while to take that razor's edge.
However, the newer Benchmade Stryker models I recently looked at were advertised as having a blade made from either M2 tool steel or 154CM steel. I am not fluent in steel-speak, so can anyone briefly point out some of the pros and cons of these two metals and how they might stack up to ATS-34 (which a fewer number are still advertised as having). If the “tool steel” is indeed better, does it justify the slight price increase of $10-$15 ? Opinions between the three are welcome.
Thanks in advance!
The Stryker was my 2nd Benchmade and unlike any knife I’ve ever owned (and that would be many), this was the only knife to surprise me into feeling like it were tailored just for me as soon as removing it from the box.
As improbable as it is, I have a fear that in the future, after year upon year of new and flashier knife designs with “automatic” this and “tactical” that having been fielded, I would lose my Stryker and find myself unable to replace it with another… instead having to “upgrade” to a newer design that I wouldn’t feel as comfortable with.
Therefore, I would like to have two, if only just to make me feel more comfortable.
So enough of all that, here’s the question: The Benchmade I currently have was advertised during the time of purchase as having a blade made from ATS-34, which I understand is somewhat respectable steel and that I find holds an edge well, even if it does take a while to take that razor's edge.
However, the newer Benchmade Stryker models I recently looked at were advertised as having a blade made from either M2 tool steel or 154CM steel. I am not fluent in steel-speak, so can anyone briefly point out some of the pros and cons of these two metals and how they might stack up to ATS-34 (which a fewer number are still advertised as having). If the “tool steel” is indeed better, does it justify the slight price increase of $10-$15 ? Opinions between the three are welcome.
Thanks in advance!