Are there any "super steels" that will hold an edge twice as long as regular steel?

[Shotgun]

Depends on geometry and what is being cut. Lots of people love to cite rope cutting tests. That is a soft, abrasive material. Switch to a hard, non-abrasive material and the results will be different. If we change it up and test steels in a chefs knife model for cutting squash or fish or something else, the results will change again each time based on the geometry, the heat treatment, and what is being cut. Every steel has a set of attributes. It is always a trade off to balance those traits for a desired purpose.

Professions that rely on knives like butchers and chefs almost universally use inexpensive, easy to sharpen knives.

I agree. HOW it's used is also a factor. I read a bushcraft blogger who cited the old adage "a carbon steel knife is easier to sharpen and holds it's edge longer then stainless." Which we all no isn't true right? Sharpens easy, yes. Holds it's edge longer, no. Well, after reading some of his articles it became apparent that he did a lot of scraping with his pocket knife to smooth wood out. For bows I think. In that case he is probably right. A high carbide stainless probably wouldn't hold it's edge as long as a steel like 1095 under that type of use.

The vast majority of the "testing" done is anecdotal. It's a good general idea of how the steels perform but until you get the knife in your hand and use it the way that YOU use it, with the maintenance schedule that works for you, you'll never know what steel is best.

 

[jfk1110]

A steel that is never mentioned is Fallkniven' s 3G. Stuff is phenomenal. Seems like it stays sharp for months with only a quick strop every week or so. Also never mentioned are Fallkniven' s folders in general. They are just classy looking functional knives and most come in 3G. Also the laminated cobalt steel is pretty DAMN impressive too, and I just love the GP model that it's used in. The kolt is a great small fixed blade using the lam co steel. I have the juni in 3G and its in my pocket or around my neck every day. Both of these steels definitely qualify as super IMHO.

 

[Fanglekai]

I agree with everything you said except the implications of the last sentence. The decision to use inexpensive kitchen knives has a lot more to do with economy of scale and the point of diminishing returns than any attempt to get the best tool for the job. No manager is gonna hand a line cook at Dennys a $200 gyuto. That doesn't mean the Dexter Russell he does use is a better knife.

Diminishing returns, theft, equipment damage, ease of sharpening, etc are all factors to consider. A high end $400+ gyuto might not be the best knife for a given set of tasks either despite its high price. A lot of the high end j-knives are very thin and will chip badly if used improperly or if too much lateral load is applied while cutting certain things. There are other scenarios where a laser gyuto is not the best tool for the job. Instead of comparing a laser gyuto to a cheaper chefs knife, we could compare a $300 "workhorse" chefs knife with thicker geometry than the gyuto, which could very well outperform the $30 chefs knife. Higher price doesn't always equate to higher performance, though. It depends on the qualities we are looking at.

For the average home cook a $35 Victorinox 8" chefs knife is a better tool than a $300 gyuto. It's less likely to get damaged, easier to sharpen, and most likely will resist corrosion better due to the Victorinox chefs knives being "mirror" polished (not a true mirror, but decent) and a highly corrosion resistant alloy. A skilled chef will know how to utilize a $200+ gyuto to get better performance than a layman. For a skilled chef performing specific tasks, the $200 knife is better in every way for those tasks. If that chef is going to do tasks where the edge might contact bone, then that $200 laser gyuto is no longer the best tool for the job and a thicker blade will probably be the better tool, making it superior to the $200 knife for those tasks.

Basically I don't like seeing all the absolute statements I see around here about x steel being infinitely superior to y steel in every possible way. It's always a tradeoff in some way and that's impossible to avoid. It's inherent in the material properties of the steels. I think that steel type is a factor to consider, but way too many people cite a well known rope cutting test as the end all be all test to determine the "best" steel. It's laughable and nonsensical because it's impossible for one steel to be the best at everything or the best for every possible scenario.

In the end a $5 hammer is better at being a hammer than a $10,000 knife is at being a hammer. Some knives are better for certain tasks than others. More often than not geometry is far more important than price or steel. I talked about knives that are easier to sharpen being used by many professional butchers and chefs because they tend to use steels to realign the edge. If those knives get damaged they're easier to fix than chipped out S110V, and they don't require diamond plates or specialized sharpening equipment. In many ways they are superior to high carbide steels. It's always a tradeoff.

I agree. HOW it's used is also a factor. I read a bushcraft blogger who cited the old adage "a carbon steel knife is easier to sharpen and holds it's edge longer then stainless." Which we all no isn't true right? Sharpens easy, yes. Holds it's edge longer, no. Well, after reading some of his articles it became apparent that he did a lot of scraping with his pocket knife to smooth wood out. For bows I think. In that case he is probably right. A high carbide stainless probably wouldn't hold it's edge as long as a steel like 1095 under that type of use.

The vast majority of the "testing" done is anecdotal. It's a good general idea of how the steels perform but until you get the knife in your hand and use it the way that YOU use it, with the maintenance schedule that works for you, you'll never know what steel is best.

Some steels are better for scraping than others. 1095 has excellent apex stability and it has very good toughness. It's known to be a great performer for woodworking. It's easy to sharpen.

As always, it depends on the tasks and the skill of the user. There is no best steel. Every steel has a set of material properties and each one with a certain heat treatment will be better at certain tasks.

 

[Rapt_up]

My experience in this is that yes just about all of them will easily double the cuts possible with a basic knife. I have been a knife enthusiast for years and my knives have mirrored my growth and experience both in terms of budget and knives. I moved from CRKT and similar in Aus8 and ATS34, CPM 154, on to 52100, S30V and now to 3V , S90V, S110V, 10v and K390. I cut up boxes for a whole winter to burn in my wood stove, using an S90V knife, without sharpening it once, and while it wasn't as sharp at the end of the winter as it was at the beginning, it was still sharper than any box cutter blade I have ever purchased. (I cut up one to two boxes a day for months)

I have seen this same pattern with my wife and her kitchen knives. for years she resisted having me buy custom kitchen knives in good alloys... and now she uses the two I finally bought about 10 times more than the others and they still need sharpening less often than the regular ones, even though her regular knives are well known reputable "consumer" knives from the likes of Henckel, Wustoff and Sabatier. Her knives in M390 and AEB-L will out cut and need less sharpening than her Wustoff and Henckels knives. Factors of 3, 4 even 5 times are not a remote stretch.

Another factor to consider is proper shape and heat treatment for the application. Personally I never understood the "I'd rather it was easier to sharpen than it doesn't get dull" attitude. They aren't that much more work to sharpen but they do last many times longer between sharpenings.

 

[Ankerson]

Personally I never understood the "I'd rather it was easier to sharpen than it doesn't get dull" attitude. They aren't that much more work to sharpen but they do last many times linger between sharpenings.

You figured that one out too.

As time goes on more people are starting to see that also, that's the reality of it all.

Over time as more of the higher wear resistant steels hit the mainstream and get into peoples hands the obvious will become much more apparent.

There is so much bad information flying around to mislead people into believing complete BS that it's becoming more pathetic than it ever has been in the past.

 

[ev13wt]

If your knife will not experience lateral loading, just have a custom guy do a blade in 75+ rockwell. It will last more than 2x as long as the best super steel.

It will ne harder to sharpen too of course. But depending on the task, it could be an option.

 

[marthinus]

In all honesty I have yet to find a steel I cannot dull in a days work on the farm or on site. So in my experience. No.

If all you are going to cut is some soft material then yes. You could find some steels that could do that. All things being equal.

 

[RX-79G]

What do you mean by outlast?

Amount of cutting before the blade in unacceptably dull for the task.

 

[Lycosa]

I stick with INFI.

 

[wfsltt]

You put a couple high end steels in the mix as regular steel, but in either case the answer is yes. I know one person that loved A2 until he started testing 3V. This guy does more field testing and hard use testing than anyone I know. The 3V blades lasted 5 to 8 time longer than his A2 blades. These were the same knife make and model both sharpen to the same angle by this guy. He also tested many other super steels and he keeps coming back to 3V for edge retention.

 

[inkynate]

that's the reality of it all.

No, it isn't, Jim.

The reality is what Fanglekai wrote is his excellent post above.

Do these "super" steels have their place? Of course, but you minimize the downsides to a far greater extent than whatever conspiracy theory misinformation you are always alluding to and you could be far more honest about them. Especially when it comes to people making runaway assertions based on your testing, talk about bs...

It is completely farcical to assert that high wear resistant steels, which are so difficult for manufacturers to machine, grind, and finish (driving up the price) are also magically very easy to sharpen. Especially with the thick geometries and wide bevels that most production knives ship with.

Now, if someone has a knife in say s90v that is used carefully so that is has no damage and is just lightly blunted, then I agree that it is not difficult to touch up the edge with SiC, ceramics, diamonds, etc. But what about when the knife is heavily blunted or damaged? What about when the edge or apex angle has thickened up/gotten obtuse and it needs to be reprofiled or worse yet, reground?

Oh, then it's a different story and I have seen you suggest multiple times that it isn't sensible for most users to take on.

I wish I could count the number of times I've seen people assert that these steels aren't bad to sharpen as long as you don't let them get too dull and touch them up often. Oh, the irony.

Now, to be clear, I actually think these steels are pretty amazing and have s90v, 110v, k390, etc. But the reality is that other factors such as overall design, ergos, geometry, hardening, edge angle, and grit finish are at least if not much more important to performance than the alloy used.

For those playing along at home, you don't have to take my word for it. This quote from Phil Wilson from an older thread about the South Fork over on the Spyderco forum is really eloquent:

There are a lot of factors that enter into how a blade cuts. I am making knives for a pretty narrow user group so I can optimize factors that others, production and also other makers do not or cannot. I have found though that just higher carbide content does not automatically mean better edge holding. That sometimes hardness will govern over carbide and that heat treat and geometry and sharpening will govern over all else. Every thing has to work together together to make a good cutting edge--knife.

 

[Ankerson]

Now, if someone has a knife in say s90v that is used carefully so that is has no damage and is just lightly blunted, then I agree that it is not difficult to touch up the edge with SiC, ceramics, diamonds, etc. But what about when the knife is heavily blunted or damaged? What about when the edge or apex angle has thickened up/gotten obtuse and it needs to be reprofiled or worse yet, reground?

Never said they are easy to work with.

Repairing, regrinding, reprofiling is much different than basic sharpening and that's what most people reference as to hard to sharpen or easy to sharpen.

Carbide content will have a large effect on that because the same wear resistance that allows the edge to hold for a longer amount of time will have the very same effect on whatever stone one sharpens with, it will resist the stone in the same way.

SIC, Ceramics and Diamonds will handle any steel without much of an issue.

Sharpening with the above can be easy and for the most part is even if the edge is dull, I have taken 10V from dull to shaving with nothing more than a SIC loaded strop in a very short time.

Things that I have always said....

To get one thing one has to give up another when it comes to steels, there is no such thing as a free lunch.

On the Phil Wilson quote I think you are mistaken on what he really ment by what he posted.

He was talking about HIS KNIVES THAT HE MAKES that are at optimal hardness, Heat Treatment and have optimal geometry for the tasks at hand no matter what the carbide content is. In his world it can be taken exactly as he wrote it, optimal is the key here, there are VERY FEW makers that are in his league so he lives in a very small world.

 

[ev13wt]

I have seen this same pattern with my wife and her kitchen knives. for years she resisted having me buy custom kitchen knives in good alloys... and now she uses the two I finally bought about 10 times more than the others and they still need sharpening less often than the regular ones, even though her regular knives are well known reputable "consumer" knives from the likes of Henckel, Wustoff and Sabatier. Her knives in M390 and AEB-L will out cut and need less sharpening than her Wustoff and Henckels knives. Factors of 3, 4 even 5 times are not a remote stretch.

Another factor to consider is proper shape and heat treatment for the application. Personally I never understood the "I'd rather it was easier to sharpen than it doesn't get dull" attitude. They aren't that much more work to sharpen but they do last many times linger between sharpenings.

So.. What kitchen knives are they? I know the Sikayo from CRK comes in S35VN but it is so thick I never ordered it.

 

[inkynate]

On the Phil Wilson quote I think you are mistaken on what he really ment by what he posted.

Of course he is talking about his own knives and experience, I don't understand what you think I'm mistaken about as result. Can you clarify how/why you feel the points he made or that I made directly prefacing the quote are not accurate in a general sense?

 

[RX-79G]

My experience in this is that yes just about all of them will easily double the cuts possible with a basic knife. I have been a knife enthusiast for years and my knives have mirrored my growth and experience both in terms of budget and knives. I moved from CRKT and similar in Aus8 and ATS34, CPM 154, on to 52100, S30V and now to 3V , S90V, S110V, 10v and K390. I cut up boxes for a whole winter to burn in my wood stove, using an S90V knife, without sharpening it once, and while it wasn't as sharp at the end of the winter as it was at the beginning, it was still sharper than any box cutter blade I have ever purchased. (I cut up one to two boxes a day for months)

I have seen this same pattern with my wife and her kitchen knives. for years she resisted having me buy custom kitchen knives in good alloys... and now she uses the two I finally bought about 10 times more than the others and they still need sharpening less often than the regular ones, even though her regular knives are well known reputable "consumer" knives from the likes of Henckel, Wustoff and Sabatier. Her knives in M390 and AEB-L will out cut and need less sharpening than her Wustoff and Henckels knives. Factors of 3, 4 even 5 times are not a remote stretch.

Another factor to consider is proper shape and heat treatment for the application. Personally I never understood the "I'd rather it was easier to sharpen than it doesn't get dull" attitude. They aren't that much more work to sharpen but they do last many times linger between sharpenings.

AEB-L/13C26 is a super steel?

It's a really great, find grained steel. But I thought it doesn't have any carbides, so how tough or wear resistant could it be?

 

[Ankerson]

Of course he is talking about his own knives and experience, I don't understand what you think I'm mistaken about as result. Can you clarify how/why you feel the points he made or that I made directly prefacing the quote are not accurate in a general sense?

In relation to anyone else's knives....

What he does and the way he does things is completely different, there are things that he has learned etc over the past 30 years or so.

 

[RX-79G]

Of course he is talking about his own knives and experience, I don't understand what you think I'm mistaken about as result. Can you clarify how/why you feel the points he made or that I made directly prefacing the quote are not accurate in a general sense?

Wasn't Phil's point that a 62 Rc basic steel will hold an edge over a 58 Rc super steel? I don't think that implies that if both are the same hardness the basic steel will win out.

 

[Ankerson]

Wasn't Phil's point that a 62 Rc basic steel will hold an edge over a 58 Rc super steel? I don't think that implies that if both are the same hardness the basic steel will win out.

I don't believe so.

Geometry factors into this also and what Phil does and how he does it so there can be and is a lot of factors to look at here not just X steel at Y hardness vs B steel at C hardness.

We aren't talking about production blades here either.

 

[inkynate]

In relation to anyone else's knives....

What he does and the way he does things is completely different, there are things that he has learned etc over the past 30 years or so.

Thanks for the reply, but I still don't understand what you're trying to say here.

Put another way, if I say that in general: "geometry, hardening, edge angle, and grit finish are at least as important as the specific alloy used for a given purpose."

Your response would be: "not unless you are Phil Wilson." ?

Totally fine if that is your stance, but it doesn't provide much of a rationale. Just trying to clarify.

Just had a lightbulb. Do you mean that if all that other stuff isn't optimal, then the alloy used becomes more important? That would be an interesting position, since I would figure the opposite. i.e., that unless all that other stuff is right where it should be, then you're not really going to see the additonal benefits that the steel could offer.

 

[RX-79G]

I don't believe so.

Geometry factors into this also and what Phil does and how he does it so there can be and is a lot of factors to look at here not just X steel at Y hardness vs B steel at C hardness.

We aren't talking about production blades here either.

Not sure what you're getting at. Some steels won't take a super acute edge, but if we're talking about the same 30 degree inclusive edge angle, what else besides the hardness and alloy can matter, assuming they were both correctly (or optimally) heat treated?