1095 Cro-Van and 50-110B Types of Steel

[tkroenlein]

You really can't compare most of the steels you've mentioned heat treated in a forge.

Larrin mentioned 80CrV2 in post #2. It is wood working steel, and excels at all things you are looking for. He did an article and/or video about setting the steel up to HT in a forge to achieve good results, and another very enthusiastic video all about 80CrV2 recently. Do exactly what he says and temper at 300F. You will have exactly what you're after. If you just like to fiddle around with stuff, that's ok, carry on.

 

[D-weaver]

Theoretically. Why not try rex 121 to really test your strength theory, or maybe maxamet, or zmax?

Send it out to be heat treated, tell them to shoot for above 66hrc minimum. 68 I would say at least or 70 for rex 121.

Honestly. I would be very interested in the resulting chisels.

As far as a hand plane. In theory I think 4v, would do much better than 3v, and be easier to sharpen than m4. At around 64ish Hrc.

They would be poor - the grain is too coarse for a relatively acute edge and they would chip. I'd be interested in someone else making them, though - along with some other super high hardness chisels.

YXR-7 is one of the steels that's used in woodworking chisels at very high hardness (up to 68). The assessment of their edges is that they lose their initial crispness, but what's left behind holds up well. I had one of these but gave it to another guy who was doing testing (it averaged 67 hardness). It did what its reputation says, something went away immediately, but what was left behind was usable. Where it excelled, though, is in the relatively uncommon circumstance where you're trimming or scraping a surface where brass and wood meet - it would give up a tiny bit of the edge, but not much, meaning you could trim a joint by hand until everything was flush.

In japan, those are considered a high quality site chisel and the ad copy says that they are less affected if someone hits staples or mild steel nails with them. the YXR-7 can be driven to really high hardness because it's attached to a mild steel or soft iron backing, or adhered one way or another.

you are right on the money with the idea of plane irons and 4V. That's next on the list if I make irons out of AEB-L (whether they are commercially heat treated or I get a furnace first just depends on the order that things happen).

XHP makes an inconvenient nuisance in the sense that it wears longer in wood and is easy to sharpen with alumina - relatively. Inconvenient because it's already out there and at kind of a low cost - it's something like $55 in a plane iron driven to pretty high hardness. I doubt there were too many mass production knives in XHP that cheap. But 4V looks like it would hit the same hardness target and have better toughness, which is where XHP struggles a little.

I think 4V would have made its way into woodworking tools if it weren't for the fact that we sharpen in a high volume and high hardness with vanadium makes for a rough slog with something like king waterstones. At some point, I'll try it. when I tested plane irons and the iron that I had was 59, it was sent to me suggesting it was 61 because that was what was requested. I asked the people who sent it several times as it would hold a burr even from 1 micron diamond sharpening on cast. At the end of the test, someone offered to hardness test all of the irons and have them XRFed - mostly to see what the hardness of a chinese almost-M2 iron was as I'd remarked that it was sold as HSS at 61, but it wouldn't hold a burr and it did pretty good (especially for the cost of $11 shipped from china to my door). It averaged 65.5 hardness, which kind of furthered what I thought.

Then, the hardness results for 3V showed it at 59 and the person who had coordinated making these 3V plane irons remembered Bos doing a batch at 59 and replying with an "oops". the (particle) M4 iron was done at 64. I don't know if it would make as good of a woodworking chisel as 26c3, but it would trim metal/wood junctions better, and you can grind it with abandon when refreshing a bevel grind (dry grinder being a very common method of chasing a bevel back in woodworking)....the only limitation there for practical purposes is wanting to go directly from the grinder to stones and burnt fingers.

I'm taking a while to get to it - as even and fine grained as 3V is, I wondered what it would've been at 61. I was shocked at its toughness when the sender kept saying it was 61 and the burr behavior would have been ungodly even at 61 - most woodworkers would not have the skill to get rid of a burr on regular sharpening material, and it was slow sharpening to remove the wear from a full cycle.

If I had a knife being made at 60 hardness to cut through styrofoam with rebar in the middle in hidden places, I'd get it in a second.

(since I don't want to be the person who messes with the ultra high carbide volume high hardness steels, I would still love it If someone else would do the samples, so long as they were clear about chasing high hardness first and worrying about toughness later.

Trying to think of a comparison for knives - if you take 26c3 and drive it into a mild steel nail, it will cut right through it. If you lay it over a little bit and lean the bevel on the nail, the bevel will probably chip out easily. What we do in woodworking is always more like cutting the nail straight in, never like leaning the bevel on it.

I appreciate the suggestion of 4V, though - you are right on target.

 

[D-weaver]

You really can't compare most of the steels you've mentioned heat treated in a forge.

Larrin mentioned 80CrV2 in post #2. It is wood working steel, and excels at all things you are looking for. He did an article and/or video about setting the steel up to HT in a forge to achieve good results, and another very enthusiastic video all about 80CrV2 recently. Do exactly what he says and temper at 300F. You will have exactly what you're after. If you just like to fiddle around with stuff, that's ok, carry on.

Which ones?

I have a bar of 80CrV2 on the way to try in chisels. I guess I'm OK with 1084 at this point, but would think that the chromium and vanadium in 80crv2 will make it a lot easier to get narrowly different results in a forge without having to be right on top of it by the second. I am always attendant and in the forge, but sometimes if you're doing things in pairs if using 1084, if it even overheats a little for 15 seconds, it needs to go back through the steps. Kind of a pain.

I would like to have gotten 0.1" 80crv2 to compare in plane irons, but it wasn't in stock where I ordered the 0.25 material (lots easier and less wasteful to snap thin samples, and faster to heat them. they'd make a great comparison visually against 1084 to monitor grain growth when using a hot forge and not shooting for time but temperature by eye.

 

[D-weaver]

You really can't compare most of the steels you've mentioned heat treated in a forge.

Larrin mentioned 80CrV2 in post #2. It is wood working steel, and excels at all things you are looking for. He did an article and/or video about setting the steel up to HT in a forge to achieve good results, and another very enthusiastic video all about 80CrV2 recently. Do exactly what he says and temper at 300F. You will have exactly what you're after. If you just like to fiddle around with stuff, that's ok, carry on.

I may have dismissed it being a woodworking steel at least in new hand tools a little too easily. It could be very common in hardware store chisels. 0.6 chrome vanadium is common in chinese woodworking tools, which leaves them high toughness but seriously lacking in potential hardness. They're panned. I'd always assumed that the low hardness and lower carbon level was intended to make the post hardening machining cheaper and easier.

There's a long history of cheapening process in wood or cutting a job grinder's allowed time resulting in heated tools when wet grinding and lower final hardness.

Also, we can't find out much about what's used in europe as they don't seem to like to tell us. It could be the steel used in pfeil carving tools or other european tools that are drop forged.

 

[Blankblank]

They would be poor - the grain is too coarse for a relatively acute edge and they would chip. I'd be interested in someone else making them, though - along with some other super high hardness chisels.

YXR-7 is one of the steels that's used in woodworking chisels at very high hardness (up to 68). The assessment of their edges is that they lose their initial crispness, but what's left behind holds up well. I had one of these but gave it to another guy who was doing testing (it averaged 67 hardness). It did what its reputation says, something went away immediately, but what was left behind was usable. Where it excelled, though, is in the relatively uncommon circumstance where you're trimming or scraping a surface where brass and wood meet - it would give up a tiny bit of the edge, but not much, meaning you could trim a joint by hand until everything was flush.

In japan, those are considered a high quality site chisel and the ad copy says that they are less affected if someone hits staples or mild steel nails with them. the YXR-7 can be driven to really high hardness because it's attached to a mild steel or soft iron backing, or adhered one way or another.

you are right on the money with the idea of plane irons and 4V. That's next on the list if I make irons out of AEB-L (whether they are commercially heat treated or I get a furnace first just depends on the order that things happen).

XHP makes an inconvenient nuisance in the sense that it wears longer in wood and is easy to sharpen with alumina - relatively. Inconvenient because it's already out there and at kind of a low cost - it's something like $55 in a plane iron driven to pretty high hardness. I doubt there were too many mass production knives in XHP that cheap. But 4V looks like it would hit the same hardness target and have better toughness, which is where XHP struggles a little.

I think 4V would have made its way into woodworking tools if it weren't for the fact that we sharpen in a high volume and high hardness with vanadium makes for a rough slog with something like king waterstones. At some point, I'll try it. when I tested plane irons and the iron that I had was 59, it was sent to me suggesting it was 61 because that was what was requested. I asked the people who sent it several times as it would hold a burr even from 1 micron diamond sharpening on cast. At the end of the test, someone offered to hardness test all of the irons and have them XRFed - mostly to see what the hardness of a chinese almost-M2 iron was as I'd remarked that it was sold as HSS at 61, but it wouldn't hold a burr and it did pretty good (especially for the cost of $11 shipped from china to my door). It averaged 65.5 hardness, which kind of furthered what I thought.

Then, the hardness results for 3V showed it at 59 and the person who had coordinated making these 3V plane irons remembered Bos doing a batch at 59 and replying with an "oops". the (particle) M4 iron was done at 64. I don't know if it would make as good of a woodworking chisel as 26c3, but it would trim metal/wood junctions better, and you can grind it with abandon when refreshing a bevel grind (dry grinder being a very common method of chasing a bevel back in woodworking)....the only limitation there for practical purposes is wanting to go directly from the grinder to stones and burnt fingers.

I'm taking a while to get to it - as even and fine grained as 3V is, I wondered what it would've been at 61. I was shocked at its toughness when the sender kept saying it was 61 and the burr behavior would have been ungodly even at 61 - most woodworkers would not have the skill to get rid of a burr on regular sharpening material, and it was slow sharpening to remove the wear from a full cycle.

If I had a knife being made at 60 hardness to cut through styrofoam with rebar in the middle in hidden places, I'd get it in a second.

(since I don't want to be the person who messes with the ultra high carbide volume high hardness steels, I would still love it If someone else would do the samples, so long as they were clear about chasing high hardness first and worrying about toughness later.

Trying to think of a comparison for knives - if you take 26c3 and drive it into a mild steel nail, it will cut right through it. If you lay it over a little bit and lean the bevel on the nail, the bevel will probably chip out easily. What we do in woodworking is always more like cutting the nail straight in, never like leaning the bevel on it.

I appreciate the suggestion of 4V, though - you are right on target.

Honestly the most I can really say I know about what woodworkers do, is from watching paul sellers videos, and stuff like that (man he makes using a chisel looks so easy, then when I try... its not that easy lol). But I've done some restorations on oldStanley's, and do the occasional project if a reason arises.

My point with the above paragraph is, I was under the impression a lot of woodworkers these days use diamond plates, to maintain flatness. That and they seem to be big fans of oil stones. I've seen some guys that are nuts about japanese natural stones for finishing too. (Not going to lie, I have some myself I use on my kitchen knives).

I just think there are some interesting areas that this could tested with this kind of stuff. To see, what's theory, and what in practices can truly be the best.

 

[Blankblank]

I stole some images from larrins site of micrographs of different steels. This isn't the whole story, but still. Its relevant.

https://imgur.com/a/YKoGlAe

I've got xhp,maxamet,3v,4v,( niomax, I think) 1095, and 52100 there. The only one of these with considerably larger carbides is the xhp

Edit: I accidentally left niomax off. I'll add it. Anyway I brought that one up, because looking at it, it seems interesting.

https://imgur.com/a/SOiJt41

 

[velegski]

seems like you are need to look at other steels. 1095 is nice but commercial outfits use steels like M2, M3, V 2. Or D2, they getting 60 + rc with the first 3 steels. Only 58 rc with d2 but if it's good enough for commercial planers it should be adequate for a hobbiest.

 

[velegski]

LOL. Dozens of people offering avenues and you finally state that all this was to find source for 50-100/110b steel..
As far as testing, if you aren't satisfied with Dr. T's results there are other labs. Find another and have them test your results.. its like getting a second opinion from another doctor.
As to steels, Are you sure the steels you are testing came from the same manufacturer and the same manufacturing run. Its not uncommon to have people start complaining about different results from the same steel, bought at the usual source. Ie 1095, its had several complaints form users. unless you buy hundreds of feet of steel at a time you can't be sure the steel you tested was actually the same composition. the manufacturer might have changed or tweak their process.
Anyways, like I said, dozens of people have given you suggestions Good luck in your hunt.

 

[D-weaver]

seems like you are need to look at other steels. 1095 is nice but commercial outfits use steels like M2, M3, V 2. Or D2, they getting 60 + rc with the first 3 steels. Only 58 rc with d2 but if it's good enough for commercial planers it should be adequate for a hobbiest.

M2 is typically used in commercial planing knives, but there are a lot of variations once you start going upmarket. Including various carbide tipped, etc, I don't think I've seen D2 because it's not heat resistant and the commercial planing machines definitely deal with speed and heat.

D2 is used by a manufacturer in the UK - if it's PM - in hand tools. People have mixed opinions about it. For all of these steels to really wow hand toolers, hey need to be at the top of their hardness range. XHP is presumably being used by another manufacturer, and I'm almost sure that the sharpenability plus the vanadium addition and ease in getting it well above 60 has a lot to do with it, as 58 hardness doesn't hold up in chisels. I put pictures in this thread or another - it needs additional geometric accommodation to make up for a lack of strength. I've not had a CPM D2 sample that was really driven to high hardness to see how much better it does, but it doesn't matter if it can't be 26c3.

It may seem like I'm not getting anything out of this, but here's what I've gotten so far:
* I've ordered 80CrV2
* I pinged a few people with 26c3 chisels that I've made for negative feedback (I do this from time to time) - none
* I've ordered 1095 that's got chromium and nickel
* I solved my issues with 1084, and found that my 1095 has something unsavory in it. I have stock from another retailer that seems to be different stuff while I wait for the 1095 mentioned above. I'm pretty sure I solved my issues with 1095, too, but now am less sure that it's better for chisels than 1084 because 1084 holds up at high hardness in a way I didn't know that it would (I thought it would become chippy)
* I made two more plane irons checking consistency for hardness with 1084 vs. made on a different day - they all feel identical. I'm kind of hopped up about seeing what it can do in chisels now
* I found that I can order W2 from NJSB and know what the composition is - it looks like it has a chance
* I recalled (didn't post about this) that I have an aging friend who has an evenheat furnace. he doesn't use it any longer. I'll talk to him in a month or two and see if he wants to sell it. He is maybe one of the most gifted makers I've ever met...OK, not maybe. He is the most gifted maker I've ever met - of any type
* CPM 4V and AEB-L are two on the list to work with once I have a furnace, I guess I'll get a dewar (this is in keeping with me chasing hardness in steels that allow it)
* I think I know not to try to find sharon 50-110B or Carbon V or anything like that - it's a dead end at this point

I don't question larrin's test results for a second - there would be no need to make coupons and see if they match what larrin gave me in results and then question anything - if they're different, it would be the difference in coupons and not testers.

I'm trying to make the best woodworking chisels, and sometimes what makes them is a departure from what makes a good knife. I don't think there will be anything commercially made for a long time that will match my chisels for two reasons:
1) I can consistently heat treat 26c3 well, and to a hardness that will make chisels more crisp without being hard to sharpen
2) I can freehand grind the shape of a chisel to something that's not easy to do industrially - something more like what was done 150-200 years ago when there was more competition to make exactly what professional woodworkers and patternmakers wanted. Industrialization kind of eliminated most of that work. Patternmaking didn't go away, but furniture went from being made in a workshop to being made in a factory. By 1900, most of the tools being offered were being made for site work, where they're tempered softer to avoid breaking (kind of like knives, except chisels shouldn't ever be pried with - on a job site, you can't stop that, though. They will be the tool in hand for someone at some point opening a stuck lid or prying in a wood/metal junction

but I do get requests from some people who are bonkers for getting as close to something like Seaton Chest chisels as possible - they seem to not want 26c3. I may just ignore their requests, though, and use it anyway, because it won't break as easily as O1. I'm making things for free or cost of materials only as a challenge, there's no obligation to solve any of it. If I wanted to make chisels for profit, I'd make complete sets and retail them, but the chance that they'll be bought by someone with deep pockets and no intention to use them goes way up, and I don't get out of my chair to make jewelry.

 

[D-weaver]

I stole some images from larrins site of micrographs of different steels. This isn't the whole story, but still. Its relevant.

https://imgur.com/a/YKoGlAe

I've got xhp,maxamet,3v,4v,( niomax, I think) 1095, and 52100 there. The only one of these with considerably larger carbides is the xhp

Edit: I accidentally left niomax off. I'll add it. Anyway I brought that one up, because looking at it, it seems interesting.

https://imgur.com/a/SOiJt41

yes -I may have the record for most views of micrographs on larrin's site. Sometimes they tell something useful, sometimes they can be a little misleading if relying on them alone (O1 being a case where the pictures look like a steel that will be very tough, but it isn't) and then sometimes chasing the toughness is misleading. The micrographs also give me something subjective to measure the size and distribution of carbides against:

XHP

I think the carbides in that picture are probably pretty round, but the wood is going into the edge so the lattice of steel behind the carbides is shielded, so you can't tell other than the lack of wider looking wear points.

going back and forth between those micrographs and larrin's hardness /toughness results makes a laundry list of good things to try. XHP gets away with being found favorable by a lot of amateurs in woodworking because we *don't* challenge toughness much, but I don't find it that great for chisels. The market doesn't agree with me because the company that uses it sells chisel sets that are near four figures made from it and they can sell them faster than they can make them. My chisels (26c3) are better, and not by a small margin.

(i also only found out about 26c3 in the first place because of larrin's book).

The bar for woodworking and steel is low, though. When one of the companies went from water hardening steel to A2, they marketed the A2 as fine grained and much longer wearing (it is longer wearing, but it doesn't make as good of a chisel...it's also not as fine grained). The important thing is that it can be made 61 hardness over and over easily without much follow-up grinding and aesthetics are pretty important with amateurs. The money in making woodworking tools is selling to beginners - their interest in them is fleeting and the tools end up on a shelf. They want something that they can look at from time to time and see a nice surface finish (which is fine). It's not like A2 is a horrible choice, either, it's just kind of the corn flakes choice if you're going to start making something where you source steel, source someone to machine it and source someone else to harden/temper and finish grind it.

I'm fixated on AEB-L and 4V as a reason to get a furnace because I think they have potential to be better in a plane iron. 52100 driven to very high hardness is a potential candidate. I've made a few plane irons out of it, and they're fine - they don't take edge damage. But where they would separate themselves would be pushing really high hardness - I can't do that at this point. I left one that can barely be sharpened on stones almost untempered and it has an uncanny ability to hold up (have enough toughness) without much tempering, but something about the way it wears in a plane iron is more rounded or different (O1 lasts the same length in wood planed and the edge enters a cut in wood easier. It's a subtle thing, but you can feel it).

 

[D-weaver]

As to steels, Are you sure the steels you are testing came from the same manufacturer and the same manufacturing run. Its not uncommon to have people start complaining about different results from the same steel, bought at the usual source. Ie 1095, its had several complaints form users. unless you buy hundreds of feet of steel at a time you can't be sure the steel you tested was actually the same composition. the manufacturer might have changed or tweak their process.

You make a good point here - which is one of my intentions with the lower cost steels. Once I find something that's good, I will buy a lot of it. I hope I'm not mistaken, but I don't feel the need to do this with O1 or 26c3, which are my two primary uses. I have some in reserve, but not hundreds of feet. with improved results in 1084 (drastically improved), it may be something to buy in some volume. I'm suspicious of the really low cost alloys being the same from one retailer bought years apart, let alone different retailers. The one reason to hoard some 26c3 would be for fear that it either is no longer available in the thicknesses that i want, or not available in retail at all.

For the first time, this week, I think I found steel with defects in it - not game ending defects, but lack of uniformity that I haven't seen before (in 1095). that bright spot in the worn matrix actually leaves a visible smudge on wood. I'd never notice it in a knife. This appears in several places along one edge in steel that wasn't hammered/forged and is about 4 thousandths of an inch here (100 microns - not small).

Wanting to check composition is why I mentioned finding a source with XRF analysis, but also to find out what may have been in natural ores in some much older tools.

 

[Seedy Lot]

I have found XHP to microchip more than I like in thin edges.

MM CD#1 or Ztuff in my mind is the ideal PM steel for wood working as I like lower carbide volume only issue is that it can only be pushed to around 62 Rc.

I like CPM Cruwear over 4V and have been using a Cruwear knife for a few months now at 64.5 Rc and the edge has held up exceptionally well for all my tasks.

 

[Blankblank]

The main point I was making with the micrograph pictures was that. At least for the maxamet specifically in that micrograph. It's carbides are fairly fine, and evenly distributed. I think it might have potential, but idk that for a fact. Which is why I would love to see how it actually performs. Especially in something like a Japanese style chisel with it laminated, and am ura on the back to ease in sharpening.

And I really think 52100, at very high hardness (probably not something that can be done properly with a forge, and possibly without at least some kind of subzero treatment) could really be great. Going higher than your 26c3 is in hardness, but having about the same toughness.

 

[D-weaver]

And I really think 52100, at very high hardness (probably not something that can be done properly with a forge, and possibly without at least some kind of subzero treatment) could really be great. Going higher than your 26c3 is in hardness, but having about the same toughness.

The charts agree with that thought - maybe holding the same toughness around 66 that 26c3 has at 64. I have only used 52100 a little bit for two reasons:
1) it tempers slightly softer than my O1 tempers when I just heat it past critical a couple of times or just anneal in vermiculite, thermal cycle and heat
2) because of the constant comments that I see about it never being quite right without the full soak in a furnace at temperatures where open atmosphere decarb can be an issue, I just haven't looked that much further at it. I have stock, though, and am keeping it instead of dumping it in anticipation of revisiting once I have a furnace and a dewar. Larrin has good information about chasing high hardness with it and setting up the microstructure so that it can be done.

i'm sure I could improve, but if I can't improve enough to get it past 26c3, then it's hard to justify spending time on it.

your mention of japanese chisels is apt - that kind of performance, what they do when well made of white steel, is what I'm chasing with 26c3. My chisels will hold up fine with a 350F temper, which is about where japanese chisels are hardened (some are underhardened when new and need some tempering to even get down to the 65 hardness range, but I think the makers expected the buyers to be professionals and find the temper point they like. Things have changed a whole lot in 75 years when the buyer expects the chisel to be usable out of the box and have a handle on it without exception).

There's from time to time a comment like "don't you wish you could get the performance of japanese tools in a western chisel". 26c3 is basically that - there's some derision about my comments about getting good toughness out of a forge here, but i do, and probably at least as good as the samples I sent. It makes me comfortable making chisels that people aren't going to break, whereas white #1A at 66 hardness would probably break. 26c3 is a gift to me - it's not expensive and everything about it is easy. It's easy to cut, it doesn't air harden, it's easy for me to bevel grind after hardening chisels (which is very important) without overheating it just with standard ceramic belts and a bucket of water and I can make something like a long paring chisel with about $20 of materials and supplies. It also doesn't blow up grain size nearly as fast as something like 1084 - it's a treat.

I've noted maxamet for experimenting down the road for chisels. if I try a couple of those bonkers steels and they don't hold up in tools, I've got a whole array of edge geometry tricks to get a knife to hold up with a relatively thin bevel.

 

[D-weaver]

I have found XHP to microchip more than I like in thin edges.

MM CD#1 or Ztuff in my mind is the ideal PM steel for wood working as I like lower carbide volume only issue is that it can only be pushed to around 62 Rc.

I like CPM Cruwear over 4V and have been using a Cruwear knife for a few months now at 64.5 Rc and the edge has held up exceptionally well for all my tasks.

Chisels match your experience - it's harder to accommodate XHP to stop edge damage than it is O1, which isn't particularly tough. Our demands in woodworking aren't that high - final bevels between 30-35, but XHP can find problems even there.

Steels below 60 hardness all seem to find some issues that there's no reason to tolerate.

I'll take a look at cruwear.

 

[Blankblank]

The charts agree with that thought - maybe holding the same toughness around 66 that 26c3 has at 64. I have only used 52100 a little bit for two reasons:
1) it tempers slightly softer than my O1 tempers when I just heat it past critical a couple of times or just anneal in vermiculite, thermal cycle and heat
2) because of the constant comments that I see about it never being quite right without the full soak in a furnace at temperatures where open atmosphere decarb can be an issue, I just haven't looked that much further at it. I have stock, though, and am keeping it instead of dumping it in anticipation of revisiting once I have a furnace and a dewar. Larrin has good information about chasing high hardness with it and setting up the microstructure so that it can be done.

i'm sure I could improve, but if I can't improve enough to get it past 26c3, then it's hard to justify spending time on it.

your mention of japanese chisels is apt - that kind of performance, what they do when well made of white steel, is what I'm chasing with 26c3. My chisels will hold up fine with a 350F temper, which is about where japanese chisels are hardened (some are underhardened when new and need some tempering to even get down to the 65 hardness range, but I think the makers expected the buyers to be professionals and find the temper point they like. Things have changed a whole lot in 75 years when the buyer expects the chisel to be usable out of the box and have a handle on it without exception).

There's from time to time a comment like "don't you wish you could get the performance of japanese tools in a western chisel". 26c3 is basically that - there's some derision about my comments about getting good toughness out of a forge here, but i do, and probably at least as good as the samples I sent. It makes me comfortable making chisels that people aren't going to break, whereas white #1A at 66 hardness would probably break. 26c3 is a gift to me - it's not expensive and everything about it is easy. It's easy to cut, it doesn't air harden, it's easy for me to bevel grind after hardening chisels (which is very important) without overheating it just with standard ceramic belts and a bucket of water and I can make something like a long paring chisel with about $20 of materials and supplies. It also doesn't blow up grain size nearly as fast as something like 1084 - it's a treat.

I've noted maxamet for experimenting down the road for chisels. if I try a couple of those bonkers steels and they don't hold up in tools, I've got a whole array of edge geometry tricks to get a knife to hold up with a relatively thin bevel.

Yeah. I can completely understand. If 26c3 works with what you have, definitely continue on with it.

I'm sure you've seen the video, and other stuff larrin has put out on forge hest treating,? I believe he got, ok hardness with 52100 in a forge, but I can't remember. I certainly think its worth at least a bit more playing with.


And when you do get a kiln, definitely look st 52100, and obviously apex ultra is going to be interesting, especially what could potentially be done with it in a kiln.

I hope you do end up going the furnace route, just for my own curiosity of what these steels will perform like in a woodworking situation. And if there are any that we may not think could have potential, that maybe could be standouts.

Kinda why I brought up that niomax micrograph. It seemed like it could be interesting in that kind of blsde.

 

[velegski]

Since you make tools how about some pictures of those. Stuff you've made would be far more exciting than the grain edge pictures most of us have seen already

 

[D-weaver]

paring chisels - 26c3

More of the same -side view

chef knife - O1 (I rarely make knives - this is just a personal use chef knife - to understand what makes a knife really feel great, I'd have to put the same effort into it as chisels. )

more paring chisels - 26c3

late 18th century style chisels - 26c3 (I don't care for this style, but there's some people who really like a very plain thin flat chisel that's more like a straight carving chisel)

tang and bolster bench chisels (the guy getting these is a pro and he wanted to make his own handles)

hand planes

I've made a lot of planes and about 10 guitars. Only this year have I started making the metal irons for the type of plane shown above because it's sort of a nuanced shape - tapered, dead flat one side and with an eccentric curvature on the back transitioning into a flat taper.

Woodworking tools are a little bit different than knives in that about 90% of the time is spent making them and the finish work hasn't been really crisp for 200 years, and even then, it wasn't that common. I don't charge more than the cost of materials and often nothing at all, so I'm not going to make things that look like jewelry when the hope is they will be marked up in use.

 

[D-weaver]

Tools give an advantage that maybe knives don't - every one of the chisels above is tested in a potentially destructive test that's much more harsh than chiseling wood. I also sharpen them before that so that I can get an idea on the hardness - very little deviation goes unnoticed if you're sharpening the exact same thing every time on a stone that's sensitive (starts to slow cutting) around the same hardness as the tools. I don't know how much of this kind of feel stuff goes on in the world of knives.

The abuse test is basically to put a temporary handle on the chisels and smash them into tropical woods with a hammer that's twice as heavy as it should be (the long chisels are for push work, but I hit those, too), twice as hard as they should be hit and then pare after doing that to see if they show any signs of damage. If they do, they'll leave lines on wood when you're paring.

It takes only minutes to test each one and to make sure they leave sharp as a courtesy - it'd be a shame not to do it. I haven't had a 26c3 chisel not pass this test in a long time. Before I narrowed down to using one process, one HT method, parks 50, a controlled tempering process (toaster oven with separate thermometer and two heavy pieces of metal that are preheated and the tools are tempered between them - double tempered - I would sometimes get rejects and more often hardness varying (except O1 - O1 is so hardenable that only the tempering would be a threat).

 

[Blankblank]

Tools give an advantage that maybe knives don't - every one of the chisels above is tested in a potentially destructive test that's much more harsh than chiseling wood. I also sharpen them before that so that I can get an idea on the hardness - very little deviation goes unnoticed if you're sharpening the exact same thing every time on a stone that's sensitive (starts to slow cutting) around the same hardness as the tools. I don't know how much of this kind of feel stuff goes on in the world of knives.

The abuse test is basically to put a temporary handle on the chisels and smash them into tropical woods with a hammer that's twice as heavy as it should be (the long chisels are for push work, but I hit those, too), twice as hard as they should be hit and then pare after doing that to see if they show any signs of damage. If they do, they'll leave lines on wood when you're paring.

It takes only minutes to test each one and to make sure they leave sharp as a courtesy - it'd be a shame not to do it. I haven't had a 26c3 chisel not pass this test in a long time. Before I narrowed down to using one process, one HT method, parks 50, a controlled tempering process (toaster oven with separate thermometer and two heavy pieces of metal that are preheated and the tools are tempered between them - double tempered - I would sometimes get rejects and more often hardness varying (except O1 - O1 is so hardenable that only the tempering would be a threat).

I mean, most of my income is from sharpening. And most of what people bring me to sharpen is knives. I only free hand sharpen.

So I feel like I can probably get a better idea than some, of the steel that I'm sharpening, from how it feels while I'm sharpening. It's obviously isn't super scientific, but I can tell right away if a knife is going to be a good knife from that.