- Joined
- Jul 30, 2006
- Messages
- 41,633
Edge Retentions of Spycerco S30V vs. VG10 vs. Buck S30V vs. Benchmade D2
Some time ago I posted a comparison chart showing the relative edge retentions of a number of popular alloys.
http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=641279
More recently I compared ZDP-189 to VG10
http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=743238
The method I have used in comparing edge retention remains as follows. I measure the Rockwell hardness of each blade. Then I sharpen the blades to be tested at a precise 15° per side until I can not see the edge when magnified under a 3x hand lens. I then make 20 slicing cuts in 3/8 manila rope with each blade. Then I examine the edges for damage under a high intensity light with a 3x hand lens, looking for the edge and for shiny areas. The advantage to this technique is that, once hardness is considered, only the alloy changes. The blade profile is no longer a consideration. (for a further discussion of blade profile and its affect on edge retention, try this thread:
http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=730419
Recently Dennis Strickland loaned me a Benchmade 710 in D2 and a Spyderco Military in S30V. To this I added a Native III in VG10 and a Buck Vantage Pro in S30V. So the lineup for this comparison looks like this:
Alloy_____________________Rockwell
Spyderco Native III VG10______59.2
Spyderco Military S30V________58.3
Benchmade 710 D2___________61.6
Buck Vantage Pro S30V________59.7
Note: Normally you can only measure Rockwell hardnesses ±1 because that is all the calibration standards are good to. So normally one could only say that these are 59±1. except for the D2. However, these were all measured on the same machine, calibrated to the same standard. Therefore, in this case, the differences are valid differences.
To sharpen I used tried several methods. The one that I settled on was to use a Sharpmaker rod at the 15° per side setting to support DMT stones, xtra-coarse, coarse, fine, extra fine . This may have tweaked the results a bit because the recurve of the Benchmade 710 made it impossible to put full blade in contact with the stone. But I did check the edge before each run and I could not see any edge. So I think the comparison is valid.
Results:
I did two types of runs, and I got somewhat different results with them. When I did a couple of runs in which I put more pressure on so as to approximate a more of a push-cut style of cutting, I got the following order of most to least edge retention:
D2>>Buck S30V Spyderco S30V VG10
The D2 was far better than any of the others and the S30V was about the same as VG10. I saw no significant differences between the two S30V blades.
When I did several runs in which I concentrated on slicing, not pressing, I got this order of edge retention:
D2- Buck S30V > Spyderco S30V >> VG10.
D2 was maybe a tad better than Buck S30V, which was measurably better than the Spyderco S30V, which was far better than VG10.
In one set of slicing cut tests, I stopped at 20 cuts with VG10, then continued cutting with the other blades, stopping after every 5 cuts to compare the amount of damage to that of the VG10. The results were:
VG10 20 cuts
D2: 30 cuts
Buck S30V 30 cuts
Spyderco S30V 25 cuts.
In a previous set of tests, I found that ZDP would go 40 cuts before it showed the same amount of damage .
Commentary and Observations:
So what did I learn from this?
In looking at the blade damage under the lens, in maybe a dozen runs all tolled, I found no chipping of either S30V blade. I used to hear a lot about S30V chipping. I did not see any here, nor have I seen any with all the other cutting I have done with my Vantage Pro.
I still dont like recurve blades, but I did find that sharpening the 710 was doable.
S30V is outstanding at slicing. This makes sense since in slicing, the carbides really do their thing in contributing wear resistance. Even with the difference in Hardness, S30V slices almost as well as D2. S30V slices far better than VG10, even when the S30V is a point lower in hardness. When it comes to push-cutting, hardness is king. These findings are what one should expect if you stop and think about the alloys and how they function, but sometimes we forget in doing comparisons that not all cutting jobs are the same.
The difference between the Buck S30V performance and that of the Spyderco Military can, I think, be safely attributed to the difference in hardness.
I do not know if the 58 hardness on the Military was standard for Spyderco, standard for the Spyderco Military, or just a fluke. But it was what was measured on a properly calibrated Rockwell machine. This reminds me that I sometimes read posts questioning Benchmade heat treating. This is the fourth one I have measured. All have met Benchmades published specs for hardness.
That Buck Vantage Pro is a helluva deal. I bought mine for about a third of what either of the other blades cost and it cut as well as any of them. Paul Bos gets a lot of credit for his 420HC heat treat, but his recipe for heat treating S30V is also outstanding.
Conclusion:
So, if you were to ask me which of these alloys holds its edge the best, I would say, D2 because it was at the top whether slicing or push-cutting. For an urban knife, D2 for sure because so many urban chores involve push cutting. But if the knife was wanted for hunting, I might recommend S30V, because it really does a superlative job of slicing (which is how I always used a hunting knife), and it is stainless. However, for the purposes of my chart, I am going to leave S30V off for the moment, because its performance varies depending on the type of cutting, which really is not true of the others.
I had lots of fun with this and I want to thank Dennis for loaning me his knives. One of the things I enjoy most about BladeForums is being able to learn and to share information. I would neither have learned nor had the change to share the learning without Denniss loan. (And I ask you, how many folks will loan you $300 worth of stuff just on friendship?)
Some time ago I posted a comparison chart showing the relative edge retentions of a number of popular alloys.
http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=641279
More recently I compared ZDP-189 to VG10
http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=743238
The method I have used in comparing edge retention remains as follows. I measure the Rockwell hardness of each blade. Then I sharpen the blades to be tested at a precise 15° per side until I can not see the edge when magnified under a 3x hand lens. I then make 20 slicing cuts in 3/8 manila rope with each blade. Then I examine the edges for damage under a high intensity light with a 3x hand lens, looking for the edge and for shiny areas. The advantage to this technique is that, once hardness is considered, only the alloy changes. The blade profile is no longer a consideration. (for a further discussion of blade profile and its affect on edge retention, try this thread:
http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=730419
Recently Dennis Strickland loaned me a Benchmade 710 in D2 and a Spyderco Military in S30V. To this I added a Native III in VG10 and a Buck Vantage Pro in S30V. So the lineup for this comparison looks like this:
Alloy_____________________Rockwell
Spyderco Native III VG10______59.2
Spyderco Military S30V________58.3
Benchmade 710 D2___________61.6
Buck Vantage Pro S30V________59.7
Note: Normally you can only measure Rockwell hardnesses ±1 because that is all the calibration standards are good to. So normally one could only say that these are 59±1. except for the D2. However, these were all measured on the same machine, calibrated to the same standard. Therefore, in this case, the differences are valid differences.
To sharpen I used tried several methods. The one that I settled on was to use a Sharpmaker rod at the 15° per side setting to support DMT stones, xtra-coarse, coarse, fine, extra fine . This may have tweaked the results a bit because the recurve of the Benchmade 710 made it impossible to put full blade in contact with the stone. But I did check the edge before each run and I could not see any edge. So I think the comparison is valid.
Results:
I did two types of runs, and I got somewhat different results with them. When I did a couple of runs in which I put more pressure on so as to approximate a more of a push-cut style of cutting, I got the following order of most to least edge retention:
D2>>Buck S30V Spyderco S30V VG10
The D2 was far better than any of the others and the S30V was about the same as VG10. I saw no significant differences between the two S30V blades.
When I did several runs in which I concentrated on slicing, not pressing, I got this order of edge retention:
D2- Buck S30V > Spyderco S30V >> VG10.
D2 was maybe a tad better than Buck S30V, which was measurably better than the Spyderco S30V, which was far better than VG10.
In one set of slicing cut tests, I stopped at 20 cuts with VG10, then continued cutting with the other blades, stopping after every 5 cuts to compare the amount of damage to that of the VG10. The results were:
VG10 20 cuts
D2: 30 cuts
Buck S30V 30 cuts
Spyderco S30V 25 cuts.
In a previous set of tests, I found that ZDP would go 40 cuts before it showed the same amount of damage .
Commentary and Observations:
So what did I learn from this?
In looking at the blade damage under the lens, in maybe a dozen runs all tolled, I found no chipping of either S30V blade. I used to hear a lot about S30V chipping. I did not see any here, nor have I seen any with all the other cutting I have done with my Vantage Pro.
I still dont like recurve blades, but I did find that sharpening the 710 was doable.
S30V is outstanding at slicing. This makes sense since in slicing, the carbides really do their thing in contributing wear resistance. Even with the difference in Hardness, S30V slices almost as well as D2. S30V slices far better than VG10, even when the S30V is a point lower in hardness. When it comes to push-cutting, hardness is king. These findings are what one should expect if you stop and think about the alloys and how they function, but sometimes we forget in doing comparisons that not all cutting jobs are the same.
The difference between the Buck S30V performance and that of the Spyderco Military can, I think, be safely attributed to the difference in hardness.
I do not know if the 58 hardness on the Military was standard for Spyderco, standard for the Spyderco Military, or just a fluke. But it was what was measured on a properly calibrated Rockwell machine. This reminds me that I sometimes read posts questioning Benchmade heat treating. This is the fourth one I have measured. All have met Benchmades published specs for hardness.
That Buck Vantage Pro is a helluva deal. I bought mine for about a third of what either of the other blades cost and it cut as well as any of them. Paul Bos gets a lot of credit for his 420HC heat treat, but his recipe for heat treating S30V is also outstanding.
Conclusion:
So, if you were to ask me which of these alloys holds its edge the best, I would say, D2 because it was at the top whether slicing or push-cutting. For an urban knife, D2 for sure because so many urban chores involve push cutting. But if the knife was wanted for hunting, I might recommend S30V, because it really does a superlative job of slicing (which is how I always used a hunting knife), and it is stainless. However, for the purposes of my chart, I am going to leave S30V off for the moment, because its performance varies depending on the type of cutting, which really is not true of the others.
I had lots of fun with this and I want to thank Dennis for loaning me his knives. One of the things I enjoy most about BladeForums is being able to learn and to share information. I would neither have learned nor had the change to share the learning without Denniss loan. (And I ask you, how many folks will loan you $300 worth of stuff just on friendship?)
Are you measuring-as Vassili seems to be doing- ability to hold a razor edge, or ability to cut and keep cutting?
