80crv2 vs. 52100 (80crv2 seems almost as good as 3v!)

Can anyone link the source to the Charpy values? I cannot find it anywhere.
 
Absolutely right. Everyone should actually read both threads and get out of them when her or she can.
 
Too much traveling and no internet connection when I have time...

I agree with Thomas Linton - read carefully on those threads, probably there are published+projected+wag data about charpy types & numbers for steels in question. Well, #s are pretty much heavily dependent on ht for intended tasks. So we should read & treat mfg # as a guide when steel heat treated in particular way.
 
You should tell us about the charpy numbers you've gotten for your own tests with your heat treats for W2, 52100, and 80crv2!
 
Blain said:
You should tell us about the charpy numbers you've gotten for your own tests with your heat treats for W2, 52100, and 80crv2!
Click to expand...

Unless he has a charpy tester, he did not create any. He can give his toughness impressions though.
 
Cobalt said:
Unless he has a charpy tester, he did not create any. He can give his toughness impressions though.
Click to expand...

He claimed he had one, and gave a charpy value to a knife with 80crv2 as being 60 @ 60 rockwell.
 
james terrio said:
They're both going to break at the same level of stress... it's just a matter of how they perform up to that point. A blade with a soft back will take a set before it breaks, a fully-hardened blade will come back to straight or nearly straight after being subjected to the same pressure.
Click to expand...
Except for a situation where there were errors/inpurities in the steel. For given thickness softer blade will be more forgiving. That is why you make laminated blades, with extra hard, yet thin central piece and softer sides. full thickness lets say aogami blade would be more fragile.
 
Blain said:
He claimed he had one, and gave a charpy value to a knife with 80crv2 as being 60 @ 60 rockwell.
Click to expand...

A charpy V-notch? Sample HT'd based on HT protocol. I am sure that many custom HT's vastly improve on toughness over standard. Also the sample used in a Charpy test is not a knife shape, but a rectangular sample with a notch placed in it. Comparing bluntcuts number to other steels is like comparing an apple to a carrot. Unless bluntcut does the exact same test to cpm3v with a top HT and of course his own 52100.
 
Alright guys - my data plan is limit and my research data is not avail while away.

I am sure, I didn't stated that I had actual charpy but projected/extrapolated based on my 3v baseline toughness testing using sort of cantilever & a plier & a hammer head drop. So, my projection can has big swing in error/bias depend on notch control & quality. grain & carbide sizes also affect toughness, therefore ht can greatly influence charpy (whatever pseudo way I am using) number. At any rate, 80crv2 sure is increasing in popularity. Under microscope, this steel is quite easy to yield very fine grain, so its toughness should be as high or higher than 3v because its carbide is much finer than 3v 1-2um VC. When I get back, I MIGHT (because there will be a boat load of work to catch up before I can do this) scan for papers/study that either has 80crv2 charpy # or author or I extrapolate such number base on grain size + carbide volume & size at particular hardness.

Blain - there are way too many 'depends + ymmv' in ht game. Test types & numbers are sort of fuzzy guide posts, actual experiences trump them all.

Cobalt - agree. I would make similar calls as you've done so. However if you are willing to entertain sub 2um grain size possibility, it could offer much higher toughness & strength then good old ht. LOL - if knives in Bodog's PA perform poorly, well I will flush stuff I said about ultra fine grain claims down the toilet myself as well:eek:
 
bluntcut said:
Cobalt - agree. I would make similar calls as you've done so. However if you are willing to entertain sub 2um grain size possibility, it could offer much higher toughness & strength then good old ht. LOL - if knives in Bodog's PA perform poorly, well I will flush stuff I said about ultra fine grain claims down the toilet myself as well:eek:
Click to expand...

bluntcut, if your testing indicates that 80crv2 is both tougher and holds a better edge than 52100, I would believe you. I personally do not think that will be the case. But I am only guessing.
 
Cobalt said:
bluntcut, if your testing indicates that 80crv2 is both tougher and holds a better edge than 52100, I would believe you. I personally do not think that will be the case. But I am only guessing.
Click to expand...

80crv2 might not hold a better edge than 52100, but it should still hold an edge that is not too far behind. I do believe that 80crv2 is tougher than 52100, and prob close to the realm of 3v toughness.
 
Blain said:
80crv2 might not hold a better edge than 52100, but it should still hold an edge that is not too far behind. I do believe that 80crv2 is tougher than 52100, and prob close to the realm of 3v toughness.
Click to expand...

I still haven't seen anything from bluntcut about the toughness difference in these two in actual testing, but it will be interesting to see.
 
Perhaps a misinterpretation somewhere, I thought I consistently stated 52100 has better edge retention than 80crv2. Furthermore likely I also found my latest ht 52100 toughness level may have past 80crv2. It is unproven claims so burden is on me to prove at qualitative and quantitative and 3rd party verified so... to seen ;)

It is a major pain to poke a message on tiny phone touch kb.

Cobalt said:
bluntcut, if your testing indicates that 80crv2 is both tougher and holds a better edge than 52100, I would believe you. I personally do not think that will be the case. But I am only guessing.
Click to expand...
 
bluntcut said:
Perhaps a misinterpretation somewhere, I thought I consistently stated 52100 has better edge retention than 80crv2. Furthermore likely I also found my latest ht 52100 toughness level may have past 80crv2. It is unproven claims so burden is on me to prove at qualitative and quantitative and 3rd party verified so... to seen ;)

It is a major pain to poke a message on tiny phone touch kb.
Click to expand...

Thanks, I look forward to seeing your results on these two steels.
 
bodog said:
There should be some independent tests of bluntcut's knives here within the next couple of weeks. 52100, CruForgeV, 1095, M2, and W2 will be tested.
Click to expand...

I am using a w2 gyuto from Luong at work and it is performing really well. My only problem is that is such a nice knife I find myself babying it. Luong laughs and says break it in half, I will make another. He is a gem and taught me so much about metals and sharpening. Great guy to have on this site. Russ
 
bluntcut said:
Perhaps a misinterpretation somewhere, I thought I consistently stated 52100 has better edge retention than 80crv2. Furthermore likely I also found my latest ht 52100 toughness level may have past 80crv2. It is unproven claims so burden is on me to prove at qualitative and quantitative and 3rd party verified so... to seen ;)

It is a major pain to poke a message on tiny phone touch kb.
Click to expand...

Stop posting and enjoy your trip. You deserve some time away brother, we will all look forward to your return. Take care,
Russ
 
mycough said:
I am using a w2 gyuto from Luong at work and it is performing really well. My only problem is that is such a nice knife I find myself babying it. Luong laughs and says break it in half, I will make another. He is a gem and taught me so much about metals and sharpening. Great guy to have on this site. Russ
Click to expand...

Feel free to post a review in the thread I started in the testing subforum if you want.
 
Cobalt said:
Seems comparable to these other steels. Properties should be very similar.


80CrV2
C(％) 0.75-0.84
Si(％)0.15-0.35
Mn(％)0.15-0.35
P(％)0.025
S(％) 0.020
Cr(％) 0.40-0.70
Ni(％)Max 0.25
V(%)0.10-0.20

L6
C - 0.7
Mn - 0.6
Si - 0.25
Cr - 0.7
Ni - 1.4

52100
C 0.980 - 1.10
Cr 1.30 - 1.60
Mn 0.250 - 0.450
Si 0.150 - 0.300
S ≤ 0.0250
P ≤ 0.0250

O-1
C - 0.85-1
Si - 0.1 - 0.5
Mn - 1 - 1.4
Cr - 0.4 - 0.7
V - 0.3
W - 0.4- 0 .6

W1
C - 0.95-1.05
Mn - 0.3-0.4
Si - 0.1-0.25
Cr - 0.15
Mo - 0.1
W - 0.15
V - 0.1
P - 0.025
S - 0.025
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top