1. BladeForums has ZERO TOLERANCE for extremism or calls of violence. We request your assistance dealing with this as we do not want to see the site shut down due to violent threats. Please see this thread here in Tech Support: https://www.bladeforums.com/threads/bladeforums-has-a-zero-tolerance-policy-towards-threats-of-violence-extremism-be-warned.1769537/

Blade steels - what's wrong with improvement?

Discussion in 'General Knife Discussion' started by Comeuppance, Feb 26, 2014.

  1. Ankerson

    Ankerson Knife and Computer Geek Gold Member

    Nov 2, 2002
    OK, very cool and nice thing to do. :)
  2. me2


    Oct 11, 2003
    I knew that wasnt it when I read that post the first time, before the dig was added. No one is suppressing anything. Thats just silly. If anything, they (we) are adding information. Its not widely known that edge angle has a large influence on cutting ability and edge retention. There are applications where modern CPM high wear alloys are not optimal. Those applications have been stated several times in other threads like this. Low edge angles, high polish, hard contacts or impacts, relatively strong materials (wood, plastic vs rope, skin, meat), and when a high sharpness is desired/required. Moderate to high edge angles, coarser finishes, relatively soft, abrasive materials, and tolerance for lower sharpness all favor modern high wear alloys.
  3. Ankerson

    Ankerson Knife and Computer Geek Gold Member

    Nov 2, 2002

    That is exactly what they are doing, suppressing it... Going backwards.......

    Instead of working to find ways to improve it, advancements in steels.... :)

    Taking what is there and building on that instead of tearing it down going backwards....

    One would think they would be the ones at the top of the mountain shouting the loudest about the newer alloys and working to advance them even farther.

    You would think anyway....
  4. me2


    Oct 11, 2003
    One group is offering information that modern alloys are not optimal for all situations, which were outlined above. That same group is offering supporting research. The other group is essentially saying "You're doing it wrong for going outside what we think the parameters should be." The same group is also scoffing at contemporary research on the subject or essentially taking the stance that research only works in the lab by pushing "real world" testing. As for real world testing, I'd be interested to know if anyone has tried bone chopping with a CPM high wear alloy and had it come through without chipping on an edge less than 0.01" thick and 10-12 dps.
  5. Ankerson

    Ankerson Knife and Computer Geek Gold Member

    Nov 2, 2002
    That's defiantly something to look at. :)

    I remember you said something about studying Metallurgy and that's great. :)

    Hopefully if you want some day you may end up working in a real lab in that field, depending on what sub field you choose will depending on who for and in what Country.

    Then you will understand what I ment. :)
  6. sodak

    sodak Gold Member Gold Member

    Mar 26, 2004
    So thicker angle then. I still don't understand what you mean. Most knives are both too thick and have too thick an edge angle for my liking. So are you saying that only knives with newer steels have edges that are too thick?
  7. sodak

    sodak Gold Member Gold Member

    Mar 26, 2004
    Have we been reading the same thread? I see no supporting documentation and false outrage when any conclusions have been made, even when the scope of testing has been clearly defined - with no reasonable tests to prove otherwise. I've asked for testing data only to be met with silence.

    It seems to me that those who prefer lower alloy steels feel as if their sacred cow is being slaughtered. I still refuse to choose one over the other. But I'll certainly smile more when using my CPM steels, knowing it's irritating a good many other people.
  8. Camber


    Jul 13, 2011
    What exactly happened to your D2 knife at 10 dps side? Could you please repeat that \?

    Keeping in mind that D2 is a HCV steel, it might be interesting then to compare it to the quote I posted by Roman Landes, which is documentation considering who he is and what research he's done.

    Oh never mind, I'll go ahead and do it.

    From Sodak, post #196
    From Landes
    "Landes measured the deformation of edges at the same edge cross section in response to microloading. He classifed steels into three groups, type I, type II, and type III mainly based on carbide volume, 0.5-5%, 5-15%, and greater than 15% respectively. These groups needed different angles to both take and hold a high polished sharpness, 8-12, 12-20, and 20-30 degrees per side respectively. The greater the size and volume of carbide, the greater the angle required to keep the edge stable. "

    Would you please care to explain why it chipped then and how it doesn't illustrate the documentation from Landes's PHD thesis?

    This is essentially one of the many questions I already asked in a previous post that was seemingly met in silence. Similarly, I asked if you noticed no difference between 10dps and 15dps on a thin edge, why not go 20dps or even 25dps to make it even more stable?

    I believe I also made reference to the physics of rupturing and wedging (that's documentation which can be found in any textbook I'm sure) and how in many cases thicknesses behind the edge is irrelevant. I didn't notice any response to those comments though.
    Last edited: Mar 2, 2014
  9. Ankerson

    Ankerson Knife and Computer Geek Gold Member

    Nov 2, 2002
    That's called progress or advancements in technology.

    While some seem to want to dwell in the past and that's fine and their choice to do so, but those types have always been around since the beginning of the human race.

    Thankfully not everyone thinks the same way so hopefully we can keep moving forward as the years go on as new technologies come out.

    So moving forward in a positive way is a good thing leaving the past behind and enjoying the newer technology as time moves on.

    Or we can go back to the dark ages for a few thousand years again.......
  10. Camber


    Jul 13, 2011
    Useless post...
    Last edited: Mar 2, 2014
  11. Camber


    Jul 13, 2011
    Here's a few more questions that are logical extensions of the conclusions that "modern" is better.

    Why did Phil Wilson stop using S125V?
    Here's some documentation that can answer that question from Phils website:
    It would seem that modern can present problems as well, and not always be "better" despite it's edge holding.
    The more important question might be why is it hard to sharpen? What makes it harder to sharpen over something like S110V? It could be the increased carbide load. I'd love to hear other thoughts though.

    Along those same lines, why not advocate REX 121, Maxamet, T15? These would logically be better than S90V and S110V (if as I understand these represent a step up over S30V and CPM 154 which in turn represents a step over "old steels") since they include even more alloy and represent even more "technological advances".
  12. Ankerson

    Ankerson Knife and Computer Geek Gold Member

    Nov 2, 2002

    That's means take the current and figure out what is wrong and make it better, not everything is perfect.

    Tearing it down and being negative isn't going to solve anything, take it and improve on it's faults.

    Sitting around nitpicking about something on a forum and putting out walls of text about how this is this copied right out of some research paper or text book isn't going to accomplish anything other than driving people away and hurting progress.

    The people on the forums aren't the ones who are doing the actual work in the labs at the steel companies or the knife companies etc.

    Run the tests or whatever and send them to the Steel companies or the knife companies, they already know all about what is in those research papers and text books because that's what they do for a living... They are the ones that will make the difference though.....

    All we can do is learn from the mistakes or the faults and find away to improve on those, that is what progress is.

    That is what those smart people are supposed to be doing.

    How many time did Thomas Edison fail before he got to were he needed to be?

    He didn't give up....

    So if one thing doesn't work, try something else, if that doesn't work try something else....

    Progress doesn't mean going back 120 years and saying that works we will stick with that.

    Nobody said it was easy, but that's what the people with the big brains do... Hopefully. :)
    Last edited: Mar 2, 2014
  13. shqxk


    Mar 26, 2012
    Final hardness of the steel has nothing to do with production or custom heat treat. Do you actually know how steel get hardenen?

    When steel get heating to target temp then get soak for the right amount of time, the steel get quench in the proper media, that how we austenitizing steel and tranform it to the martensize, this actually how steel harden.

    For some example 1095 which austenitizing at 1575F then quench in fast oil will have the as quenched hardness at about 66rc. If it were tempered at 390F the hardness will drop to about 60. Tempering at 250 and you will have 63-64rc 1095, the lower temering temp the higher final hardness.

    Now do you see that the hardness of steel have nothing to do with the quality of heat treat. If some maker/company would like to get their HT to another level they can involve multiple normalizing/tempering or cryogenic, the method mentioned will help to reduce the grain/carbide size, reduce dislocation densities for forged blade and aid the distribution. HT in small batch also make it easier to control the temperature, and can run the HT process in even more precise time, nothing magic.

    Then if a big company really have the full equipment with the right knowledge they can HT the blade at the quality no less than the best custom maker. I think you shoud stop overate custom HT since there still lot of custom maker who have only one paragon kiln and didn't care much about metallurgy.
  14. Gator97

    Gator97 Gold Member Gold Member

    Apr 10, 2000
    Ironically enough... Stepanov, the father of C++ STD library (don't bother unless you're comp geek) had a speech at google and one of his main complaints about Romans was that they literally halted ALL scientific advance in all the places they conquered. Their philosophy was exactly that - "If it ain't broken don't fix it"... Yes, the bridges and sewer systemtn they've built 2K years ago still stand/work today but eventually it was one of the reasons of their downfall.
  15. Ankerson

    Ankerson Knife and Computer Geek Gold Member

    Nov 2, 2002

    Yes I already know that....

    I can read the data sheets and have read some of the Books on the subject...
  16. Ankerson

    Ankerson Knife and Computer Geek Gold Member

    Nov 2, 2002
    Yes, in the places they conquered, but not in Rome proper.

    And that was what was lost, they were very advanced for their time.
  17. me2


    Oct 11, 2003
    There's no outrage. At least not on my part. The documentation has been provided other places, as this discussion spans a couple of forums. New steels are great. They are made for a whole number of reasons. The latest steels in knives lean toward higher wear resistance. However, to say they are universally better is not the case. There are circumstances where they are not outperformed by the newer steels, as was my interpretation of the original post of the thread.

    Not everyone uses knives with the kind of geometry considered typical. Very acute edge angles favor the higher edge stability steels. This acute angle has a large influence on cutting ability (ease of making a cut) and on edge holding (lower edge angles cut longer). Steels with lower wear resistance can handle lower edge angles. If someone doesn't use these lower angles, then the higher wear steels are for them. At least now everyone reading this thread knows and can check for themselves. Does a 15 dps edge on a S90V blade out last a 1095 blade at 7 dps? Maybe. It depends on what's being cut, the edge finish and the heat treatment. Will a 1095 or 52100 blade at 60-62 out last a S90V blade (same hardness) at 7 dps? Your experience with D2 indicates the S90V blade is likely to have issues, since it has even more carbides than D2. The 1095 or 52100 blade might, depending again on what's being cut and the finish and HT, but the low alloy steels have an advantage.

    Ankerson, thanks for the vote of confidence. When I grow up, I wanna be just like you.
  18. thombrogan


    Nov 16, 2002
    I'm saying that steels with large carbides cannot hold polished edges with angles as thin as steels with small carbides. Where'd you get the other stuff?

    You could accuse also people who aren't goo-gah about using certain types of steels for blade steels of trying to hold back scientific progress. I remember when I talked Jenny McCarthy into using a Frost's of Sweden mora and she started pretending the MMR vaccine gave her child autism the next day. Or that time I brought a knife made from 15N20 strip steel to parochial school and Intelligent Design started getting preached.
  19. Ankerson

    Ankerson Knife and Computer Geek Gold Member

    Nov 2, 2002
    NO, be better than me, I missed my chance decades ago, it's your time now. :)
  20. james terrio

    james terrio Sharpest Knife in the Light Socket

    Apr 15, 2010
    Well yeah... alloy selection and geometry do work together.

    They can work against each other too... like the classic bad example of a high-alloy knife with a really thick edge. All that does is give you a knife that cuts poorly and is a huge pain to sharpen (more because of the thick edge than just the steel itself).

    Latrobe's datasheet for 52100 claims as-quenched hardenability as high as 67Rc, so at least in theory fully tempered blades of 64 or 65Rc could be done. I'd have to ask my HT guy about that; maybe there's a technical reason we don't usually see them run that hard, even by custom makers.

    I completely agree. I like the way O1 cuts, but the thrill of sharpening knives wore off a long time ago for me. Many of my clients simply don't mind the fact that O1and 52100 don't stay sharp very long and they're easy to touch up... So, OK if that's what you want, great! My love affair with 3V is not because it's "super", but because it's well-balanced and versatile.

    Not many, and I doubt we ever will. It's the problem of economy of scale working against the bigger manufacturers... grinding a whole boatload of 60+ Rc blades is awfully hard on machinery.

    If that's true, why aren't more (if any) competition cutters using O1 or 1085 in their blades anymore? Those cats have to perform both fine, controlled cuts and very aggressive cuts/chops in every run, without sharpening or stropping. By far the most commonly-used steel in competitions is CPM-M4 run hard, and those guys bring their edges down very, very thin and polish them highly.

    Meh... we just would have had massive pollution and nuclear weapons a thousand years sooner. We likely wouldn't even be here anymore. ;)

Share This Page