CPM-154 VS CPM-S35VN

Which stainless would you choose or prefer for a 4 inch EDC blade?

  • CPM-154 @ 60-62 HRC

    Votes: 20 55.6%

  • CPM-S35VN @60-62 HRC

    Votes: 16 44.4%
  • Total voters
    36
Ocelot85

Ocelot85

Joined
Feb 1, 2012
Messages
424
It seems like both of these steels are competitive in pricing and availability. It seems like CPM-154 is tougher, and CPM-S35VN is better in wear resistance. Is that accurate? I will most likely make test blades in both in the future in a HRC range of 60-62 w/ cryogenic treatment. I'm curious which you would choose and for what reasons. Thank you.
 
Last edited:
Ocelot85 said:
It seems like both of these steels are competitive in pricing and availability. It seems like CPM-154 is tougher, and CPM-S35VN is better in wear resistance. Is that accurate? I will most likely make test blades in both in the future in a HRC range of 60-62 w/ cryogenic treatment. I'm curious which you would choose and for what reasons. Thank you.
Click to expand...
Nah, S35VN is tougher and more wear resistant. The vanadium and niobium promote finer, harder carbides.

CPM 154 is easier to work with grinding, handsanding and sharpening without fancy stones.

Both make a nice knife with good processing and geometry.
 
DeadboxHero said:
Nah, S35VN is tougher and more wear resistant. The vanadium and niobium promote finer, harder carbides.

CPM 154 is easier to work with grinding, handsanding and sharpening without fancy stones.

Both make a nice knife with good processing and geometry.
Click to expand...

Some of the charpy test information showed CPM-154 above S35VN. It was at a slightly lower hardness, but I would be curious how close they would be at matching hardness.
 
Larrin said:
I would agree with you but our toughness test did show superior behavior for CPM-154. Still a bit puzzling.
Click to expand...

This is what caught my attention and caused me to start questioning how close they are.
 
Last edited:
Ocelot85 said:
Some of the charpy test information showed CPM-154 above S35VN. It was at a slightly lower hardness, but I would be curious how close they would be at matching hardness.
Click to expand...
We tested as low as 58.2 Rc on the S35VN but the toughness wasn't higher than the values that I put on the chart. Higher austenitizing temperatures led to higher toughness in general, maybe from more retained austenite.
S35VN-toughness.jpg
 
The CPM-154 sample I saw on the chart was just under 60 RC I believe and around 17 ft-lbs? I would be interested to see how it tests at 61 and 62 RC.

Beyond toughness I'm interested in edge retention, sharpenability, corrosion resistance also. I'm going to do some searching for CATRA results for both steels, I'll post up what I find later.
 
The S35VN survived. I'm sure it's because it was slightly softer more than anything. Still I had thought CPM154 would do the best.

I'd be interested to test again with them all
at 60rc. Probably just make charpy samples to send to Larrin thenstead, save time and money.
 
When I was starting working with stainless, I debated back and forth for a week, and randomly chose S35VN. The properties were very similar, and opinions were pretty evenly split. I don’t think you can go wrong with either.
 
Crucible says that CPM 154 is tougher than S35VN. My understanding is that the purpose of S356VN was to get the abrasion resistance of S30V but with more toughness.
 
CPM-154: http://www.crucible.com/PDFs/DataSheets2010/Datasheet CPM 154 CMv12010.pdf

CPM-S35VN: https://www.crucible.com/PDFs\DataSheets2010\dsS35VNrev12010.pdf

On the CPM-154 data sheet it looks identical in their toughness graph compared to S30V. Though they give no actual Charpy data to support the graph. Then on the S35VN sheet they give Charpy data and it show's S35VN as having scored 2 ft-lbs higher than S30V.

@nsm Website show's CPM-154CM as having substantially more toughness on their graph than CPM-S35VN.

http://www.nsm-ny.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=page.display&page_id=27

So I'm confused, some sources say CPM-S35VN is tougher, some equal, and some not as tough as CPM-154.

Then as far as wear resistance the CATRA data from the Crucible data sheet for S35VN say's it's an "estimate based off of market feedback" based off a 440C standard. Does anyone have a link with real CATRA data comparing these two steels at the same hardness and edge geometries? I'm sure that CPM-S35VN with it's Niobium and Vanadium carbide content will have superior edge retention I'm just wondering by what margin.
 
Last edited:
Ocelot85 said:
Then as far as wear resistance the CATRA data from the Crucible data sheet for S35VN say's it's an "estimate based off of market feedback" based off a 440C standard. Does anyone have a link with real CATRA data comparing these two steels at the same hardness and edge geometries? I'm sure that CPM-S35VN with it's Niobium and Vanadium carbide content will have superior edge retention I'm just wondering by what margin.
Click to expand...
https://knifesteelnerds.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/Bohler-Uddeholm-CATRA.pdf
 
Willie71 said:
When I was starting working with stainless, I debated back and forth for a week, and randomly chose S35VN. The properties were very similar, and opinions were pretty evenly split. I don’t think you can go wrong with either.
Click to expand...

Considering the votes are split evenly for each, I would say that you're pretty spot on with that analysis.
 
I haven't tried the 154 CM but I have used the S35VN on one of my test loners as a 9" chef and have only had good feedback. I'm sure people have better HT than mine but I just ran it on the hard side of the recommend HT. I gave it a near zero edge and have had Zero chips and edge retention is great.
 
Storm W said:
I haven't tried the 154 CM but I have used the S35VN on one of my test loners as a 9" chef and have only had good feedback. I'm sure people have better HT than mine but I just ran it on the hard side of the recommend HT. I gave it a near zero edge and have had Zero chips and edge retention is great.
Click to expand...

For clarity and to avoid confusion: CPM154 =/= 154CM.
 
Stacy E. Apelt - Bladesmith said:
154-CM (Hitachi)= CPM-154 (Crucible)= RWL34 (Uddeholm) = Damasteel (Damasteel)
Click to expand...

I believe Larrin described this in one of his articles. CPM-154 is the powder metallurgy version of 154CM. So it would be a stretch to say they're the same. RWL34 is a product from Damasteel, not Uddeholm.

Edit: Added some references.
https://knifesteelnerds.com/2018/05/21/154cm-development-properties-legacy/
https://damasteel.se/about-us/
https://damasteel.se/story-of-rwl34/
https://www.uddeholm.com/app/upload...holm_Premium_Steel_for_Knives_Eng_1703_e6.pdf
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top