ATS-34 versus 154cm

S

spyderco lover

BANNED
Joined
Feb 27, 2012
Messages
508
I recently received an old American made Benchmade Ascent in ats-34, and it seems to me that it produces a finer edge than the 154cm I had on the 940. Does anyone have any experience comparing the two? I've also experienced 154cm from Gerber in their applegate folder, and a griptilian, but this Ascent seems to smooth to a thinner cutting edge after stoning and stropping it.
 
You might be thinking of CPM-154CM, which is the particle steel version of 154CM. It is finer grained.
 
I don't have any experience with the new (and more expensive) CPM version, I'm just curious why my ATS-34 slices newspaper easier than the 940 did.
 
Tsujigiri said:
You might be thinking of CPM-154CM, which is the particle steel version of 154CM. It is finer grained.
Click to expand...

No such steel as CPM-154CM. It's either 154CM or CPM154, the latter being made with the partical metallurgy process. As far as 154CM and ATS-34 are concerned, they are very, very similar, ais VG-10 and even RWS. ;)

http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/s...-better-then-cpm-s30v?p=10538411#post10538411

The slicing of newspaper might be attributed to the fact that the latter knife was just sharper than the former?
 
Last edited:
It's possible, I tried to sharpen them the same but either way they both take outstanding edges and maintain them exceptionally. As for vg-10, do you find it easier to sharpen than 154?
 
spyderco lover said:
It's possible, I tried to sharpen them the same but either way they both take outstanding edges and maintain them exceptionally. As for vg-10, do you find it easier to sharpen than 154?
Click to expand...

I usually use a sharpmaker for VG-10, it's about the same in my eyes. Once again, I think different manufacturers have different formulas for the heat treat though.
 
spyderco lover said:
I don't have any experience with the new (and more expensive) CPM version, I'm just curious why my ATS-34 slices newspaper easier than the 940 did.
Click to expand...

Probably more of a grind and edge geometry thing rather than the steel. Really you shouldn't be able to tell between them, or any other similar steels
 
RevDevil said:
No such steel as CPM-154CM. It's either 154CM or CPM154, the latter being made with the partical metallurgy process. As far as 154CM and ATS-34 are concerned, they are very, very similar, ais VG-10 and even RWS. ;)

http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/s...-better-then-cpm-s30v?p=10538411#post10538411

The slicing of newspaper might be attributed to the fact that the latter knife was just sharper than the former?
Click to expand...

Thought that sounded a little unwieldy, although I was sure there was a particle steel version...

Spyderco Lover: Spydercos usually have thinner edge geometry than most other knives, so they tend to slice better and seem sharper, even if they aren't. Are you comparing a thin blade to a thicker one?
 
No they're two benchmades, and I reprofiled both to 17 degrees then stropped them. They're almost the same in thickness, a difference of about .3 millimeters. Its a small amount, but I can feel slightly less resistance with the ATS
 
i had a Benchmade 905 in ATS-34 and i remember that steel taking a particularly sharp edge. compared to it, i was never impressed with 154-CM
 
IIRC Custom maker RJ Martin, who has a degree in materials engineering, had some metallographic studies done on samples of ATS-34 and 154CM in about 2005 or so. He posted that the studies showed the 154CM had the better grain structure than ATS-34. I also remember that there was a time in the late 70's or 80's when ATS-34 was more consistent was decidedly better than 154CM.

But in your own assessment, you are leaving out a major variable. Aside from geometry and alloy, there is also hardness. If you do not know to what hardness each blade was heat treated, you really cannot make a comparison. I've seen a difference in hardness of a a point or two make such a difference as you describe.
 
I actually did email benchmade specifically asking their ats-34 heat treat so that I could compare that factor, still waiting for a return email.
 
spyderco lover said:
I actually did email benchmade specifically asking their ats-34 heat treat so that I could compare that factor, still waiting for a return email.
Click to expand...
a) I doubt anyone in customer support worked @ BM back when they were still using ATS-34
b) Even if they ask someone who did, the info is most likely a trade secret, or too complicated to relay through third person and I doubt anyone from HT department will sit down to answer an email like that.

As to the OP, I really like slicing abilities of old Crawford Leopards in ATS-34. And still, I feel that all it comes down to is HT and edge geometry.
 
Ats-34 was seen as the be all end all of steels when it became popular, now we think M390 can be it. Wow how far have we come.

154CM had some major manufacturing faults for a while. Air pockets in the steel. The push for Ats-34 was big, however 154CM resolved the problem.

Now, they both have similar composition to my knowledge (can't check my resources at this time), but, heat treat as well as EACH RUN of the steel can have some slight variables resulting in different carbide formation resulting in a slightly course feeling edge or maybe not.

Comparing two knives, with different runs of 154CM can also result in what you are describing, its all small variables.

You might get another ATS-34 blade giving more resistance like the 154CM knife through news paper.

IMO the new RWL-34 (powdered ATS-34 named after Bob Loveless) and CPM-154 are the best balanced steels for the user and maker on the market and at HRC of 62 is excellent. It can handle fine and course edges and hold them for some time in my uses due to the 0.2% Vanadium giving excellent balanced carbide formation.

The packaging of the last two steels mentioned is also excellent from the factories, carbonised is removed and is perfectly flat, thus reducing the cost to the maker to do it on his own.
 
Last edited:
I have 710s and 705s in both ATS-34 and 154CM. There may be metalurgical differences, but I've ever noticed any difference between them in real life use. In spite of super-steel developments in the last decade, both are still pretty darned fine choices for a knife blade.

spyderco lover said:
I recently received an old American made Benchmade Ascent in ats-34, and it seems to me that it produces a finer edge than the 154cm I had on the 940. Does anyone have any experience comparing the two? I've also experienced 154cm from Gerber in their applegate folder, and a griptilian, but this Ascent seems to smooth to a thinner cutting edge after stoning and stropping it.
Click to expand...
 
ATS34 is the Japanese version of 154CM. Heat treatment varies, and that could explain any differences.
I find my knives in VG10 are easier to sharpen by hand, but that is probably because the blades are somewhat thinner behind the edge.
Wear resistance is pretty good for any of these steels.
 
Air pockets in steel ??? NO ! You might be talking about inclusions that have been pulled out during polishing. ATS-34 and 154CM are essentially the same as for chemistry. However over the years they have varied due to variations in the steel making process and QC.Sometimes ATS-34 is better and sometimes 154CM at any point in time . Try CPM154 and RWL-34 and you'll be happier .
 
mete said:
Air pockets in steel ??? NO ! You might be talking about inclusions that have been pulled out during polishing. ATS-34 and 154CM are essentially the same as for chemistry. However over the years they have varied due to variations in the steel making process and QC.Sometimes ATS-34 is better and sometimes 154CM at any point in time . Try CPM154 and RWL-34 and you'll be happier .
Click to expand...

Hi mete, could you elaborate a bit on this? All I can remember was something mentioned that some were grinding 154cm and then, no steel like a air pocket. I am running on a foggy memory on this. See if I can find where I read it.
 
Nope, cant find it, forget what I said about the air pocket thing.

Here is something I found while looking around. Posted back in 2000

A lot of companies and makers are turning from ATS-34 to (or rather, back to) 154CM. The two steels and nearly identical, ATS-34 being made by Hitachi and 154 CM by Crucible. The standard knife lore is that knifemakers originally used 154CM, then found that its quality of manufacture became suspect and switched to ATS-34. People have been asking that, given the quality problems, why are companies switching back to 154CM. The response is that 154CM is now being manufactured to very high quality standards, equal or superior to ATS-34.

I asked Crucible about this, and here is the reply from one of their metallurgists:

---------------
Let me give you a time line of where this grade was and where it is
now.

Our steel mill is a rod and bar mill. 15 or more years ago, we did
not produce sheets of steel, but instead rolled thin bars. Thin bars
were the preferred material for stock removal blades. 154CM was a
bearing material produced primarily in round bar form for that market.
The cutlery end of the grade was a side market and since the stainless
bearing market is not huge kept the volume up. Crucible marketed this
grade primarily through knife supply houses and really didn't come
into direct contact with the knife industry.

One myth from that time that continues to plague the grade is that
154CM was vacuum re-melted. This grade was never produced with vacuum
re-melt technology. At the time it was air melt material. Today it
is melted differently, but I'll cover that later.

As the stainless bearing market continued to shrink, it became more
difficult to justify an 80,000 lb heat of 154CM, especially for the
smaller cutlery industry. At the same time, the industry converted to
using sheet product, which allowed lazer cutting and more versatiliy
of widths. Put all this together with Crucible having no direct
contact with the market and guess what, we were out of the business.
Take a note of how many supply houses carry sheets of steel. None.

A little over 10 years ago the distribution part of Crucible became
it's own divison. The number of warehouses doubled and this division
became very intimate with its markets. The Service Center Divsion is
not limited by the mill's production and can convert material using
outside sources (i.e. sheet products). With this in mind we entered
back into the 154CM, 440V, 420V,etc. business and intend to stay there
for quite a while. We dove back in about 3 years ago with the help of
one of the larger knife producers and have been getting better every
year. The mill still melts the material, but we stock the sheets in
our warehouse system for cutting into various sizes.

Now this brings us to the material production. Like I said earlier,
many years ago, this material was produced by air melt technology.
Today it is produced by the Argon/Oxygen/Decarburization process
(AOD). This is the primary way to produce quality stainless steels.
It is not as clean as re-melted steels but is about as close as you
can get and is much cleaner than 15 years ago. 3 years ago when we
entered back into the 154CM market we were concerned that the ATS-34
was cleaner than ours. We found just the opposite. They do not
re-melt their material either and in numerous tests with knife makers
and polishers our material was much cleaner. Based on our sales and
responses from our customers, the myth of the dirty 154CM is behind us
for good.

Now for the future. We are still adapting to the needs of the market.
Many of the larger companies purchase full sheets and this is easy for
us. Cut strips and pieces are another story. Since we can't possible
stock sheet product in every district (We have 26 warehouses in North
America) we are setting up one of our warehouses to handle the small
piece business for the whole country. This project is currently in
motion and will be completed by year's end. As soon as you see our ad
in the magazines you will know we're ready.

If anyone wants to meet us we will be at the Oregon knife collectors
show in April and we will be at the Blade show, also.

I still feel we are not completely where we want to be service wise
but we get better each month. We urge the knifemakers to give us
feedback good or bad so we can continue to improve.

I hope this answers your questions, Sorry for being so windy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top