A'nuther S30V Question (or Two)

Carbide structure doesn't matter?

How about some data?

CPM-3V has a higher carbide volume than AUS-8. Is AUS-8 tougher than 3V?
 
Jerry Hossom said:
Carbide structure doesn't matter?

How about some data?

CPM-3V has a higher carbide volume than AUS-8. Is AUS-8 tougher than 3V?
Click to expand...
Structure does matter, you'd find that if you looked at AUS-8 its structure would be pretty dang good, likely better looking than S30V. There are micrographs of 13C26, AEB-L, and X65Cr13 available on the internet to look at, they have prettier structures than S30V and are not PM. AUS-8 has a little greater carbide volume and likely does not have the same quality of forging as done by Uddeholm and Sandvik but I would guess it looks pretty good. The bad rap for AUS-8, IMO, is due to poor heat treatment.

For data, there is a Blade magazine from a couple years ago where Crucible had a chart on comparisons of steels, it listed AUS-8 as tougher than S30V.

You don't have any information showing 3V as having greater carbide volume than 3V. If it does have greater carbide volume, the greater toughness is in part because of the better structure but with similar carbide volume, it also does not have the high chromium which weakens grain boundaries; however, even with high chromium there are stainless steels with very great toughness, the large carbide volume and/or carbide size is typically the limiting factor.

Edit: The sentence saying "3V as having greater carbide volume than 3V" is supposed to be "greater carbide volume than AUS-8".
 
The real point I was making is that numbers and photos mean less than what happens when you make a knife of the steel and use it as it is intended. Most who have used S30V when it has been heat treated properly have been impressed with both its edge retention and its toughness.

I've used it in many large knives (7-12"), including many that have seen serious use in real life conditions and it has never failed to perform. It's by no means a super steel but it is a very good knife steel, and most of its detractors have little experience to justify their claims to the contrary. Larrin, have you actually had bad experience with S30V?

As for low carbide stainless steels, such as those used in kitchen cutlery, if they were great steels most knifemakers would be using them. They're cheaper than S30V and we'd have you and Cliff to sell them for us. :D

Carbide volume of 3V is about 8.5%
 
I haven't said anything bad about S30V.

3V carbide volume after heat treatment is about 5% as stated in the patent.

99% of forgers are using low carbide steels, are they all wrong? I've never said low carbide is the only steel to use, I've always said there are different steels for different applications.
 
We're inclined to call it a "super" steel because of the cost. Then we hear the stories of broken tips and microchipping on the edges. Improper heat treat is fairly common in poor quality no-name knives, but because of the cost, most S30V knives are made by well known and reputable manufacturers.

Although S30V can apparently be used for larger outdoor knives, I'm not convinced a rugged carbon steel knife wouldn't be more cost effective and tougher. The cost has to be ultimately justified, so when someone drops $450 for a pocketknife with a 3-inch blade, it damn well better be able to cut.

I have a CRKT S-2 with a titanium handle and a 4-inchish ATS-34 blade, and it's a remarkable cutter. Didn't much care for it when I first got it but, heck, it was on sale at Smokey Mountain for twenty-five bucks. I got eight of 'em because that's all I could afford and I didn't have to pay shipping, but my point is this: when it eventually dawned on me what a great knife it was, I can understand why some people would spend a lot of money for a premium steel. The blade cuts deeper with less effort than blades made of cheaper steels and it holds that edge longer. And if S30V blades are significantly better, I'm willing to call it a super steel (and let's face it, if S30V isn't a super steel, then what steel is?) I just don't want it chipping or breaking on me.

For defense, I want a very tough knife and have settled on AUS8A bladed knives. Even 420 is suitable in some applications. If I were a skydiver, though, I'd want a premium blade that could quickly and efficiently. Ditto for fire and rescue.
 
My only experience with S30V is with the new Buck Folding Kalinga Pro my lovely wife just gave me for Christmas.

The Buck 419 is a seriously impressive piece of work, and the blade is a big part of that fantastic first impression. It came the 'ol "hair popping sharp," a first I have had in a long while from a mass market maker. It is also nearly mirror polished. The edge grind reveals a very fine grain structure when under magnification.

I had no hesitation asking for an S30V blade, despite the rumblings about the steel's performance issues as regards possible brittleness and edge chipping. Then again, I knew the S30V I was starting off with was stamped "BOS" with flames, and backed by a great American company. No worries, though I'll have to find some sterner chores than hair, tape, and gift wrap for this hefty beauty and it's mildly controversial blade steel.
 
Larrin I'm not sure what forging has to do with the discussion. 99% of forgers are not equipped to forge high alloy steels, and it really wouldn't make much sense to do so if they did, unless they were making specialized damascus such as your dad does.

The question was asked about using S30V to make large knives. I think it works pretty well, based on quite a bit of experience. Can you screw it up? Sure. That's why there have been reports of chipping, but those have pretty much subsided now that people have learned to heat treat and sharpen the steel properly. It can be mistreated so don't blame a broken point on the steel. A tougher steel can easily deform under the same conditions that might snap a higher carbide steel point. S30V has the same transverse toughness as A2 and A2 has long been considered a tough steel, a good knife steel in fact.

If you want stainless, very good edge retention and pretty good toughness, especially in a stainless, it's hard to beat S30V. If easy sharpening is more important than edge retention, then you might like something else. If price is important, it's probably not a good choice.

I think the Swedes make some great steels like those mentioned above; Larrin and Cliff seem to like them a whole lot, but there are some pretty good reasons why a whole lot of high end knife companies don't make them their first choice. There are also some, especially one, good reason why low end knife companies use some of the steels Larrin has listed above, 420HC for instance. They are fine blankable, meaning you can stamp out the blades from a coil of steel. Higher carbide steels, >0.7% Carbon, like S30V, 154CM, etc. must be laser or water jet laser cut from plate stock, which is a whole lot more expensive because you get a coarse cut which normally requires additional shaping and finishing. So they cost more - more to buy, more to cut, more to grind, more to finish. Are they worth it? Only if you want the qualities they offer. Stainless, good edge retention and tough are pretty good qualities in a knife. Some people want other things. That's why they make knives in tool steels as well as lower grade stainless. Is there a downside to low carbide steels? Sure. Why would anyone use something else if they were all that some claim they are. In fact why would anyone bother with high carbide steels if low carbide steels worked as well as some say? They don't. Edges may not chip on impacts, but they roll, they wear, they go away.

The bottom line is that everyone makes a choice, the people who buy knives as well as the people who make them. Most of those choices are honest, many are informed choices, some are misinformed, but the lines between honest, informed and misinformed can get real blurred on internet forums. I can't count the number of times I've read "S30V is brittle" on these forums. It isn't, but that's a common misconception. That belief is expressed in this thread, without most of the people who have expressed that belief having any experience to base that on except for what they've read, here and elsewhere.

In truth, I'm honestly not sure how you know what to think. I think S30V is good stuff. :)
 
3V, your favorite steel, has low carbide volume. I'm not sure what this argument is about.
 
It's not an argument, but 3V isn't stainless either. 3V does however experience plastic failure as the price of it's low carbide toughness. You have to really stress the steel to make it happen, but if you slam an Rc61, CPM-3V edge onto a hard object, it will deform, usually just flatten a little. It's easy enough to sharpen out, but that is the typical failure mode of high ductility steels.

What steel you use in your knife is a choice, and all choices have positive and negative attributes. There is a brittle end of the spectrum that gets talked about on here a lot. There is another end to that same spectrum, plastic failure and poor wear resistance. In between there are a lot of good steels. S30V is one of those. CPM-3V is another. In fact the design goal of S30V was to produce a stainless version of 3V. Why it ended up with 4% Vanadium I can say, but it did achieve the benchmarks of 1) as tough as A2 and 2) as wear resistance as D2.

There are lots of good steels, but in the interest of lively forum debate some of them get more or less credit than they deserve, both positive and negative.

I was told by a Crucible metallurgist that the total carbide volume of 3V was 8.5%. I may have misheard him, but I can say that patents are not a reliable source of technical data because they are usually written and filed well before everything is known about a process or material. A patent gets written, but the science moves on even though it may embrace the essence of the patent claims.
 
Jerry, what advantages does S30V have over, say BG42 in a custom knife if both are heat treated properly for the steel? I've long thought that the move from BG42 to S30V was more lateral than vertical.
 
From what I've heard about the development of S30V, it was designed to have both more wear resistance and toughness than BG42 (they worked primarily with Chris Reeve knives). I don't know who first said that it was supposed to be stainless-3V, but those criteria do not equal stainless-3V.

Edit: In the end, I wish they would have put slightly less importance on wear resistance, but S30V is a good steel, I've never said anything else.
 
Larrin, I've heard that explanation too. It appears to me that S30V was designed on paper to be better but when actually produced, had to be "forced" to even be as good! What I'm getting at is whether in practicality, S30V actually delivers a better product than BG42. ...and if so, how much better? I've had knives in both steels and wonder why BG42 was supplanted.
 
Jerry Hossom said:
Larrin and Cliff seem to like them a whole lot, but there are some pretty good reasons why a whole lot of high end knife companies don't make [S30V] their first choice.
Click to expand...
Can you elaborate on this? I'm willing to accept the idea that the notion of S30V being "brittle" is a misconception, but it's largely been fueled by people who have actually owned and used the stuff. That doesn't make it true, as you've said, but first-hand reports tend to
make more of an impression than technical charts and heat treat processes.

Is there a downside to low carbide steels? Sure. Why would anyone use something else if they were all that some claim they are. In fact why would anyone bother with high carbide steels if low carbide steels worked as well as some say? They don't. Edges may not chip on impacts, but they roll, they wear, they go away. The bottom line is that everyone makes a choice, the people who buy knives as well as the people who make them.
Click to expand...
I think a large part of the problem lies in the subjective views of people who are too unwilling to accept some of the more positive aspects of other steels. And, yes, cost is one of those. Some people have had a bad experience with a certain type of steel and they never consider that they may have gotten a poor sample. (I have a CRKT Desert Cruiser w/AUS8 that simply will not take an edge. But I have other knives (including CRKT) that have AUS8 blades that sharpen and hold an edge just fine.
 
bruce said:
Larrin, I've heard that explanation too. It appears to me that S30V was designed on paper to be better but when actually produced, had to be "forced" to even be as good! What I'm getting at is whether in practicality, S30V actually delivers a better product than BG42. ...and if so, how much better? I've had knives in both steels and wonder why BG42 was supplanted.
Click to expand...

I'm curious as to what is the basis for these comments. Have you tested both steels in identical edges?

BG-42 is a very good steel, but there were a couple problems with it. In my case, they didn't supply it in the sizes I wanted. In fact Latrobe has never really made much of an effort to accommodate the needs of knifemakers. As I recall they produced it in two thicknesses, one width in each. I understand that's changed, but so too have the alternatives, namely S30V which is more wear resistant and maybe tougher and CPM-154 which is a bit tougher and not quite as wear resistant. Both of these steels are available in any sizes you might want and the people you speak with at Crucible understand knife talk..

Which leads us to the other problem with BG-42 - Crucible Steel, who started a dialog with knifemakers as to what attributes they wanted in knife steels. They came to our shows; they asked our opinions, and they listened. I was a part of that dialog, was working with 3V, and asked that they make a stainless version of it. What S30V became is not exactly what I wanted, because I did indeed want more tough and less wear resistant (as Larrin suggests) than it ended up. Chris wanted more wear resistance; he buys a lot more steel than I do and I think that's why the V ended up at 4%. From Chris' perspective of making most of his money on folders, that was probably a good call. From my perspective, I think it was a little shortsighted.

Regardless, you do tend to work with the people and products who support what you do, especially if there is no reason to work with an alternative.

As I said earlier, I think those firsthand reports reflect some early example of S30V which may or may not have been heat treated properly. I think too people have learned the steel doesn't do well with a coarse (toothy)edge. What has been largely ignored in a lot of these threads are the later reports where people have said, "after I resharpened it the chipping stopped," and "this is some really great steel."

Let me observe something though. If BG-42 were as good as S30V, I would stop using S30V immediately. S30V is the most difficult steel I work with from every perspective; BG-42 is a walk in the park by comparison. Crucible doesn't pay any of my bills, and the extra hour (or more) I spend on each S30V knife would be better spent doing more productive things than cussing and sweating. I don't know of a single knifemaker that thinks differently.

With all the negative comments on here about S30V, the ONLY possible reason to continue using it in knives rather than switching to one of the steels du jour is because I honestly think it is a better steel than the present alternatives. Then again, I've not tried CPM-D2... :)
 
Jerry Hossom said:
Larrin and Cliff seem to like them a whole lot, but there are some pretty good reasons why a whole lot of high end knife companies don't make them their first choice.
Click to expand...

Confederate, you posted:

"Originally Posted by Jerry Hossom
Larrin and Cliff seem to like them a whole lot, but there are some pretty good reasons why a whole lot of high end knife companies don't make [S30V] their first choice."

Kindly explain why you edited what I said, then ask me to comment on your edited remarks.
 
Jerry Hossom said:
Then again, I've not tried CPM-D2
Click to expand...

Someone at Crucible, or maybe Sal, could address this with more accurate info - but I've seen a few posts stating that there wasn't enough of an observed change in properties, and they are no longer going to apply the CPM process to D2.
 
Someone at Crucible told me otherwise on both scores. I know they've made two more batches anyway. They weren't sure at first they want6ed anything more to do with it, especially after the first batch produced 100% austenite powder, so they couldn't move the powder with a magnet and had to use shovels. :)

It turns out the steel does have some nice qualities not found in normal D2. It is MUCH finer grained (not a normal D2 quality by any means), meaning it is both tougher and can actually be polished. It should also be more corrosion resistant because of the better control over carbide distribution afforded by the CPM process (meaning more free Chromium compared with normal D2), but I've not heard back on that score.

My guess is that a lot will depend on further feedback from the field. That's why I've held off looking at it.
 
This is really bizarre. Jerry wrote:
Jerry Hossom said:
I think the Swedes make some great steels like those mentioned above; Larrin and Cliff seem to like them a whole lot, but there are some pretty good reasons why a whole lot of high end knife companies don't make them their first choice. There are also some, especially one, good reason why low end knife companies use some of the steels Larrin has listed above, 420HC for instance.
Click to expand...

Confederate quoted that, edited it, and turned it into:
Originally Posted by Jerry Hossom
Larrin and Cliff seem to like them a whole lot, but there are some pretty good reasons why a whole lot of high end knife companies don't make [S30V] their first choice.
Click to expand...

Normally that would be considered forging a quote and the forger would be banned from Bladeforums and ostracised all over the net for the rest of his life, but based on other posts I've seen from Confederate I don't think that was a deliberate forgery. I think Confederate has his head so far up his bunghole he can't see what he's doing; he's typing blind and there's no telling what's going to come out of his keyboard....
 
Jerry, lighten up! Your question, "I'm curious as to what is the basis for these comments. Have you tested both steels in identical edges?", seems to indicate there are only two camps here – those for and those against S30V! Well, I'm not in either. I'm just a user who reads this forum and uses knives. None of what I posted was a challenge to you or S30V, just an honest quest for the difference between BG42 andnS30V. Actually, I've owned as many S30V knives as BG42. My statement about "had to be forced" is reflective of just what you said, "As I said earlier, I think those firsthand reports reflect some early example of S30V which may or may not have been heat treated properly. I think too people have learned the steel doesn't do well with a coarse (toothy)edge. What has been largely ignored in a lot of these threads are the later reports where people have said, "after I resharpened it the chipping stopped," and "this is some really great steel."

Now, it seems you like S30V because it comes in sizes you like while BG42 doesn't, because Crucible takes your needs into consideration while Latrobe doesn't, and because you've continued to work with S30V till it has become a great steel. Fine, now, could you please compare and contrast these two steels, using whatever comparisons you choose, when they are at their optimum? As a user and buyer, I'd hate to walk away thinking that the difference between these two steels is only political, and I think you'd rather not have me think that either. Am I right?

Thanks,

bruce
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top