ats34 vs cm154

brownshoe said:
"In either event, a better hunter can be had from a forged blade." Please tell us why.
Click to expand...

I am waiting to hear all of that wisdom too.... ROFL

Waiting to be enlightened with all of that expert knowledge.....

Neither is better than the other given the same skill level of the craftsmen making the knives.
 
Last edited:
In theory CPM 154 should be a better product than the 154 CM or ATS 34. The reason is the finer grain structure which reduces the likelihood of chipping (or maybe the chips will be smaller and harder to see). It makes sense that ATS 34/CM 154 is easier to sharpen than S30V because it lacks the very hard Vanadium carbides that are present in S30V. The flap I heard on the availability of CM 154 way back when was that Crucible wasn't interested in selling small lots in the sizes that knifemakers needed. So Hitachi got their foot in the door with ATS 34.
 
In my experience 154CM and ATS 34 are essentially the same as referenced in a quote of what I wrote some time ago. I now use 154CM since I have a larger supply of that grade. I have never seen any inclusions or pits in either steel that would cause any concern for a good finish. 154CM makes a very nice fillet blade, tough and aggressive cutting due to the larger carbide strings. CPM 154 is the particle version of the same chemistry although I think Crucible breathed on it some, maybe a little vanadium to make it more suitable for the PM process and maybe a tad of nitrogen. The advantage is the finer grain yields a little better toughness. That provides the opportunity for pushing the hardness higher. I have some hunters and kitchen knives for my own use that are RC 63 and they perform very well. 154CM works best at 61 or so. There are two tempering ranges on all of these grade mentioned. 400+/- or 975+/-. They higher end yields higher hardness due to the secondary hardness bump but will have slightly less corrosion resistance due to some loss of chrome from the matrix. Crucible data sheet also says some ductility loss also but I have never really seen that as a problem, even in a fillet knife. 154CM was not used for turbine blades but for high temp. bearings application. The moly 4% gives it some hot hardness capability which is nice for a bearing but not really necessary in knife blade. All of these were developed as mods to 440C. A little less chrome and the addition of 4% moly. Phil
 
I hear the forged carbon vs stock removal stainless argument is that forged blades are more flexible, less likely to stay bent or break under hard use. what say all of you?
 
Last edited:
deltablade said:
I hear the forged carbon vs stock removal stainless argument is that forged blades are more flexible, less likely to stay bent or break under hard use. what say all of you?
Click to expand...

Depends on the Steel and HT of both blades.

There are so many variables one really can't even begin to state things like that.
 
correct heattreat & recommended hardness for each different alloy will determine toughness. a forged diffentally hardened carbon blade will be no tougher than a differentally hardened stainless alloy. as long as the individual blades are correctly treated i doubt that the toughness will be superior in carbon. all that said i do prefer carbon alloys for the boonies. dennis
 
deltablade said:
I must be more precise. the steel is described as CPM154cm. and I am getting a real education from all this
Click to expand...

if it is CPM-154 then the equivalent competition for it is RWL-34.

I have a custom on the way with RWL-34 at a Rockwell hardness around 62 or something. There is limited info available on RWL but there are some videos on it. I know Anso has also made some folders with the steel.

A while back this came up that I thought was pretty impressive.
[youtube]qgOLDW15y8M[/youtube]
 
deltablade said:
I hear the forged carbon vs stock removal stainless argument is that forged blades are more flexible, less likely to stay bent or break under hard use. what say all of you?
Click to expand...
Geometry controls flexibility, regardless of heat treat/hardness. A fully annealed piece of steel will flex the same amount as a hardened piece, as long as they are the same size. Bending and breaking is not influenced by forging vs stock removal, but by alloying and heat treatment. Hitting the steel with a hammer is not what affects it, sticking it in the forge over and over while hammering it is the factor that counts.
 
You are probably thinking of forged blades that are differentially tempered or hardened. This produces two levels of hardening, with the edge being tempered harder to offer better edge holding and the spine being softer to offer greater toughness and flexibility. This process is often associated with tool steels and hand-forged knives but is not exclusive to them. A similar outcome can also be achieved with laminated blades (such as the San Mai steel used by Cold Steel and others).

Here's an example of a hand-forged knife that is differentially tempered. You can clearly see the temper line. Some use clay when tempering to create a hamon to enhance the aesthetics of the knife.

Smithbowie021.jpg


deltablade said:
I hear the forged carbon vs stock removal stainless argument is that forged blades are more flexible, less likely to stay bent or break under hard use. what say all of you?
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
do you thinks a stock removal blade could be differentially tempered and have similar properties strength as a forged diff tempered?
Buffalohump said:
You are probably thinking of forged blades that are differentially tempered or hardened. This produces two levels of hardening, with the edge being tempered harder to offer better edge holding and the spine being softer to offer greater toughness and flexibility. This process is often associated with tool steels and hand-forged knives but is not exclusive to them. A similar outcome can also be achieved with laminated blades (such as the San Mai steel used by Cold Steel and others).

Here's an example of a hand-forged knife that is differentially tempered. You can clearly see the temper line. Some use clay when tempering to create a hamon to enhance the aesthetics of the knife.

Smithbowie021.jpg
Click to expand...
 
Yes indeed it can.....

The essential benefits of hand-forging comes with the ability to take some rather unusual source materials and make 'em into a working knife. There's a gent selling a knife on another forum that was made from a piece of suspension cable from the San Francisco bridge.

Plus the process of bashing on steel is said to be very therapeutic, although also hard on the elbows. ;)
 
In terms of hunting knife performance, ATS-34 and 154CM are the same. However, these days, 154CM has less "grain" when mirror polished.

ATS-34 (@HRC 61) has comparable wear resistance to 1095 (@HRC 63) -however, 1095 is very brittle at this hardness (snaps like glass), ATS-34 is tougher. That's why, 1095 is tempered down to HRC 58 when toughness is desired.

In terms of a carbon steel, 5160 (at HRC 60) imho is better than 1095. However, it won't cut as long as ATS-34.

CPM 154 has slightly better wear resistance (if hardened to HRC 62-63) than all the above, and takes a better mirror polish.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top