This has been a great thread -- thanks to all for contributing. There's nothing like seeing with one's own eyes and your pictures have accomplished this. Personally, I think a pickled blade looks great. Would I want every knife blade to like like this? Maybe not, but I might want a user to be pickled, especially if I know there's no harm done and there may even be a rust-protective effect of the pickled layer.

All of this raises an interesting question in mind. If pickled blades look great, and there is a protective effect, and carbon has other advantages in edge retention and sharpening, why isn't carbon our collective first choice in a blade material? Is it simply because a pickled blade looks like a used blade and we know it will be harder to sell?

I'll be honest about this and say that even though a pickled blade looks, in some respects, better to my eyes than a shiny new blade, I'd pay more for a blade that looks brand new than one that has sat in pickle juice for three hours!

The other question that is even more interesting to me than the relative value of pickled vs. non-pickled knives is whether pickling is as (technically) protective of the blade as stainless is. In other words, if you took a pickled carbon blade out in the woods for three months, how would it hold up relative to its stainless brethren? I suspect that the stainless knife would resist rust better but don't have the knowledge to answer this question.

So I'll throw the question out to all of you -- If you could only take one Randall with you in the woods for three months, and you needed this knife for your survival, would you take a pickled carbon blade or stainless?

As a newbie to this forum, I apologize if I'm asking a question that's too controversial or provocative, but I'm sincerely interested in picking blade material based its performance and durability rather than its looks. Again, thanks for the input!

John