BG-42 QFog results?

jeffj · Feb 7, 2000

I've been waiting on these results...have I missed them? I know that Sal said that they were testing BG-42 sometime back and I hadn't seen the results yet. I am really curious how this steel holds up when compared to ATS-43 and 440C on this test.

jj

Sal Glesser · Feb 8, 2000

Jeffj - My apologies. It's always difficult to post our test results. Firstly because it is only our tests and could vary with others (??). Secondly, Some are always upset if results do not equal their claims. Also keep in mind that the BG-42 that we tested had been heat reated by Chris Reeve, which I believe is different that Labtrobe's formula.

In our most recent Qfog test;

After 6 hrs BG-42 still had a 9.7 rating which was very good. Actually one of the the better of the uncoated steels. 440C was still a 10 (unaffected) (with one exception).

After 48 hours, BG-42 still rated as one of the higher of the stainless steels at 6.8 (with 1 exception). At 48 hours in Qfog, the only stainless steels (in this test) that stayed above 5 was a coated 440V, MBS-26, VG-10 and 17.4ph. The exception listed above is still our secret as we're curretnly working with it.

It appears that BG-42 is some very good stuff when properly heat treated. BTW heat treat makes a BIG difference in corrossion resistance. Hope that answers your Q and causes no problems.

sal

jeffj · Feb 8, 2000

Thank Sal! I really like the performance of the BG-42 in my Sebenza, so this is great news.

When you said that the coated steels rated a 5, did you mean at 72 hours? Were they all coated? Is the coating a secret, too? Hmmm....secret steel...

I think that the only problem I see is that you have too many secrets!

And everybody will want to know what Sal is hiding!

Thanks again.

jj

[This message has been edited by jeffj (edited 02-08-2000).]

JoHnYKwSt · Feb 8, 2000

Sal,

Was 420V tested? And if so how did it do.

Thanks

------------------
Johnny
[]xxxxxx[]=============>

Cliff Stamp · Feb 10, 2000

Sal, does that number represent the depth of penetration of the rust, or the surface area covered, or the total mass converted?

-Cliff

Sal Glesser · Feb 9, 2000

JJ - Sorry 'bout that. Our competitors lurk also.

Johnny - 420-V was at 7.4 in 6 hours, down to 1.7 in 48 hours.

Cliff - Each number represents a percentage of area covered:

10 = 0%
9 = 0.03%
8 = 0.1%
7 = 0.3%
6 = 1%
5 = 3%
4 = 10%
3 = 16%
2 = 33%
1 = 50%

sal

Cliff Stamp · Feb 10, 2000

Sal is there any way for you to determine a median pit depth for the Q-fog corrosion test? It would be interesting to see if it was directly proportional to surface area covered. It would also be very useful if you did cutting evaluations on the corroded blades to see how much performance was lost and again see if that was directly proportional to surface area covered.

-Cliff

JoHnYKwSt · Feb 10, 2000

Sal,

Where was 440C at 48 hours?

Thanks,

------------------
Johnny
[]xxxxxx[]=============>

Sal Glesser · Feb 15, 2000

Cliff - I agree that would be interesting info. Perhaps when time allows?

Johnny - 4.4

sal