Amazing steel vs Amazing heat treat?

[Balls Deep]

Most factory knives by far are simply stamped out and thrown onto a conveyor belt, run through a furnace, dumped into a vat of quenchant or allowed to air cool, and straight into a tempering oven. You can find videos of it on youtube... It's basically like watching a batch of cheap hamburger patties roll through the flamebroiler at your local burger joint... with similar results in quality and consistency. :barf:

The biggest problem with this is that it can be difficult to get entire sections of blades up to the proper hardening temperature, and they are almost certainly not staying at temp long enough to get all the elements into solution (mixed together properly). There are also issues with oxidation, uneven heating if blades are touching or piled on top of each other, not quenching fast enough and tempering properly in that manner... but you get the idea.

It's cheap though, and it (usually) gets a whole bunch of blanks somewhere in an acceptable range of hardness in a very short time.



That's also true. Not only can over-heating from aggressive (very often robotic) grinding cause issues, there's also the simple fact that most production knives are tempered much softer than they really should be, simply to save wear-and-tear on the machinery.

Higher-quality manufacturers, especially those using more expensive steels, take much greater care in every step of the process to eliminate variables and maintain consistency while maximizing the steel's potential.

This why I love the forums, totally answers my question. Thanks James!

 

[Noctis3880]

I'd prefer both, but if anything I'd be okay with a "super" steel so long as it's from the big 3(BM, Spydie, Kershaw).

Think of the steel as the base potential, and the HT determines how much of that potential can be brought out.

In the case of production knives, the HT will almost never push the limits of the steel(typically pertaining to high hardness), so I find that better quality steel helps a lot to improve performance.

In the case of customs, a well HT somewhat "old" steel like CPM154 can keep up with the hottest steels of today. But one issue is that those customs may not have the form factor you want(say if I wanted a BM 940), at the price you're willing to pay(probably can't go below $400 for a true custom folder), and at the time you demand it(typically 6 months for a turnaround, maybe longer).

So in my eyes, amazing steel wins out overall:thumbup:.

 

[Noctis3880]

I think about this every time I use a Buck 420HC blade. Good Heat treats makes me happy.

While I think Buck's 420HC is good considering it's 420HC, the downside is that it's somewhere between Chinese alphabet steel and just about everything else available on the market.

Great for most non-knife people, but I think steel snobs will be left wanting. Though given the price range, it's clear who the target audience is.

Hard to argue with a Made in the US knife at that price on the other hand.

 

[FortyTwoBlades]

While I think Buck's 420HC is good considering it's 420HC, the downside is that it's somewhere between Chinese alphabet steel and just about everything else available on the market.

Great for most non-knife people, but I think steel snobs will be left wanting. Though given the price range, it's clear who the target audience is.

Hard to argue with a Made in the US knife at that price on the other hand.

For true hard use many of the more common steels provide performance that's more than suitable. Many times hard use tasks include the possibility of striking things that that will dull any knife, like dirt, concrete, steel staples, etc. and ease of resharpening is a higher priority than the increased edge retention of super steels. If you allow super steels to include things like S7 or L6 then that's another story. I like to have a geometry that cuts well, but a steel/heat treatment that will hold an edge reasonably well (as opposed to extremely) but is easy to quickly restore an edge to. Hit a rock with S30V and it's still going to dull. Now if it was just as rapid to restore an edge to the knife and it had increased edge retention without costing an arm and a leg more then sure I'd opt for that. My purchases are usually made at a balance between price and performance--I like to stretch what I get for my dollar because there are other things in life I have to spend money on, too.

 

[james terrio]

I respectfully disagree with 42... Ease of sharpening is vastly over-rated, especially in survival situations. (disclaimer/disclosure... he sells a lot of low-alloy blades, and I sell mostly high-alloy blades for a living... so there's that.)

I meant without any real equipment, like on a cement block :barf: .

Let's face it, if you're down to sharpening your knife on a broken rock or chunk of concrete it's not really gonna matter what steel your knife is made of, and you're not going to get a perfect shaving edge anyway.

You should carry a means to sharpen anyhow though.

Indeed. Small diamond pocket "stones" are affordable, easy to use, work on any steel at any hardness, and don't require any special oil. :thumbup:

I prefer blades that keep an edge longer, as long as they're not so crazy hard (64Rc+) that they become chippy and genuinely a pain to sharpen. If you have a good tough steel at 58Rc or 60Rc with some decent wear-resistance, you can grind the edge thinner without fear of chipping. That not only makes it cut better while staying useful longer, it also makes it easier/faster to sharpen than a much softer blade with a very thick edge.

In the case of customs, a well HT somewhat "old" steel like CPM154 can keep up with the hottest steels of today.

You're right that CPM-154 isn't new and exciting anymore, but I still consider it to be in the upper tier of stainless steels. It has slipped from number two or three to maybe number 6 or 7... but that's only because the top five slots have been taken over by even better alloys.

 

[Ankerson]

I respectfully disagree with 42... Ease of sharpening is vastly over-rated, especially in survival situations. (disclaimer/disclosure... he sells a lot of low-alloy blades, and I sell mostly high-alloy blades for a living... so there's that.)

Very over-rated indeed IMO.

 

[Wanimator]

I'd prefer both, but if anything I'd be okay with a "super" steel so long as it's from the big 3(BM, Spydie, Kershaw).

Think of the steel as the base potential, and the HT determines how much of that potential can be brought out.

In the case of production knives, the HT will almost never push the limits of the steel(typically pertaining to high hardness), so I find that better quality steel helps a lot to improve performance.

In the case of customs, a well HT somewhat "old" steel like CPM154 can keep up with the hottest steels of today. But one issue is that those customs may not have the form factor you want(say if I wanted a BM 940), at the price you're willing to pay(probably can't go below $400 for a true custom folder), and at the time you demand it(typically 6 months for a turnaround, maybe longer).

So in my eyes, amazing steel wins out overall:thumbup:.

Cold Steel's martemper pushes the limits.

 

[jdk1]

I tend to think of a survival situation being relatively short-term, so imagine ease of sharpening isn't that big of an issue. For that situation, I think the fact that simple carbon steels seem to be tougher and softer (which would also make them easier to sharpen) is more important. For "regular" non-survival use, I like the ease of maintaining simple carbon steels. The original DPX made by Lionsteel (not the ESEE version) was in Sleipner hardened to about 61 IIRC. This blade/steel combo was designed for "expedition" use, where it would see long-term use and maintaining a good working edge without stopping to sharpen it could be important. I'll add though, that even I can sharpen that blade, so it's not work intensive like D2 is said to be. Sleipner is the only "exotic" steel I have, so I'm going by what I've read and heard about D2.

When using my traditional khukuri in what's probably 5160 and my CS Gurkha in SK-5, I just steel the blade with the shaft of a screwdriver from my work bench after use. This seems to take the edge right back to what it was before I used it. That's pretty handy IMHO. Most people, even here, probably aren't as skilled in or equipped for sharpening as others. But, even a friend of mine who is skilled at about every form of sharpening there is prefers the simple, easy to sharpen steels over say D2.

One interesting story along these lines, but a little different, is about a khukuri the Brits made at the end of WWII. It was a GI Mk. III made by, I believe, Wilkinson Sword. It was carefully designed, produced, and hardened to Western standards. The Gurkhas hated it. One reason being they could not easily sharpen the blade in the field. Granted, that was war and Gurkhas, not the rest of us here who would honestly do fine with a cheap pocket knife for our entire lives. Also, in the book SPEARHEAD, about Merrill's Marauders, this issue was addressed. The a section called "Jungle Notes", the author, who was a member, states that a sharpening stone is a must in combat and that they are worth their weight in gold. Now, reading on here it seems soldiers use mainly multi-tools now, but at least in WWII jungle combat, the ability to sharpen a knife easily was considered very important by the men in combat. Take care.

 

[FortyTwoBlades]

I respectfully disagree with 42... Ease of sharpening is vastly over-rated, especially in survival situations. (disclaimer/disclosure... he sells a lot of low-alloy blades, and I sell mostly high-alloy blades for a living... so there's that.)

Yup--I do sell 'em. But I sell 'em 'cause I like 'em. Note that I said nothing about survival situations. I was actually referring more to utility use--around the homestead I do a lot of cutting chores, many of them being ones where edge damage is something one has to be constantly mindful of. There are only so many hours in the day, and I don't like having to trek all the way back to the workshop to grind deep ding, roll, or badly blunted zone out of an edge. I want to be able to give the tool a few restorative licks with a field hone and get back to the job.

I find that I have rarely needed to merely touch up an edge in the field--the edge usually holds up just fine for extended periods as long as I don't hit dirt, stone, or metal-- but have had occasions where I have needed to repair an edge in the field. I find that even on simple low-alloy steels that I tend to have negligible edge wear when performing common hard-use utility tasks where full-blown damage is absent.

Indeed, a thin geometry will allow one to sharpen faster and easier. That being said, I commonly sharpen machetes that are 1075 steel at 52-54 RC to about 12°-15° per side and don't run into any issues with rolling or chipping in spite of them being used for impact on woody targets. Tools like my rabbit processing knife (made from the same steel that Victorinox uses, though heat treated just a tad harder) is able to process many many rabbits without needing any touchup whatsoever, and I use it for all stages of the operation, including breaking work like removal of the head, paws, and splitting the rib cage, all of which see extensive direct edge contact with bone. When removing the head the edge is even laid on the vertebrae and rocked back and forth until the edge finds the gap between and the cut is then made. In spite of this, I've done easily a dozen rabbits without the blade seeing so much as the slightest touchup and it'll still cleanly slice paper.

I'm not saying that higher end steels are without benefit, but rather that I tend to balance performance against price. One does reach a point of diminishing returns with this stuff and it's up to each individual user to determine where their cap is. My point is that very basic steels can actually perform very well, and that in my field experience I would rather be able to iron out damage to a blade easily so long as edge retention is still reasonable. If I hit a rock with a thin high alloy edge above 60RC then I'm probably in trouble, even with a coarse diamond field stone. It means I'm going to have to stop what I'm doing and take a lot of time to get the edge back up to where it's properly performing its task. Then after the job is done I can work it back up from a "suitable" to an "optimally desired" condition.

The benefits of premium steels is worth it to many people, and for good reasons. That being said, often production knives don't take the steel choice as strongly into account in their designs as they could and so many of the benefits of the steel are squandered on an unoptimized geometry. Just because a higher end steel can be used in a knife with thinner geometry doesn't mean much if it's used in a thick blade. A strong example of this is when companies offer multiple versions of a given knife in different steels with the exact same geometry, and well thicker than necessary at that. Performance specifications are determined by the relevant range of use for the tool. This is why geometry is most important to me first and foremost, and sharpening is one aspect of maintaining geometry. If geometry is compromised, the tool will not cut as intended. Restoring that geometry to a functional level is sometimes time-sensitive. Geometry is limited by material, but also by what the manufacturer decides to do with that material. I would rather have an Opinel or Douk-Douk in my pocket than a Medford, for instance. Yes, I'll have to touch up the knife more, but it's going to cut better in spite of that due to better geometry, and if I have an "oh crap" moment it interrupts my work less. Should the edge dull on the softer knife it still only takes me a few seconds to bring it back up to par.

I'm not saying "go soft" or "go hard" -- I'm saying "go just right for what you need overall." All aspects of performance, including how it fits into your existing system of needs and resources (like how you want to spend your money) play into the decision. I'm just comfortable and fast enough with sharpening that I'm not put out by having to give the blade the occasional extra swipe in order to save myself time when I'm performing a task and things "go all sideways" and the edge needs to be repaired before work can continue.

 

[sodak]

This is a philosophy and preference question, do you prefer a more simple less "preferable" steel with an absolutely amazing heat treat (Like what Ka-bar and Cold Steel's known for with 1095, SK5, Carbon V, O-1) Or do you prefer a complicated awesome steel that relies less on a heat treat which I really don't like writing a list for.

And you thought you'd get a simple answer! We love to "discuss"...

 

[Gator97]

Very over-rated indeed IMO.

Even worse than you think
I do recall having few pages long argument on BF about field sharpening on flat rocks and problems associated with that.
Having compact diamond sharpeners (let alone all other types of sharpeners) makes this whole flat rock field sharpening very moot point.
And majority still ignore the simple fact that hard, high wear resistance alloys need A LOT LESS sharpening to begin with, and are easier to touch up than old stuff that is so easy to sharpen on rocks(which is rather untrue unless you are very efficient at freehand sharpening and found a suitable rock)...

P.S. @42Blades, I do agree, chipping repair is easier on softer alloys, but having folding diamond sharpener I could do quite good repair in a short time, also chips, or several chips won't render the edge unusable, at least for the field use.
And from personal experience, I've seen a lot more soft knives loosing sections of the edge due to soft metal and associated metal fatigue, than hard steel knives chipping to anything comparable.

 

[Wanimator]

And you thought you'd get a simple answer! We love to "discuss"...

It wasn't a sad surprise. It was more like asking for a Wal-mart Gerber parang and getting a high quality hand forged one.

 

[FortyTwoBlades]

Even worse than you think
I do recall having few pages long argument on BF about field sharpening on flat rocks and problems associated with that.
Having compact diamond sharpeners (let alone all other types of sharpeners) makes this whole flat rock field sharpening very moot point.
And majority still ignore the simple fact that hard, high wear resistance alloys need A LOT LESS sharpening to begin with, and are easier to touch up than old stuff that is so easy to sharpen on rocks(which is rather untrue unless you are very efficient at freehand sharpening and found a suitable rock)...

P.S. @42Blades, I do agree, chipping repair is easier on softer alloys, but having folding diamond sharpener I could do quite good repair in a short time, also chips, or several chips won't render the edge unusable, at least for the field use.
And from personal experience, I've seen a lot more soft knives loosing sections of the edge due to soft metal and associated metal fatigue, than hard steel knives chipping to anything comparable.

I actually didn't say softer specifically. Just more humble "basic" and low alloy steels, many of which can still be run at higher hardnesses--the low presence or total absence of carbides usually just means they aren't as wear resistant at a given hardness compared to high-alloy steels.

I have and use diamond sharpeners myself, so take that into consideration with the opinions I voice. If anything, I find it makes those minor touchups to less wear-resistant steels even faster and easier. I'm not advocating for stuff that's shovel-soft with consequently unstable edges or anything like that. While the ideal is for a steel to be a top performer in all characteristics, the reality is that there tend to be tradeoffs, almost as if you're given a certain number of "points" to assign to those attributes. Max out one and there aren't as many points to go around for the others. While the march of progress has increased the number of those points we have in total to distribute, we still can't have it all. Like with computers, I'm content to play with "last year's model" at a much lower price, with performance that's still very high and will serve me well for years to come in spite of not being the hottest thing out of the steel mill. I find that out of those points I have to assign when determining the steels I like, I tend to opt for high toughness, edge stability, and ease of edge maintenance, with less emphasis on aspects like edge retention and corrosion resistance (although they're far from ignored.) Other people's preference profiles will be different, though, and that's just fine and dandy on account of us all living different lives and having different needs.

 

[BluntCut MetalWorks]

I am bias toward amazing heat treat ever since I began tinkered with ht. I can get decent grain & carbide refinement with high alloy steels. For low chromium steels, I can get quite far. Here is my newly created thread - show off what supposed to be not possible in ht - super quench mid to high carbon steels.
http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showthread.php/1177712-Super-quenched-52100-knife

 

[Gator97]

Blah, I think the thread deviated from OP.
Frankly, I can not imagine a a situation where I'd want less than amazing/perfect HT regardless of the alloy. Yeah, the reality is we do not get the best HT in production knives, due to various reasons, but some are very good.

 

[Wanimator]

I myself like a more simple high carbon steel. Such as 1095 or SK5. Though you could call me a liar since I'm making a couple things out of DC-53.

 

[Noctis3880]

Blah, I think the thread deviated from OP.
Frankly, I can not imagine a a situation where I'd want less than amazing/perfect HT regardless of the alloy. Yeah, the reality is we do not get the best HT in production knives, due to various reasons, but some are very good.

By what measure do we use to say it's the "best"?
Don't a lot of custom makers send their blades out to Peter's? Not criticizing them or anything, but I don't believe they do anything that really pushes the envelope to the extremes.

I'm talking about proprietary HT like Howard Clark's L6 Bainite, where a relatively ordinary, cheap, and common steel is made extraordinary. Certainly cost prohibitive, but there's no question it's the "best".

Speaking of which, I do hear things about HT procedures that make 154CM, a non-powdered stainless steel into something suitable to be used as jet turbine blades. I also believe one member touches on HT of titanium alloys that last for days.

Might be demanding a bit much, as custom knife makers are not necessarily metallurgists too, but I have impossibly high standards about "best". Just a hair under lightsaber to be precise:thumbup:.

 

[Gator97]

By what measure do we use to say it's the "best"?

With defined HT protocol, best simply is how closely it was followed during the process. Defined HT meaning, optimized for particular type of knife/use.

Speaking of which, I do hear things about HT procedures that make 154CM, a non-powdered stainless steel into something suitable to be used as jet turbine blades.

That is what it(154cm) was designed for Most of the steels were designed for something else, and need some tinkering to optimize HT for knives.

Might be demanding a bit much, as custom knife makers are not necessarily metallurgists too, but I have impossibly high standards about "best". Just a hair under lightsaber to be precise:thumbup:.

Well, I suppose that goes both ways. Metallurgists are not knife makers either. Getting best HT for a tool steel used in a die press might not do so well in any type of knife. Ideally you'd have knife maker like Phil Wilson willing to experiment with HT and various alloys in search of the best.

 

[james terrio]

Yup--I do sell 'em. But I sell 'em 'cause I like 'em.

Right on, same here. :thumbup: I used to be a hardcore fanatic about simple carbon steels, for all the usual reasons. Then I opened my mind, tried other alloys, and made up my mind based on performance.

I'm not saying "go soft" or "go hard" -- I'm saying "go just right for what you need overall."

Also true, especially regarding your comments on price. There's no way on Earth I could make a $20 machete out of Elmax or CPM-3V... the barstock alone costs more than that, before I even get to work. But if someone's interested in serious performance and willing to cover the costs, I'll put an Elmax or 3V machete at 58 or 60Rc against one made of 1075 at 54Rc all day, every day...

Blah, I think the thread deviated from OP.
Frankly, I can not imagine a a situation where I'd want less than amazing/perfect HT regardless of the alloy. Yeah, the reality is we do not get the best HT in production knives, due to various reasons, but some are very good.

True. Sometimes thread-drift is OK, though. I say again, this has turned out to be a pretty interesting thread. :thumbup:

Don't a lot of custom makers send their blades out to Peter's? Not criticizing them or anything, but I don't believe they do anything that really pushes the envelope to the extremes.

I do indeed send my blades to Peters for HT, as do many other custom makers and manufacturers. It's costly and it takes extra time. I assure you, I would do it myself if I thought I could get anywhere near their results on a consistent basis without a huge investment in time and money. You are flat wrong that they aren't pushing the envelope of truly excellent HT. Along with the Bos shop, these are the cats who set the bar so very high for knife-specific HT. Give Brad Stallsmith (the guy in charge of Peters' dedicated cutlery division) a call... tell him I sent ya... ask him about it.

 

[idaho]

By what measure do we use to say it's the "best"?
Don't a lot of custom makers send their blades out to Peter's? Not criticizing them or anything, but I don't believe they do anything that really pushes the envelope to the extremes.

The key to extreme HT is extreme control. If you are able to control steel temperature in every inch and every minute of heating, you can get to the extreme.

I'm talking about proprietary HT like Howard Clark's L6 Bainite, where a relatively ordinary, cheap, and common steel is made extraordinary. Certainly cost prohibitive, but there's no question it's the "best".

Really? What is cost prohibitive? Bainite HT? L6 steel? Or finished sword?
And about l6 bainite. Why do you believe that it is the best? What is so good about it? it will be quite soft, not really good for a knife.

Speaking of which, I do hear things about HT procedures that make 154CM, a non-powdered stainless steel into something suitable to be used as jet turbine blades. I also believe one member touches on HT of titanium alloys that last for days.

Might be demanding a bit much, as custom knife makers are not necessarily metallurgists too, but I have impossibly high standards about "best". Just a hair under lightsaber to be precise:thumbup:.