Benchmade 3v

[Alchemy1]

You tested through the coating, which results in a lower measured hardness. Remove the coating and test in bare steel. The hardness will probably measure in the 58-60 range.

Benchmade themselves don’t even rate the steel that high. They rate it for 56-58. Even if the test is total and utter garbage, why do the cut tests show what my HT scores show? Also, why wouldn’t BM just say that. That’s an easy out. Instead, everyone is speculating as the testers rack up info/data, and BM sits back quietly.

I have at least 2 others that have volunteered their knives for any kind of testing I see fit and say they stand by their product. Hogue knives and Chuck Richards Knives. Doesn’t sound like I’m too far off base if 2 other companies would volunteer their product up for crappy evaluation ‍

 

[H0kieengineer]

Benchmade themselves don’t even rate the steel that high. They rate it for 56-58. Even if the test is total and utter garbage, why do the cut tests show what my HT scores show? Also, why wouldn’t BM just say that. That’s an easy out. Instead, everyone is speculating as the testers rack up info/data, and BM sits back quietly.

I have at least 2 others that have volunteered their knives for any kind of testing I see fit and say they stand by their product. Hogue knives and Chuck Richards Knives. Doesn’t sound like I’m too far off base if 2 other companies would volunteer their product up for crappy evaluation ‍

I did not mean to say that your tests are garbage, just that there is room to improve. That other companies offered their knives shows that they are confident in you methodology.

 

[marrenmiller]

Remove the coating and test the hardness again. I'm sure it's still low, but it could actually be a little higher than 55.8-56 HRC.

Nonetheless, I'm a bit disappointed that they target such a low stated hardness range.

 

[marrenmiller]

Lol they rate the steel at 55-58hrc and it's just Cerakote. It's not going to change the number, where do you get that info. Seriously?

Then also explain the cut tests. Lol keep making things up.

Hardness tests work by measuring tiny amounts of displacement under load. A coating will effect the values observed, and not in a positive way.

 

[Alchemy1]

I did not mean to say that your tests are garbage, just that there is room to improve. That other companies offered their knives shows that they are confident in you methodology.

Garbage is my wording. I’m saying totally discredit a single data point. If we’re talking “science”, you should never rely on a single data point to begin with. However, cut tests, HRC readings, bend tests, etc all start to make the baby poo soft HRC reading very valid.

We have to stop making excuses for these companies. They’re literally syphoning the money out of our pockets and we aide in the syphoning by making excuses. This is not a BM indictment at all. This is a very small piece of a very large conversation. This is not the only knife, from the only company, that came up lame. Some have come up lame numerous times on numerous samples. We need to trust our eyes and not the rhetoric we hear companies spouting.

 

[WillB]

Benchmade pride themselves that this steel will bend 90deg and that's why it's 55-56hrc. Why is that a pocket knife feature? Some toughness is great, but... Low edge retention, chipping and bendy. You are a consumer, stop bending over on this stuff cause you like the look or its fine for your uses.

That's first thing I thought of, the low HRC makes little sense on a folder vs say edge retention. Not the charts for the 3v start at 58 above. Not sure why BM would choose that and on a folder, I'd think benefits had with going toward the higher HRC for the steel vs lower. By all accounts, 3V is excellent steel, but a "bad" HT can diminish any steel no?

 

[H0kieengineer]

Garbage is my wording. I’m saying totally discredit a single data point. If we’re talking “science”, you should never rely on a single data point to begin with. However, cut tests, HRC readings, bend tests, etc all start to make the baby poo soft HRC reading very valid.

We have to stop making excuses for these companies. They’re literally syphoning the money out of our pockets and we aide in the syphoning by making excuses. This is not a BM indictment at all. This is a very small piece of a very large conversation. This is not the only knife, from the only company, that came up lame. Some have come up lame numerous times on numerous samples. We need to trust our eyes and not the rhetoric we hear companies spouting.

I completely agree, I was just offering a point to improve one if your tests, though the rest of the testing certainly support the low hardness test.

People have said for years that CRK runs their S35VN soft and ZT is no less guilty. With small manufacturers developing high performance HT’s, large companies have no excuse. They can’t really run with the “we’re too big to do that development” when makers with fewer resources are developing things like the D3V treatment and pushing the super steels to where they belong.

 

[Alchemy1]

I completely agree, I was just offering a point to improve one if your tests, though the rest of the testing certainly support the low hardness test.

People have said for years that CRK runs their S35VN soft and ZT is no less guilty. With small manufacturers developing high performance HT’s, large companies have no excuse. They can’t really run with the “we’re too big to do that development” when makers with fewer resources are developing things like the D3V treatment and pushing the super steels to where they belong.

That’s the conversation we need to be having and we need to be asking the manufacturers the hard questions. If a backyard “scientist” (again, my wording) puts out some hairbrained idea, how hard is it for BM, or any other company, to come out and simply provide the reasonable and logical answers/proof. Do we really think BM hasn’t seen these conversations? It’s all over IG. Do we really think BM couldn’t get an HRC reading/pic in minutes? Do we really think that their company doesn’t have data sheets on hand from QC testing? Yet and still, they sit quietly. One has to begin to wonder if they think this is a conversation that is just going to blow over.

 

[Carlito86]

If this Is not a clear defect,I am cancelling my order

 

[Mo2]

If this Is not a clear defect,I am cancelling my order

Why would it be a defect. They state 55-58hrc. Its clearly in spec.

 

[Mo2]

You tested through the coating, which results in a lower measured hardness. Remove the coating and test in bare steel. The hardness will probably measure in the 58-60 range.

Perhaps you are correct. But I assume that Dlc would be a bigger difference but cerikote would be a far lower difference imho... I assume the preload would remove the coating, but didn't factor in the rest of it that will have to clear when pushed in. Regardless, more testing will be done. It is within spec and the performance does line up with a low hrc.

 

[Mo2]

Toughness testing....

https://www.instagram.com/p/BxcprwXgLCX/?igshid=t1iyt61pm4xg

https://www.instagram.com/p/Bxctz2XA1G5/?igshid=k361cir8tepf

If the vids don't work, goto the links. I can upload to yt later. Not my posts, they are via @pm2og
Edit, vids uploaded.

Again, if you look at the end of post one... With the Carrothers video... It doesn't have these issues.

 

[DocJD]

OK . So what if BM opted instead to sacrifice toughness for edge retention and high hardness ?

Ain't some fool gonna purposefully break a blade and brag about it with pics . Maybe BM is afraid of not maximizing toughness for 3V for PR reasons .

 

[tomhosang]

OK . So what if BM opted instead to sacrifice toughness for edge retention and high hardness ?

Ain't some fool gonna purposefully break a blade and brag about it with pics . Maybe BM is afraid of not maximizing toughness for 3V for PR reasons .

I think you're correct in that regard. Even so, 3V at 62 is 8 ft lbs higher on impact toughness than M4 at 62. They run their m4 at 62-64. So basically, they prioritized toughness in this knife (not edge strength, I'm talking about lateral toughness), in a lightweight platform. If someone tries to pry with it, the handle is gonna snap well before the blade ever does, even if they took it to 62.

 

[michaelm466]

They have the Puukko listed as 57-59 (which is still too low IMO) I wander why they went even softer for the folder? I do still have hope though, as I remember when they first started with CPM-M4 they were running it 60-62 and maybe 2 years later bumped it up to 62-64.

 

[H0kieengineer]

Is there anyone from Benchmade on Bladeforums that we could invite to this conversation? Without them, we are shouting into the void.

 

[tomhosang]

@Benchmade @BKC Customer Service

 

[Mo2]

I don't see what the problem is. They consciously made this product this way.

This is just a thread to show the performance and what to expect.

I would like to inform that this isn't just Benchmade that run steel softer. It just so happens this is kind of an extreme case in comparison. Instead of just buying labels/brands/trends. There is more than just a steel or steel composition.

We have companies that are putting out m390 that performs less than there s30v. Heat treatment of s30v at 60hrc and m390 at 58hrc. In the large scope of the matter, hrc doesn't mean better performance. when the performance in tests by multiple people are repeatably showing less though,thats an issue. We're paying more and showing this brand of steel is more premium but without the actual performance that it's supposed to portray. Paying more for a steel model that has no or little benefits over the main steel of choice for that company. The value of these knives goes up due to the proposed performance even though the performance isn't performing over s30v.

In anycase, if you look at the hardness tests. It does Hella roll instead of chip. And it's a rather thin blade. So yea. It's doing something they intended. But daymn, you should be able to get good results at 58-60hrc and get some better edge retention while we're at it.

It just doesn't make sense to make a pry bar for a plastic handle pocket knife with these specs. Buyers just see 3v and gotta have it.

 

[skyhorse]

You tested through the coating, which results in a lower measured hardness. Remove the coating and test in bare steel. The hardness will probably measure in the 58-60 range.

I'd really like to know how a blade coating brings down the rockwell rating on heat treated blade steel ?

 

[H0kieengineer]

I don't see what the problem is. They consciously made this product this way.

This is just a thread to show the performance and what to expect.

I would like to inform that this isn't just Benchmade that run steel softer. It just so happens this is kind of an extreme case in comparison. Instead of just buying labels/brands/trends. There is more than just a steel or steel composition.

We have companies that are putting out m390 that performs less than there s30v. Heat treatment of s30v at 60hrc and m390 at 58hrc. In the large scope of the matter, hrc doesn't mean better performance. when the performance in tests by multiple people are repeatably showing less though,thats an issue. We're paying more and showing this brand of steel is more premium but without the actual performance that it's supposed to portray. Paying more for a steel model that has no or little benefits over the main steel of choice for that company. The value of these knives goes up due to the proposed performance even though the performance isn't performing over s30v.

In anycase, if you look at the hardness tests. It does Hella roll instead of chip. And it's a rather thin blade. So yea. It's doing something they intended. But daymn, you should be able to get good results at 58-60hrc and get some better edge retention while we're at it.

It just doesn't make sense to make a pry bar for a plastic handle pocket knife with these specs. Buyers just see 3v and gotta have it.

But we can’t bemoan Benchmade’s design choices without letting them know what they should do differently.