Best steel in a Production folder REGARDLESS of price

[FlaMtnBkr]

That would be surprising and I would be curious to hear some theories. With less material to support the edge I can't imagine the edge retention increasing. It seems like it would be more prone to damage, especially lower alloy, softer steels like 420HC. I know in my experience the 'lower end' steels get deformed, flat spots, and burrs when thinned out which all dull the edge.

Do you happen to have a link to discussion of these tests? Did they do something sneaky like when they use special bought bolts that were extra soft to cut through in demonstrations? At least I remember reading about something like that.

 

[chessguy]

Interesting viewpoint you have; I like sharpening my knives. In my limited experience, S30V is excellent. zdp189 I havent tried yet.

I now realize that i was less specific than i should have been

What i mean by best steel in a production folder is not ONLY the actual alloy. I'm referring to the finished product of a given manufacture's specific product

From start to finish, including heat treat, raw materials, and blade profiling, what is the best finished product steel out there.

The only real characteristics i'm concerned with is edge retention and OOTB sharpness. I don't ever intend to sharpen it myself (i have a guy for that) so I want long term edge holding and chip resistance

 

[Ankerson]

FlaMtnBkr, I think you have it backwards.

I think Knarfeng was, at least in part, referring to the CATRA testing that Buck did where their 420HC out performed some other steels based solely on thinner geometry of the 420HC blade. The competitors included some 154cm type steels. The overall point for me is that geometry, steel choice, heat treating, balance, and ergonomics are all important and any individual trait can out weigh the others if the difference is big enough.

I believe that was blade geometry and thickness, not edge angle that was the difference.

I can say that will make a HUGE difference, HUGE difference in performance from my own testing.

Edge angle can also make a Big difference as can edge finish based on my own testing.

Lots of variables that can really make a noticeable and measurable difference.

So if Buck changed the blade geometry and possibly either the edge finish or edge angle on the 420HC blade it's very likely and very possible that 420HC can and will perform better than 154CM.

I have seen similar things happen a lot in my own testing.

I don't give out numbers, but the differences can be so large that most people wouldn't believe it.

The guys at Buck are really very smart.

 

[cheeseychung]

I gotta say Ive been pretty impressed with the bd30p on the manix 2 sprint. But I tend to sharpen pretty frequently just for fun

 

[me2]

I think that testing was done by Buck when they changed to their Edge 2000 configuration, with lower factory angles and thinner edges. The CATRA test is fairly limited, as it makes slicing cuts on abrasive paper. There are no hard impacts, and side loading is virtually eliminated, since the blade is held in a clamp. Also, Buck takes the hardness of their 420HC quite high, up to 58-59 HRc, but knarfeng can confirm that, as he has measured it. Its one of those paradoxes that are often seen in knives. Thinner edges cut longer, unless you do something to damage them. My reground machete cuts through 4x4s and still shaves my arm. But, if I hit a rock with it, well, it's back to the grinder. With a stronger (read harder) steel, the damage is still much less than you'd think, only 1/2 the depth of a bevel thats 1/32" wide. So, thinner, harder steel with adequate toughness will cut better than thicker, softer, more wear resistant steel.

Anyway, the tests are very difficult to find, and are about 10 years old or more now. What few details I remember were that the new Edge2K was compared with their old geometry, new in 420HC and old in 154CM or similar. The new geometry performed better in the CATRA test than the 154CM(ish) blade by a good bit. Naturally, when the geometries matched, the more complicated steel won out. Now, this whole discussion ignores the shortcomings of CATRA testing in general, but it illustrates very well the huge effect of geometry on cutting ability and edge holding.

Along these lines, and w/r to the original question, I'll take the hardest, thinnest, high speed steel (M2, M4, T1, etc.) blade I can get for a folder. Excellent wear resistance, very high hardness (typically >= 64 HRc), and surprising toughness combine to make a folder I'd love to carry. This is the only type of steel I've used at this high a hardness. I may expand to include others, were I to use them.

 

[Ankerson]

I think that testing was done by Buck when they changed to their Edge 2000 configuration, with lower factory angles and thinner edges. The CATRA test is fairly limited, as it makes slicing cuts on abrasive paper. There are no hard impacts, and side loading is virtually eliminated, since the blade is held in a clamp. Also, Buck takes the hardness of their 420HC quite high, up to 58-59 HRc, but knarfeng can confirm that, as he has measured it. Its one of those paradoxes that are often seen in knives. Thinner edges cut longer, unless you do something to damage them. My reground machete cuts through 4x4s and still shaves my arm. But, if I hit a rock with it, well, it's back to the grinder. With a stronger (read harder) steel, the damage is still much less than you'd think, only 1/2 the depth of a bevel thats 1/32" wide. So, thinner, harder steel with adequate toughness will cut better than thicker, softer, more wear resistant steel.

Anyway, the tests are very difficult to find, and are about 10 years old or more now. What few details I remember were that the new Edge2K was compared with their old geometry, new in 420HC and old in 154CM or similar. The new geometry performed better in the CATRA test than the 154CM(ish) blade by a good bit. Naturally, when the geometries matched, the more complicated steel won out. Now, this whole discussion ignores the shortcomings of CATRA testing in general, but it illustrates very well the huge effect of geometry on cutting ability and edge holding.

I noticed that too in my own testing, the blades that are thinner behind the edge will cut MUCH longer than the thicker ones.

The biggest advantage to the steels with the High HRC ratings are the will deform less and can be taken to a much thinner blade geometry.

Combine a thin blade with high hardness in a good steel and we really have something.

I am not talking about reprofiling the edge here though, thin primary grinds are what I am talking about, there is no shortcut that will do the same thing (No cheap way out on this).

That's why those ZDP blades that have been reprofiled very thin don't hold up very well when compared to a thin primary grind, even a micro bevel won't help much.

A blade ground around .010" behind the edge at high hardness with a reasonable edge angle around 30 inclusive will cut extremely well, even at 40 inclusive it will still cut very well.

 

[knarfeng]

FlaMtnBkr, I think you have it backwards.

I think Knarfeng was, at least in part, referring to the CATRA testing that Buck did where their 420HC out performed some other steels based solely on thinner geometry of the 420HC blade. The competitors included some 154cm type steels. The overall point for me is that geometry, steel choice, heat treating, balance, and ergonomics are all important and any individual trait can out weigh the others if the difference is big enough.

I think that testing was done by Buck when they changed to their Edge 2000 configuration, with lower factory angles and thinner edges. The CATRA test is fairly limited, as it makes slicing cuts on abrasive paper. There are no hard impacts, and side loading is virtually eliminated, since the blade is held in a clamp. Also, Buck takes the hardness of their 420HC quite high, up to 58-59 HRc, but knarfeng can confirm that, as he has measured it. Its one of those paradoxes that are often seen in knives. Thinner edges cut longer, unless you do something to damage them. My reground machete cuts through 4x4s and still shaves my arm. But, if I hit a rock with it, well, it's back to the grinder. With a stronger (read harder) steel, the damage is still much less than you'd think, only 1/2 the depth of a bevel thats 1/32" wide. So, thinner, harder steel with adequate toughness will cut better than thicker, softer, more wear resistant steel.

Anyway, the tests are very difficult to find, and are about 10 years old or more now. What few details I remember were that the new Edge2K was compared with their old geometry, new in 420HC and old in 154CM or similar. The new geometry performed better in the CATRA test than the 154CM(ish) blade by a good bit. Naturally, when the geometries matched, the more complicated steel won out. Now, this whole discussion ignores the shortcomings of CATRA testing in general, but it illustrates very well the huge effect of geometry on cutting ability and edge holding.

Along these lines, and w/r to the original question, I'll take the hardest, thinnest, high speed steel (M2, M4, T1, etc.) blade I can get for a folder. Excellent wear resistance, very high hardness (typically >= 64 HRc), and surprising toughness combine to make a folder I'd love to carry. This is the only type of steel I've used at this high a hardness. I may expand to include others, were I to use them.

Yes sir. It was to that testing by Buck I was referring. You described it perfectly, except it was a BG42 blade which the 420HC blade outperformed. (BG42 holds an edge even better than 154CM.)

 

[hardheart]

They tested 420HC, BG-42, ATS-34, and 440C. There is also a chart of Edge 2K 420HC vs ATS34 and BG-42 at 40 degrees. Up to 25 cycles, the 420HC easily outperformed the other two.

The thinnest blade and the lowest angle are going to provide the least resistance on a cut. The most refined edge is going to turn the applied force into the greatest pressure at the edge. The issue is getting an alloy with the deformation resistance to maintain that cutting performance. The initial loss of sharpness is drastic, and then the performance plateaus as the stability of the cutting edge increases but the sharpness has reduced.