All About Pocket Knives

I give up, I surrender..I thought I knew how to search but I cannot seem to find an answer to this. I have seen a few guesses that it might mean "Muskrat Blade" but nothing definitive on that. I can post pictures, but it's on the tang (case xx knife) where you would normally see "SS" for stainless steel. But instead it's SSM.

Just taking a wild guess here, but if SSP stands for "Stainless Steel Polished" perhaps SSM stands for "Stainless Steel Mirror"

Does your knife have mirror finish on the blade(s)?

Better get out your camera and post up some pics...Now I'm intrigued.

Q is correct! "M" stands for Mirror Polished.

THANK YOU !

I knew someone here would know the answer. I rarely post but I read a lot and you all have helped me learn so much, it is greatly appreciated.

Di

It must be QTcut5's day. He got the answer by extending his mis-understanding of what SSP means. SSP means stainless steel springs and stainless steel blades with polished edges. In other words they are sharpened better but the sides of the blades are not necessarily polished. During the 1970s most stainless steel Case blades were not polished bright. Some of those satin finished 1970 knives are stamped SSP.

Modern Slip Joints wrote:It must be QTcut5's day. He got the answer by extending his mis-understanding of what SSP means. SSP means stainless steel springs and stainless steel blades with polished edges. In other words they are sharpened better but the sides of the blades are not necessarily polished. During the 1970s most stainless steel Case blades were not polished bright. Some of those satin finished 1970 knives are stamped SSP.

Thanks for sharing that info, MSJ, I did not know the SS also referred to the springs.

On a related note: Does a CV stamp mean that the spring as well as the blade steel is chrome vanadium?

QTCut5 wrote: [...] On a related note: Does a CV stamp mean that the spring as well as the blade steel is chrome vanadium?

I do not know. If I was in charge I would only inventory one of each spring shape, stainless, because I think that would be less expensive. I wonder if as stainless became the predominant blade steel Case phased out non-stainless springs like Ruger phased blued non-stainless hammers and triggers out of their blued revolvers. We could test our newest CV slip joint then if it is stainless test backward through our older knives. I have a post 2000 6375 CV but I forget how new it is. A tiny blued spot on the inside surface of a spring would not devalue my collection enough to loose sleep over. Alternatively light sanding with 800 & finer grits then metal polish would remove a spot from the outside of a spring.

All my Case CV knives have CV springs to best of my knowledge. With use the springs develop patina and if not cared for properly will rust as well.

An important part of knife-making is having springs of relatively the same hardness as the blade tang where the two make contact. If one is harder than the other the result will be premature wear. Thus it seems to me it would be desirable for both springs and blades to be of the same or similar steel.

Ken

Mumbleypeg wrote:All my Case CV knives have CV springs to best of my knowledge. With use the springs develop patina and if not cared for properly will rust as well.

An important part of knife-making is having springs of relatively the same hardness as the blade tang where the two make contact. If one is harder than the other the result will be premature wear. Thus it seems to me it would be desirable for both springs and blades to be of the same or similar steel.

Ken

Excellent point. I had not considered the spring-to-blade interaction. What you say makes a lot of sense.

Modern Slip Joints wrote: If I was in charge I would only inventory one of each spring shape, stainless, because I think that would be less expensive.

From a business perspective, that also makes a lot of sense. I wonder if the 'powers-that-be' at Case's executive headquarters would agree with you about the choice to save on expenses even if it could potentially result in an inferior product? (Assuming the use of a SS spring with a CV blade would result in substantially more wear/degradation than a spring and blade both made of the same type of steel.)

Which should take priority: Producing a higher quality product or earning higher company profits?? Alas, the corporate dilemma.

(If you're GEC, apparently you've found a way to do both!)

Mumbleypeg wrote:All my Case CV knives have CV springs to best of my knowledge. With use the springs develop patina and if not cared for properly will rust as well.

An important part of knife-making is having springs of relatively the same hardness as the blade tang where the two make contact. If one is harder than the other the result will be premature wear. Thus it seems to me it would be desirable for both springs and blades to be of the same or similar steel.

Ken

That used to be true, but not any more.

At some point in the 80's or 90's, I am not certain of the exact time frame, Case switched over to using stainless steel backsprings in all knives including those with CV blades.

So a modern Case CV knife made today will have SS springs.

Thanks for that info Steve. I recall when I toured the Case factory about 10 years ago they showed us the operation step, after heat tempering of the blades, where the blade tangs are “de-tempered” so that they are not harder than the back springs. They also test the Rockwell scale hardness of each blade, IIRC at about this point in the process. Maybe they determined there is not sufficient difference in untempered stainless steel (the back springs) and untempered CV (the blade tangs) to be significant.

Ken

This is a very informative post, thanks to all who replied, I'm learning some new tricks.

I agree with 1967redrider. This is very interesting. Thanks for letting me listen in even though I have nothing to share.