S30V Techno?

[Evil D]

It's a great time for knife enthusiasts when we can complain about a steel like S30V.

[Donut]

I think S30V fits the Techno a little better than XHP.

I will believe the switch when I see an "in the wild" picture of one.

[WireEdge Roger]

I just love these 1st post new members stirring the pot. Seems trollish.

S30V or XHP, regardless they are premium steels on an awesome Spyderco model.

[jackknifeh]

If I ordered a knife with a particular blade steel and it was different I'd be unhappy I didn't get what I ordered (as a rule). But if I ordered a Delica with VG-10 and received a Delica with S30V I'd be happy and wouldn't complain. If, OTOH, the Delica came with 8Cr13MoV, I'd return it. In this case the Techno with S30V is just as good as the Techno with XHP. I might complain but I wouldn't return the knife.

This type of thing, on this knife, is probably more important to the collector than it would be to the user. The blade steels IMO, are both good and the knife is great with either one. But, in the years to come having a Techno with both blade steels would be a good thing. Just like a collector having a Chaparral CF with S30V and XHP both.

It is surprising though for the knife to show up in someone's hand before Spyderco announces it. Most people don't care what blade steel is on their knife. But the guys/gals that spend time on a forum usually know about the blade steel. When I was in high school a friend (girl) of mine got a new car. I asked her what engine it had. She had no idea. Same thing with knives and blade steels for the majority of the folks out there I bet.

Jack

[Cliff Stamp]

But if I ordered a Delica with VG-10 and received a Delica with S30V I'd be happy and wouldn't complain.

And if I would prefer a 420HC blade does that mean you should not be able to refuse if yours came with that? I prefer the Paramilitary over the Military, that doesn't mean if someone ordered a Military then Spyderco could substitute one for the other. That fact that one person not part of a contract would ok an alteration to it obviously has no bearing on if a contract between two other people can be changed without the consent of both parties.

With steels none of them are uniformly better than another, they all have a host of properties so that kind of argument about the ability of the steel is inherently moot. However even if this was the case and Spyderco used a material which was some kind of direct upgrade it still isn't trivial to just force contract changes because you are ignoring issues such as collectability.

Not everyone buys knives because of function, maybe someone wanted a particular steel sample for collection purposes and they already had S30V and wanted XHP. Maybe they really were curious about that steel and that is why they bought that model. It is obvious you can't simply ignore the preferences of a consumer when they buy a product and change the product after the contract has been made.

Aside from an issue of what should/should not be done, in most places it is simply not legal unless you have grounds such as restrictions (material wasn't available) and even in those cases it is almost always the case you have to provide refunds for the other party who can claim the original contract is null/void. Exceptions to this are when products are sold with conditions (may not be exactly as appears, substitutions are possible, etc.) .

In any case if you buy the knife and got the steel you were not expecting and don't want it then just return it, request a full refund including all shipping costs. It would be very rare for anyone to refuse that because in most places they would be trying to force an altered contract without consent.

[brancron]

I just love these 1st post new members stirring the pot. Seems trollish.

Oh please. I posted here for the first time because Spyderco is selling knife advertised as having one steel and delivering a knife in a different steel is not something that should be happening. I'm active on Blade Forums, USN, and Reddit's /r/knifeclub, and I love Spyderco--the reason I posted here is because I want to find out what's going on. Are you really such an apologist for Spyderco that you can't see this is a problem?

[apollo]

Strange for Spyderco to change a steel just like that without telling the Public.
Now that Techno will also be as good as an XHP one but indeed i mut say this should have never happend in this mannor.
But we can not forget we are all human so we all make mistakes. :)

[SpeedHoles]

I think this thread has jumped the gun....

There are some wildly exaggerated examples being thrown out here and causing tension that may be unnecessary...

[PiterM]

The change could have been better communicated, that is clear and true. But... I've got Techno in XHP and also Burch in S30V. Quite similar in blades size (about 2.5" each). Well, the dufference in realnuse and edge retention is virtually zero. Both XHP ans S30V with Spyderco heat treatment provide users with SUPERB edge.nsonfrom practical point of view - no difference.

Also it gives us a unique opportunity to get now Techno in S30V and compare both steels in yhe same knife design side-by-side! I'll be getting Techno in s30v just to try it and compare. Yeah! Should be cool comparison :D

[Cliff Stamp]

... I posted here is because I want to find out what's going on.

If the fact you have one post means anything, I would ask the same question. I have more than one post so the original complaint is obviously moot then. I would wonder how someone can join without having a first post unless they do so in some kind of quantum singularity, and why a first post which is "negative" is indication of some kind of hidden bias but a first post which is positive is not.

[gbelleh]

Oh boy, here we go...

[LC Kid]

Hi Folks!


I mean, this is a very simple question: does anybody around did ever hear of some 'New S30V Version' of the Techno?

The Techno is a very successful and widely well received model. Everybody knows that. I lost count how many reviews I have seen on the web about the Techno, and haven't yet seen the first one that doesn't acclaim the model. Not many pocket knives can claim that. :)

So, it really looks very surprising to me that Spyderco didn't announced a change like this one, anywhere.

And giving the whole avalanche of fake models everywhere on the web, it could be just another phony blade. :rolleyes:

Really like to hear somebody from the Spyderco Crew to chime in. :spyder:

[FCM415]

Oh boy, here we go...

Yep...

[brancron]

Just to clarify, a steel change is perfectly fine. What’s not fine is a steel change with no indication that it has occurred—literally ZERO indication from any source whatsoever, including Spyderco’s website, Amazon, Blade HQ, Knife Center, Google, even the freaking pamphlet that came with the knife. It is only until the end-user has cut open the box, removed the knife from its bubble wrap, and opened up the blade that he realizes that it’s not what he ordered.

How anyone here could be completely indifferent to this is beyond me.

[Cliff Stamp]

How anyone here could be completely indifferent to this is beyond me.

To be fair, the same arguments used here are also on BF in the same thread and elsewhere.

On BF a poster noted that they had correspondence from Spyderco who noted they had changed the steel in production at some point and this information simply has not been updated in all promotions.

If it wasn't the internet, this happens all the time in print as obviously you can't recall catalogs and most have some kind of disclaimer to note changes can be made.

The promotion should of course be changed, the only thing I would realize is that the sheer amount of material on any given website.

If you look past the Techno for a moment, start looking at other ads and seeing how many issues you can find. Not a defense, just a note about practical implementation.

[Molle Ninja]

Yes, steel matters to people. That's one of the reasons I love Spyderco.

Also, remember how people were happy when the Chaparral moved in the opposite direction from what might be happening here? It follows that people would see a switch in the other direction as a downgrade--fact notwithstanding.

[Liquid Cobra]

So are you going to send it back and ask for an XHP version?

[JNewell]

The tone of the thread title may have something to do with the way some people are reacting.

[Blerv]

If the Techno has CTS-204p or CTS-20cp I can totally understand the outrage. However, those steels aren't anything like XHP.

While S30v and XHP aren't analogs they are extremely similar steels in regards to carbon content and relative edge retention. XHP just relies on chromium instead of vanadium. Both high carbide mid-grade carbon alloys.

Ankerson's PM2 test (or was it a Military one?) actually had S30v as the winner. The v-carbides in theory are harder and smaller making for a more stable edge. At least unless I'm mistaken.

While IMHO it's not very professional to have a rolling change of steels without a SKU change (it's a blow-up waiting to happen) it's far from typical Spyderco behavior. Typically the CQI/rolling changes are universally seen as improvements in every way. That said, the customer always has the right to return the product if not as described.

[nirvanero]

I don't know if this change is for real as it's weird that Spyderco haven't advertised it but those steels perform vey similar, it's not like M390 vs VG-10. Some people say XHP is a bit easier to sharpen and S30V a bit more wear resistant... As Blerv said, in Ankerson's test S30V actually performed better so unless you look for a specific steel both options should satisfy everyone.