8Cr13MoV

knarfeng

senex morosus moderator
Staff member
Super Mod
Moderator
Joined
Jul 30, 2006
Messages
37,526
is the generic 440 similar to the 8Cr13MoV? Your steel chart does show almost the same composition as AUS8, which I prefer to the too-high-imo chrome content of the 440 series.

and I'm ordering up an frn robin, my G10 Cara Cara was a very good work knife... until I took it apart and played with it on the drill press >_> <_<

______________440A________AUS-8
Carbon______0.65-0.75_____0.70-0.75
Mang________1_____________0.5
Chr_______16.00-18.00____13.00-14.50
Moly_________0.75_________0.10 - 0.30
Nickel______|__—___________0.49
Van___________—________0.10 - 0.26

There is some question in my mind as to the actual composition of alloys called "440A" that are found in Chinese knives. Case in point: I have a Chinese Buck that is supposed to be 440A, but the measured hardness of my blade is 58 HRC. 440A isn't supposed to get that hard.

I don't currently have a good sample of 440A to measure edge retention. There is so much 440A that is poorly heat treated. Planning on finding a suitable Kershaw. I trust them to heat treat that steel properly.

According to Carpenter Steel, a high end maker of steel alloys, 440A will only attain a tempered hardness of "56/57". I think the edge retention would be similar to that of some of the AUS8 that is only hardened to that same range. But I won't know until I do an actual side-by-side comparison.
 
Joined
Mar 16, 2005
Messages
3,652
I don't take spyderco's word on steels for four reasons.

Brownshoe,

Have you attempted to extort any knives from the company you say you don't trust lately?;)

However, as a good american, I can also be bribed to let by gones be by gones. I'll shut up if you give me a new Starmate when they come out. You do either and you have my word, I never will post about spydercos again.
Hey, I don't want to be an extorionist, and that is what it appears I am, since a gift not freely given is extorted. So forgedaboutit.


It's all right here for you newer people on the forums:http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4130532&postcount=54


Regards,
3G (The guy who'll always be here to remind people of your past)
 

HoB

Joined
May 12, 2004
Messages
2,611
My own response to BS's comments (funny how the handle shorthand works out, isn't it?) is usually:
:yawn::yawn::yawn:
You know what's coming the moment you read the handle.

I get the same response though when people claim that everything made in china must be some clone or copy of an american or japanese product. First of all: There is Europe as well and 8Cr13MoV is a European steel designation and secondly, how do you know :yawn:.

But those are just the comments from the cheap seats.
 
Joined
Nov 12, 2005
Messages
1,494
______________440A________AUS-8
Carbon______0.65-0.75_____0.70-0.75
Mang________1_____________0.5
Chr_______16.00-18.00____13.00-14.50
Moly_________0.75_________0.10 - 0.30
Nickel______|__—___________0.49
Van___________—________0.10 - 0.26

There is some question in my mind as to the actual composition of alloys called "440A" that are found in Chinese knives. Case in point: I have a Chinese Buck that is supposed to be 440A, but the measured hardness of my blade is 58 HRC. 440A isn't supposed to get that hard.

I don't currently have a good sample of 440A to measure edge retention. There is so much 440A that is poorly heat treated. Planning on finding a suitable Kershaw. I trust them to heat treat that steel properly.

According to Carpenter Steel, a high end maker of steel alloys, 440A will only attain a tempered hardness of "56/57". I think the edge retention would be similar to that of some of the AUS8 that is only hardened to that same range. But I won't know until I do an actual side-by-side comparison.

Everything that I have seen on the Chinese Bucks says 420HC which Buck seams to harden better than anyone else. The Chinese Bucks use to all be 440C when they first came out, maybe that is what hit 58 HRC.
 

knarfeng

senex morosus moderator
Staff member
Super Mod
Moderator
Joined
Jul 30, 2006
Messages
37,526
Most of even the Chinese Bucks list the steel as 420HC. However, several of them, such as my Buck Colleague, list the steel as 440A

From the Buck website:
http://www.buckknives.com/index.cfm?event=product.detail&ProductID=3122

0325SSS-B
Colleague™
Overview Tech Specs
Contemporary, slimline design, one-hand deployment. With a mirror polished blade and handle, this knife makes the perfect engravable gift for a person looking for a small pocket knife.


Blade Length: 1 7/8"(4.8 cm)

Blade Material: 440A Stainless Steel

Handle Material: Brushed stainless steel
Length Closed: 2 3/4" (7 cm)
Locking: Yes
One Hand: Yes
Weight: 1.3 oz. (37 g)
 

brownshoe

I support this site with my MIND
Joined
Sep 6, 2002
Messages
9,308
I don't libel and don't post lies. Sorry if my post was disturbing, but all I posted is fact except for the comment on ATS55. You note glesser did not dispute any of the facts, because he know's they are true, and he's not a liar either. Spyderco discusses many things on these forums and with journalists that some other firms do not. Some of the information given, such as 440 CPM V change in hardness, no corrosion testing of ZDP, mislabeling the steel in the early chinese run, all came from past spyderco posts.

The comment on ATS55 is not fact, but other's opinions from knife magazines and discussions on this forum. My personal opinion of ATS55 is that it's OK, but is no AST34 and is more like AUS8. I've seen dramatic differences in corrosion resistance in my ATS55 knives, but I don't know why. I own and use spydercos and give them as presents. I just choose model and individual piece carefully and never buy one in its first year of production.

When it comes to steel, spyderco's biggest achievement, IMHO, is bringing VG10 to the US market. A great contribution to knife technology, followed by Al Mar, SOG, Fallkniven...
 
Joined
Sep 27, 1999
Messages
3,164
I would disagree that ATS-55 is like AUS-8. I have had an ATS-55 Delica and an Endura for 9 years of EDC. The edge retention on ATS-55 is waaaay better than AUS-8.

I have many posts on the positive qualities of AUS-8, edge holding is not one of them.

One question I have is why would the Dayhiker series be so pricey with such a moderate steel? I would never pay $150-200 for 8cr13MoV.
 
Joined
Oct 16, 2006
Messages
1,324
One question I have is why would the Dayhiker series be so pricey with such a moderate steel? I would never pay $150-200 for 8cr13MoV.

Because it doesn't have 8Cr13MoV? If my memory (and the product webpage) serve me correctly, it's made of N690CO, which is a fairly good European steel. I think the Dayhiker &c are made in Italy (not too sure about that part though).
 
Joined
Sep 27, 1999
Messages
3,164
My mistake, The steel is N690CO and they are made in Italy.


Apologies to Spyderco.
 

Sal Glesser

Moderator
Joined
Dec 27, 1998
Messages
11,521
Dear Mr. Brownshoe,

Perhaps it is only my observation, but it seems that each comment you make with regards to Spyderco seems to have a negative spin on the information.

Then you take my lack of comment to support your spin. So I guess some additional explanation is called for.

I don't take spyderco's word on steels for four reasons. First, they released their original run of 440V with an ill-advised heat treatment. They were suprised with the chipping and changed the heat treat forumla.

While you do not take my word for anything on steels, it seems that much of the industry does give more credit than you do.

Spyderfco was the first company to use a powdered metal in a production kinife. We consulted with Crucible on their steels. I personally visited their plant and observed CPM steels actually being made. I think there are few in the industry that have seen this process. Since there was no history by any other company, we pioneered powdered metals.

Crucible advised us to use CPM-440V (now called CPM-S60V). They recommended that we harden to 59-60. Once we began production, we learned that 59-60 ws too hard for an edge. We again consulted with Crucible and they recommended that we drop the hardness, which we did, and had no further problems. Since there were no other companies attempting to use powdered metals, we were the only "experts".

Second, they released their first run of ZDP knives w/o testing the corrosion resistance. They were suprised with some of the unexpected corrosion.

That is true. We did not Q-fog ZDP, we followed Hitachi's recommendations. To my knowledge, no other company has done any testing on ZDP's corrosion resistance. Funny how we get called out for not doing something that no one else has done.

Third, ATS-55 a "special" steel that turned out to be a "bargain" steel that was dropped as soon as supplies ran out. It was neither as good as the ATS34 it was supposed to be equivalent to nor as good as the AUS-8 it replaced.

Hitachi developed ATS-55 and offered it to us on an exclusive basis. Their claim was that it was equal to their own ATS-34. We tested ATS-55 at the same time we tested VG-10.

The ATS-55 was introduced on the Goddard lite weight, the VG-10 was tested on the Moran. After several years of testing, we decided the VG-10 was closer to our requirements and we adopted the VG-10 and dropped the ATS-55. It was hardly a bargain steel and significantly outperformed AUS-8 in all but corrosion resistance. you don't know what you're talking about.

Fourth, as you state, they were selling a knife thinking it was 440C and didn't even know their supplier was actually giving them 8Cr13MoV. For their higher end line, Spyderco is a steel junky for anything stainless, but they are not steel experts. For their lower end line, it seemed they didn't even know what steel they were selling and didn't figure it out until the performance of production knives showed them what it was. By the way, 440C is a "better" steel than AUS-8.

We were told by our supplier it was 440C, as was all of the other companies making knives in Taiwan and China. We bothered to do analysis and found differences. We then decided to put the actual steel used on our knives.

Only after we did, did all of the other companies claiming to be using 440 suddenly change their marks on the blades.

Again, we were the first to make the discovery and the first to change it. We did what no other company did and you still find fault.

While you state that we are not "experts", I believe our expertise exceeds most of our competitors.

As far as carbon steels go, I forge carbon steels when I forge blades. How many other CEO's of knife companies forge blades?

While 440C is "better" than AUS-8 in corrosion resistance and edge retention, it will not get as sharp as the almost perfect homogenous grain structure of AUS-8.

Razor seems to know something about the steel, that's why I asked him how he knows it is a clone of AUS8 (i.e. a copy) and how he knows it is inferior to AUS8.

8Cr13MoV is not a "clone" of AUS-8. Anyone that thinks that is not correct. The chemistry's are quite different. They are similar in some of their characteristics. I guess Razor must be an steel expert. If so, then he knows that 8Cr13MoV is not an "inferior" steel.

best,

sal
 

brownshoe

I support this site with my MIND
Joined
Sep 6, 2002
Messages
9,308
Mr. Glesser, Thanks for your comments, as I said before, I don't libel and don't post lies and your comments indicate that is true. Per your comments:

For ATS55, you say "you don't know what you're talking about." I indicated that the information I gave was not fact, but what others have said, or printed about the steel. I've read that AST55 was a "bargain" compared to ATS34, because a key performance element was missing. Was ATS55 cheaper than ATS34? Per what others have reported, ATS55 was cheaper than ATS34, and a marketing ploy, since it was "exclusive".


Per CPM 440V, "Once we began production, we learned that 59-60 ws too hard for an edge." So this implies that spyderco's testing before production was insufficient. Makes you wonder how many knives spyderco made before production since they didn't catch something as simple as incorrect heat treat/hardness for intended use. Since you forge, you'll know that this is common for a backyard forger when trying out scrap steel, or even commercial steel. You forge a test knife, do some simple tests, if it works, you know your heat treat and steel combo is OK. Not testing before production, contradicts the Spyderco marketing claim of extensive testing of their products before they come to market.

Per ZDP, "We did not Q-fog ZDP, we followed Hitachi's recommendations. To my knowledge, no other company has done any testing on ZDP's corrosion resistance. Funny how we get called out for not doing something that no one else has done." I am pretty sure you don't know what goes on in your competitors R&D labs. It'd be pretty stupid of them to share this information, given the fact you are such a good competitor. They could have very well tested the material. However, what your competitors do is not relevant. The reason Spyderco should be called out for not testing the corrosion resistance of ZDP is because Spyderco's made its reputration on product testing and quality not on good looks. Just another case of where spyderco did not do basic testing on a new steel. There are many corrosion tests and its not expensive.

Per the Chinese mystery steel, what I said was "[Spyerco was] selling a knife thinking it was 440C and didn't even know their supplier was actually giving them 8Cr13MoV." You indicated this was true, but OK because other (unnamed) firms were doing the same. I am quite familiar with oversees production. Testing a knife to assure its blade is the correct steel and hardness is a basic test of a new low-bid supplier. Spydercos actions contradicts two marketing claims by Spyderco. First Spyderco does extensive testing of their products before they come to market and second Spydercos low end chinese knives are a cut above the others.

As I said before, I own and use spydercos and give them as presents. I just choose model and individual piece carefully and never buy one in its first year of production.
 

Brian Jones

Moderator
Joined
Jan 17, 1999
Messages
7,560
It must be a terrible thing to wake up every day with a personality disorder.
 

knarfeng

senex morosus moderator
Staff member
Super Mod
Moderator
Joined
Jul 30, 2006
Messages
37,526
Brownshoe, none of your arguments makes any sense. (why am I not surprised?)

From what source have you learned that ATS55 was a bargain? It was offered as an exclusive to Spyderco. That implies confidentiality. Name your sources. How would they know the terms offered to Spyderco?

Have you ever developed a heat treat for a blade steel? Have you ever developed any new technology? I have developed new materials. It is not easy and is far from "simple". It is easy to miss a minor detail that sinks the entire plan. It is apparently easy for you to be scornful about something you have not done. I've been there and your scorn amuses me.

Since you know so much, why don't you tell us which other companies run Q Fog testing instead saying, "well, I think they must because I think they should." If they did it, they would advertise it and just not reveal all the results. And by the way, corrosion testing is difficult, time consuming, and expensive. I have performed corrosion testing professionally. Have you?

So if testing prior to selling is so common, why was Spyderco the first company to doubt what they were told find the discrepancy in the steel? Since you know so much about dealing with Chinese suppliers, then you know that contractual agreements don't always work with them. It is relatively common for them to give you what they feel is an equivalence to what you ask for and think that they have satisfied the terms of the contract, rather than giving you exactly what is in the contract. Most American companies have to learn this the hard way as they enter the Chinese market just as Spyderco did. When Spyderco found a discrepancy in the info from their testing, they went back, found the difference, and published it. Where were your other precious companies then? Still believing in their contracts, no doubt.

Sir, I find you to be a PT cruiser deluxe. (beware of the pirates.)
 

Brian Jones

Moderator
Joined
Jan 17, 1999
Messages
7,560
Brownshoe, none of your arguments makes any sense. (why am I not surprised?)

Have you ever developed a heat treat for a blade steel? Have you ever developed any new technology? I have developed new materials. It is not easy and is far from "simple". It is easy to miss a minor detail that sinks the entire plan. It is apparently easy for you to be scornful about something you have not done. I've been there and your scorn amuses me.

"It is not the critic who counts: not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles or where the doer of deeds could have done better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs and comes up short again and again, because there is no effort without error or shortcoming, but who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, who spends himself for a worthy cause; who, at the best, knows, in the end, the triumph of high achievement, and who, at the worst, if he fails, at least he fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who knew neither victory nor defeat."

Teddy Roosevelt
"Citizenship in a Republic,"
Speech at the Sorbonne, Paris, April 23, 1910
 

HoB

Joined
May 12, 2004
Messages
2,611
I've read that AST55 was a "bargain" compared to ATS34, because a key performance element was missing.

Oh man.....:rolleyes:. That "key performance" element is there mainly to prevent drawing the temper in hot turbine engines...hardly anything you would miss in a knife steel application. Seems that Mr. Glesser had been right (why am I not surprised).
 
Joined
Nov 16, 2002
Messages
9,948
HoB,

If you don't cut as quickly as a turbine, you're the one missing out by choosing ATS-55 over ATS-34. I'm rather plodding, so ATS-55 is a-ok in my Merlin.
 

zenheretic

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2005
Messages
18,769
I don't libel and don't post lies. ..

A lie by omission of all facts to present a false reality is still a lie. So you post lies, extort, and maintain a vengenance to bad mouth Spyderco at any opportunity based on your ridiculous demands from a long ago warranty issue. That is pathetic.


You wuv Spyderco
 
Joined
Mar 7, 2001
Messages
4,608
Brian Jones,

I like your quote ;)

Sal,

From my very limited experience with sanrenmu knives (but I think it's 8Cr12MoV not 8Cr13MoV) which uses similar steel, it rust rather easily. In my tropical environment, leaving a folder closed on the table for several days resulting in the dust attracting humidity and rust spot grows. I thought it's stainless, but the resistance is so low, I had to wipe it off with oil. Since then, it's not happening anymore. Edge holding is ok, but I can't get it sharper than my Victorinox

Unfortunately Spyderco and other quality brand is a rare found here, due to high tax imposed by govt, resulting in 2-3 times price increase from what available online. The only time I saw a real Spyderco was Spyderfly, sold at about 250US$ :(
 

The Mastiff

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2006
Messages
5,481
I've often wondered if Brownshoe was turned down on a job application by Spyderco, or some other deep personal issue he can't let go of. Watching him over the last couple years I'd be surprised if it was merely an issue of having a knife he had trouble with.

Brownshoe, you come accross as some kind of disturbed cyber stalker at times when looking at past posts of yours. The key is that you aren't very good at it, any more than your attempt at extorting a knife was successfull. Joe
 
Joined
Mar 7, 2001
Messages
4,608
Further report. Comparing AUS6 (CRKT Point Guard, older version), Vic SAK and this China steel, the China steel can get sharp, but won't be as smooth as SAK or CRKT AUS6.

So, the statement about grain uniformity might be true. AUS is more homogenous ..

Let's go back on the steel itself and not discussing Spyderco .. ??
 
Top