3V vs S35VN characteristics?

Status
Not open for further replies.
michaelm466 said:
S7 is pretty low in the edge retention category, yet the highest of regularly used steels in toughness, take a step down in toughness to 3V, but a sizable step up in edge holding, and same thing for M4, take another step down in toughness and step up in edge retention, while still tougher than most premium stainless steels.
Fig3-WR.jpg
Click to expand...

The issue with charts like this one is that they can lead people to the mistaken conclusion that better edge retention requires higher wear resistance. The charts are useful, but cannot stand alone.
 
Ankerson said:
Basically they didn't add another good carbide former to the alloy to sub for the loss in vanadium and are trying to run it at the same hardness as S30V and say there is not any loss in edge retention.
Click to expand...

Huh? It seems like Crucible is saying that they may well have used 25% less vanadium, but the Niobium carbides more than make up for it? I really wish Thomas would chime in here on Kershaw's experience with this steel. I would be surprised if they didn't do some testing before they chose s35vn to replace the vanax which they were originally going to use on the 0550...
 
Last edited:
CrimsonTideShooter said:
Knifenut, you are throwing a lot of technical terms around, which I didn't do in my test.


I can tell you this, after testing I thoroughly looked the edge over with a loupe and microscope. In addition to the edge warping, it also blunted. I don't meant in a select few spots. Literally the whole part of the edge that was doing the cutting blunted. To the point that it was butter knife dull.


Now people can tell me that's my fault, but I have video proof that it's not. 420hc stayed sharp longer, 8cr stayed sharp longer, a LOT of budget steels out performed S35VN. And not ONE of them had edge damage even similar.


The steel (at its current state) is garbage.
Click to expand...
This to me is curious. To my knowledge, most budget steels are at Rc 58 and no higher. S35VN should be in the Rc 58-59 range IIRC from CRK. Assuming that both steels are the same hardness, it does seem curious that the harder one would roll while others would not. The only real exception to the soft/hard thing I've observed is when S90V(Rc60) chipped where M390(Rc62) would roll.
 
niobium is a very strong carbide former.

If the heat treat is off, then you can't yet call the steel 'garbage'. If the heat treat needs to be sorted, then blaming the alloy composition seems rather premature. Any steel is garbage at the wrong hardness. Spyderco seemed to do a good job on the Mules already, and they don't use it on anything else. Maybe wait until they or someone else decides to run it harder and plays with the heat treat protocol for several runs.
 
hardheart said:
niobium is a very strong carbide former.

If the heat treat is off, then you can't yet call the steel 'garbage'. If the heat treat needs to be sorted, then blaming the alloy composition seems rather premature. Any steel is garbage at the wrong hardness. Spyderco seemed to do a good job on the Mules already, and they don't use it on anything else. Maybe wait until they or someone else decides to run it harder and plays with the heat treat protocol for several runs.
Click to expand...

Spyderco's Native 5 came out recently with S35vn
 
hardheart said:
niobium is a very strong carbide former.

If the heat treat is off, then you can't yet call the steel 'garbage'. If the heat treat needs to be sorted, then blaming the alloy composition seems rather premature. Any steel is garbage at the wrong hardness. Spyderco seemed to do a good job on the Mules already, and they don't use it on anything else. Maybe wait until they or someone else decides to run it harder and plays with the heat treat protocol for several runs.
Click to expand...


What do you mean they don't use it in anything else? I tested that steel in the Native 5.

Also, I didn't make an absolute saying the steel is garbage. I said at it's current state.
 
Yeah, forgot about the N5. Still, that is a very new release. My point was they did a good job with their first retail product. If the N5 maintains that level of performance, then the steel isn't exactly garbage, and it isn't exactly garbage at it's current state, which includes the Mule and the N5. A single piece in a single test does not mean Spyderco doesn't know how to HT the steel.

S30V is really great now in this thread, but several years back? Same story, people had problems.
 
hardheart said:
Yeah, forgot about the N5. Still, that is a very new release. My point was they did a good job with their first retail product. If the N5 maintains that level of performance, then the steel isn't exactly garbage, and it isn't exactly garbage at it's current state, which includes the Mule and the N5. A single piece in a single test does not mean Spyderco doesn't know how to HT the steel.

S30V is really great now in this thread, but several years back? Same story, people had problems.
Click to expand...


Well, everyone is entitled to their opinion. In mine, S35VN is less desirable than just about any other knife steel. Like I've said many times, MANY other steels withstood that same exact test without being damaged (or flattened) at all, and they were also sharper at the end.

I tested the steel in two different knives, with two different edge angles, from two different manufacturers. Both knives reacted the exact same way. Maybe I shouldn't speculate as to what exactly is wrong, but I am quite sure that something is in fact wrong.

If nothing is wrong, then I am shocked that 8CR, VG10, 420HC, and many other steels out perform it in my test.
 
I don't doubt something was wrong. But is it the steel, or the heat treat? That's my question. I'm already of the opinion that a CRK in S30V at 58Rc or under isn't going to do it for me, and S35VN at the same hardness isn't going to make me feel any differently. If the N5 was the same hardness, then same feeling. The hardness tester and the cardboard and rope don't care who made the knife. If it needs an extra couple points of hardness, then it needs a couple extra points. I have had problems with M2, S110V, 154CM, and SGPS. Others have not. I don't think any of those steels are terrible, I think I got some lemons that were in a cool corner of the austenizing chamber, or some other issue outside of the basic composition.
 
hardheart said:
I don't doubt something was wrong. But is it the steel, or the heat treat? That's my question. I'm already of the opinion that a CRK in S30V at 58Rc or under isn't going to do it for me, and S35VN at the same hardness isn't going to make me feel any differently. If the N5 was the same hardness, then same feeling. The hardness tester and the cardboard and rope don't care who made the knife. If it needs an extra couple points of hardness, then it needs a couple extra points. I have had problems with M2, S110V, 154CM, and SGPS. Others have not. I don't think any of those steels are terrible, I think I got some lemons that were in a cool corner of the austenizing chamber, or some other issue outside of the basic composition.
Click to expand...


I would really like to believe that it's the HT, because I have a feeling this steel will be widely adopted since it's easier to machine.

Hopefully this is brought to the attention of the makers, and something is done about it. If the steel keeps being released in this state then a lot of people will end up being unhappy. Of course this is just conjecture, but you get what I'm saying.

Maybe it will be figured out like S30V was. On paper the new traits of S35 seemed like a welcomed change, so I'd still like to see it executed properly.
 
John your test results are killing me man. There's no arguing with seeing it for yourself though and I just purchased a very very expensive knife in that steel! :( (a lot more than a Sebenza)

I've come to believe that everytime I read that it's easier for the maker to work with, easier on their equipment, easier to sharpen to a nice edge. What they're really saying is this steel is good for the manufacturer but not for the customer.
 
cziv said:
John your test results are killing me man. There's no arguing with seeing it for yourself though and I just purchased a very very expensive knife in that steel! :( (a lot more than a Sebenza)

I've come to believe that everytime I read that it's easier for the maker to work with, easier on their equipment, easier to sharpen to a nice edge. What they're really saying is this steel is good for the manufacturer but not for the customer.
Click to expand...

I'm assuming it's a custom? It is probably heat treated harder than these production knives. I wouldn't get too freaked out until you use it. Blade thickness has a lot to do with it also. Mind telling me what it is?
 
Ankerson said:
I still believe S35VN is a mistake.

If they wanted a steel with 3% Vanadium they should have just used ELMAX as it is very stable and proven instead of gutting S30V.

Like I always say there are no free lunches with steels and with S35VN they took too much away from S30V without adding enough other alloys and they will figure that out hopefully before too long.
Click to expand...

i don't understand why manufactures aren't using elmax instead of S35VN. the steels are basically the same price and require a similar heat treat procedure :confused:

p.s. i personally like carpenters BD30P better than S30V and from the way it sounds here, better than S35VN.
 
Last edited:
jimnolimit said:
i don't understand why manufactures aren't using elmax instead of S35VN. the steels are basically the same price and require a similar heat treat procedure :confused:

p.s. i personally like carpenters BD30P better than S30V and from the way it sounds here, over S35VN also.
Click to expand...

The infamous Cliff Stamp has a post on the front page of Spyderco's forum (thread "The future of S30V?") on this topic that raises some good possibilities for why they aren't
 
kreole said:
The infamous Cliff Stamp has a post on the front page of Spyderco's forum (thread "The future of S30V?") on this topic that raises some good possibilities for why they aren't
Click to expand...

Page 4 of the discussion btw. ;)
 
I'm wondering if it's a heat treat issue as well. Looking at the steel's alloy composition you'd think it would still perform as well or better than higher-end ingot steels like 154CM or VG-10. It shouldn't be getting blown away that badly by S30V from a 1% loss in Vanadium, even if the niobium doesn't pull it's weight.
 
Here's something to consider:

Jon Walker said:
Catra testing of the steel have shown it to not perform as well as S30v in edge retention with both at the same rockwell.

The added Niobium makes it easier to finish and easier to sharpen but it will not hold the edge as long.

Link for the skeptics... http://www.bucorp.com/files/CATRA_Test_Results.pdf

PM 14-2-4 CrMoV is S30v and PM 14-2-3 CrMoVN is CPM S35VN.

If you aren't super anal retentive the steel still has good performance. I just want my knives to be extraordinary.
Click to expand...

CTS, sending that "thing" out tomorrow.
 
This must be the heat treat causing these results as others have said.
I dont see how s35vn with its alloy contents can be a worse edge holder than 420 and 8cr and the like.
I am pleased someone has pointed the problems out so hopefully this will get sorted.
Thanks for your tests CTS.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top