Blade Steel Rehardening

hardheart said:
By giving a knife away, a private individual does himself no tangible favors, just a sense of goodwill. With this offer, cotdt gets a chance to feel good, experiment, and if all goes well, set himself up to provide the service for a fee. He's taking a page from the drug dealers' manual ;)
Click to expand...
Kind of like a passaround, which we do all the time. This is the "maintenance and tinkering" forum, after all. I've re-beveled dozens of knives, had them re-ground professionally, and had some re-heat treated for me. I'm glad there isn't a law passed making that illegal. After all, once I buy them, I was under the impression that they are mine. ;)

hardheart said:
Destroying? You do realize that many of the registered knifemakers posting here started as random individuals. Also, some people posting here appear to be random individuals, and then we find out they are established makers. There is no pedigree required to heat treat a knife. Some use a blowtorch and a bucket of used motor oil. Some use cooking oil, or a concoction made up of various chemicals.
Click to expand...

I have Wayne Goddard's book, the $50 knife shop or something like that, and he gives very good instructions for folks just getting started. For around $50. Sounds like he is encouraging it....


hardheart said:
There is no theory at this point. The gains are noticed in a task as mundane as cutting manila rope. It is like questioning the difference between 420HC and S90V. Why does one cut longer than the other? Why would a 1095 blade at 59 Rc cut longer than one at 55? These are not difficult questions, and they are not barely perceptible differences.
Click to expand...
I've written more than once of the spectacular performance that I've gotten from one of Phil Wilson's knives. He was playing with the heat treat on CPM 10V several years ago, and I specifically asked him to make it as hard as he dared. He cautioned me several times, but eventually gave in to my nagging. I've got it at 64.5 HRC. It's wonderful! I have no doubt that I can snap this with stupidity (as I've done before) - it's thin and hard , but if I break it, I have only myself to blame. It sure is fun to use, though, and man, does it hold an edge.... Almost as good as Rosta Frei, and as everyone knows, I don't make such claims lightly! :eek: :D
 
Sharp Phil said:
And I disagree with destroying perfectly functional knives
Click to expand...
Perfection is in the eye of the beholder. A lot of people are very happy with their Kershaw 110V at 59-61HRC, and probably wouldn't want to deal with sharpening the same metal at 64HRC. I do, and many others do. Same with Benchmade, same with many other makers.

Sharp Phil said:
because some random individual claims to be able to achieve speculative, marginal gains in performance by monkeying about with their heat treatment.
Click to expand...
Even if it's 50% it's not marginal. And for many knives gains in cutting ability and edge holding will be greater than that.

Sharp Phil said:
I can't even claim to be an expert in metallurgy because I have work experience or a degree in an entirely different field.
Click to expand...
That it is. You also completely ignore all the reasoning that was provided. Including the fact that some of us stated they anticipate that it may not work 100% perfectly for all cases.
There are modders for cars, flashlights, computers, pretty much anything. Why knives are a taboo, especially when we have rehardenings and regrindings going at a pretty high rate on this very forum.
 
Last edited:
Sharp Phil said:
I don't understand this thread. There is nothing an individual can do to the heat treatment of a purchasezd blade except ruin it. This seems like a bizarre idea to me -- an unworkable solution desperately searching for a nonexistent problem to solve.
Click to expand...

fujita yuji said:
This is a great thread and Cotdt is doing a very good thing.
He is trying to let steel go for it's best performance.
I can see his point, as this is my reason why I began to make knives by myself.
I, too wanted steel to perform as good as it can go.
Click to expand...

Gentlemen, the caterwauling has gone on long enough. I agree with fujita yuji. If someone wants to try this, it is worth the effort, even if only as a learning experience.

Sharp Phil, butt out. Your input is purely negative, nothing but a distraction, not a bit of personal experience to enlighten. No one is proposing to damage your knives. No one is interested in having you protect theirs.

I cannot ban you from an individual thread or specific forum, but I will insist you leave this thread alone.
 
Gator97 said:
If we compare published specs ( I only got 4 elements for Krupp 4116) then it's closest relative seems to be X45CrMoV15.
Also, if you have more complete specs, do you mind sharing, I'd really appreciate :)
Click to expand...

Here's what i have:

http://www.ebladestore.com/steel_chart.shtml

http://www.metallograf.de/start.htm?werkstoffkartei/4116/4116.htm

Krupp 4116: C 0,45-0,55, Cr 14,00-15,00, Mo 0,50-0,80, V 0,10-0,20, Si max. 1,00, Mn max.1,00, P max. 0,04, S max. 0,03.

420 HC : C 0,40-0,50, Cr 12,00-14,00, Mo 0,60, V 0,18, Si 1,00, Mn 0,80, P 0,05, S 0,02.

Hope it helps.

dantzk.
 
Thanks for the info and your time :)
Although, it just adds to the confusion.
Several sources list 4116 Krupp as different than 1.4116. That besides listing X45 and X50 as different steels both with DIN 1.4116 material number...
 
Gator97 said:
Although, it just adds to the confusion.
Several sources list 4116 Krupp as different than 1.4116. That besides listing X45 and X50 as different steels both with DIN 1.4116 material number...
Click to expand...

I fear you are right. Sorry. I've tried to find equivalences between the German standard, the American AISI, using the Japaneese standard and even the French AFNOR. No succes, just a headache. I will try again and will let you know if i find something.

dantzk.
 
For now I have listed all 3. 4116 Krupp, X45 and X50 as separate entries, with corresponding alternate names.
dantzk8 said:
No succes, just a headache. I will try again and will let you know if i find something.
Click to expand...
Yeah, steel industry is a real mess. let me know if you find something. I've cross referenced around 15 manufacturers and charts I rely mainly, nothing in addition to what I already posted here...
 
cotdt,

What do you think about trying this with the Carbon V?

I recently obtained several of the Camillus reject blanks that are currently floating around, and if your willing and able to improve them, then I might just give it a try.

I also have a Schrade knife blank that will need a heat treat after I grind it.

Feel free to email me if you wish.

Thanks,
David
 
As far as I understand proper HT is not possible without knowing exact steel. Carbon V is changing all the time so I suspect that's not quite simple.
But I might be wrong.
 
Gator97 said:
As far as I understand proper HT is not possible without knowing exact steel. Carbon V is changing all the time so I suspect that's not quite simple.
But I might be wrong.
Click to expand...
I did not know that it was constantly changing. All I knew is that they stopped making it because they went bankrupt.

Thnx.
 
Carbon V was 50100B/0170-6C (name created by Phil Gibbs), designed by Dan Maragni. For some reason, a rumor sprouted up that the name was not associated with a specific alloy.
 
I guess the negative threw you off. They said that Carbon V was a specific alloy and Camillus did not change what the knives were made of. Carbon V was always the same steel.
 
ghostrider said:
cotdt,

What do you think about trying this with the Carbon V?
Click to expand...

I question whether changing the heat treat on this particular alloy would be a good idea. Not because the composition is unknown, but because the HT has already been optimized. Phil Gibbs (ex-Camillus employee) says that the heat treat was developed by the head metallurgist at Camillus, Dan Maragni.
http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4301656&postcount=17

Gator97 said:
As far as I understand proper HT is not possible without knowing exact steel. Carbon V is changing all the time so I suspect that's not quite simple.
But I might be wrong.
Click to expand...

No sir, that is not true. There was only one Carbon V. It's composition is obscure, but known.


hardheart said:
I guess the negative threw you off. They said that Carbon V was a specific alloy and Camillus did not change what the knives were made of. Carbon V was always the same steel.
Click to expand...

:thumbup::thumbup:

Cold Steel Carbon V was a custom alloy made for and heat treated by Camillus. (at the time, Camillus was a primary supplier for Cold Steel.)

Camillus called the material "Carbon V" when they made it into blades for Cold Steel. They called it "0170-6C" when they used the alloy in their own blades and in the Becker Knife and Tool blades.

Wayne Goddard had a Carbon V blade analyzed (destructively - ouch). He published the results in his book The Wonder of Knife Making.
This book is currently available on Google Books.
The composition of Carbon V was:
Carbon___0.95
Mn______0..46
Si_______0.16
Cr_______0.48
V_______0.19

The composition is similar to the 1095 Cro Van used by Ka-Bar, but Ka-Bar runs their blades at 56-58 and Camillus ran their blades at 58-59.
 
knarfeng said:
I question whether changing the heat treat on this particular alloy would be a good idea. Not because the composition is unknown, but because the HT has already been optimized. Phil Gibbs (ex-Camillus employee) says that the heat treat was developed by the head metallurgist at Camillus, Dan Maragni.
http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4301656&postcount=17



No sir, that is not true. There was only one Carbon V. It's composition is obscure, but known.




:thumbup::thumbup:

Cold Steel Carbon V was a custom alloy made for and heat treated by Camillus. (at the time, Camillus was a primary supplier for Cold Steel.)

Camillus called the material "Carbon V" when they made it into blades for Cold Steel. They called it "0170-6C" when they used the alloy in their own blades and in the Becker Knife and Tool blades.

Wayne Goddard had a Carbon V blade analyzed (destructively - ouch). He published the results in his book The Wonder of Knife Making.
This book is currently available on Google Books.
The composition of Carbon V was:
Carbon___0.95
Mn______0..46
Si_______0.16
Cr_______0.48
V_______0.19

The composition is similar to the 1095 Cro Van used by Ka-Bar, but Ka-Bar runs their blades at 56-58 and Camillus ran their blades at 58-59.
Click to expand...
Thanks both of you for all the info!

Here's another question.
What about the True Flight Thrower? Would it have been hardened to the same hardness as the other blades since it was a thrower?
 
knarfeng said:
No sir, that is not true. There was only one Carbon V. It's composition is obscure, but known.
Click to expand...
Ok, thanks. Although the knife steel FAQ here and number of posts in the past suggested that Carbon V was simply CS name for whatever steel they happened to be using at a given time.

knarfeng said:
Cold Steel Carbon V was a custom alloy made for and heat treated by Camillus. (at the time, Camillus was a primary supplier for Cold Steel.)
Click to expand...

Can I use the info(composition and description) provided by you here to add Crabon V to knife steel charts?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top