I just got a 240 iron clad Toyama @216gThey slimmed down before the shift to stainless clad -- some of the iron clads are just as svelte as the current stainless clad.
less distal taper than my 240 ss clad - still friken awesome
I just got a 240 iron clad Toyama @216gThey slimmed down before the shift to stainless clad -- some of the iron clads are just as svelte as the current stainless clad.
If anything, the “better Yoshikane” komorebi might be closer to a Toyama, though I suspect the two are more different than the specs would suggest. Any thoughts on the two?Yoshi has a flat profile. Like really flat. They also tend to be shorter at the heel around 50mm or so. Toyama has more of a curve in the profile and are closer to 55mm at the heel for the 240.
They share similarities in the height, weight and the taper. However they differ greatly in the grind. The watoyama has a fully convex grind compared to the very thin wide bevel style of the komorebi. The komorebi is much thinner behind the edge than the watoyama.If anything, the “better Yoshikane” komorebi might be closer to a Toyama, though I suspect the two are more different than the specs would suggest. Any thoughts on the two?
And one more thing, the Komorebi has a sort of "machi" style neck compared to the thin straight neck of the toyama. It's a bit taller in that area, but not as adjustable. If you want to install the handle with less of a gap to the choil, then you will have to grind some of the machi steel (hope I'm using that term correctly) before reinstalling. For the toyama, all you would need to do is simply make the tang hole deeper because the tang of the knife doesnt have the machi notch. This probably doesn't matter to the majority of people, but I'm very particular about these kind of things when deciding which knives I want to keep.If anything, the “better Yoshikane” komorebi might be closer to a Toyama, though I suspect the two are more different than the specs would suggest. Any thoughts on the two?
I get the sense that a lot of folks here have a preference for iron clad over SS clad (Takeda classic vs. NAS another example). Can anyone explain why? I don't see how the cladding has an iota of impact on the cutting proficiency.Just got a Watanabe SS from trading, pretty good so far, really want to try a iron clad.
I do have a *fairly* light touch and always use a hi-soft type board which I think is much more forgiving than others.I might be brutal but i tend to get small micro chipping when its zero edge
Patina and aesthetics for a lot of people. Iron cladding is also much easier to thin and refinish. But, in addition to that, in the case of Watanabes and Toyamas, the iron clad ones tend to have a little more weight and convexity to them and their grinds were geared a little more towards food release while the stainless ones are a little thinner throughout and behind the edge. IMO, the stainless ones are better pure cutters, but the iron clad ones just feel a little more special to me.I get the sense that a lot of folks here have a preference for iron clad over SS clad (Takeda classic vs. NAS another example). Can anyone explain why? I don't see how the cladding has an iota of impact on the cutting proficiency.
My early 2019 240 Wat Migaki gyuto has the same specs as the current versions in stainless clad. I have an older Kurouchi 270 that is a beast. I really like the 240, but it is not as distinctive as the older one. I'm not sure exactly when they switched to stainless. If I'm not mistaken, it has happened before. The more recent shift must have been around 2021.
I just got a 240 iron clad Toyama @216g
less distal taper than my 240 ss clad - still friken awesome
I’m kind interested in how old Watanabe would compare to Shi.Han KU, both monsters of a knife, and with the price increase they are close to each other now.
Also would like to hear from someone with both, my understanding is that shihans ku line is more of a middle weight knife similar to the wats of recent years, versus the super heavy that wat was known for back in the days of myth.
Looking at the ku shihans on BST of the last year or so, they mostly seem to be under 1g/mm, whereas I’ve read about folks with ku wats in the 1.25 g/mm range.
That being said, that metric doesn’t take grind or height into account so maybe not worth anything
Shihans have a nice gentle convex from the KU finish down to the edge with a slight righty bias throughout the grind, or at least mine does. Although some can be more symmetrical and I know he takes orders for lefty grinds. Iron Watanabes are flat from the spine down about 1/3rd the face of the blade where a KU finish would be, then a really gentle convex in the mid 3rd, then a strong righty biased asymmetric the last third down to the edge which is the biggest difference.
Wats also come with that fragile zero grind so they are better cutters OOTB. Shihans have a more conservative edge bevel, so still cut very smoothly, but less of a “fall through food” feeling, although they also feel a lot easier to control and maneuver while Wats can be a bit too forward feeling initially. Although my Shihan is from his first A2 batch from a couple years ago and some of the newer ones I’ve seen on here look thinner behind the edge just going by the eye test.
Wat is also on the brittler side (high hardness+nail flexing edge+blue 2 isn’t the toughest steel) while my A2 gyuto has proved very tough and Shihan’s 52100 is known to be pretty bulletproof. I’d feel much better about loaning about my Shihan to someone I know will abuse it a bit (within reason of course).
I can see a Shihan as being more user friendly, while a iron Wat takes more getting used to before you get proficient at using it, but once you get it, it’s very efficient, like a vegetable cleaver.
Thanks for the great reply @kpham12. All valid reasons. I think I got lucky with my NAS, it's a wicked cutter with good release, though it is fairly recent.Patina and aesthetics for a lot of people. Iron cladding is also much easier to thin and refinish. But, in addition to that, in the case of Watanabes and Toyamas, the iron clad ones tend to have a little more weight and convexity to them and their grinds were geared a little more towards food release while the stainless ones are a little thinner throughout and behind the edge. IMO, the stainless ones are better pure cutters, but the iron clad ones just feel a little more special to me.
In the case of Takedas, the classic Takedas have a reputation of being better cutters than the NAS which a lot of people found to wedge too much. From what I’ve seen, a lot of the newer NAS Takedas have nicer grinds, but for a while, a lot of them had huge shoulders and the bevels were really low, even for a Takeda, so they would crack any remotely dense or hard food.
Iron Watanabes are flat from the spine down about 1/3rd the face of the blade where a KU finish would be, then a really gentle convex in the mid 3rd, then a strong righty biased asymmetric the last third down to the edge which is the biggest difference.
Wats also come with that fragile zero grind so they are better cutters OOTB.
Wat is also on the brittler side (high hardness+nail flexing edge+blue 2 isn’t the toughest steel) while my A2 gyuto has proved very tough and Shihan’s 52100 is known to be pretty bulletproof. I’d feel much better about loaning about my Shihan to someone I know will abuse it a bit (within reason of course).
Agreed, it takes a bit of fine tuning to balance keeping them thin enough behind the edge while microbeveling or sharpening at a higher angle to maintain the same cutting performance and sharpness while making the knife durable, especially with heavy volume on hard cutting boards. Also good to hear the deflections in edge is more of a common problem. I like my knives to be durable enough to cut through an apple including the seeds and stem and the Watanabe is pretty likely to have some deflections afterwards. They are usually pretty small though and don’t really affect performance, plus they come out after a touch-up or two so I don’t mind too much. Cutting just regular foods at home on an end grain board or something similarly soft like synthetic rubber, you don’t really get these problems.I've owned three of them over the years, this pretty much nails my experience of them as well. I'd add that the edges tend to deflect easily off of tough boards, seeds, etc. They get stupid sharp, but are hard to maintain without modifying the edge bevel some, which tends to change the cutting behavior of the knife. If your careful what you cut, the surface and the technique they are really amazing, but not bullet proof by any means. Maybe "Workhorse" is not the best description for them.
I'd also add that the KU finish on the Wats is probably my favorite of all knifes. Almost a bluing effect, that is quite durable and almost completely non reactive.
I've had the opportunity to try a Komorebi 240 Blue 2 recently and its disappointing honestly.If anything, the “better Yoshikane” komorebi might be closer to a Toyama, though I suspect the two are more different than the specs would suggest. Any thoughts on the two?
This. I have a hard time deciding between my 270 Wat KU and Moritaka Chuka.... a iron Wat takes more getting used to before you get proficient at using it, but once you get it, it’s very efficient, like a vegetable cleaver.
And has replaced the Wat in my home drawerAnd just to throw another one out there. I commissioned a 270 wrought clad workhorse from Harbeer @HSC /// Knives . It is a nice happy medium from the bulletproof but sometimes pedestrian feeling Shi.han and the high performance, delicate but thorny flower that is the Watanabe.
Try out HeijiThat Wat zero grind scared me. I didn't even use it.
True. Heiji and Shig edges are even more zero-edge-ish than Wat’s.Try out Heiji
Mazaki I suppose.Given Toyama's age, who is going to make all the Watanabe knives?
Enter your email address to join: