14c28n is... good...?

[oldmanwilly]

I've only got one in 14c28n that I've been using in recent memory. I found this Douk Douk and am thoroughly impressed with it.



It takes a screaming edge with hardly any effort and holds it very well, especially for such thin stock. It's a wicked slicer and keeps a hair slicing edge after prolonged use in the kitchen, whittling hardwood, slicing cardboard, etc. Idk what the HRC is, but I'm now quite keen to find more knives in 14c28n.

 

[Chronovore]

I haven’t used any in a while, but I remember it being better than 8cr13mov. I had a Leek in 14C28N and an Amplitude in 8cr and the Leek held an edge a little longer. They were some of my first knives and I wasn’t stropping back then so I can’t comment on that.
But I do know that CPM-154/S35VN from the same company is done well and blows both of those steels out of the water.
Maybe I would like 14C better now that I have a nice strop and some compounds…maybe someday I’ll give it another shot. People do seem to like it.

While they get a similar rating on edge retention from Larrin, I always seem to get better edge retention from 14C28N than I do 8Cr13Mov. There are reasons for that. Some of it could be in heat treatment. Some of it is just how the edges degrade over time and how we perceive sharpness. Think of it this way. Both of those steels are relatively easy to get very sharp. Of course, very sharp and usably sharp are not the same thing. I feel like 8Cr13Mov wears more quickly or more abruptly to a ho-hum working edge versus 14C28N or some other steels. The quality of the edge over its life feels better with 14C28N.

I'm reminded of discharge curves and comparing different batteries in the flashlight community. It's not always the run time but the quality of the run time.

That said, yes. Steels like N690, 154CM, or certainly the powder-metallurgy super steels can outshine 14C28N, Nitro-V, or AEB-L if given a good heat treatment. Generally though, this family of finer-grained stainless steels is going to be tougher and more user-friendly. If they are already offering enough edge retention for our daily needs, then those are nice qualities to have. What makes 14C28N stand out versus Nitro-V or AEB-L is its excellent corrosion resistance. Heck, 14C28N is more stainless than N690 or S35VN.

 

[The_Iron_Joe]

While they get a similar rating on edge retention from Larrin, I always seem to get better edge retention from 14C28N than I do 8Cr13Mov.

This actually reminds me of something I've noticed before; Pete's testing (Cedric & Ada on YouTube) shows tough steels in particular performing better on average than some steels that otherwise rank higher in the CATRA edge testing results Larrin has shared. (Larrin has graphs on his website and in Knife Engineering, iirc, Pete has a google doc spreadsheet linked from his channel.)

While some of those results when compared side by side can seem a little odd, it appears that steels that feature a combination of high wear resistance AND toughness do better in Pete's specific test versus steels which simply have high wear resistance but lower or middling toughness.

Pete's rope-cutting test results are highly subjective (as he mentions frequently in his videos), but I'm inclined to believe there is a degree of consistency that allows us to make some basic observations about possible trends in edge performance in the type of use Pete is testing.

One interesting example is that of the relationship between M4, S110V and MagnaCut. Larrin found that S110V performed roughly 24% better than M4 in CATRA testing, while Pete's testing shows that for the best performing specimens, there was only about a 16% difference in edge holding capability. Meanwhile, also in Pete's tests, MagnaCut actually outperformed S110V by about 30% on the average number of cuts, and by 43% from the highest number of cuts. Larrin has MagnaCut placed lower than M4 in CATRA testing (except for when MC has significantly higher HRC), and actually scored an approximate average of 27% lower than S110V!

I'll also note that the best performing Maxamet was outdone by the best performing MagnaCut by about 16% in Pete's tests.

I believe that the blades chosen for Pete's tests of the aforementioned four steels were sourced from companies with reliable heat treatments, though that may be an assumption on my part.

Huge caveat here; Larrin records different HRC values in his testing graph, which gives us a better understanding of the results, Pete's does not. Pete's testing is very rudimentary by comparison, and though it seems to be fairly consistent in execution, it's probably best seen as anecdotal, at best a rough estimate.

 

[knarfeng]

The_Iron_Joe
I trust Larrin's tests more than those of other folks. Larrin used blades with the same blade profile, edge geometry, and sharpness. They also measured and controlled the blade hardness. All of those factors must be controlled in order to have valid results. They have more impact in the results than the alloy does. Buck Knives proved that some 25 years ago.

Also, I note that most folk-testers test by cutting on a hard surface. When you cut on a hard surface, it is possible to get variation in the results depending onn how hard the blade impacts the cutting base. The CATRA tester does not do that. The only thing the blade cuts is the special cardboard. So that source of variation is eliminated. (I used to do my own cutting tests using rope with a base that had a gap where I was doing the cutting so that the only thing my blade cut was rope. And I also measured the hardness of each blade, and precisely sharpened the blade using a sharp maker to lock in the edge angle, so I knew what I was testing. As a result, I got fairly accurate results.)

 

[Chronovore]

The_Iron_Joe
I trust Larrin's tests more than those of other folks. Larrin used blades with the same blade profile, edge geometry, and sharpness. They also measured and controlled the blade hardness. All of those factors must be controlled in order to have valid results. They have more impact in the results than the alloy does. Buck Knives proved that some 25 years ago.

Also, I note that most folk-testers test by cutting on a hard surface. When you cut on a hard surface, it is possible to get variation in the results depending onn how hard the blade impacts the cutting base. The CATRA tester does not do that. The only thing the blade cuts is the special cardboard. So that source of variation is eliminated. (I used to do my own cutting tests using rope with a base that had a gap where I was doing the cutting so that the only thing my blade cut was rope. And I also measured the hardness of each blade, and precisely sharpened the blade using a sharp maker to lock in the edge angle, so I knew what I was testing. As a result, I got fairly accurate results.)

It's important to remember that any testing is testing particular things a particular way under particular conditions. Larrin has the best controls but he is using a particular blade shape with a particular heat treatment against particular media. Will your knife have the same geometry? Will your knife, especially a production knife, have the same heat treatment? Will you be cutting the same stuff? Etc...

Don't get me wrong. I'm very glad for Larrin's testing in this and many other areas. His contributions are a major benefit to the community. We just shouldn't lose sight of this very important point about science and modeling in general.

Some people tend to discount the "folk testers" because Larrin's data exists and I think that's a shame. It's just a matter of understanding what different testers are doing and what they are actually testing.

 

[Shorttime]

This is getting into another subject that I've been interested in for a while now, which is not only applying science to the "does it cut good?" question, but also ways of getting that information out in front of people. Even if it's just us knife cognoscenti, and we're the ones who are most likely to want it anyway.

I can imagine a graphing tool for really hard-core enthusiasts, where you can enter steel type, hardness, and bevel angle, and it will cross-reference a database to tell you what your expected cutting effort will be in various media, with a curve to reflect increased effort as the edge erodes.

That's probably a little too fantastic.

So, it seems to me that what's keeping 14C28N from realizing it's potential is it's image, rather than it's actual properties?

 

[Larrin]

Looking at Pete’s tests I do not see a correlation with toughness. Edge geometry definitely, hardness probably, toughness no. That would be great if there was because I often promote the benefits of toughness over strictly wear resistance but I haven’t seen it with rope cutting tests. Usually when people point out an inconsistency between my data and his (LC200N cuts longer than S30V is a common one) it is an edge geometry or sharpening difference. He often tests factory edges, and when he sharpens them he has changed his procedure several times. I enjoy his tests but analyzing it can take some work and comparisons you want to make are often not possible if you restrict everything to the same edge geometry and sharpening procedure.

 

[The_Iron_Joe]

knarfeng Larrin

That's entirely fair, I guess I may have seen a number of his results and thought I noticed a trend that I only thought I saw because of how tested blades happened to perform in a few instances. I had thought that in the case of his tests, particularly the ones where he resharpened the blades himself with a guided system, the stock thickness and behind the edge measurement wouldn't matter quite as much since he tests until he can no longer cleanly slice paper, whereas I thought I understood CATRA to test with a consistent pressure until a certain threshold of resistance was met? I think I need to go back and do more reading.

(Edit again to add that I found the CATRA website and found this explanation for their automatic and semi-automatic machines for those reading and curious;

"How it works:
The cutting-edge to be tested is mounted vertically and a pack of specially developed synthetic card is lowered on to it. By moving the blade back and forth repeatedly, the blade cuts into the paper; the depth of the cut being the measurement of sharpness. The test card is loaded with 5% silica, which has a mild wearing effect on the blade edge. The measurement of cut depth at each subsequent stroke can then be plotted to produce a wear curve for each blade tested."

Nevermind the fact that in Larrin's steel testing article, he explains how his particular machine works. I'm shocked I misremembered this info so severely.)

I'm certainly not trying to imply that Pete's testing is ideal, I might have been too excited at the idea of an edge test that tested toughness alongside abrasive edge wear.

Edited to add that the more I think about it, the cutting angle relative to media and force used per cut (various levels of impact with cutting board like Knarfeng mentioned), among other things definitely add a lot more of an unknown to the results than I had considered, even aside the differences in blade geometry. I am still interested in the relationship between his results, but a more consistent testing approach would be hugely beneficial.

 

[Chronovore]

While 14C28N is mostly used in budget blades, that's because it can be. The properties can make it attractive in customs and higher end knives too. I've seen it and I've even requested it in larger customs. Heck, this mid-sized fixed blade just dropped on KnifeCenter for $280.

RMJ Tactical Osprey 9 Adventure Kitchen Fixed Blade Knife 4.5" 14C28N Stonewashed Sheepsfoot Blade...

 

[Greggy]

Even the largest samples are but a collection of anecdotal data points.

 

[Corton93]

I like it for a good, budget, all purpose edc steel. I've got plenty in 14c28n. From Mora, Civivi, Vosteed, Kershaw, and some others I know I'm forgetting.

Apart from the Vosteed randomly having some rust spotting issues, I've never had any complaints about it. I'd consider it a top tier stainless ingot steel up there with 154cm..

 

[Alberta Ed]

Sandvik has been producing steel for a century or so, and I'd bet most manufacturers follow their guidelines on heat treat. I think Mora still uses 12C27 in its basic stainless knives.

 

[Blade Lab]

Looking at Pete’s tests I do not see a correlation with toughness. Edge geometry definitely, hardness probably, toughness no. That would be great if there was because I often promote the benefits of toughness over strictly wear resistance but I haven’t seen it with rope cutting tests. Usually when people point out an inconsistency between my data and his (LC200N cuts longer than S30V is a common one) it is an edge geometry or sharpening difference. He often tests factory edges, and when he sharpens them he has changed his procedure several times. I enjoy his tests but analyzing it can take some work and comparisons you want to make are often not possible if you restrict everything to the same edge geometry and sharpening procedure.

If I understand correctly (and I well may not!), one of the main benefits of toughness is that it allows you to go with a lower edge angle without chipping, which should give an improved cut test result, no? So a more appropriate test might be, e.g., testing a 14c28n blade at 12 dps versus an M390 blade at 15 dps? On the other hand, the tougher steel will generally be more prone to rolling, no? And doesn't that then negate the ability to lower one's edge angle?

 

[Larrin]

If I understand correctly (and I well may not!), one of the main benefits of toughness is that it allows you to go with a lower edge angle without chipping, which should give an improved cut test result, no?

Yes.

So a more appropriate test might be, e.g., testing a 14c28n blade at 12 dps versus an M390 blade at 15 dps?

Not necessarily, since trying to figure out the "optimal" angle for a given steel and heat treatment would be difficult, requiring a lot of trial and error, and ultimately would be use-specific and somewhat based on opinion. How much strength is enough? How much chipping resistance is enough? How do you test the edge for strength and chipping resistance? And notice that I also mentioned the heat treatment; at different hardness levels the optimal angle would also change.

On the other hand, the tougher steel will generally be more prone to rolling, no?

No, a softer steel is more prone to rolling.

And doesn't that then negate the ability to lower one's edge angle?

Only if the prior question was correct.

 

[Blade Lab]

No, a softer steel is more prone to rolling.

Okay, I thought it was also a function of plastic deformation versus fracturing. Are you saying that a tougher steel and a more wear-resistant steel are equally prone to rolling at the same hrc?

 

[kafolarbear]

Okay, I thought it was also a function of plastic deformation versus fracturing. Are you saying that a tougher steel and a more wear-resistant steel are equally prone to rolling at the same hrc?

Harder steel is more likely to chip whereas softer steel is more likely to roll as a general rule. However a harder steel might be able to take a harder impact without chipping that would cause a softer steel to roll.

 

[Larrin]

Okay, I thought it was also a function of plastic deformation versus fracturing. Are you saying that a tougher steel and a more wear-resistant steel are equally prone to rolling at the same hrc?

A brittle steel will fracture prior to rolling. However, if it is heat treated soft enough it will still deform. Even a "tough" steel can chip or fracture instead if hard enough and when used in the right (well, wrong) way. Also, if the edge is sufficiently thin even quite brittle steels will roll. It is relatively common for people to say, "It rolled so the steel was very tough," but really it just means the steel had insufficient strength/hardness for how it was used.

 

[Pomock]

The issue of proper heat treatment hits a lot of steels, and not just on the budget end. 14C28N is a great steel with a cool story, but lots of companies have run it softer over the years. While it still works at 55-58HRC and I suppose that optimizes toughness, it still has relatively excellent toughness at higher hardness. That's part of what makes it great as a stainless steel.

Thankfully, there are more companies running it in the 58-60HRC range these days. Forgive me not recalling where but I did recently see some listed in the 59-61HRC range.

As @LimpCroissant mentioned, WE seems to be doing a good job with this steel in their Civivi line.

Muela advertise 60 HRC on their 14C28N Cryo-t knives.

I have an older Rhino predating that quench that has been great.

Disclaimer: Whether I could actually tell the difference between 'soft' or 'hard' is highly debatable

 

[dirc]

just to add a few makers that I have used & have had good experience with (believing they have a good heat treat):

mora - top of the list since they are the long time sandvik steel knife company - 12c27 for decades and recently 14c28n on their garberg
kershaw - my leek in 14c28n is wonderful all around after long extended daily use & carry - and they are known for a pretty consistent quality control
ruike - adding this since I have a jager in 14c28n, excellent all around, but this is an Asian import... my example is good but I can't say that is true for them 'in general' since they are not really discussed much on these forums

as far as 'budget' stainless goes, 14c28n is the top of my list, I don't think there is a better ingot (non-pm) stainless option

 

[Chronovore]

ruike - adding this since I have a jager in 14c28n, excellent all around, but this is an Asian import... my example is good but I can't say that is true for them 'in general'

Ruike is the same company as Fenix Flashlights. Like Real Steel, their knives seem to be made by Sanrenmu. If you notice some similarity between the Boker Tech Tools and Ruike's multi-function knives, Sanrenmu makes those too.

The quality is decent relative to other Asian brands. They don't hit the quality level of Kizer or WE but that's more the top of the curve. A relevant difference here is the Civivi knives in 14C28N getting a better heat treatment. That's not to say the Ruike stuff is bad or anything. Just trying to give perspective.

The Ruike Jager in 14C28N continues to be an easy recommendation among sub-$100 fixed blades. The sheath isn't the best but it does use Sanrenmu's multi-position belt attachment. As my sheath has worn out, I'm going to get a replacement made to accommodate the same belt attachment.