Is Talonite a truly good steel? Is it better or worse that D2? Or maybe it is D2? I have no knowledge of any of this so if I sound dumb I can't help it. I want a knife of the "best" steel, so what is it? I know that best is an impossible term, and there is no absolute best, but in peoples opinions, whats the best investment for edge holding, durability all that good stuff?
-
The BladeForums.com 2024 Traditional Knife is ready to order! See this thread for details: https://www.bladeforums.com/threads/bladeforums-2024-traditional-knife.2003187/
Price is$300$250 ea (shipped within CONUS). If you live outside the US, I will contact you after your order for extra shipping charges.
Order here: https://www.bladeforums.com/help/2024-traditional/ - Order as many as you like, we have plenty.
"BEST" steel types?
- Thread starter JuAln
- Start date
- Joined
- Aug 1, 1999
- Messages
- 3,036
I think it might be CPM-3V. Very tough with good wear resistance. If you define your application a little more, it might be easier to answer the question.
------------------
Jerry Hossom
www.hossom.com
------------------
Jerry Hossom
www.hossom.com
- Joined
- Apr 27, 1999
- Messages
- 6,117
Talonite is not steel at all. It is a cobalt alloy rather than an iron alloy. You can find out a lot about it from previous postings if you use the "search" function on the word "talonite". It is corrosion resistant and wear resistant, but it is "different". It doesn't take a regular razor edge.
D2 takes a good cutting edge and holds it a long time. It is not as tough as some steels when it is hardened above 60 rockwell. It is semistainless
CPM3V is way up in the toughness department. It may not get quite the same razor edge of some of the other steels, but you can practically make a thinner edge using 3V so it may practically be the "best".
52100 is tough and takes an excellent edge. Non stainless.
A2 is in between in toughness, gets really sharp. Non stainless.
420V wears really well and takes a razor edge. Stainless.
BG42 is fairly tough, wears well, takes a great cutting edge, is easier to sharpen than 420V. Stainless.
5160 is a spring steel. It works particularly well for big choppers.
See Joe Talmadge's Steel FAQ in the knowledge base:
http://www.bladeforums.com/features/faqs.shtml
[This message has been edited by Jeff Clark (edited 06-21-2000).]
D2 takes a good cutting edge and holds it a long time. It is not as tough as some steels when it is hardened above 60 rockwell. It is semistainless
CPM3V is way up in the toughness department. It may not get quite the same razor edge of some of the other steels, but you can practically make a thinner edge using 3V so it may practically be the "best".
52100 is tough and takes an excellent edge. Non stainless.
A2 is in between in toughness, gets really sharp. Non stainless.
420V wears really well and takes a razor edge. Stainless.
BG42 is fairly tough, wears well, takes a great cutting edge, is easier to sharpen than 420V. Stainless.
5160 is a spring steel. It works particularly well for big choppers.
See Joe Talmadge's Steel FAQ in the knowledge base:
http://www.bladeforums.com/features/faqs.shtml
[This message has been edited by Jeff Clark (edited 06-21-2000).]
I vote for CPM-3V. It's tough & able to hold an decent edge nearly forever. It is difficult to sharpen however & you will need to probably use a diamond hone to do it. That's the tradeoff for the edgeholding ability. Over all, it's a great steel for a tough using knife in my opinion.
Doug
Doug
- Joined
- Nov 17, 1999
- Messages
- 676
Depends on several factors.
If you are prepared to spend loads of money, go with the CPM-stuff. If you can spend even more money, go with talonite. If you are on a budget (like me), I think a blade of 52100 is the best you can get. I would read Ed Cafferey's article;" the overall package ".
Don't be impressed by any steel, as there always is better. Example; try to get a knife of CPM 440V and make exactly the same from 1095 (very cheap stuff). Test some around, and harden the 1095 till it is just a fragile as the CPM 440 V stuff. I guarantee that the 1095 will outcut it with flying colours. Un fortunatley, it rust like hell.
It is a trade-off between several factors, from important to less important: price, edgeholding, toughness and corrosion resistance.
Talonite is no wonder stuff, neither is any CPM stuff. Yes, I mean that. And do you people know why? Because if a certain steel costs 2 times as much as 1095 or 52100, I expect 2 times the performance, and usually it doesn't. Talonite prove to be a good dissapointement in this way of seeing it.
Corrosion resistance is not really that important to me, as I like the funky taste of food prepared with an O-1 kitchen knife, and I don't mind spots on the blade, they can be polished off. Bad edgeholding or toughness can't. And folks, I said it before and no-one prove me wrong yet, lots of steels out there are good because they carry a specific name, because they are a hype ! And you don't have to look far in this post to find the names I am referring at.
To be practical, I suggest try'm all out and get your own favourite. Everyone has one, and somewhere out there, there is a blade material made for you. For me that'll be 52100, 5160 and D-2 when it can rust easily.
I never had problems with D-2. My benchmade ATS-34 rusts faster and holds an edge worse. And about thougness...I only use 4 mm thick D-2, for knives up to 15 cm. I guarantee that you won't break it bear-handed, simply because you can't. And, it is not a prybar. If you want a prybar, I'll make you one from 5160.
greetz, Bart.
Feel free to mail me.
If you are prepared to spend loads of money, go with the CPM-stuff. If you can spend even more money, go with talonite. If you are on a budget (like me), I think a blade of 52100 is the best you can get. I would read Ed Cafferey's article;" the overall package ".
Don't be impressed by any steel, as there always is better. Example; try to get a knife of CPM 440V and make exactly the same from 1095 (very cheap stuff). Test some around, and harden the 1095 till it is just a fragile as the CPM 440 V stuff. I guarantee that the 1095 will outcut it with flying colours. Un fortunatley, it rust like hell.
It is a trade-off between several factors, from important to less important: price, edgeholding, toughness and corrosion resistance.
Talonite is no wonder stuff, neither is any CPM stuff. Yes, I mean that. And do you people know why? Because if a certain steel costs 2 times as much as 1095 or 52100, I expect 2 times the performance, and usually it doesn't. Talonite prove to be a good dissapointement in this way of seeing it.
Corrosion resistance is not really that important to me, as I like the funky taste of food prepared with an O-1 kitchen knife, and I don't mind spots on the blade, they can be polished off. Bad edgeholding or toughness can't. And folks, I said it before and no-one prove me wrong yet, lots of steels out there are good because they carry a specific name, because they are a hype ! And you don't have to look far in this post to find the names I am referring at.
To be practical, I suggest try'm all out and get your own favourite. Everyone has one, and somewhere out there, there is a blade material made for you. For me that'll be 52100, 5160 and D-2 when it can rust easily.
I never had problems with D-2. My benchmade ATS-34 rusts faster and holds an edge worse. And about thougness...I only use 4 mm thick D-2, for knives up to 15 cm. I guarantee that you won't break it bear-handed, simply because you can't. And, it is not a prybar. If you want a prybar, I'll make you one from 5160.
greetz, Bart.
Feel free to mail me.
What is "BEST" drink?
Coffee, thee, beer or Coke?
------------------
D.T. UTZINGER
Coffee, thee, beer or Coke?
------------------
D.T. UTZINGER
sevenedges
BANNED
- Joined
- Sep 14, 1999
- Messages
- 992
Pepsi, with a side of INFI.
Daniel
Gold Member
- Joined
- Oct 3, 1998
- Messages
- 3,962
1.What are you going to use it for?
2.Who is heat treating it and tempering it?
I believe that these are more important questions than what type of steel before you decide what type of steel.
Daniel
[This message has been edited by Daniel (edited 06-22-2000).]
2.Who is heat treating it and tempering it?
I believe that these are more important questions than what type of steel before you decide what type of steel.
Daniel
[This message has been edited by Daniel (edited 06-22-2000).]
- Joined
- Oct 7, 1998
- Messages
- 1,838
Bart Student; I must respectfully disagree with some of your statements. You said:
I suggest you peruse the data compiled by Wayne Goddard, who has compiled a table of the edge holding ability of various alloys, controlled with respect to blade geometry, sharpening and hardness. Here is the site: http://www.ameritech.net/users/knives/edge.htm
While 1095 is not among the alloys tested, there are similar alloys which are included. 52100, 5160, 07, even the high speed tool steel M2 was tested. They all performed about the same. This as would be predicted, as these are all relatively low alloy, traditional ingot steels (although I am somewhat surprised that the M2, with its' 6% tungsten didn't do a little better).
Two alloys performed head and shoulders above the rest: CPMT440-V, and Stellite (r) 6k. The question is WHY did these do so well?
You should know the difference between ingot steel and CPM steel. It is this: you can get more good stuff, a LOT more good stuff into the CPM steel. Stated more precisely, ingot steel is limited in the amount of alloying elements, as above a certain (fairly low, compared with CPM) limit, the elements will precipitate out of the ingot and migrate to the surface. With CPM steel, you can put much higher levels of alloying elements, due to the freeze-dry / flash melt process, which holds the elements in even suspension throughout the steel.
This means that you can have alloy levels and concomitant qualities impossible in ingot steel. Carbon, for example, forms molecules of Fe and C, which are iron carbides. These aid in edge holding. Likewise vanadium, chromium, and tungsten all form carbides. When you have higher levels of carbon (CPMT440V has over twice the carbon of 1095), and lots of carbide formers to form carbides with that carbon, you get a LOT of HARD carbides.
CPMT440V has 17% chromium, 0.5% molybdenum and 5.6% vanadium. 1095 has NONE of these elements.
Read this from the Crucible Particle Metallurgy site: http://www.crucibleservice.com/crumain2.htm
Well, you say, that accounts for the high alloy CPM steel's good showing, but how about Stellite (r)? Stellite is a member of a group of alloys called Haynes alloys. These have cobalt as the primary ingredient (with almost no iron), and Cr-W-Mo as carbide formers. Plus enough carbon to make the carbides. Talonite (r) is similar to Stellite.
If you look at the hardness of the Haynes alloys, you will be quite surprised. Rc's run in the mid 40's. So why the excellent edge holding? Because they are hard facing alloys. This means the alloy exposed when the edge wears is just as hard as the surface was; this is in contrast to steel, where the surface is often harder than the underlying metal. The Rockwell hardness test only measures surface hardness, thus gives misleading figures.
Therefore, esteemed colleague Bart Student, I must respectfully advise you that both experimental data and theoretical predictions of edge holding characteristics are diametrically opposed to your assertations.
I await your reply with interest.
Walt
I suggest you peruse the data compiled by Wayne Goddard, who has compiled a table of the edge holding ability of various alloys, controlled with respect to blade geometry, sharpening and hardness. Here is the site: http://www.ameritech.net/users/knives/edge.htm
While 1095 is not among the alloys tested, there are similar alloys which are included. 52100, 5160, 07, even the high speed tool steel M2 was tested. They all performed about the same. This as would be predicted, as these are all relatively low alloy, traditional ingot steels (although I am somewhat surprised that the M2, with its' 6% tungsten didn't do a little better).
Two alloys performed head and shoulders above the rest: CPMT440-V, and Stellite (r) 6k. The question is WHY did these do so well?
You should know the difference between ingot steel and CPM steel. It is this: you can get more good stuff, a LOT more good stuff into the CPM steel. Stated more precisely, ingot steel is limited in the amount of alloying elements, as above a certain (fairly low, compared with CPM) limit, the elements will precipitate out of the ingot and migrate to the surface. With CPM steel, you can put much higher levels of alloying elements, due to the freeze-dry / flash melt process, which holds the elements in even suspension throughout the steel.
This means that you can have alloy levels and concomitant qualities impossible in ingot steel. Carbon, for example, forms molecules of Fe and C, which are iron carbides. These aid in edge holding. Likewise vanadium, chromium, and tungsten all form carbides. When you have higher levels of carbon (CPMT440V has over twice the carbon of 1095), and lots of carbide formers to form carbides with that carbon, you get a LOT of HARD carbides.
CPMT440V has 17% chromium, 0.5% molybdenum and 5.6% vanadium. 1095 has NONE of these elements.
Read this from the Crucible Particle Metallurgy site: http://www.crucibleservice.com/crumain2.htm
Well, you say, that accounts for the high alloy CPM steel's good showing, but how about Stellite (r)? Stellite is a member of a group of alloys called Haynes alloys. These have cobalt as the primary ingredient (with almost no iron), and Cr-W-Mo as carbide formers. Plus enough carbon to make the carbides. Talonite (r) is similar to Stellite.
If you look at the hardness of the Haynes alloys, you will be quite surprised. Rc's run in the mid 40's. So why the excellent edge holding? Because they are hard facing alloys. This means the alloy exposed when the edge wears is just as hard as the surface was; this is in contrast to steel, where the surface is often harder than the underlying metal. The Rockwell hardness test only measures surface hardness, thus gives misleading figures.
Therefore, esteemed colleague Bart Student, I must respectfully advise you that both experimental data and theoretical predictions of edge holding characteristics are diametrically opposed to your assertations.
I await your reply with interest.
Walt
- Joined
- Nov 17, 1999
- Messages
- 676
Hello Walt,
Finaly someone who says I am wrong. On a personal note, I don't mind a bit. I like it, this is a discussion forum, isn't it. And if we differ from opinion, here's the place to find out. I was a little rough in my statements tough they are right.
I found that things that cut with carbides cut different then regular steel. I can easily do a test and find out that talonite sucks. Just scrape of a aluminium bar. Rips the carbides right out, and a steel will be rather inaffected tough it loses sharpness fast too. A spyderco Native with a CPM 440V blade is my daily carry, so I have no grudge against CPM or something. I just need to see for myself which steel is best, and so far the simple alloys are the best. Except that they rust so darn quick.
And, maybe you are wright, experimental and theoretical data prove me wrong, but no-one yet prove me practically wrong.
The CPM 440V experiment should be performed by someone. CPM 440 V will be like HRC 55-56, 1095 will be around 61-62. And let's not cut a lot of fibers. Cut plastic, aluminium, scrape paint, cut wood and such. I predict CPM 440 V will lose.
Talonite is a formidable cutter in fibers, as are the other carbide-cutters. But since my daily use does not contain a lot of fibers, I have yet to find a better the 52100, and so does Ed fowler, and possibely the rest of the ABS. Most people say that 52100 performs like CPM 420 V, and that's supposed to outcut CPM 440 V, right?
Wayne goddard's test is a good effort, but kinda focused on hennep rope. As most steel test are. What's your obsession with that stuff? Who cuts that all day (except for a test)? I found that fibers are one thing, a real thin edge and a razorsharpness to be another. That's also the reason my usual steel knives mostly have serrations, to compensate for the loss against carbide cutters.
I general, chrome doesn't do much good for a blade, carbides and simple steel cut different, and I plee for more everyday work cutting tests.
I await your reply too. If you decide to mail me ( by all means, please do so, I prefer E-mail), my adress is bount to change to
Bart.Weijs@skynet.be
Don't get me wrong. You can answer here too. I just like the "you have new mail" sound of the PC.
thanks for the great discussion, Walt.
Greetz, Bart.
Finaly someone who says I am wrong. On a personal note, I don't mind a bit. I like it, this is a discussion forum, isn't it. And if we differ from opinion, here's the place to find out. I was a little rough in my statements tough they are right.
I found that things that cut with carbides cut different then regular steel. I can easily do a test and find out that talonite sucks. Just scrape of a aluminium bar. Rips the carbides right out, and a steel will be rather inaffected tough it loses sharpness fast too. A spyderco Native with a CPM 440V blade is my daily carry, so I have no grudge against CPM or something. I just need to see for myself which steel is best, and so far the simple alloys are the best. Except that they rust so darn quick.
And, maybe you are wright, experimental and theoretical data prove me wrong, but no-one yet prove me practically wrong.
The CPM 440V experiment should be performed by someone. CPM 440 V will be like HRC 55-56, 1095 will be around 61-62. And let's not cut a lot of fibers. Cut plastic, aluminium, scrape paint, cut wood and such. I predict CPM 440 V will lose.
Talonite is a formidable cutter in fibers, as are the other carbide-cutters. But since my daily use does not contain a lot of fibers, I have yet to find a better the 52100, and so does Ed fowler, and possibely the rest of the ABS. Most people say that 52100 performs like CPM 420 V, and that's supposed to outcut CPM 440 V, right?
Wayne goddard's test is a good effort, but kinda focused on hennep rope. As most steel test are. What's your obsession with that stuff? Who cuts that all day (except for a test)? I found that fibers are one thing, a real thin edge and a razorsharpness to be another. That's also the reason my usual steel knives mostly have serrations, to compensate for the loss against carbide cutters.
I general, chrome doesn't do much good for a blade, carbides and simple steel cut different, and I plee for more everyday work cutting tests.
I await your reply too. If you decide to mail me ( by all means, please do so, I prefer E-mail), my adress is bount to change to
Bart.Weijs@skynet.be
Don't get me wrong. You can answer here too. I just like the "you have new mail" sound of the PC.
thanks for the great discussion, Walt.
Greetz, Bart.
Cliff Stamp
BANNED
- Joined
- Oct 5, 1998
- Messages
- 17,562
Bart :
Talonite will handle metal scraping/slicing easily. Bare metal on metal is one of the things it was designed to do.
Compared to a decent aggressive steel, Talonite slices rope quite poorly.
-Cliff
Talonite will handle metal scraping/slicing easily. Bare metal on metal is one of the things it was designed to do.
Compared to a decent aggressive steel, Talonite slices rope quite poorly.
-Cliff
- Joined
- Oct 7, 1998
- Messages
- 1,838
Bart; thank you for your kind and prompt reply. I shall answer you here, rather than by e-mail, as some members may learn from our exchange.
You said:
Well, Wolf Borger, a german Master Knifesmith, has this to say on the Benchmade forum (under 'metallurgy'):
Mr. Borger's statement is in accord with what I understand to be correct. Thus, your comment is diffult to understand. 'Regular steel' is able to cut well due to the carbides in it. Remember that the higher the carbon, the more carbides, and (in general) the better the steel will cut. Since the high alloy steels have 2 to 4 times the carbon of ingot steel (and thus will make more carbides), and contain carbide formers which make VERY hard carbides, it would be expected that the high alloy steels would cut better than 'regular' (low alloy) steel. Since the experimental data of Mr. Goddard support this hypothesis, I fail to see any mechanism which would explain your position. Perhaps you could enlighten me regarding your reasoning on this.
Regarding the edge holding of Talonite (r), it was tried out in the form of scraping blades in a cereal mill. It out lasted tungsten carbide by 35%. Steel blades would have lasted only a small fraction of the time the tungsten carbide lasted. This test method is useful, as it allows for easy comparison of the actual wear rate of blades. Since changing the blades costs the company money in both labor, material, and lost operating time, the Talonite (r) saved a lot of money as it wore for such a long time. Surely you cannot believe this company would waste money on an expensive alloy if a cheap steel would work better?
Regarding scraping an aluminum bar and having the Talonite (r) affected at all, this is something I would dearly like to see, as a file will barely scratch Talonite (r), and a hack saw blade skitters right off the surface of it.
Rope cutting is one of the standard tests for knives. It is true that the Haynes alloys are not ideally suited for this task, due to their inherent lubricity. Here is what MatWeb has to say about this:
Despite this inherent lubricity, which makes Stellite (r) or Talonite (r) less than ideal for cutting rope, and the fact that the Stellite (r) blade in the Goddard test was sharpened to a polished edge, further reducing its' ability to cut, the Stellite (r) cut AS MUCH ROPE AS THE CPMT440V! Further, these two alloys cut the most rope in the test.
On a practical level, my eldest daughter, Dark Mistress on the forums, has a Rob Simonich Wambli with fossil mammoth ivory scales. She uses it daily for a variety of purposes; she even once used it for wallpapering! She reports excellent edge holding.
Hoping you can shed some light on this intriguing subject, I await your reply.
Walt
You said:
Well, Wolf Borger, a german Master Knifesmith, has this to say on the Benchmade forum (under 'metallurgy'):
Mr. Borger's statement is in accord with what I understand to be correct. Thus, your comment is diffult to understand. 'Regular steel' is able to cut well due to the carbides in it. Remember that the higher the carbon, the more carbides, and (in general) the better the steel will cut. Since the high alloy steels have 2 to 4 times the carbon of ingot steel (and thus will make more carbides), and contain carbide formers which make VERY hard carbides, it would be expected that the high alloy steels would cut better than 'regular' (low alloy) steel. Since the experimental data of Mr. Goddard support this hypothesis, I fail to see any mechanism which would explain your position. Perhaps you could enlighten me regarding your reasoning on this.
Regarding the edge holding of Talonite (r), it was tried out in the form of scraping blades in a cereal mill. It out lasted tungsten carbide by 35%. Steel blades would have lasted only a small fraction of the time the tungsten carbide lasted. This test method is useful, as it allows for easy comparison of the actual wear rate of blades. Since changing the blades costs the company money in both labor, material, and lost operating time, the Talonite (r) saved a lot of money as it wore for such a long time. Surely you cannot believe this company would waste money on an expensive alloy if a cheap steel would work better?
Regarding scraping an aluminum bar and having the Talonite (r) affected at all, this is something I would dearly like to see, as a file will barely scratch Talonite (r), and a hack saw blade skitters right off the surface of it.
Rope cutting is one of the standard tests for knives. It is true that the Haynes alloys are not ideally suited for this task, due to their inherent lubricity. Here is what MatWeb has to say about this:
Despite this inherent lubricity, which makes Stellite (r) or Talonite (r) less than ideal for cutting rope, and the fact that the Stellite (r) blade in the Goddard test was sharpened to a polished edge, further reducing its' ability to cut, the Stellite (r) cut AS MUCH ROPE AS THE CPMT440V! Further, these two alloys cut the most rope in the test.
On a practical level, my eldest daughter, Dark Mistress on the forums, has a Rob Simonich Wambli with fossil mammoth ivory scales. She uses it daily for a variety of purposes; she even once used it for wallpapering! She reports excellent edge holding.
Hoping you can shed some light on this intriguing subject, I await your reply.
Walt
- Joined
- May 9, 2000
- Messages
- 29,205
Talonite is a great steel. No it is not D-2 or CPM-3V. It is more like Stellite 6K. It is none magnetic and holds an edge better than almost anything else. It also is almost impossible to rust and is fairly easy to sharpen.
As you can tell I like this steel very much.
As you can tell I like this steel very much.
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2000
- Messages
- 4,492
With all this discussion regarding Talonite (Stellite 6K) someone please help me figure this scenario out. The industrial mineral plant where I work utilizes many screw conveyors for transporting finely ground product. These screw flights are suspended and turn in bearing sleeves and gudgeons that are left unlubricated to protect the product from contamination from grease, oil, etc. Wear is a very major concern. One of our sales reps informed us of this great new material (Stellite 6K) was available and that it would reduce our wear rate down to next to nothing when compared to the simple steel sleeves and gudgeons presently being used. We tried some out. These $500 a set (old ones were $30 a set) sleeves lasted considerably LESS time than the old ones. So in this case of continual metal to metal contact with only a mineral powder as a lubricant, The cobalt alloys do not excel. Why?
Bronco
Moderator
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2000
- Messages
- 7,585
Doc,
There you go again trying to make your point using facts, logic and well reasoned arguments. Won't you ever learn?
Keith,
While I think that your fondness of Talonite is well justified, allow me to clarify a few common misconceptions regarding Talonite:
-Talonite is not a steel at all, but rather a matrix composed of primarily cobalt (as I understand it)
-Talonite is non-ferrous, but not truly non-magnetic, (i.e. it still generates magnetic eddy currents). This distinction is of importantance to EOD specialists and those who harbor fantasies of bypassing the less sophisticated metal detectors currently in use.
------------------
Semper Fi
-Bill
There you go again trying to make your point using facts, logic and well reasoned arguments. Won't you ever learn?
Keith,
While I think that your fondness of Talonite is well justified, allow me to clarify a few common misconceptions regarding Talonite:
-Talonite is not a steel at all, but rather a matrix composed of primarily cobalt (as I understand it)
-Talonite is non-ferrous, but not truly non-magnetic, (i.e. it still generates magnetic eddy currents). This distinction is of importantance to EOD specialists and those who harbor fantasies of bypassing the less sophisticated metal detectors currently in use.
------------------
Semper Fi
-Bill
1. Talonite® is a cobalt / chrome alloy and, by definition, not a steel. We started offering it as a knife alloy because we felt that it had properties not available in other knife alloys. There are materials considerably superior to Talonite® depending on how you define superior. Many (most) steels are cheaper. Obsidian takes a better edge. (There is a knife maker who makes beautiful obsidian and stone knives. Can't remember his name - love his work) Titanium is lighter. Bronze, glass, ceramic and others all have advantages over Talonite®.
2. One of the things that really impresses me about many members of these forums is the way they express themselves. The really knowledgeable people rarely say x is better than y without qualifying it. E.g. Steel is better because it is cheaper than Talonite ®. Talonite® holds an edge much longer than steel in overall use. The really smart guys actually use numbers and test results. They also talk about tests they have done rather than speculating and predicting what would happen. The tests are not perfect and may not reflect real world use but they are considerably better than no tests at all.
3. Any knife is a combination of the material and the way it is used. With Talonite® initially the word was that it wouldn't get sharp enough to be a good knife. Then Rob Simonich got a microscope and did some experimenting. If you get a chance to see one of the Camillus production Cuda's it will answer a lot of your questions about Talonite®.
4. Steel can reasonably be considered as iron carbides in an iron matrix. How readily the carbides are removed depends on many things especially the quality of the matrix. An iron matrix is generally poorer at holding the carbides and thus dulling than a cobalt / chrome matrix.
5. Actually Talonite® testing and reviews have been almost all real world. I would like to see much more formal testing but the really important thing is how good a knife it makes judged by the knife users. I think it is important to a knife purchaser to know that a knife will clean 5 hogs and still be sharp compared to an ordinary knife that only does one hog. I think this is more important than Rockwell, grain size or anything of that nature.
6. Talonite was superior to other metal alloys in the abrasion test with the cereal scrapers. It was tested against tungsten carbide in sawmills. The tungsten carbide will wear longer in a non-corrosive or mildly corrosive environment such as dry lumber. With green lumber, especially cedar, Talonite ® alloys stay much sharper, much longer.
(Either Doc Welch made a mistake or I didn't make myself clear when I explained it to him and I would appreciate it if no one commented on which is most likely.)
7. I wasn't going to do this but if you read this far you deserve something. If you are really interested in Talonite® I will buy another Camillus Cuda and loan (repeat loan) it to you. How about 2 weeks and this is for a normal use test not a test to destruction.
A. It would be really great if you could get knives in Stellite®, CPM metals, Titanium and some of the other materials to test with this. Let me know and I will reserve you a time period for that.
B. Talonite® works better than you think it would. There is really no way to appreciate without actually using it. Sort of like the Kit Carson dive knife in our advertising photo. It looks really good in the picture but there is magic that only comes out when you actually hold it.
C. Then there is a sneaky commercial reason. Talonite ® is expensive but it seems a lot more affordable once you have actually used it.
2. One of the things that really impresses me about many members of these forums is the way they express themselves. The really knowledgeable people rarely say x is better than y without qualifying it. E.g. Steel is better because it is cheaper than Talonite ®. Talonite® holds an edge much longer than steel in overall use. The really smart guys actually use numbers and test results. They also talk about tests they have done rather than speculating and predicting what would happen. The tests are not perfect and may not reflect real world use but they are considerably better than no tests at all.
3. Any knife is a combination of the material and the way it is used. With Talonite® initially the word was that it wouldn't get sharp enough to be a good knife. Then Rob Simonich got a microscope and did some experimenting. If you get a chance to see one of the Camillus production Cuda's it will answer a lot of your questions about Talonite®.
4. Steel can reasonably be considered as iron carbides in an iron matrix. How readily the carbides are removed depends on many things especially the quality of the matrix. An iron matrix is generally poorer at holding the carbides and thus dulling than a cobalt / chrome matrix.
5. Actually Talonite® testing and reviews have been almost all real world. I would like to see much more formal testing but the really important thing is how good a knife it makes judged by the knife users. I think it is important to a knife purchaser to know that a knife will clean 5 hogs and still be sharp compared to an ordinary knife that only does one hog. I think this is more important than Rockwell, grain size or anything of that nature.
6. Talonite was superior to other metal alloys in the abrasion test with the cereal scrapers. It was tested against tungsten carbide in sawmills. The tungsten carbide will wear longer in a non-corrosive or mildly corrosive environment such as dry lumber. With green lumber, especially cedar, Talonite ® alloys stay much sharper, much longer.
(Either Doc Welch made a mistake or I didn't make myself clear when I explained it to him and I would appreciate it if no one commented on which is most likely.)
7. I wasn't going to do this but if you read this far you deserve something. If you are really interested in Talonite® I will buy another Camillus Cuda and loan (repeat loan) it to you. How about 2 weeks and this is for a normal use test not a test to destruction.
A. It would be really great if you could get knives in Stellite®, CPM metals, Titanium and some of the other materials to test with this. Let me know and I will reserve you a time period for that.
B. Talonite® works better than you think it would. There is really no way to appreciate without actually using it. Sort of like the Kit Carson dive knife in our advertising photo. It looks really good in the picture but there is magic that only comes out when you actually hold it.
C. Then there is a sneaky commercial reason. Talonite ® is expensive but it seems a lot more affordable once you have actually used it.
Dear Blademan 13:
Talonite® is not Stellite® 6K. Talonite® has a bit more carbon and special processing that makes it more ductile. Talonite® comes from an ancestry of military use especially turbines. Think of a navy fighter sucking in seawater and sand. Turbine blades need a bit of give. This is why we think it makes a superior knife blade to 6K. In your question it might depend on just how the material failed. Materials are hard and tough. There is generally a trade off between hardness and toughness. (That is way over simplified.) If you have hard materials in a use where they are not tough enough then they can fail without wearing out. Ceramic knife blades have wonderful wear qualities but can snap. Different materials react differently in different environments. With some hard materials in your kind of an application you get grains working into bearings, sleeves, etc. in the pressure point and the grains (of the transported mineral) act as force concentrators to cause microfracturing. It chips away rather than wearing away. There is also lubricity. There is metal fatigue due to flexing. There is chemical attack and heat in combination. Essentially there could be a lot of reasons. The same way that Oilite® bearing work better than steel maybe. Basically it has hard to determine from the description given. This is unusual enough to make me ask about the source of the materials. Was it genuine Stellite®? If so, what did they say? The Haynes alloys can vary widely in performance depending on small changes in the chemistry and the processing as can steel. Wear life can depend on whether the materials was cast, rolled, forged, HIPed (Hot Isostatic Press) or other. Cast parts can have voids and softer spots. Essentially, then, I don't know either. There are Stellite® folks monitoring and posting to the knife forums. Maybe one of them can answer this. Maybe he can also arrange for the loan of a knife for the tests.
Tom
Talonite® is not Stellite® 6K. Talonite® has a bit more carbon and special processing that makes it more ductile. Talonite® comes from an ancestry of military use especially turbines. Think of a navy fighter sucking in seawater and sand. Turbine blades need a bit of give. This is why we think it makes a superior knife blade to 6K. In your question it might depend on just how the material failed. Materials are hard and tough. There is generally a trade off between hardness and toughness. (That is way over simplified.) If you have hard materials in a use where they are not tough enough then they can fail without wearing out. Ceramic knife blades have wonderful wear qualities but can snap. Different materials react differently in different environments. With some hard materials in your kind of an application you get grains working into bearings, sleeves, etc. in the pressure point and the grains (of the transported mineral) act as force concentrators to cause microfracturing. It chips away rather than wearing away. There is also lubricity. There is metal fatigue due to flexing. There is chemical attack and heat in combination. Essentially there could be a lot of reasons. The same way that Oilite® bearing work better than steel maybe. Basically it has hard to determine from the description given. This is unusual enough to make me ask about the source of the materials. Was it genuine Stellite®? If so, what did they say? The Haynes alloys can vary widely in performance depending on small changes in the chemistry and the processing as can steel. Wear life can depend on whether the materials was cast, rolled, forged, HIPed (Hot Isostatic Press) or other. Cast parts can have voids and softer spots. Essentially, then, I don't know either. There are Stellite® folks monitoring and posting to the knife forums. Maybe one of them can answer this. Maybe he can also arrange for the loan of a knife for the tests.
Tom
Walt, thank you for some informative and interesting posts to this thread. I appreciate the efforts of all of you who take the trouble to look these things up so that I may benefit from your knowledge.
Tom, thank you also for your informative postings, and the amazing offer of a knife to test. It is people like you, Will Fennell, Sal Glesser, and many others, who not only produce the knives we love so much, but also clearly care so deeply about their work and customer base, that make this such an amazing site to be a part of.
Sorry if this is sort of a sappy post, I was just truly struck by the degree of thoughtful consideration every poster to this thread has displayed.
Tom, thank you also for your informative postings, and the amazing offer of a knife to test. It is people like you, Will Fennell, Sal Glesser, and many others, who not only produce the knives we love so much, but also clearly care so deeply about their work and customer base, that make this such an amazing site to be a part of.
Sorry if this is sort of a sappy post, I was just truly struck by the degree of thoughtful consideration every poster to this thread has displayed.
- Joined
- Oct 7, 1998
- Messages
- 1,838
Burke; thanks for the kind words, and not to worry; as mentioned above by Tom Walz, Talonite (r) exhibits excellent wear characteristics with green lumber. Thus, sappy posts should not be a problem.
(and yes, I do need to have my meds adjusted)
'Captain' Tom Walz of the good ship Talonite (r) made a rather confused suggestion that I had erred (WHERE can I get one of those neat symbols for registered trade mark like Tom has? In other words, as The Joker said about Batman, 'WHERE does he get those marvelous toys?') :
I only commented on the cereal mill scraper test. I didn't say anything about lumber, dry or green, that I recall; I suspect that Tom is suffering confusion from drinking that inferior Washington State wine again. I shall (again) have to send him some quality California wine so that his thinking improves. Were I to encounter a patient in the ER as confused as this, I would ask him to count fingers...OK, ready, Tom?...one finger, the middle finger? Right you are Mr. Walz!!
Awaiting your reply with modest expectations, I remain, yr. obt. svt.
Walt
[This message has been edited by Walt Welch (edited 06-23-2000).]
'Captain' Tom Walz of the good ship Talonite (r) made a rather confused suggestion that I had erred (WHERE can I get one of those neat symbols for registered trade mark like Tom has? In other words, as The Joker said about Batman, 'WHERE does he get those marvelous toys?') :
I only commented on the cereal mill scraper test. I didn't say anything about lumber, dry or green, that I recall; I suspect that Tom is suffering confusion from drinking that inferior Washington State wine again. I shall (again) have to send him some quality California wine so that his thinking improves. Were I to encounter a patient in the ER as confused as this, I would ask him to count fingers...OK, ready, Tom?...one finger, the middle finger? Right you are Mr. Walz!!
Awaiting your reply with modest expectations, I remain, yr. obt. svt.
Walt
[This message has been edited by Walt Welch (edited 06-23-2000).]