80CRV2; what do you think about it?

O1 vs 80CrV2 will be about the same cost per blade for steel, HT is similar, 80CrV2 needs short soak both do well in 12 second oil, both are high carbon and will rust if not kept clean and dry
O1: easy to source in whatever thickness you need as Precision Ground Flat Stock, 0.95 carbon gives higher as quenched hardness, 1.25 manganese helps insure thru hardening, 0.5 tungsten helps with edge retention. you don't want to temper over 400F due to hydrogen embrittlement, this would be my choice for thin high hardness blades, 3/64" blades at Rc64 cut like a laser.
80CrV2: not many sources unless you are buying big pieces(2' x 6') or 100' rolls, would be my choice for a chopper/cleaver where you are willing to swap high hardness for increased toughness and resistance to chipping
scott
 
I REALLY like 80CrV2. It was first described to me as 1080+. Hits alot of sweet spots in use.
 
Scott, do you in fact have to trade the high hardness? The recent work that people have done with 52100 at 1475 says you don't but you may trade some abrasion resistance compared to O1 and to 52100 HT'ed at 1550 or so to get the big primary chromium carbides. I'm not sure how much you lose because traditionally, i have seen people leaving 52100 at around 59 when they use the "normal" formula compared to the low 60 range for the low temp method.
scott.livesey said:
O1 vs 80CrV2 will be about the same cost per blade for steel, HT is similar, 80CrV2 needs short soak both do well in 12 second oil, both are high carbon and will rust if not kept clean and dry
O1: easy to source in whatever thickness you need as Precision Ground Flat Stock, 0.95 carbon gives higher as quenched hardness, 1.25 manganese helps insure thru hardening, 0.5 tungsten helps with edge retention. you don't want to temper over 400F due to hydrogen embrittlement, this would be my choice for thin high hardness blades, 3/64" blades at Rc64 cut like a laser.
80CrV2: not many sources unless you are buying big pieces(2' x 6') or 100' rolls, would be my choice for a chopper/cleaver where you are willing to swap high hardness for increased toughness and resistance to chipping
scott
Click to expand...
 
52100 is a whole different animal, limited sources, more involved HT(almost always needs normalization), being a plain jane bearing steel, it is not held to the tight standards you have with 1.2510(O1) or 1.2235(80CrV2). if you made the same blade with 80CrV2 and O1, doubt anyone could tell the difference
scott
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: vba
I have an 80crv2 knife from Nick Wheeler at 60rc.

Performance wise - its awesome, the edge stability is fantastic - also takes a screaming sharp edge rather quickly.
 
Scott, twice in one thread ,shame ! 'plain jane bearing steel' ? There are many grades of 52100 and those have been made for many years.Bearings are critical especially the amount of non-metallic inclusions .
These are the points of initiation of failure in many cases.Bearing grade , aircraft grade , etc !I learned something at Timken !!!
 
I've heard the things about not enough of the other alloys to do anything......but they were put there for something. :)

I would agree mostly, on paper it shouldn't perform as well as it does....but it does. I would put scary sharp edge holding on par with W2 (I've not used O1). W2 might hold it's scary sharp razor edge just a bit longer, but it's probably negligible. But I would say that the sharp working edge, after the razor edge is gone, on 80CrV2 lasts longer than any steel I've personally used. It just keeps cutting, way longer than it seems it should.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vba
I recently made a Nata knife with some 80CrV2, I have been splitting logs with it and taking small branches off of trees with it for a few months now and I'm very pleased with how it's holding up.

The steel is very resistant to chipping and rolling, it is also very easy to sharpen and touch up the edge.

It was a little tough to forge for me, seemed a little bit more stuff than 1095 is when forging. May be nothing but it caught my attention after a while ( also could have just been small personal errors). Has anyone else noticed this?

HT was very simple (I used canola oil to quench), nothing complicated and no problems at all during the quench
 
jdm61 said:
I think that the 1080+ was devised because of the carbon content. It really doesn't resemble 1080 beyond that. It has the chrome content of 5160, the vanadium content of W2 and manganese content somewhere in between W2 and "traditional" 1084. I have seen some specs that say it has a pinch of moly like O1 or L6 and a little silicon. Knives said that some batches have like .4% nickel, but Chucks specs do not list that for his 1080+ Basically, it looks like it has little pinches of a number of alloying elements that we normally associate with producing fine grain, fairly easy hardening characteristics and good toughness. Of course, the contrarian position could be that "it doesn't have quite enough of this or that to do this or that" but we have seen in stuff like Don's W2 than even a small amount of an alloying element like V can do some things that you don't expect like give some fairly good abrasion resistance at high hardness levels. That property may be the result of the V allowing fine grain and stable edges at those high hardness levels, but you still get the benefit even if v carbides are not "directly" contributing.
I wonder why people just don't call it L2 Modified, because it does kinda sorta fit into the broadest L2 specs if you stuff it in.
Click to expand...

I bought a few bars when W2 was hard to get a few years ago. It fits pretty well in the L2 spec. I tried to get a good hamon with it, but nothing worth writing home about. Not worth the effort in my mind, when you can just use W1 or W2. Performance was good, but 52100 seemed better, and there are better steels for a hamon. I like 15n20 for tough little blades, so this steel sat in no man's land for me. For any property I was looking at, there seemed tone a better option. There's nothing wrong with it, and it's harder to screw up than other steels, so that is an advantage.
 
mete said:
Scott, twice in one thread ,shame ! 'plain jane bearing steel' ? There are many grades of 52100 and those have been made for many years.Bearings are critical especially the amount of non-metallic inclusions .
These are the points of initiation of failure in many cases.Bearing grade , aircraft grade , etc !I learned something at Timken !!!
Click to expand...

cut an old sailor some slack. yes the diagram shown was a CCT but the steel maker called it a TTT. there have been numerous posts on this forum and others of garbage steel being marketed as 52100, we have to trust that the seller is shipping what we want. the 52100 i have purchased came in a cardboard tube, the steel was not marked in any way, no way to determine composition, country of origin, grade, or any other info. 80CrV2 used to have this problem, which is why AKS marketed it as 1080+ for almost 10 years. When you buy a piece of precision ground flat stock from Starrett or Precision-Marshall you know what you are buying and have a heat lot number that will give exact chemical makeup, date made, and other information.
 
Last edited:
erik markman said:
I have been looking at this steel for a while. Would you think it is much different from my much loved O1 Derrick?
Click to expand...

Erik, I haven't done any side by side comparisons so I really can't say with any confidence that it's notably better or worse in certain applications. I think I got mine from Achim, but Schmiedeglut also has some available. Might be worth talking to those guys. Unfortunately I haven't seen any round bar, so integrals might be out of the question for now.

Are you still quenching in Durixol W25? If so that should work well for 80CrV2. The V35 is probably a bit fast.
 
Lot's of interesting info and opinions here already! Running bird, 80CRV2 seemed a bit tougher to move under the hammer for me also when I forged a couple from it, but not drastically different. As has been mentioned a lot, I've also heard of it being marketed as L2 or 1080+.

However, this is the first I've heard of anyone differentially hardening the stuff. Based on alloy content, I imagine that it would be a little less active and less contrasting than a 1084 hamon. Fun to think about, but just doesn't have the same allure as what is possible with W1 and 2.
 
Wulf said:
Erik, I haven't done any side by side comparisons so I really can't say with any confidence that it's notably better or worse in certain applications. I think I got mine from Achim, but Schmiedeglut also has some available. Might be worth talking to those guys. Unfortunately I haven't seen any round bar, so integrals might be out of the question for now.

Are you still quenching in Durixol W25? If so that should work well for 80CrV2. The V35 is probably a bit fast.
Click to expand...

Yes, I still use w25w. Thanks.
 
Scott, sorry but I think I should correct and explain things especially for beginners. That wasn't the first time I corrected a company's mistake !! I'm an old timer and far more familiar and comfortable with TTT.
Having been seriously involved with such alloys like 52100 I remember all the work with them especially for bearings .We worked at reducing inclusions especially and the various methods of reducing them, vacuum degassing etc .Looking at thousands of failed bearings ,finding the exact causes of failures and guys asking for suitable pieces for knives !!!
 
Coming quite late to this discussion, how much does 80CrV2 benefit from forging vs. stock removal?
 
All I can really say is to research the differences between forging and stock removal, and go with whichever you are best set up with. Each has its own benefits and detriments. There is nothing special about 80CrV2 one way or the other. It is a low alloy carbon steel that can easily be forged or ground to shape. Whether forged or ground, the heat treatment is what matters.
 
I have a Winkler II Recon since many years and this is my least favourite knife. The steel is easy to sharpen but dulls pretty quickly. The worst part is that the steel rusts like nothing I’ve seen before. I had the knife stored out of the sheath and oiled and it still formed small rust spots. I store the knife alongside other knives but these don’t rust at all even without oil. Some are A2 or O1 or Vanadis 4 Extra.
 
Welcome Downunder.

When posting on a thread you find, look at the date of recent posts. This is a six year old thread that was resurrected three years ago,.
 
I just started using 80crv2 and I must say that I like it. I forge all my knives so I can't speak from a stock removal perspective. So far I've made 2 knives from it which I'll be putting the handle on 1 today and the other later this week. I did have some issues drilling it before heat treat but that's probably due to my inexperience. I don't know the hrc on my knives but they seem to be pretty dang tough.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top