5160v?

[crimsonfalcon07]

My challenge has always been, my design and geometry (ground by me) in both 3V and 5160, both HT'ed and tempered to the same hardness. I would pick 58-59Rc as a reasonable range for both alloys, for a large knife. And I'll bet my dinner on 3V.

If you don't mind me asking, why the same hardness? It seems to me that sometimes what makes one steel better than another is that it can take a higher hardness without loss of function. I was sort of under the impression (and please correct my utterly novice impression if it's wrong) that there are optimal ranges of hardness for each steel. If that's so, each steel should receive the optimum heat treat to provide a really good test of its abilities, all other things being equal.

More on the same vein, does it matter how good the design is, etc, if the design is the same (and functional)? Maybe for the overall performance of the knife, but for a quantitative scientific analysis, it seems that as long as neither has a blown heat treat, and they have the same design and edge geometry, the test still ought to be good, right?

As for there being no reason to do it, what about doing it for the sheer, unadulterated heck of it? I mean, I was under the impression this would be a test done mainly for fun, right? And, side bonus, you get some actual quantifiable information about the overall quality of the steel.

I wouldn't be surprised to find out that 3V is better. I'm just wanting to know how MUCH better it can be, given the fact that it is a good bit more expensive than 5160.

 

[james terrio]

You're right about hardnesses; to really test both (like the mills and engineers do) we'd have to take several samples of each at difference hardness and determine how much force it takes to break or chip them. I selected 58-59 Rc because it's well within the range of good-to-great performance for both steels - in fact for most steels we typically use for knives. For a test like this we'd have to keep as many factors as possible the same, otherwise we're comparing apples to oranges.

As for why not to do it, A) it's expensive and time-consuming, and B) it's already been done. I don't have the numbers in front of me but I'm sure some mill or manufacturer has the Charpy numbers for 5160. And they definitely exist for CPM-3V.

Steel mills don't spend millions coming up with different alloys for the heck of it - they need to justify that cost by producing a product that will perform as well we possible within certain parameters. I try to take the same approach. I'm not saying simple alloys like 5160, 1084, 1095 don't make good knives - just that particle-metallurgy grades with higher alloy content can make better ones.

Note, in case it came up and I missed it, I really don't include ease-of-sharpening in this, because sharpening is just not my favorite thing to do and I'd rather do it as seldom as possible. Many people feel differently and specifically choose alloys that are easy to get an edge on. Nor do I include ease of machining or forgeability as a factor, because I'm a stock-removal guy and it's just not that big a deal on a small scale.

 

[james terrio]

Do you believe the 3V will be tougher than the 5160 at 58-59RC? I have no doubt that 3V will have better edge retention, but toughness?

Yes, I do. I think it would be smart to build such a knife based on the BladeSports guidelines. Those knives are specifically meant to be able to make both very powerful, and very delicate cuts. I'm not particularly interested in destroying knives by chopping cinder blocks or whatever.

 

[gga357]

I hope more experienced people chime in on this, but my thoughts are...
My understanding is that 3V requires cryo to get over 60RC and even with that most maker and HT’ers seem to run it right around 60RC.

5160 not sure you can get it high enough to temper down to 60RC.

So 58-59 will probably be the high end for 5160 and about 1-2 points lower than optimum edge retention for 3V. Since I think we all agree 3V will outperform 5160 for edge retention then at 58-59 we are getting what is the relative edge retention (know 3V is capable of more) but also relative toughness. Will the respective edges chip out, roll or will one survive an antler or hardwood test much better than the other? I would love to know how the edges survive some ambitious hard work. I personally prefer slight rolling to chipping.

Of course if all else is equal and edge retention is the only difference then it all comes down to price of 3V versus edge retention.

These thoughts are my though based on what knowledge I have as a user. I welcome any corrections or additions by any of the more knowledgeable people on this site.

 

[Darrin Sanders]

When properly done the as quenched hardness of 5160 can easily reach HRC 62-63. So drawing it back to HRC 60 would be no problem. With the proper geometry 5160 might handle HRC 60 but 3V should be able to handle a much finer/thinner geometry at the same hardness. Thats just my opinion though. If I ever get one of them round toits I'm gonna find out.

 

[gga357]

When properly done the as quenched hardness of 5160 can easily reach HRC 62-63. So drawing it back to HRC 60 would be no problem. With the proper geometry 5160 might handle HRC 60 but 3V should be able to handle a much finer/thinner geometry at the same hardness. Thats just my opinion though. If I ever get one of them round toits I'm gonna find out.

Thanks for the input Darrin. That means a test that shoots for a HRC 60 might be a better test in terms of getting the most out of both 5160 and 3V as a cutter and a test at 58 may be good for a chopper. Or is 58 too hard for a big chopper type knife?

 

[crimsonfalcon07]

If 3V can handle the hardness better, I'd be inclined to have it tempered a point or so above where 5160 is normally tempered to for a chopper. I'm certainly interested in numbers from people who do a lot of 3V. Looks like Fehrman tempers their choppers to 57-59 though, and they're supposed to have some of the best 3V in the business.

 

[Darrin Sanders]

I agree with James, it would take several blades at different hardnesses and edge geometries to really find out the optimal hardness and edge geometry for each steel. And yes it would take lots of time and expensive material to do so. I think edge retention and ease of sharpening would be the main deciding factor between the two. If you don't like to sharpen go with 3V and if you prefer ease of sharpening and want to be able to sharpen using primitive methods go with 5160. But if I wanted a super tough chopper that was easy to sharpen I would choose L6. But any of these steels with the proper hardness and edge geometry will make excellent choppers. I have 5160 blades with geometry fine enough to cut several water bottles in half and still chop 2x4's with no chipping or rolling. Performance like that is good enough for me.

 

[james terrio]

But any of these steels with the proper hardness and edge geometry will make excellent choppers.

That's also true. To an extent I enjoy splitting hairs and pushing envelopes, but honestly even the "lowly" 1084 makes a perfectly serviceable, tough sharp chopper.

 

[gga357]

I agree with James, it would take several blades at different hardnesses and edge geometries to really find out the optimal hardness and edge geometry for each steel. And yes it would take lots of time and expensive material to do so. I think edge retention and ease of sharpening would be the main deciding factor between the two. If you don't like to sharpen go with 3V and if you prefer ease of sharpening and want to be able to sharpen using primitive methods go with 5160. But if I wanted a super tough chopper that was easy to sharpen I would choose L6. But any of these steels with the proper hardness and edge geometry will make excellent choppers. I have 5160 blades with geometry fine enough to cut several water bottles in half and still chop 2x4's with no chipping or rolling. Performance like that is good enough for me.

Darrin, yes that kind of performance is really good and takes it back to the basic premise is the relatively small increase in performance of the new steels worth the price? I am sure each person see the difference in performance in their own way. To some the difference is worth the price. I guess I will just have to have one design made in several steels and use then till I find a favorite.