Better than S30V

KnifeTest said:
or an other knifemaker who treated S30V more hard than 60 HRC please ?


Thanks Cliff
Click to expand...


R. J. Martin runs his S30V at 60 or better, and gets excellent results. I have a little Japanese style neck knife R.J. made for me out of S30V. This little knife is hollow ground VERY thin, and is at least 60 Rockwell. The performance has been excellent.
 
2 KnifeTest

My point is that comparison from CPM Sata Sheets
CPM S30V to 440C is 145 to 100
CPM S60V to 440C is 800 to 100
with little arithmetic magic we may say that
CPM S60V to CPM S30V is 551 to 100

Wich means CPM S60V 5.5 times better then CPM S30V.

And 440C used here as a common reference base.

Thanks, Vassili.
 
Cliff Stamp said:
They run it softer because :

1) they do a lot of grinding after hardening and thus have to factor in machinability
2) thier ovens can not take the required soak temps (this was an issue with 440V (S60V) in particular)
3) they would have to fight the misconception that it is "bad" at higher HRC (benchmade commented in the past that one of the reasons they didn't switch more to M2 vs ATS-34 was the demand it would take on marketing to promote the change)
4) their tolerances might not be high enough, you give up precision in large batches and thus have to keep the hardness down so that you can exceed it without too much trouble
5) they are trying to make a more "abusable" knife, as they are selling to a wide range of users who may be relative novices
6) no cryo ability
and so on .

-Cliff
Click to expand...






Cliff , if you don't know ,don't guess! None of the reasons mentioned are why production companies run s30v softer eccept item #5 . They do it because they want the enhanced toughness because there are alot of people out there that beat the absolute hell out of there knives and then claim warranty on them . You would be in awe if you saw one month of tip breakage returns from the average knife company.Most companies honor these returns even though they are not obligated to do so .My hats off to them.
To imply that they make inferior products with slack tollerances and inadequate heat treating facities is mean spirited and obviously an ill informed attack . Don't pretend to know something you don't .I've been to almost all the larger production factories at one time or another and they are quite impressive and the tollerances very close .
 
Another misconception is that harder steel makes for better edge retention. Harder is not always better .It is unlikely that there is going to be a steel in the near future that will not go dull after prolonged use . My recomendation is that more knife buyers learn to sharpen and maintain there knives . s60v Holds a great edge but becomes glasslike at 60-62rc. Even at 56-57 rc it is difficult for a novice to sharpen. S30v is easier to sharpen, I can get it sharper than s60v, has better toughness ,strength and corrosion resistance.
Focus should be on the overall balence of an alloy,taking into concideration all the other factors strength,toughness, edge retention ,sharpenability , corrosion resistance etc... as they are equally important when deciding on the proper alloy for your knife. Then make sure your edge geometries are correct as this will determine more about how a knife performes for the most part than the alloy it's self .
 
can you give a true comparison BG42 against S30V ?


I mean with the physical data : toughness at the same hardness, edge retention, corrosion resistence and so on


Because each producer said his steel is better than an other but OBJECTIVELY what's better like steel ?

I saw the data sheet of Crucible about S30V but the comparison is not against BG42, or it's seem to me the best competitor of S30V is BG42


Some one can help ???
 
Ken, as noted, these were issues brought up on manufacturer forums or well known problems in general. For example Benchmade statement on M2 vs ATS-34, lets not be so naive that we forget these companies exist to make money. As for QC, there are thermal mass issue with large batches of knives in commencial gas ovens, plus with air and oil quenching. There is *NO* way a large manufacturer can come close to the tolerance of a custom maker who inspects, HRC stamps and does a few cutting and flex trials with each knife. Some production companies are dealing with these issues with baths, more blade testing, adding cryo etc., some are better than others.

As for hardness, a greater hardness gives greater resistance to edge roll / denting for the same reason it gives greater hardness as both are simple measures of resistance to deformation. Edge roll is very important to blunting hence the use of smooth steels. Is it the only consideration, no, but it can't simply be ignored, when you drop hardness you drop this aspect of performance significantly.

As for "hard to sharpen" this depends critically on :

1) how the knife is ground
2) is the steel suitable for the blade

If it actually depends on the machinability of the steel, then the maker didn't grind the knife correctly or picked the wrong steel for that blade.

As an example, I am currently doing a lot of sharpening of a U2 from Fallkniven (uses a high alloy stainless at 62 HRC) and a Voyager from Cold Steel (uses softer, low alloy AUS-8A), which one sharpens easier - the U2. The U2 was also trivial to reprofile to my personal angle preference (about a minute) and the Voyager saw ten minutes on the same abrasives getting about half way there (finished on a belt sander).

It doesn't matter than the steel is inherently harder to machine, because the steel is well suited to the knife and ground accordingly (0.005" thick edge, and ground acute) so it is touched up readily. The edge on the Voyager is *much* thicker and thus much more material has to be removed to hone it (many times more than the U2). In addition the softer steel rolls and wear faster and thus has to be sharpened more often.

The same steel in the U2 (SPGS) would be very hard to sharpen in a large convex bowie, and the AUS-8A more suitable (AUS-6A more suitable still). So it depends on the knife, pick the steel according. Too much too often however a popular steel is picked and just jammed into a knife because you can sell a steel regardless of it is actually suitable for a knife.

As for S60V being much more wear resistant than S30V yes, S90V even more so. With high Vanadium steels this can be estimated coarsely by just the Vandium content. However note that edge retention isn't proportional to wear resistance, it helps, but usually isn't the critical factor.

-Cliff
 
It will be interesting to know how edge retention actually related to wear resistance. I can imagine that this is not linear dependancy but is it correct to say that if S60V 8 times then 440C more wear resistant then it should be few times more edge rtentant them S30V?
According to CPM datasheets CPM S30V better then ATS-34 so

BG-42 C=1.15 Cr=14.5 Mn=0.5 Mo=4 Si=0.3 V=1.2
CM-154 C=1.05 Cr=14 Mn=0.5 Mo=4 Si=0.3

Does it means that CPM S30V can be comparable with BG-42 similary?

Thanks, Vassili.
 
Well said, gents. Cliff makes a very rudimentary statement. A Thick blade is more work to grind than a thin one. It's obvious and certainly true. That's something a data sheet won't help resolve. Ken makes another true statement and that is that blade design and workmanship affect performance in a meaningful way. Again, something a data sheet can't resolve.

I continue to be amazed that people want to put various steels in a list ranked from "best" to "worst" without considering all these other elements. What is a "best" steel for one application could be a "worst" steel for another. I think it's probably more useful to understand that the data sheet for a steel is only one decision making input - not usually a very important one, though, except for the knife designer and maker. The aspects of a blade that go beyond the data sheet are probably more important for the consumer. Interesting discussion. Take care.
 
This is two point of view.

As a consumer I like to know is for example Spyderco Militar with CMP S30V better then same Spyderco Military with CPM S60V. However if am am selling knives it does not really matters. I like to know what the difference between Benchmade Nivramus HS and Benchmade Nivramus, there is difference in price so I like to make right desidion - what I am getting for extra money?

I think from consumer point of view the fact "that people want to put various steels in a list ranked from "best" to "worst" " is perfectly reasonable and valid.

Thanks, Vassili.
 
I think it's a natural human (male) reaction to categorize things from best to worst. Even as a kid, it was important to know which plane was the fastest, wrestler the strongest, etc., even though practically, it made no difference in my life then and now...

I have a Buck 110 in BG 42, and when the new S30V 110's are off backorder, I'll be able to compare them. All I can say is that my 110 in BG 42 is amazing. Keeps a razor edge for a long, long time when cutting things such as cardboard or wood, and can be stropped/steeled back very easily.

I have a very expensive folder that I'm reluctant to name (don't want to start another of *those* threads) in S30V, and I'm very disappointed in the edge holding. It's about equal to AUS 8A, but at 10 times the cost. The Buck absolutely outshines it hands down.

I also find S30V to be very difficult to bring to a razor edge, even with my Edgepro. I have no trouble getting many other steels to a razor's edge, such as 1095, 5160, Infi, 52100, AUS 8A, Carbon V, D2, BG 42, CPM 3V, well, you get the idea. I don't think it's my technique.

I don't know. Maybe mine is too soft, or whatever. I have a Buck Vanguard coming in S30V, and I'm anxious to try it, but I think the real testing will be with "dueling" 110's. All I can say is that BG 42 is a great steel for edge holding during light cutting.
 
Cliff , I know this could go on all night and still wouldn't be resolved . I make and test all the time and know what I'm talking about. I do it for factories and on a custom and R&D level . While your reciting someone said once in a similar thread I am trying to discuss this on a real world,cut the bullshit and show it for what it is without the hype standpoint.
Many things come into play when making a knife perform in a perticular fashon . steel choice ,heat treatment, edge geometry,sharpness,Blade geometry,etc... There is no one steel that is inherently the "best" . Makers have there favorites and prejudices. Data sheets are useful but don't tell all. S30V is a great choice. The great thing about S30V is its diversity . It is capable of performing flawlessly in both large choppers and small precision knives designed for detail .The difference is in the heat treat. Say what you will ,but a 57-59 rc S30V blade is a beautiful thing in the peformance arena. Toughness is greater ,strength is better and edge retention only diminished slightly and corrosion resistance isn't compromised. These hardnesses have proven themselves over and over as the best balence between edge retention and toughness.As far as the accuracy of factory heat treat bieng inferior. Your information is flawed . Factories test thousands of blades each day to ensure proper H/T and invest thousands into state of the art testing machines to be sure . Just because a company is in business to make money doesn't mean there dis honorable or cutting corners or bieng dis honest in some way. Comparing custom to production is pointless. Especially because we have all seen a bunch of custom crap. As well as extreme precision and attention to detail . It's not fair to lump custom into one category or make a blanket comment that includes custom vs production as ther is also alot of production crap.

Now if you compared a Frank Centofante to a production Production would loose every time.

It would be nice if we could categorize that easily but it's not possable .


With reguard to harder bieng better thats generally speaking . not all steels perform best at 60 rc classic example is s60v becomes quite brittle at this hardness and the edge chips if you look at it under magnification. But at 57-58 it will out perform steels in the 60 rc.
 
A quote from Mick Strider..."60V and 90V are for fags......." I'm sure Mick was kidding, so don't get too pissy about this quote. I just posted it to lighten up this thread a little.

Or from Tom Mayo..."420v holds an edge extremely well, and as stated is hard to sharpen for the average user, it also chips when used hard with a thin edge, not big chips, very small ones right on the edge, one sharpening on a belt sander will take them out.

S30V, while not holding an edge as long, has great toughness, which goes well with a thinner bevel and thus a more efficient cutting edge.

440v falls behind both of these steels, and although it is excellent, it has been surpassed by Crucibles constant enginneering pursuits."
 
nozh2002 said:
This is two point of view.

As a consumer I like to know is for example Spyderco Militar with CMP S30V better then same Spyderco Military with CPM S60V. However if am am selling knives it does not really matters. I like to know what the difference between Benchmade Nivramus HS and Benchmade Nivramus, there is difference in price so I like to make right desidion - what I am getting for extra money?

I think from consumer point of view the fact "that people want to put various steels in a list ranked from "best" to "worst" " is perfectly reasonable and valid.

Thanks, Vassili.
Click to expand...

So you're suggesting that one Nimravus is better for everyone than the other? Let's say I really care about corrosion resistance? Or, perhaps, edge retention matters to me more? Or toughness? Maybe I just don't like black blades. Perhaps budget is more important than other characteristics.

Isn't it possible that one steel isn't better than another but only better for some characteristics? Isn't it possible that one is better for one individual and the other for another? The answers, of course, are yes as you know so putting steels into a list without paying attention to application is silly. It is, in fact, quite unreasonable. If such were not the case then there would only be one steel - the best one. There is no perfect steel. All of them have trade offs. The idea is to fit them to an application or a set of design parameters, not to make a list with a grade. Hopefully, now I've explained it well enough that you understand what I mean.
 
" So you're suggesting that one Nimravus is better for everyone than the other? Let's say I really care about corrosion resistance?"
No I am not. I am saying exactly this:
"I like to know what the difference between ..."

Yes I like to know which is better for one characteristic and which is better for another. CPM S60V is better for one characteristic - wear resistance then CPM S30V.

"There is no perfect steel." - M2 for example is not corrosian resistant, but for edge retention it is perfect etc.

Hopefully, now I've explained it well enough that you understand what I mean.

Thanks, Vassili.
 
they don't want more 440C and so on

for stainless steel only S30V, BG42, S60V, S90V, and now SGPS



in carbon steel they continue to buy any steel D2 A2 and sandwich and so on



because according to them, the toughness is not so important, the edge retention and the possibility for resharpen is more important


Any comment ?
 
the same model with a better steel


Some time they ( my friends ) want some model but I don't want to buy this when it's in normal steel, you can say they are stupids but it's the reality
 
How much wear resistance contributes to edge holding depends on the type of material you are cutting and the other properties of the knife. A few general rules of thumb :

1) as a knife gets softer, wear resistance contributes less, because the edge rolls readily and can't stay crisp enough to allow any wear

2) as the material becomes very abrasive, wear resistance starts to be a factor

3) as the material starts to become harder, wear resistance becomes less of a factor (because it tends to roll the edge rather than wear it)

So for example considering cardboard :

Here blunting is roughly half wear and half deformation, so to determine the effect of increasing wear resistance you would calculate :

(50*(1+x)+50)%

where x = the increase in wear resistance

So if you doubled wear resistance you would get 75%, which would mean the knife was only 75% as blunt after similar work, a decent enough advantage.

However, if you tripled the wear resistance you would get 63%, which shows you that increasing it dramitically doesn't gain you nearly as much as some tend to suggest.

If you go insane and increase it by ten, you just get ~55. So you can see that useful increases are 100% or less.

So don't get too excited about wear resistance *without* hardness, regardless of the hype.

Ken, how about sticking to debating the facts and just using logic, are you actually going argue against :

1) custom makers with oil + cryo can get higher hardness than just air (this is basic materials science)

2) large batch oven soaks + tempering induces thermal mass issues (this is basic materials science)

3) single blade testing is vastly more precise than any random sampling done (this is basic statistics, you are comparing populations to sampling inferences)

4) production companies have to build their blades to looser tolerances because they don't know who is using them, from novices to experts (this is basic common sense)

As for the companies looking out for our best interests, sorry, P.T. Barnum doesn't have a customer in me, try to sell that somewhere else, Newfoundland wasn't founded by people that naive.

Look around and you will find lots of production and custom makers openly stating that they routinely offer products with a lower functional ability just to meet the popular demand which is often *not* based on performance, choosing steels and/or designs which will sell not because of how they work, but how they appear or are thought to work (the whole concept of stainless being "superior" to carbon steels [a large portion of the public think the stainless marking is a direct sign of quality] for example sells a lot of knives even though it has no basis in fact)..

As for S30V being tough, it has no functional advatnage in toughness nor flexibility nor strength over ATS-34 in the like, as per the actual spec sheets by crucible and as by blades I have used and broken, and seen broken by others.

Is it a decent stainless steel, sure, It can get very hard (~63 HRC), and at such hardness makes a very nice light utility knife, giving better edge retention than ATS-34, and has a nicer heat treat according to a few custom makers. At <60 HRC it offers little to no functional advantage over ATS-34 that I have seen personally (outside of wear resistance which as you can see in the above is more hype than fact).

I have a Military in S30V, its a great folder. However would I get really excited about it vs VG-10 in the exact same blade - no. Would I want it in a large tactical, not even close. I have even used it at Reeve hardness and it still chips too readily.

As for best / worst, as I noted this depends on the knife, so all you need to specific is the knife and how it is going to be used (and what you want performance wise) and you can rank a steel from best to worst, just like you can talk about cotton vs wool for clothes.

Do all of the comments I made apply to all companies, no, as noted some are much better than others (Spyderco and Swamp Rat for example have very high QC and standards of quality). But quite frankly if you think thay anyone who is trying to sell you something isn't inherently biased about its abilities - then Lady Liberty is up for sale, contact me for details (only $9.99 a month, no interest, no down payment).



-Cliff
 
There were also problems with chipping with S30V when it first came out, they may have adjusted the RC lower to fix this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top