12c27... why not more love?

[pinnah]

There are 3 basic general categories of steels that are used in knives these days.

1) High Alloy/High Carbide Stainless and tool steels: Examples are CPM S110V, CPM 10V, CPM S90V, CPM M4.

When maximum edge retention is the priority, they also have good strength, drawbacks can be harder to sharpen than some other steels and impact toughness is lower than the other types so if big choppers are needed there are other steels better suited for those.

2) High Alloy/Medium Carbide Stainless and Tool Steels: Examples are CPM S30V, CPM S35VN, CPM 154, 154CM, ELMAX, M390, CPM 3V, CPM 4V.

These provide a good balance of toughness, strength, and edge retention and can be used in a variety of different types of knives so we typically see them used in the mainstream knives.

3) Low Alloy/Low Carbide Stainless and Basic Carbon Steels: Examples are 10XX Series, AEB-L, 420HC, 420J2, 440A/B/C, 52100, A2, 5160, L6, VG-10, AUS-8, N690, S7.

Good toughness for larger blades, swords, machetes for some of them. Can be used in smaller general use knives when cost is a factor to keep the prices down so we see them a large variety of knives. Can provide decent edge retention, but less than the other two groups in general.

In the main, I agree with this basic breakdown. A few quibbles, but again, in the main, this is how I think of things.

The major problem I have with this breakout and I think the core disagreement here is that I think this categorization diminishes key differences that exist among the steels in the 3rd group. 1075 and 420J2 just won't go above 55Rc (or there abouts). Others in this group can vary wildly in terms of how a knife maker heat treats them. 1095 or 420HC behave very, very different at 58Rc than they do at 55Rc.

You bias shows very, very strongly in your characterization. You assert that your preferred steels offer a "good balance of toughness, strength and edge retention" while asserting that all steels in the 3rd group are used only when "cost is a factor".

Many users, including Buck's customers and the OP's customers disagree with you and insist that fine carbide steels properly heat treated give a balance of these attributes that is preferable to them.

Here is a thread from 2008 about the performance of S30V vs 420HC in Buck 110s. These reflections by users are qualitative results but these definitely matter.
http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showthread.php/572830-Buck-110-CPM-154-S30V-or-420HC

Another way to think about this is..

Carbides: a feature or a bug?

There's just no way around this. The more carbides the steel has, the harder it is to sharpen. When diamond (or similar) sharpening mediums are readily and reliably available, this issue is moot. For users who don't have or can't guarantee access to diamond sharpeners (or similar), then high quality, fine carbide steels are preferable.

Summarizing:

1) There is a massive performance difference between fine-carbide steels at higher Rc levels (approx 58Rc) and those at lower Rc levels (56 and lower). This has more to do with edge stability and less to do with abrasive edge retention, so things like the CARTA or rope cutting tests won't show this difference and we end up relying more on qualitative assessments from experienced users. 420HC, 12C27, 440A/C and 1095 at 58Rc shouldn't be compared to similar steels at lower Rc levels.

2) When the user doesn't have access to diamond stones, many users prefer the balance of performance characteristics of fine carbide steels.

 

[Ankerson]

You bias shows very, very strongly in your characterization. You assert that your preferred steels offer a "good balance of toughness, strength and edge retention" while asserting that all steels in the 3rd group are used only when "cost is a factor".

Actually there is no bias at all as they are broken down by Carbide content.

Cost follows along with Carbide content, the lower the percentage the lower the cost in general.

$2 a pound is much cheaper than $35 a pound, that's just raw material cost.

That's actually the only way to break them down in a way that shows zero bias in a broad general way.

To break them down in any other way would show bias.

 

[pinnah]

Ankerson, you wrote:

2) High Alloy/Medium Carbide Stainless and Tool Steels: Examples are CPM S30V, CPM S35VN, CPM 154, 154CM, ELMAX, M390, CPM 3V, CPM 4V.

These provide a good balance of toughness, strength, and edge retention and can be used in a variety of different types of knives so we typically see them used in the mainstream knives.

I think it is more correct to say they provide a good balance of toughness, strength and edge retention but are more difficult to sharpen, particularly without the aid of diamond sharpeners.

Here is what Buck says about S30V.

"We consider this the absolute best blade steel available, and it is made in America. S30V contains carbon as well as high amounts of Chromium, Molybdenum and Vanadium. This steel combines fantastic edge retention and high ductility combined with corrosion resistance. Double-tempered - it can be hardened to a Rockwell hardness of Rc 59.5-61. However, it is difficult to resharpen yourself, but we do offer sharpening services for a nominal fee."


You bias also shows in what you consider to be mainstream knives. Here is what Buck says about 420HC.
"This is Buck's standard blade material because it approaches the wear resistance of high carbon alloys while delivering the corrosion resistance of chromium stainless steels. Add our exclusive heat-treat process and you have a very user-friendly combination of superior corrosion resistance with excellent strength for wear resistance and durability. You also have a blade that is easy to resharpen."


The vast, vast, vast majority of mainstream knives sold use fine-grained steels like 1095, 420HC and Sandvik 12C27. You're just not going to get more mainstream than the mainstream knives sold by Buck, Opinel, Victorinox, Mora, Boker and on and on.

Actually there is no bias at all as they are broken down by Carbide content.

This is precisely the bias. You equate more carbides with universally better. This is like saying a better 1/4 speed is universally better for cars.

And you are wrongly viewing this as an issue of cost. Fine-carbide steels are better than large/course/medium carbide steels for some applications, regardless of cost. Performance engineering is based on performance characteristics, not material/production costs. If one is in the field without access to diamond sharpeners (or their equivalent), having a knife blade that is more difficult to sharpen is a big problem and the fact that medium carbide steels (that you prefer) are more expensive doesn't fix that problem.

In the OP's scenario of military personnel in the field, carbides are bug, not a feature. The same is true for wilderness/survival scenarios, which is why fine carbide steels dominate those markets and, again, the same is true for farming/labor markets, which is why, again, fine carbide steels dominate those markets as well.

 

[Ankerson]

Ankerson, you wrote:




I think it is more correct to say they provide a good balance of toughness, strength and edge retention but are more difficult to sharpen, particularly without the aid of diamond sharpeners.

Here is what Buck says about S30V.

"We consider this the absolute best blade steel available, and it is made in America. S30V contains carbon as well as high amounts of Chromium, Molybdenum and Vanadium. This steel combines fantastic edge retention and high ductility combined with corrosion resistance. Double-tempered - it can be hardened to a Rockwell hardness of Rc 59.5-61. However, it is difficult to resharpen yourself, but we do offer sharpening services for a nominal fee."


You bias also shows in what you consider to be mainstream knives. Here is what Buck says about 420HC.
"This is Buck's standard blade material because it approaches the wear resistance of high carbon alloys while delivering the corrosion resistance of chromium stainless steels. Add our exclusive heat-treat process and you have a very user-friendly combination of superior corrosion resistance with excellent strength for wear resistance and durability. You also have a blade that is easy to resharpen."


The vast, vast, vast majority of mainstream knives sold use fine-grained steels like 1095, 420HC and Sandvik 12C27. You're just not going to get more mainstream than the mainstream knives sold by Buck, Opinel, Victorinox, Mora, Boker and on and on.



This is precisely the bias. You equate more carbides with universally better. This is like saying a better 1/4 speed is universally better for cars.

And you are wrongly viewing this as an issue of cost. Fine-carbide steels are better than large/course/medium carbide steels for some applications, regardless of cost. Performance engineering is based on performance characteristics, not material/production costs. If one is in the field without access to diamond sharpeners (or their equivalent), having a knife blade that is more difficult to sharpen is a big problem and the fact that medium carbide steels (that you prefer) are more expensive doesn't fix that problem.

In the OP's scenario of military personnel in the field, carbides are bug, not a feature. The same is true for wilderness/survival scenarios, which is why fine carbide steels dominate those markets and, again, the same is true for farming/labor markets, which is why, again, fine carbide steels dominate those markets as well.

Who is we?

Members of Blade Forums that are hopefully more educated than the typical Flea Market or Wal Mart shoppers.

What is mainstream?

Mainstream to us here on Blade Forums and what we typically see in the typical Spyderco, Benchmade, Kershaw, ZT etc knives that are generally talked about here.

Now outside of BF....

Yeah talking about the general population and what they buy?

Yes, most of what is sold out there by a very large percentage is complete garbage and most of us here on BF are well aware of that fact.

But as people get more educated they tend to find a forum like BF and gain more information so they can separate themselves from the masses and enjoy our hobby.

I would hope you aren't associating BF members with Flea Market and Wal-Mart Shoppers.

 

[chiral.grolim]

...And you are wrongly viewing this as an issue of cost. Fine-carbide steels are better than large/course/medium carbide steels for some applications, regardless of cost. Performance engineering is based on performance characteristics, not material/production costs. If one is in the field without access to diamond sharpeners (or their equivalent), having a knife blade that is more difficult to sharpen is a big problem and the fact that medium carbide steels (that you prefer) are more expensive doesn't fix that problem.

In the OP's scenario of military personnel in the field, carbides are bug, not a feature. The same is true for wilderness/survival scenarios, which is why fine carbide steels dominate those markets and, again, the same is true for farming/labor markets, which is why, again, fine carbide steels dominate those markets as well.

I take issue with what i bolded above, carbides are absolutely NOT a "bug" and definitely not in farming/labor markets. I encourage you to google "carbide utility blade" or "carbide bit". The vast majority of industrial/labor saw blades (circular, band, etc. for construction, manufacturing) are tipped with sintered carbide - not just high-carbide steel but actual tungsten carbide/cobalt. High-performance utility blades (e.g. box-cutters) are manufactured with a tungsten-carbide edge (powder-deposition followed by diamond-grinding) to maximize sharpness (minimal apex diameter) and edge-retention. Ever heard of carbide drill-bits and routers or carbide coating for bits? Understand what that is for? Extending tool life, maximizing performance. Carbide-toothed chainsaw chains are also improving, though an HSS blade is still a better performer. Carbides are THE feature of these tools, and high-carbide steel is an improvement by offering much higher toughness, it's the natural evolution in performance. These tools cost more but provide much longer tool-life for the price.

What farm-tools did you have in mind? I am not a farmer but work a homestead and would LOVE if my scythe blade would hold its edge longer, high-carbide steels are excellent for butchering my goats and chickens, for trimming goat-hooves I use a carbide-coated trimmer. Our grain-mill has carbide plates, the big mill/seed-cleaner a few towns away also uses stone (high-carbide) grinding plates. Combine/harvester blades need to be manufactured at low enough cost and endure significant abuse that immediately negates the option of high-carbide steels, but oh if only! Shovels and rakes and axes and machetes and mower and plow blades, forget it, these tools need to be cheap and tough, cheaper/tougher than HC-steels can manage. How many worn-down mower and saw and combine blades have you seen that needed to be replaced? What about worn-down old Bucks and Moras of 420HC and 12C27?

Carbide-technology, including HC-steels, are specifically designed and manufactured to improve performance and increase tool life. Using the right equipment/techniques, these materials can take a finer edge and hold it longer than low-carbide steels... but they cost much more and many people, knife users at least, might never notice any benefit, and if we abuse our tools there may even be a detriment. Soldiers (as previously described) are not doing "industrial" work with their knives, they tend to abuse their tools, they may not have good sharpening equipment readily available, and they may not want to pay a lot for a knife (depending), so carbide-technology may not be beneficial to such users. What steels are most popular in military knives? 1095 & 420HC.

 

[pinnah]

I take issue with what i bolded above, carbides are absolutely NOT a "bug" and definitely not in farming/labor markets.

(snip...)

Carbide-technology, including HC-steels, are specifically designed and manufactured to improve performance and increase tool life. Using the right equipment/techniques, these materials can take a finer edge and hold it longer than low-carbide steels... but they cost much more and many people, knife users at least, might never notice any benefit, and if we abuse our tools there may even be a detriment. Soldiers (as previously described) are not doing "industrial" work with their knives, they tend to abuse their tools, they may not have good sharpening equipment readily available, and they may not want to pay a lot for a knife (depending), so carbide-technology may not be beneficial to such users. What steels are most popular in military knives? 1095 & 420HC.

The bolded part in your post is the most important.

By the "farming/laborer" market, I meant to say the "farming/laborer KNIFE" market.

My sense in talking with farmers and guys in the trades is the vast majority of them (like soldiers) have little to no sharpening knowledge, skill or tools and those who do have some sharpening ability tend to use simple stones or sharpeners like pull-through do-hickeys.

I know that on the forum, there are plenty of guys in the trades who LOVE medium carbide steels for working in the trades and love how their knife will stay sharp all day or multiple days with no touch ups despite their hard use.

Just expand your last sentence just a bit and we will have achieved "raging agreement".

Suggested...

Many people, including soldiers (as previously described), farmers, tradesmen, industrial fishermen, hunters, anglers and backcountry travelers are not doing "industrial" work with their knives, they tend to abuse their tools, they may not have good sharpening equipment readily available, and they may not want to pay a lot for a knife (depending), so carbide-technology may not be beneficial to such users. What steels are most popular in general purpose knives? 1095, 420HC, Sandvik 12C27 and the like.

 

[Ankerson]

I think it is more correct to say they provide a good balance of toughness, strength and edge retention but are more difficult to sharpen, particularly without the aid of diamond sharpeners.

That is a huge, huge misconception.

I don't use diamonds as a general rule, most of the time (99%) I use the same thing I have been using for the past 35+ years to sharpen knives with, that's Silicon Carbide. They aren't expensive for high quality stones, Norton 8" x 3" Stones for under $20 for example, that's coarse, Med or fine. And like $4 a piece for the ones I use on my Edge Pro, that's Hard Silicon Carbide, Congress Moldmasters.

Haven't seen a steel yet that it won't handle easily.

I do use ceramics to touch up, quick touch ups, that or a Silicon Carbide loaded strop.

I do have one, that's one diamond stone that I got not long ago (A month) that I am playing with, still not broken in yet.

 

[rustyrazor]

That is a huge, huge misconception.

I don't use diamonds as a general rule, most of the time (99%) I use the same thing I have been using for the past 35+ years to sharpen knives with, that's Silicon Carbide. They aren't expensive for high quality stones, Norton 8" x 3" Stones for under $20 for example, that's coarse, Med or fine. And like $4 a piece for the ones I use on my Edge Pro, that's Hard Silicon Carbide, Congress Moldmasters.

Haven't seen a steel yet that it won't handle easily.

I do use ceramics to touch up, quick touch ups, that or a Silicon Carbide loaded strop.

I do have one, that's one diamond stone that I got not long ago (A month) that I am playing with, still not broken in yet.

Jim, I have the utmost respect for your opinion and I really appreciate you're input on this thread in particular. My only point of contention is that although a lot of real knife nuts can sharpen these tools well without the expensive stuff or sending them away, a lot of soldiers simply aren't that good at that aspect of cutlery. My market is primarily military and while the misconception is that military guys know knives inside and out... it's just not the case. Most of them end up with something just as useless as everybody else and for the same reasons... it looks cool or it was advertised by an "expert" on knives. That being the case, they use and abuse these things for everything under the sun and then a few other things that you would be amazed to see a knife doing... 16 years and i still get a chuckle now and then at what new idea someone has come up with for a use. All this to say, is that although i offer other steel grades, I base my choice of 12c27 off the old "infantry proof" idea and that i want someone that buys one of mine to be able to give it some abuse, be able to sharpen it himself and trust it to be there when he's done abusing it till the next time.

Respectfully

Royce

 

[chiral.grolim]

...My sense in talking with farmers and guys in the trades is the vast majority of them (like soldiers) have little to no sharpening knowledge, skill or tools and those who do have some sharpening ability tend to use simple stones or sharpeners like pull-through do-hickeys...

I live in farm-country. Back in the fall, my family had dinner with some friends of ours at their dairy farm. In their kitchen were cheap, dull knives that made me shudder to look at, and only a carbide pull-through sharpener. My father and brother are avid outdoorsmen - hunting, fishing - and they bring their knives (usually Buck or Gerber as that's what is sold at the Sporting-Goods stores they frequent) to me to sharpen, and boy are they ever dull when they get here! My army friends mostly got their knives from the PX, Gerbers, etc. When asked why they used those knives the answer was always: "Because it was cheap and looked good." These folk generally did not sharpen their knives at all. Another farmer friend offers a sharpening service for tools and the like, great guy that a lot of folks have gone to - turns out his service is just a grinding wheel. The local hardware-store is owned/operated by a guy from Pakistan, he has a special display of "damascus" knives from his brother-in-law's factory back home... I mentioned utility blades, those are quite common among "laborers", they're very easy to sharpen... but almost no one bothers.

I don't think that there is a "farmer/laborer knife market". There are those who know knives and those who don't. Those who don't know knives will use whatever is "cheap and looked good", usually buying a brand to test and then sticking with it if it works, then they'll do what they can to keep/maintain an edge which sometimes is nothing at all. They don't want to spend time or money on these tools. Those who do know knives will look for specific aspects/qualities including steel-type and hardness, will buy different brands to test and reject those that do not work - this usually results in a collection and more expensive knives . They don't mind spending time or money on these tools, they don't mind sharpening. A person in the latter group might appreciate Opinel for its elegance and thin geometry, it's traditional character and ease of maintenance. A person in the former group will appreciate Opinel because it's cheap - ease of sharpening doesn't enter the equation unless they actually sharpen their own knives and many do not, as you note. By the way, I should stress that this has nothing to do with income - I know "rich" folk that only buy cheap knives and "poor" folk that buy quality because they recognize it.

So when marketing knives to specific groups, e.g. general military personnel, the primary attributes are durability (tough), ease of maintenance (stainless or coated), and cheap, which is why you'll find 420HC Bucks and Gerbers and AUS6 or 8 Cold Steel and SOGs, and 1095 Becker/Kabars mass-produced for such groups. What steel should you choose if you need a knife to be cheap, to hold a decent edge (i.e. >55 RC), and endure heavy abuse without being properly sharpened?

When marketing knives to better informed or better-funded enthusiasts within a group, e.g. military personnel looking for a better knife than what's available at the PX or local store, you start to see more 154CM, 440C, S30V, D2, CPM-3V, etc., more expensive alloys. Such knives need to hold a good edge for a long time and endure some abuse but expect to be sharpened from time to time.

Buck and Gerber are on to this and now offer a lot of models in both 420HC and S30V.

 

[davek14]

​

The major problem I have with this breakout and I think the core disagreement here is that I think this categorization diminishes key differences that exist among the steels in the 3rd group. 1075 and 420J2 just won't go above 55Rc (or there abouts). Others in this group can vary wildly in terms of how a knife maker heat treats them. 1095 or 420HC behave very, very different at 58Rc than they do at 55Rc.

You bias shows very, very strongly in your characterization. You assert that your preferred steels offer a "good balance of toughness, strength and edge retention" while asserting that all steels in the 3rd group are used only when "cost is a factor".



1) There is a massive performance difference between fine-carbide steels at higher Rc levels (approx 58Rc) and those at lower Rc levels (56 and lower). This has more to do with edge stability and less to do with abrasive edge retention, so things like the CARTA or rope cutting tests won't show this difference and we end up relying more on qualitative assessments from experienced users. 420HC, 12C27, 440A/C and 1095 at 58Rc shouldn't be compared to similar steels at lower Rc levels.

2) When the user doesn't have access to diamond stones, many users prefer the balance of performance characteristics of fine carbide steels.

Yup.

There are advantages and disadvantages to different steels but I don't want to speak to that actually.

The high and medium carbide steels are pretty dang good. They are wonderful, wonderful.

Thing is, lots of folks buy lots of knives which are inexpensive for lots of reasons. It could be a tackle box knife, they might just not like to carry expensive items on their person due to fear of loss, they might want to not be afraid to beat the knife. There are many reasons other than being "cheap".

This thread shows there are lots of Bladeforums folks who buy low alloy knives.

People at this end of the spectrum discuss the differences between things like 420J2, 440A, and 12c27. Some of these differences are considerable. It's a valid discussion.

I'm a knife whore and love 'em all.

De gustibus non est disputandum

 

[calc]

Why not more love?....simple

People are use to 12C27 that is hardened too soft. 12C27/14C28N/13C26 can all go above HRC of 60. One local South African maker gets consistent results of 61 with 12C27 after temper and 14C28N at around 62. In my experience these steels really perform well at higher HRC with little to no drawbacks.

Could you perhaps direct me to one of those makers? I'm very curious as to what those steels can do when properly hardened.

 

[chiral.grolim]

Could you perhaps direct me to one of those makers? I'm very curious as to what those steels can do when properly hardened.

Tim Johnson of Blackstone K&T built the utility knife in 60Rc AEB-L (Peters HT) that was used in Jim's rope-cutting: http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/s...based-on-Edge-Retention-cutting-5-8-quot-rope

Steel - # of cuts - Model - HRC Hardness - Geometry Measurement

CPM 10V - 2400 - Phil Wilson Coyote Meadow - 64.5 RC - .004" behind the edge
CPM 10V - 1180 - Darrin Sanders Custom - 63 RC - .012" behind the edge
S110V - 1120 - Manix 2 - 62 RC - Regrind to .005" behind the edge.
CPM 10V - 1100 - Spyderco/Farid K2 - 63 HRC - .020" behind the edge.
Z-A11 - 880 - Darrion Sanders Custom - 62.5 RC - .020" behind the edge/.070" spine thickness.
K390 - 820 - Mule - 62-64 RC
CPM 4V - 740 - Big Chris Custom - 63 RC - .008" - .010" Behind the edge.
S110V - 720 - Manix 2 - 62 RC
Cru-Wear - 700 - Phil Wilson Custom Bow River - 63 RC - .005" behind the edge.
S110V - 600 - Mule - 60 RC - .015" -.018" behind the edge.
S90V - 600 - Benchmade 940-1 - 59-61 RC - .018" Behind the edge.
S90V - 460 - Military - 60 RC
S90V/CPM 154 - Para 2 - 460 - ? RC
CTS 204P - 420 - Para 2
ZDP -189 - 420 - Endura 4 - 65 RC
M390 - 400 - Benchmade 810-1401 Contego 60-62 RC
M390 - 380 - Military - 61 RC
ELMAX - 340 - ZT 0770CF - ? RC
ELMAX - 340 - Para 2 - ? RC
AEB-L - 340 - Tim Johnson Custom - 60 RC - .006" behind the edge
S30V - 300 - Military - 60 RC
PSF-27 - 280 - MT-19 - ? RC
Cru-Wear - 260 - Military - ? RC
CTS-XHP - 240 - Military - 60.5 RC
CTS-B75P - 240 - Mule
Sleipner - 240 - LionSteel PM2
Dozier D2 - 220 - Dozier K2
ELMAX - 220 - Mule - 58.5 RC
VG-10 - 160 - Stretch
AUS-8A - 160 - Recon 1
12c27 MOD - 120 - Opinel #8 - .012" behind the edge
XC90 - 80 - Opinel #8 - .012" behind the edge

AEB-L is 13C26, an upgrade from 12C27. At 0.006" behind the 15-dps edge, it had the geometry and the hardness to put it up against Elmax and M390... but the latter knives were much thicker behind the edge *shrug*

 

[calc]

Tim Johnson of Blackstone K&T built the utility knife in 60Rc AEB-L (Peters HT) that was used in Jim's rope-cutting: http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/s...based-on-Edge-Retention-cutting-5-8-quot-rope

Ah, I missed that entry. Thank you.

That's actually rather impressive, given that the steel isn't really optimal for that sort of test. I can think of a few applications that I would like a knife in it for.

 

[Ankerson]

Jim, I have the utmost respect for your opinion and I really appreciate you're input on this thread in particular. My only point of contention is that although a lot of real knife nuts can sharpen these tools well without the expensive stuff or sending them away, a lot of soldiers simply aren't that good at that aspect of cutlery. My market is primarily military and while the misconception is that military guys know knives inside and out... it's just not the case. Most of them end up with something just as useless as everybody else and for the same reasons... it looks cool or it was advertised by an "expert" on knives. That being the case, they use and abuse these things for everything under the sun and then a few other things that you would be amazed to see a knife doing... 16 years and i still get a chuckle now and then at what new idea someone has come up with for a use. All this to say, is that although i offer other steel grades, I base my choice of 12c27 off the old "infantry proof" idea and that i want someone that buys one of mine to be able to give it some abuse, be able to sharpen it himself and trust it to be there when he's done abusing it till the next time.

Respectfully

Royce

I can remember back when I was in the Military, 82-86 it was pretty much the same except we didn't have near the choices that there are today. For the most part most of us carried either a K-Bar, Buck 119 or one of those cheap $10 things there seemed to be around back then. I used to be one of the guys that people went to for sharpening back then.

So I can only imagine how bad it could really be now with all the choices, marketing etc.

 

[Ankerson]

Ah, I missed that entry. Thank you.

That's actually rather impressive, given that the steel isn't really optimal for that sort of test. I can think of a few applications that I would like a knife in it for.

Geometry can make a rather large difference in performance, .006" behind the edge compared to others that are .025" on ave.

 

[calc]

Geometry can make a rather large difference in performance, .006" behind the edge compared to others that are .025" on ave.

Was there any reason why the hardness wasn't pushed to, say, 62 HRC? Forgive me if this was covered in your thread; I follow it periodically but I must have missed when it was added.

 

[rustyrazor]

I can remember back when I was in the Military, 82-86 it was pretty much the same except we didn't have near the choices that there are today. For the most part most of us carried either a K-Bar, Buck 119 or one of those cheap $10 things there seemed to be around back then. I used to be one of the guys that people went to for sharpening back then.

So I can only imagine how bad it could really be now with all the choices, marketing etc.

just exactly as you picture it... with more "high speed" handles, finishes and tactical whatchamacallits thrown in. not surprisingly "tops" knives make more than their share of appearances. afterall "special ops (role players) trust TOPS" right? I just thank whoever's watching that "dark ops" went under.

P.S. Edit to note... thank you to TOPS for taking almost all of the silly "hardcore" sayings available. otherwise someone new to the industry might fall victim to using them and severely regret it once they grow up.

 

[sodak]

WHAT? Darks Ops is kaput? When did this happen? I loved their ads, they could pack an entire year's worth of tactical buzzword BS into 3 lines of ad.... No more deanimators, I'm bummed.... :grumpy:

 

[chiral.grolim]

Was there any reason why the hardness wasn't pushed to, say, 62 HRC? Forgive me if this was covered in your thread; I follow it periodically but I must have missed when it was added.

It was HT'd by Peters, the maker himself wondered about going higher here: http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/s...cutting-5-8-quot-rope?p=14326604#post14326604

Here is a post from someone on another forum: http://www.kitchenknifeforums.com/s...reat-for-AEB-L?p=144073&viewfull=1#post144073

I'm having Peters heat treat my AEB-L and their knife guy Brad--someone who knows his heat treats and his steels--has told me that 60 is the highest anyone should reasonably expect from AEB-L and he won't promise to get blades any harder than that on that steel... using cryo, etc.

You can get it higher per this chart, http://www.alphaknifesupply.com/zdata-bladesteelS-AEBL.htm, but without carbides it won't much improve wear-resistance and will probably decrease toughness... might be great in the kitchen though :thumbup:

 

[Ankerson]

just exactly as you picture it... with more "high speed" handles, finishes and tactical whatchamacallits thrown in. not surprisingly "tops" knives make more than their share of appearances. afterall "special ops (role players) trust TOPS" right? I just thank whoever's watching that "dark ops" went under.

P.S. Edit to note... thank you to TOPS for taking almost all of the silly "hardcore" sayings available. otherwise someone new to the industry might fall victim to using them and severely regret it once they grow up.

That's what I figured for the most part.