Blade steels - what's wrong with improvement?

[Huntsman Knife Co.]

Actually, my reading indicates that 52100 and AEB-L perform better than any more recent steel in "edge stability" specifically because of "grain structure" - these steels, when heat treated properly, present a finer grain structure than any of the powder steels HT'd at its very best. Indeed, they are the benchmark to which the powder-steels are compared. They are cheaper to produce, take a finer edge, take it quicker, and maintain it longer against impact and compressive stress. But AEB-L is superior to 52100 in corrosion-resistance.

CPM-3V will outperform 1095 in toughness, wear, and corrosion; M390 will out-perform 440C in all 3. But how does each of those compare to 52100 in ease of manufacture, maintenance, and edge-stability? Both present better corrosion resistance but M390 is not quite as tough... and MUCH more expensive and more difficult to manufacture. I'm not sure how 3V compares...

Again, I'm not poo-pooing the new steels, just playing the opposing side here. I LIKE the innovation of bringing these new steels to market, especially for certain applications. But the application is key.

If you don't need the ease of maintenance or the edge-stability provided by these "stand-bys", then they are for the dust bin. But these 2 at least are NOT inferior in respect to grain structure.

I use 52100 extensively in my knives and use AEB-L as well. They are an exception as they have the finest grain structures of any steel which is something that makes them perform very well. I absolutely love 52100. I use it in everything from razors to skinners to tomahawks and machetes. Its probably the most well rounded steel out there if you ask me and will excel at everything from fillet knives to katanas.

That said 3V is probably better than 52100 for anything but a razor blade or kitchen knife. It has better edge stability, cuts more aggressively, is significantly tougher at the same hardness and has about 2.5X the edge retention on most things. You can run 3V at 62 and its as tough as 52100 at 57-58.

BUT Its also 3X as expensive and the cost is not worth the increase in performance much of the time. 52100 is amazing and I plan to continue to use it until a better steel comes along at a similar price point.---which hasn't happened yet and probably won't for a long time if ever.

 

[Huntsman Knife Co.]

Then dull both and resharpen each and tell us how that goes too.

Jim will get both the 1095 knife and the super steel knife sharp in a minute or two because they have thin edge geometry.

I think "hard to sharpen" only applies to extensive edge damage in the field on a knife with a little bit thicker edge. I can sharpen any knife in any steel on my norton india stones to sharving sharp in about 5 minutes as long as it has good, thin geometry. If you don't have to remove much steel it doesn't matter if its 1055 or M4. A good set of sharpening stones will make quick work of it.

 

[Gator97]

Then dull both and resharpen each and tell us how that goes too.

Unless you add a condition that he must sharpen on a "flat rock" or something equally not suited for sharpening, it's not gonna be any different, and for prolonged cutting he'll spend a lot more time sharpening 1095 than 10V.
With modern sharpening equipment, handheld, freehand, systems, etc it's really not difficult to sharpen all those exotic alloys.
yes 10V, S125V even more. but in reality, that only plays role when you are rebeveling or repairing damaged edge. In other words, removing considerable amount of metal. That doesn't happen too often, and even less in the field.
If the edge is there, and doesn't have significant chipping, S110V or 10V be literally few more strokes on the same stone or whatever sharpener, but both will outlast 1095 my very significant margin.

P.S. If someone doesn't know how to sharpen a knife correctly, I seriously doubt "easy to sharpen" knives will help.

 

[PURPLEDC]

I personally get irritated with the steel debate. To me "better" is a relative word. To me there is no such thing as "better" steel. Different steels have different attributes. Some desirable, some not so much depending on the application and user. With that said I have no problem with better anything as long as it truly is better for my needs. I think the only think i really dont like about the whole steel argument is when the opinions are coming from someone who's idea of hard use is flipping a knife open and closed throughout the day. Or the weekend warrior metallurgist who doesnt realize that a small amound of vanadium or cobalt can actually mean a big difference. It absolutely drives me bat crazy when someone looks at a chemical compostion chart and thinks that because the carbon content of one steel is similar to another then it must be a variant or equivalent of that steel as if no other elements but compostion come into play. Luckily these people arent plentiful.

 

[Ankerson]

Then dull both and resharpen each and tell us how that goes too.

About a minute, or under....

I use those types of high carbide steels on a regular basis and it doesn't take long to sharpen them.

As a simple example I use S110V at very high hardness (65) in the kitchen on a regular basis and once it does start to lose bite it takes me seconds (literally) to get the edge back to screaming sharp.

That's about 4 passes, two on each side on the ceramic rod that I use, Spyderco Professional File Set Ceramic Sharpening System, Medium and Fine.... I use the Medium....

Same thing for S90V, K294(10V) and CPM 154......

And that 1095 blade would be completely butter knife dull before one of the other steels even started to get dull enough to sharpen it.

 

[Ankerson]

Actually, my reading indicates that 52100 and AEB-L perform better than any more recent steel in "edge stability" specifically because of "grain structure" - these steels, when heat treated properly, present a finer grain structure than any of the powder steels HT'd at its very best. Indeed, they are the benchmark to which the powder-steels are compared. They are cheaper to produce, take a finer edge, take it quicker, and maintain it longer against impact and compressive stress. But AEB-L is superior to 52100 in corrosion-resistance.

CPM-3V will outperform 1095 in toughness, wear, and corrosion; M390 will out-perform 440C in all 3. But how does each of those compare to 52100 in ease of manufacture, maintenance, and edge-stability? Both present better corrosion resistance but M390 is not quite as tough... and MUCH more expensive and more difficult to manufacture. I'm not sure how 3V compares...

Again, I'm not poo-pooing the new steels, just playing the opposing side here. I LIKE the innovation of bringing these new steels to market, especially for certain applications. But the application is key.

If you don't need the ease of maintenance or the edge-stability provided by these "stand-bys", then they are for the dust bin. But these 2 at least are NOT inferior in respect to grain structure.

Once all the smoke and mirrors clear up it comes down to this:

Dull is Dull, if the knife won't cut it's dull....

Edge stability is a wonderful thing, but all of that in the world won't help if you can't cut anything with the blade because it dulled too fast.

And that is the difference, especially when cutting abrasive materials, if the alloy content isn't there, it's just not there.

And all the 50X magnification and or 500X magnification isn't going to make any difference because it just doesn't matter because one blade still cuts and the other is bone butter knife dull.....

Yeah that high edge stability is great, nice and smooth, can't cut anything with it, but it's got great edge stability......

That's what happens when the scope is narrowed down too much, you miss the forest through the trees......

While scientifically correct and backed up with all sorts of literature and pretty pictures from a number of places by some very smart people.....

One still can't get around dull vs still cutting....... No matter how it's slanted to show the point one is trying to make and how technicality correct it is.

 

[Ankerson]

I use 52100 extensively in my knives and use AEB-L as well. They are an exception as they have the finest grain structures of any steel which is something that makes them perform very well. I absolutely love 52100. I use it in everything from razors to skinners to tomahawks and machetes. Its probably the most well rounded steel out there if you ask me and will excel at everything from fillet knives to katanas.

That said 3V is probably better than 52100 for anything but a razor blade or kitchen knife. It has better edge stability, cuts more aggressively, is significantly tougher at the same hardness and has about 2.5X the edge retention on most things. You can run 3V at 62 and its as tough as 52100 at 57-58.

BUT Its also 3X as expensive and the cost is not worth the increase in performance much of the time. 52100 is amazing and I plan to continue to use it until a better steel comes along at a similar price point.---which hasn't happened yet and probably won't for a long time if ever.

Yup.

I wouldn't want to skin a bunch of wild boars with a knife in AEB-L or 52100 (Would be sharpening it a lot) just like I wouldn't want a razor made out of CPM 10V or S90V.. That hurts just thinking about it

Different steels for different uses, that's why we have choices.

 

[precisionshootist]

My problem with the "super steels" is I see very little VERIFIABLE difference in performance. I have my doubts if anyone could consistently tell the difference with identical unmarked knives between high quality stainless steels in real world performance.
I may be naive but I think as long as the blade is made of quality steel it comes down to a simple trade off. The trade off is harder steel stays sharp longer but by definition will take equally longer to sharpen. Hard stainless steels are going to be more prone to breakage than typically softer heat treats of carbon steel. In short, outside of very small almost undetectable performance in the various alloys, the difference in the type of steel is a zero sum game.

 

[marthinus]

Aside from western fillet knives, why exactly do you wanna bend the knife?
HT being the soul is meant (and can only do) to get the best out of the given alloy.
One can bend 1095(with best HT) all day, but in the end it'll never touch 10V(with best HT) performance on abrasive materials as far as actual cutting is concerned HT won't make Vanadium appear out of nowhere or any other chemical element for that matter.


By the same token, any fool using 1095 doesn't mean he/she HTed it correctly. Somehow, whenever we have debates about old and trusty steels vs. new superalloys, the old ones automatically get best possible HT(perhaps because it's simple) and new ones are assumed to have crappy HT. Not a valid comparison at all.

My argument is simply that there is no be all end all of steels. I used the ABS test as a simple example.

 

[Ankerson]

My problem with the "super steels" is I see very little VERIFIABLE difference in performance.

There are differences that have been verified over and over again, depends on what steels you are talking about because there are larger differences in comparing some to others depending on what they are.

I have my doubts if anyone could consistently tell the difference with identical unmarked knives between high quality stainless steels in real world performance.

Sure one can depending on the actual use....

I may be naive but I think as long as the blade is made of quality steel it comes down to a simple trade off. The trade off is harder steel stays sharp longer but by definition will take equally longer to sharpen. Hard stainless steels are going to be more prone to breakage than typically softer heat treats of carbon steel. In short, outside of very small almost undetectable performance in the various alloys, the difference in the type of steel is a zero sum game.

Not sure what one would be doing to break a knife in a high alloy steel any faster than one in a carbon steel if the knives were made for really rough use, neither are exactly weak....

A person would have to be trying to break the knife and MOST of those higher alloy steels are tool steels so they aren't going to break like glass....

One has to fit the steel to the knife and the use at hand in the end...

 

[Ankerson]

My argument is simply that there is no be all end all of steels. I used the ABS test as a simple example.

Nobody has said that there is either.

 

[bdmicarta]

I like steels that have high toughness, wear resistance, and corrosion resistance.

And yet, there remains a segment of this little community that seems staunchly opposed to new steels.

I like new steels. I've bought a number of knives in the past few years just because they had new steels (probably too many!). I was collecting custom knives over 20 years ago and the average fixed blade hunter was probably 440C. They were beginning to change over to ATS34 and the higher priced custom knives had to have that steel in order to sell. Now ATS34 is pretty mundane and we have a lot better steels to choose from.

Realize that "toughness" and "corrosion resistance" are somewhat mutually exclusive. There is always a tradeoff in steels between toughness and hardness, and alloying a steel for corrosion resistance seems to hurt the toughness. Fortunately for us the better steels move this point of tradeoff to allow improving one quality without hurting the other. That is enough reason to be interested in newer steels.

 

[marthinus]

Nobody has said that there is either.

But people argue as if there was.

Cant find that Elmax test through searching.

 

[Ankerson]

But people argue as if there was.

Yeah I know....

Makes no since either....

Match the steel to the knife and the intended use.

 

[Ankerson]

Cant find that Elmax test through searching.

Can't either, it was awhile back and I don't remember all of the details, I just remember reading about it and was surprised and found it interesting.

It is possible with the proper HT and tempering, would take a highly skilled Blade Smith to do it though as I understand.

You do understand those knives that are made to pass the ABS Blade Smith Test and Master Smith Tests are TEST knives that are made to very specific specs and are tested to destruction and not your typical finished works of art that a customer would get.

 

[Bo T]

One of these days I am going to get one of those cast iron knives. So I think that innovation is good. Unfortunately, my folks were depression era so frugality was taught to me. Most users (non professional) will have a problem wearing out an inexpensive Green River knife in half their lifetime. So there is a struggle with the justification of $500 vs $15. But arguably S125V will make a 2 lifetimes or more knife when compared to 1095CV.

 

[Ankerson]

One of these days I am going to get one of those cast iron knives. So I think that innovation is good. Unfortunately, my folks were depression era so frugality was taught to me. Most users (non professional) will have a problem wearing out an inexpensive Green River knife in half their lifetime. So there is a struggle with the justification of $500 vs $15. But arguably S125V will make a 2 lifetimes or more knife when compared to 1095CV.

There is a very large spread in cost in even 1095 blades, from like $10 to thousands depending on the knife and who made it.

 

[Cypress]

For EDC, I wanted a no-maintenance slicer that could hold an edge forever between sharpenings. When I sit down to sharpen, I generally spend the same amount of time no matter what the steel. M390 fit this bill, and has outperformed all of my other stainless steels as far as holding a low-angle freaky edge.

My older stainless steels cannot hold a candle to M390, and the only thing that comes close in the non-stainless category is M4. I'm no pro like Ankerson, but the difference between M390 and 154CM in the "thin slicer" category is pretty obvious once both knives have met a cardboard box or two.

 

[james terrio]

I would love to see that (bending) test on Elmax.

Why? Flexibility is a function of geometry. Just grind it thin if all you want to do is show it can flex 90 degrees. It's really not that big of a deal.

The ABS bending test has nothing to do with cutting performance. It's strictly to see if a smith can differentially HT a blade. Their words, not mine...

BENDING: THE PURPOSE OF THIS TEST IS TO SHOW THAT THE APPLICANT IS ABLE TO HEAT
TREAT A KNIFE WITH A SOFT BACK AND A HARD EDGE.

Whether or not that's important to you is a matter for a whole different thread, and has been beaten to death long ago. Frankly, I prefer hard use blades that neither bend nor break...

...I can add that toughness is very desirable trait for the light use knives, with very thin edges and high hardness. helps a lot with micro chipping... 3V as usual gets mentioned or used for large blades, but it performs very well at 62-63HRC with 10deg per side edges.

I really wish more people understood that. I run big 3V blades at 58Rc and small ones at 62Rc. With either, my clients are consistently surprised and pleased with how thin I can grind the edges without having them chip out. As you say, that's where the higher toughness really shines. :thumbup:

 

[marthinus]

Can't either, it was awhile back and I don't remember all of the details, I just remember reading about it and was surprised and found it interesting.

It is possible with the proper HT and tempering, would take a highly skilled Blade Smith to do it though as I understand.

You do understand those knives that are made to pass the ABS Blade Smith Test and Master Smith Tests are TEST knives that are made to very specific specs and are tested to destruction and not your typical finished works of art that a customer would get.

Yes, I do understand that and no, it depends on what the customer orders. Many are willing to make a plain jane for performance.