3v HRC Debacle

[madcap_magician]

Thanks. I'll leave it alone the same way I leave Emersons alone. They made a decision on this one that I disagree with, so I'll just pass on the knife.

I am curious if they run a lot of their other knives at suboptimal hardness, though.

 

[Cypress]

Alright guys. I have been out of the office and now catching up on things. Our actual 3V heat treat spec is currently 56-59 HRc.

Any comment on why nobody is finding your 3V to be in that range?

The question was also asked why the range is so large... I can’t find a single manufacturer that is has a larger spread than 2 HRC. 56-59 is pretty big gap.

 

[Twindog]

Not to be too caught up in semantics, but it's still a 3 point spread, as in the distance between 55 and 58 HRC is only 3 points. You're right that it can be any of 4 integers between the two points, as in 55/56/57/58 HRC.

Similarly, a 59-60 HRC range is a single point spread, not a two point spread.

I see what you're saying -- the difference between a hardness of 56 and 59 is three points Rc. Fair enough. But the hardness could be a range of four hardness points: 56, 57, 58 or 59. What makes the difference roughly 4 also is in the precision -- or lack of it.

An Rc of 56 could be 55.5. And an Rc of 59 could be 59.5. (I know that rounding 0.5 points is a bit more complicated, but not enough to waste time with in this discussion.) So the difference is actually about 4 points of Rc. (Rather than 3.0 for more precise Rc hardnesses of 56.00 and 59.00.)

And we've seen that some Benchmade 3V has come in at 55 Rc, which makes the range even worse.

Regardless, it's a huge spread. The performance difference between 55.5 and 59.5 is considerable. I haven't heard why Benchmade made the Rc hardness range so wide.

Maybe in its custom shop, Benchmade could offer custom heat treats with a precise hardness, not a hardness range.

 

[marrenmiller]

I see what you're saying -- the difference between a hardness of 56 and 59 is three points Rc. Fair enough. But the hardness could be a range of four hardness points: 56, 57, 58 or 59. What makes the difference roughly 4 also is in the precision -- or lack of it.

An Rc of 56 could be 55.5. And an Rc of 59 could be 59.5. (I know that rounding 0.5 points is a bit more complicated, but not enough to waste time with in this discussion.) So the difference is actually about 4 points of Rc. (Rather than 3.0 for more precise Rc hardnesses of 56.00 and 59.00.)

And we've seen that some Benchmade 3V has come in at 55 Rc, which makes the range even worse.

Regardless, it's a huge spread. The performance difference between 55.5 and 59.5 is considerable. I haven't heard why Benchmade made the Rc hardness range so wide.

Maybe in its custom shop, Benchmade could offer custom heat treats with a precise hardness, not a hardness range.

The hardness range might be wide because they do a ton of them at once in a giant oven and leave them outside to air cool.

Also, nobody knows if their range is supposed to include rounded figures or not. If you set a minimum tolerance on a part drawing and the part being made is below that, it doesn't matter if it rounds to that number or not; it's still out of spec.

 

[Sonnydaze]

Benchmade states in their literature that the HRC for their 3v is 55 - 58.
They were aware and this was intentional.

KnifeCenter said this in their ad...

• CPM-3V premium tool steel (58-60HRC)

 

[Mo2]

KnifeCenter said this in their ad...

• CPM-3V premium tool steel (58-60HRC)

@KnifeCenter can you correct this asap. Cause this is wrong according to Benchmade. It's 55-57hrc

Note this is the 2nd tag for this to be changed. False advertising is not good. Especially in this instance.

 

[grumpy514]

Woah.... I've seen a few people send their blades out and the HT does seem to be hitting below the marks. One person tested at 54HRC, another youtuber tested his twice and it came to 55.8/56HRC. Still well below where this metal should be at for a GOOD heat treat. Hopefully Benchmade catches this in their next batch and changes the HT on these and takes care of the current customers who are not very happy with theirs.

 

[beattheheat]

Hello fellow knife enthousiasts,
Is the 3V heat treat debacle also for the 200 Puukko?

 

[Mo2]

Hello fellow knife enthousiasts,
Is the 3V heat treat debacle also for the 200 Puukko?

The puukko is not thin nor used for high edge retention. We would like to see it at a higher hrc still. But it's less of an issue for batoning small wood, kindling, wideling, shavings, etc.

 

[lovescamaros]

And crucible says 60 is best...I’m curious if the test being done through the cerakote had an impact, that doesn’t seem like the most “pure” test.

Bigger question overall for me is why did they use 3V on this knife anyway? S30V would have been fine, probability more logically really.

I know quite a few people have complained about s30v and how much it's used and i can only assume that's why they wanted to change steels.

 

[John_0917]

FWIW today I used my 537 to cut up several cardboard shipping boxes, large size standard thickness, from amazon and chewy for reference. The factory edge was hair shaving before and remains so now, I was pleasantly surprised.

By the way, I hand picked my example at a local knife store I frequent, it took me 4 examples to find one with major QC issues...

Also, mine is not a first production...perhaps might they have increased the hardness?

 

[Mo2]

Warning, swearing in these two vids.

 

[somber]

I really enjoyed your explanation here. Well spoken.

I don't know if I have faith in the ultimate accuracy of the results, but like you send in the video, the intent is to gather information and start a discussion that will further the knife community, not bring it down.

 

[Mo2]

I really enjoyed your explanation here. Well spoken.

I don't know if I have faith in the ultimate accuracy of the results, but like you send in the video, the intent is to gather information and start a discussion that will further the knife community, not bring it down.

Those videos were not mine. Alchemy1 is the first video and Supersteel steve were the next two. Steve's not currently a member here that I know of.

 

[Alchemy1]

I really enjoyed your explanation here. Well spoken.

I don't know if I have faith in the ultimate accuracy of the results, but like you send in the video, the intent is to gather information and start a discussion that will further the knife community, not bring it down.

The guy running the tests is a contractor for very important people testing very important things. The type of operation where tolerance and repeatability is key. He also carries a BM “Super Freek”. I don’t remember the numbers off of the top of my head, but the “Super Freeks” tested, yes, multiple, have tested well over 60. Like 62+.

He has also tested 3 Bailouts now and none have tested at 57 or higher. BM also confirmed in the email to me, that is posted in my vid/IG, that they intended to run the steel this soft.

It was also brought to my attention, by a buddy, that the Bailout is now listed in the Blue Class and Black Class sections of BM’s site. Who knows what that means, but it is.

 

[Mo2]

It was also brought to my attention, by a buddy, that the Bailout is now listed in the Blue Class and Black Class sections of BM’s site. Who knows what that means, but it is.

i just checked and it is listed in both classes. probably because its edc tactical specification. i dunno.

 

[John_0917]

So again totally unscientific but real world feedback from my non first run example... cut more cardboard today and edge retention was barely effected, still have a hard time believing it’s that soft. Is it possible they have raised the hardness? Or perhaps I was just lucky and got a harder one of the batch?

Also gave it a quick few stones on a lansky fine rod set, came back to hair popping no time at all...I was set to be let down but definitely am not so far.

 

[Mo2]

So again totally unscientific but real world feedback from my non first run example... cut more cardboard today and edge retention was barely effected, still have a hard time believing it’s that soft. Is it possible they have raised the hardness? Or perhaps I was just lucky and got a harder one of the batch?

Also gave it a quick few stones on a lansky fine rod set, came back to hair popping no time at all...I was set to be let down but definitely am not so far.

It's still being tested at 56ish. Nothing changed yet. How much feet of cardboard have you cut. You can see how much have been cut in the few tests already done. It's not a small amount but it's not really an acceptable amount for what your getting. I mean aus8 in a sub 40$ knife will cut more.

 

[John_0917]

It's still being tested at 56ish. Nothing changed yet. How much feet of cardboard have you cut. You can see how much have been cut in the few tests already done. It's not a small amount but it's not really an acceptable amount for what your getting. I mean aus8 in a sub 40$ knife will cut more.

I’ve used it for about a half dozen medium and large size boxes, mostly standard shipping cardboard (amazon, chewy), I went to town on them and cut the pieces to about the size of a cell phone...I actually found that the worst part about the design is actually the sharp edges of the pommel, definitely a hot spot especially when closing since you (or I at least) dig the butt into my palm/heel of my hand.

Could the decent edge retention even at lower hardness be a result of the 3% vanadium?

 

[Dallas T]

So again totally unscientific but real world feedback from my non first run example... cut more cardboard today and edge retention was barely effected, still have a hard time believing it’s that soft. Is it possible they have raised the hardness? Or perhaps I was just lucky and got a harder one of the batch?

Also gave it a quick few stones on a lansky fine rod set, came back to hair popping no time at all...I was set to be let down but definitely am not so far.

Ah finally someone else with good actual use results. I’ve experienced your same in use, not displeased at all with actual performance, not numbers and data!!!! Perhaps hrc is less of a indicator of edge performance than originally thought in use? And lower hardness works just fine at slightly less?