Why isn't S2 steel used for axe heads?

BlindGoldenRetriever said:
I'm just going to assume youre in the if it ain't broke don't fix it camp. While I'm like wouldn't it be cool if we could test out all these different alloys and see how they stack up. They make jackhammer bits out of this. I wonder how that would do in an axe. Is a little molybdenum & vanadium going to morph into inconel?
Click to expand...

You know what they say about those who assume.
 
Danke42 said:
Lets not get all bogged down with facts
Click to expand...

Facts can only tell you so much, and only deal with truth. Let's dig into some anecdotal evidence to make sure things are more clear and so we get the whole picture.
 
If you want an axe-like tool with fancy steel, those full tang tomahawks come in all sorts of steel variants.
Because they aren't having to forge an eye hole, the process doesn't affect steel selection. Can use whatever steel is out there in a suitable thickness.
 
BlindGoldenRetriever said:
I'm just going to assume youre in the if it ain't broke don't fix it camp. While I'm like wouldn't it be cool if we could test out all these different alloys and see how they stack up. They make jackhammer bits out of this. I wonder how that would do in an axe. Is a little molybdenum & vanadium going to morph into inconel?
Click to expand...

By all means, feel free to do it! Get your hands on some steel and have a custom smith make you some test pieces. But you'll find that in terms of real-world use if one pulls ahead of the others it'll be because the geometry and steel/heat treatment are the closest to being optimized for one another, and less because of the particular steel. If geometry and hardness are held as constant and the steels are all within the same broad classifications of steels, if you were to mix them all up without labels on them you wouldn't be able to tell which steel was which between them in actual use. If you really wanted to set out to optimize them you would have to define your contexts of use and then adjust your geometries and heat treatments accordingly to actually achieve the limits of performance you're able to squeeze out of those particular combinations, all of which come with certain sacrifices or tradeoffs. And you have yet to describe what you actually consider as a "better" axe. You can't just take a particular axe and change nothing about it but the steel and consider it universally improved. That's just not how good design works.

Steels that maintain their toughness at higher hardness reduce the chances of breaking when bits are run hard, but when run hard they're a pain to fix up from the reduced damage they receive because most things that damage axes will damage any thin-edged steel tool, no matter how fancy. Filing as a repair method would then be rendered impossible. Even if that's acceptable, that increased toughness at high hardness will mostly show up in very thin geometries, which would be prone to sticking unless you're reducing your swing force to deliberately limit the depth of penetration, and it comes at the sacrifice of having reduced chip-popping and splitting ability, making it less of an all-purpose tool. Even in such cases, you're able to run thin geometries in 1055 at up to about 58 RC without them being chippy under most circumstances so unless you plan on pushing ultra-thin geometries up into the 60-62 range there's just not much point. At the end of the day, an axe that can be filed is of greater help to real-world users, and you can easily achieve a tough axe in the 55-58ish hardness with pretty pedestrian steels, which results in an axe that takes and holds a good edge without being brittle and remains maintainable with a file.

But don't get me started on knife steels. The overwhelming majority of them gain little from being made in one steel vs. another because their geometries are not optimized for their given steels and heat treatments. 99% of the knife world is marketing spin and 0.99% of what remains is mechanical novelty. BUT it is true that there are some true performance innovations within the space that deserve celebrating. You just have to sift through mountains of same-y drivel that puts dollars into flash over substance in order to find the good stuff. And, again, a lot of it comes back to geometry rather than steel, or very niche use cases that have unusually high demands on the tool being used in ways that they normally aren't.
 
FortyTwoBlades said:
By all means, feel free to do it! Get your hands on some steel and have a custom smith make you some test pieces. But you'll find that in terms of real-world use if one pulls ahead of the others it'll be because the geometry and steel/heat treatment are the closest to being optimized for one another, and less because of the particular steel. If geometry and hardness are held as constant and the steels are all within the same broad classifications of steels, if you were to mix them all up without labels on them you wouldn't be able to tell which steel was which between them in actual use. If you really wanted to set out to optimize them you would have to define your contexts of use and then adjust your geometries and heat treatments accordingly to actually achieve the limits of performance you're able to squeeze out of those particular combinations, all of which come with certain sacrifices or tradeoffs. And you have yet to describe what you actually consider as a "better" axe. You can't just take a particular axe and change nothing about it but the steel and consider it universally improved. That's just not how good design works.

Steels that maintain their toughness at higher hardness reduce the chances of breaking when bits are run hard, but when run hard they're a pain to fix up from the reduced damage they receive because most things that damage axes will damage any thin-edged steel tool, no matter how fancy. Filing as a repair method would then be rendered impossible. Even if that's acceptable, that increased toughness at high hardness will mostly show up in very thin geometries, which would be prone to sticking unless you're reducing your swing force to deliberately limit the depth of penetration, and it comes at the sacrifice of having reduced chip-popping and splitting ability, making it less of an all-purpose tool. Even in such cases, you're able to run thin geometries in 1055 at up to about 58 RC without them being chippy under most circumstances so unless you plan on pushing ultra-thin geometries up into the 60-62 range there's just not much point. At the end of the day, an axe that can be filed is of greater help to real-world users, and you can easily achieve a tough axe in the 55-58ish hardness with pretty pedestrian steels, which results in an axe that takes and holds a good edge without being brittle and remains maintainable with a file.

But don't get me started on knife steels. The overwhelming majority of them gain little from being made in one steel vs. another because their geometries are not optimized for their given steels and heat treatments. 99% of the knife world is marketing spin and 0.99% of what remains is mechanical novelty. BUT it is true that there are some true performance innovations within the space that deserve celebrating. You just have to sift through mountains of same-y drivel that puts dollars into flash over substance in order to find the good stuff. And, again, a lot of it comes back to geometry rather than steel, or very niche use cases that have unusually high demands on the tool being used in ways that they normally aren't.
Click to expand...
The only time I've ever said "better" was "many knife steels are marginally better & make a killing for companies. Imo d2 works 99.9% as well or better as s30v, yet the market sold a ton" From the jump I've primarily mentioned trade offs, and how they match up. Yet you straw man that "better" line, like I don't understand tradeoffs. Just like you kept mentioning edge geometry & heat treat when I also stressed the importance of it in like my second post. Back to the only reason for the thread "S2 steel seems like on paper a good candidate for an axe. Is there some fatal flaw I'm missing, Any reason cartech s2 shock absorbing steel would make a poor head? Or is the conventional why bother, when 1060 works great." I'll just assume that it works great is your answer. I appreciate the hardness & toughness vs chipping & bending point thats why I picked a steel I read is known to bend not break under 60 hrc. I didn't say hey why don't they use the special dozier? d2 recipe for axes & 62 hrc. I later mentioned a few alloys known for toughness in the 40-80 range. I've enjoyed the chat but we're obviously having two different conversations. enjoy the rest of your week.
 
If you really are literally only asking "is it a bad choice as a steel for an axe" then the answer is no. It'll work fine. That much could have been easily inferred from my initial response. I then went into explicit detail of why axe companies choose the steels that they do vs. others within the broad families of appropriate plain carbon or low-alloy tool steels: a combination of cost (in raw form and in labor to work it), convenience, and available format. And repeatedly stated that while there might be some mechanical property differences that could be quantified in a laboratory setting, none of those differences will be noticeable to the end user in practice compared to other factors.
BlindGoldenRetriever said:
The only time I've ever said "better" was "many knife steels are marginally better & make a killing for companies. Imo d2 works 99.9% as well or better as s30v, yet the market sold a ton" From the jump I've primarily mentioned trade offs, and how they match up. Yet you straw man that "better" line, like I don't understand tradeoffs. Just like you kept mentioning edge geometry & heat treat when I also stressed the importance of it in like my second post. Back to the only reason for the thread "S2 steel seems like on paper a good candidate for an axe. Is there some fatal flaw I'm missing, Any reason cartech s2 shock absorbing steel would make a poor head? Or is the conventional why bother, when 1060 works great." I'll just assume that it works great is your answer. I appreciate the hardness & toughness vs chipping & bending point thats why I picked a steel I read is known to bend not break under 60 hrc. I didn't say hey why don't they use the special dozier? d2 recipe for axes & 62 hrc. I later mentioned a few alloys known for toughness in the 40-80 range. I've enjoyed the chat but we're obviously having two different conversations. enjoy the rest of your week.
Click to expand...
BlindGoldenRetriever said:
I agree .45-70% carbon I get it. We all know the gimmick. Ive gone through dozens of old catalog with "special alloy steel" "super quality tool steel" "high carbon steel" that's just 1055-1065 or some majestic swedish steel thats just a recycled European equivalent. I'm just curious of the trade offs of s2 vs say 1060 or 5160, 4140. With the advancements of knife steel, it's kept the market alive. With axes it's usually buy gb, council, or find something older than a Countach
Click to expand...

While phrased as a statement this is a question.^^^

BlindGoldenRetriever said:
I'm just going to assume youre in the if it ain't broke don't fix it camp. While I'm like wouldn't it be cool if we could test out all these different alloys and see how they stack up. They make jackhammer bits out of this. I wonder how that would do in an axe. Is a little molybdenum & vanadium going to morph into inconel?
Click to expand...

These are all also questions.
 
B BlindGoldenRetriever -- your questions are interesting, and there is some science to it... I suggest you read every steel article that Larrin Larrin has written, including his website knifesteelnerds.com... you'll get what you're after. Also, re-read the points FortyTwoBlades FortyTwoBlades wrote, take it as wisdom from someone who has gone down this rabbit hole, and knows a few things.

imho, the tldr version is to focus on steel toughness, since that will be one of the more important properties of steel for an axe (AFTER geometry & heat treat)

this is a pretty good video he did

a recent article of his examines the higher end toughness steel types
knifesteelnerds.com

How to Heat Treat Nickel Knife Steels - 15N20, 8670, L6 - Knife Steel Nerds

Thanks to the new Knife Steel Nerds Patreon supporters! Fikes Lee, Dennis Toland, mlknhny, Immenreiner, Robert Pearce, Andrew Lakey, and Scott Amstutz. It is thanks to your support that I can do experiments like the ones you find in this article. YouTube Video Here is a video version of the...
knifesteelnerds.com knifesteelnerds.com
low-alloy-steel-toughness-3-20-23.png

looks like 15n20 is your best bet (if you have good geometry & heat treatment)
this is also a good early article of his -> https://knifesteelnerds.com/2018/05/28/chipping-of-edges/
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top