Chris Reeve Green Beret

[RedLynx]

I can only imagine (with regard to the police force). Very interesting stuff, glad nothing much has happened with your knife rights so far. Thanks very much for sharing, I like to know what's going on with gun and knife rights in other countries.

There has been threats from our Gov to impose much more stringent limitations (based on UK legislation) but thus far nothing hectic materialized. The last draft I saw of an updated dangerous weapons act was just plain stupid. We can do pretty much anything here at present but it doesn't mean Gov is not trying to come up with plans to make life difficult. Our Gov completely screwed up our gun laws and hopefully that taught them a lesson. It is one thing to make laws but a very different thing to enforce them with a police force that can't be trusted to adhere to laws themselves.

 

[chiral.grolim]

You guys do know that the Green Beret and Pacific are no longer made from S30V, right?

To clarify, they aren't, they're now made from S35VN, which performs very differently.

Please substantiate the bolded above.

Per Crucible, S35VN uses slightly less carbon and replaces some vanadium with Niobium to get <20% increase in toughness over S30V... except that it transverse toughness rather than longitudinal where both achieve only 25-28 ft.lbs (33-38 J), about the same toughness as CPM 10V and a little better than D2 all at 59-60 Rc. That equates to NO difference in toughness between S30V and S35VN. In order to substantiate ANY difference in toughness, toughness which is really quite low, Crucible must turn to transverse toughness, a marketing move that does present an advantage of PM steel over some ingot steels at very low thickness but has very little real-world application since blades are not made in such a fashion as to test transverse toughness, which is GOOD because it is MUCH lower and a blade made that way would fracture readily on impact.

In terms of wear-resistance, the two are indistinguishable. Corrosion resistance? Same. Machinability? AhAA! S35VN, with fewer vanadium carbides, is easier to machine & polish, i.e. cheaper to produce! How does that benefit the consumer if the price is the same?

Now if CR is making these knives HARDER than before, THAT would be detectable in performance in terms of edge holding. An edge that doesn't roll/bend/flatten is subject to less stress (longitudinal or transverse) and so is also less likely to fracture! But at the same hardness, the only noticeable difference between the two steels for users is that one acquired a reputation for failing in CR knives and the other has not.


As to other features of the knife:

The guard IS the thumb-ramp (was mentioned above) - for added pressure on the point, you position your hand with the thumb behind the rear-guard.
The serrations are not like a 'Spydie-edge' designed for better penetration and a thinner geometry, but they are thick (less fragile) and carve alright.
The blade is quite thick, as is the grind to attempt to increase durability and lateral strength at the cost of cutting performance.
The handle is well-shaped and the micarta grippy, but the tang protrudes around the entire circumference which is UNcomfortable! Transfers impact-shock, temperature (cold/hot), and induces blisters - not recommended for ungloved hands.
The knife is quite pretty, very tactical in appearance (Harsey design, of course!) which may be the primary determinant for its selection by ANYONE.

Is it worth the price? Depends on you.
Is it a poor design for its intended purpose? As a display piece, no. As a rugged SHTF outdoor/combat tool... Perhaps. Is it likely to break in half in real-world use more easily than a Kabar (comparable in the D-tests)? No, it's 1/4" thick steel. But those attributes which make this steel special are NOT those which folks tend to look for in an outdoor/combat tool. Would the knife perform better or be more durable as 1095? Probably ... and it should be cheaper. *shrug*

 

[t1mpani]

Superior in that for pretty much identical performance, there's no reason for the greater difficulties encountered in the manufacture of the knife in terms of ability to machine and polish the material (and the resultant ease with which the end user will be able to get a very keen edge on the knife by using something like S30V or S35VN if you're going to run it so soft and thus not take advantage of the attributes the alloy was designed to exhibit. Crucible lists a recommended hardness range for a reason. They're paying for a premium material which is harder to work with and then running it at a hardness that makes it perform pretty much like a regular, lower carbon stainless steel. It's rather like paying extra for a sports car and then putting a governor on it to keep it slow. The only reason I can think to do that is because they know that knife magazine readers (which make up a large portion of their clientele) have been told that S35VN is a "sexy" steel where something like 440b , 12c27 etc. are not sexy.

 

[RedLynx]

The only reason I can think to do that is because they know that knife magazine readers (which make up a large portion of their clientele) have been told that S35VN is a "sexy" steel where something like 440b , 12c27 etc. are not sexy.

So what I hear you saying is 440b is sort of like 440c's unattractive awkward sister.

 

[chiral.grolim]

Superior how?

With a proper edge (not too thin) both will cut stuff and both will withstand batoning when done properly (not allowing the target to contact the handle and create a shear).

What do you consider a "proper" edge? How thin?

Either will snap in half when hit with a big hammer.

LOTS of cheaper knives do not so fail and perform as well or better in knife tasks as well

I've abused my S35vn bravo 1 and, after polishing out the kydex scratches, it looks brand new. I'm really not sure how anything could be measurably "superior"? There's a point of diminishing returns where things are about as good as it's going to get. I can't tell the difference between properly heat treated and ground 154cm, cpm154, S35Vn, 440, etc. The key here is that they must be properly ground and heat treated.

Measurably "superior" would be impact toughness values, cutting efficiency (amount of force required to cut x inches deep into a given material), wear-resistance (amount of abrasive material cut prior to reaching a given level of force required to complete the cut), lateral strength (amount of weight, steady or dynamic, able to be borne without taking a set), deflection (how far it can be bent prior to fracture or taking a set), etc. etc.

What do you think you mean by "properly ground and heat treated"? That is quite vague.

You abused your Bravo by sheathing it? Please elaborate.

 

[RedLynx]

You abused your Bravo by sheathing it? Please elaborate.

I think what he's saying is that, although he abused the knife a great deal, the scratches from Kydex were the only noticeable signs of damage, despite it being subjected to much more abuse that should have been more noticeable.

 

[t1mpani]

So what I hear you saying is 440b is sort of like 440c's unattractive awkward sister.

Yes, though still more inherently winning than their other sister, 440a; cheap and easy to get ahold of, and almost EVERYONE has tried her out, but hard to find anybody who wants to commit.

 

[RedLynx]

Yes, though still more inherently winning than their other sister, 440a; cheap and easy to get ahold of, and almost EVERYONE has tried her out, but hard to find anybody who wants to commit.

I think 440a often hangs out with the wrong crowd honestly... knives that pretend to be better knives than they actually are. Knives that really put on airs when they're just low class.

 

[RedLynx]

double.

 

[Balls Deep]

Steel on steel contact is bad when it comes to batoning a knife. It's a bad idea. Softer wood to baton with is a better idea. I saw a youtube video where someone batoned a CS Recon with rebar. The knife was fine but it hurt me to watch it because it's just such a bad idea. It's cool to know a products breaking point but important to remember it's intended use.

Have I mentioned steel on steel contact is a bad idea?

 

[AntDog]

Didn't they used to make their fixed blades out of A2? I think A2 would be a lot better for a knife like this.

 

[t1mpani]

All kidding aside, the problem with the whole 440 family is that almost all industry has moved onto newer alloys, so finding a version of 440a, b, or c that is actually made to exacting standards is trickier. One of the reasons that steels like Bg-42 and 52100 are held in such high regard is that they're manufactured--consistently--to such tight tolerances because they're used for precision ball bearings in very expensive pieces of equipment and thus had damned well better perform. As such, when they claim to have X amount of carbon, Y amount of Vanadium, etc. you can bet that it'll be REALLY close to that from batch to batch. When the 440 steels were new, they were state of the art, and held to high standards. As they're now the cheap alternative to other alloys, they can vary a fair bit in their composition, which makes it difficult to get really stellar performance out of it unless you buy a very large quantity from the same batch and test/adjust your heat treatment until you've perfected it. That is an area where S30V or S35VN are absolutely superior, in that the quality/standards these alloys are held to are very high, but so also is 12c27 from Sandvik. I think there are more useful and ergonomic designs out there, but if I were choosing between a GB in S35VN at 55-57 Hrc and one in 12c27 at 57-59 HRC for exactly the same money, I'd take the latter. Now, a Nyala on the other hand, in S35VN at 57-59 HRC, is damned near perfect, both in the hardness range chosen and matching the alloy to the size and purpose of the knife.

 

[t1mpani]

Again, I believe they ran their A2 too soft (same 55-57 HRC range--which is really unfortunate as A2 is graphed as having a valley in strength/toughness right around 56 HRC, meaning it's actually tougher when run a couple points higher) but yes, A2 in the GB would be very interesting.

 

[MatthewSB]

Please substantiate the bolded above.

Comparing two similarly ground folders, my S35VN Native 5 and my S30V Military, that I use and sharpen the same...The Native's edge has rolled when cutting hard wood and plastic that caused the Military's blade to chip which required substantial reprofiling.

Because of my actual real world experience with the two steels, I prefer S35VN for anything that will be used for anything harsher than cutting fabric or cardboard.

What do you consider a "proper" edge? How thin?

Not as thin as my Spyderco Military, that seems to chip when I look at it funny, but not as thick as an ESEE-5 that barely cuts before hanging up.

What do you think you mean by "properly ground and heat treated"? That is quite vague.

Ground and heat treated so that I never notice the inferior grind or heat treat when using or sharpening.

Measurably "superior" would be impact toughness values, cutting efficiency (amount of force required to cut x inches deep into a given material), wear-resistance (amount of abrasive material cut prior to reaching a given level of force required to complete the cut), lateral strength (amount of weight, steady or dynamic, able to be borne without taking a set), deflection (how far it can be bent prior to fracture or taking a set), etc. etc.

I lack the motivation to carry out such tests, and mostly trust manufacturers enough to buy their products which I then "test" by using them. Some knives pass (keep) and some fail (sell at a slight loss).

My method has yet to result in a broken blade, but I don't do things like try to cut concrete or hit knives with a hammer.

I'm honest enough to admit that I can't tell the difference in performance between a 440c Randall, an S30V Strider, or an S35VN Bravo 1 because all knives were designed, made, heat treated, and ground by people who know what they are doing.

You abused your Bravo by sheathing it? Please elaborate.

I abused my Bravo by pounding it through knotty hardwood and using it as a prybar, something I hesitate to do with a knife. I prefer axes for processing wood and prybars for prying, but don't like to carry heavy things into the woods.

The sheath did more damage (rather the particles held against the blade, by the sheath) than the abuse in question.

 

[chiral.grolim]

Comparing two similarly ground folders, my S35VN Native 5 and my S30V Military, that I use and sharpen the same...The Native's edge has rolled when cutting hard wood and plastic that caused the Military's blade to chip which required substantial reprofiling.

Because of my actual real world experience with the two steels, I prefer S35VN for anything that will be used for anything harsher than cutting fabric or cardboard.

Thank you for the elaboration :thumbup:

The first thing I note about the Spyderco Military vs Native is the blade length - the longer Military blade is easier to stress due to increased leverage, which can lead to edge bending/fracture. Second item of note, are the grinds really so similar? The Military is ~0.025" thick at the apex ~15-dps from Spyderco. How thick is the native at the edge-shoulder, and what angle are you putting each at? Edge-thickness tells more about durability and what materials to use it on than simply the angle.
As a point of reference, my GSO-5.1 is ground to 0.020" thick 15-dps. Want to know what it can handle?

But I like your general assessment, that "properly ground and heat-treated" means "I never notice the inferior grind or heat treat when using or sharpening". Some of this is user skill-level or user error, but it can certainly help you determine what geometry you are comfortable with. Only after you establish that should ou move to discerning between steels, otherwise you may simply be choosing different geometries on knives than just happen to also feature different steels, but you mis-attribute the difference in performance to the steels. *shrug* Strider and BRKT in particular have been noted for their failure in regard to design and grinding of the steels, and neither heat-treats the steel themselves, they out-source it.

As to hammering knives or throwing them, etc., I have yet to experience ill effects with knives >1/8" thick at the spine and >0.020" thick at the shoulder. Given how short and fat the Bravo 1 is, and that BRKT increased the edge thickness due to numerous reports of failure with even the A2 models, I would be very surprised if such use resulted in ANY damage. There seems to be some confusion about what the "intended use" of a knife 1/4" thick is. Not all knives are the same or have the same "intended use". I would hesitate to use my handmade timos- blade (which i reviewed recently) for batonning hardwood as it is ~0.005" behind the 15-dps edge and only 4-dps in the primary, a FAR cry from a the Bravo 1, but neither knife is really long enough for much batonning. The purpose of the timos- is clear in the design - very thin, light, short, AEB-L - an awesome utility blade. But the Bravo 1? Short and fat with a round handle? Sounds like a pry-bar to me...

This CRK is longer, which justifies the thickness via the increased leverage a user can easily apply to the blade. But i do not see how S35VN improves it much over S30V... *shrug*

 

[RedLynx]

All kidding aside, the problem with the whole 440 family is that almost all industry has moved onto newer alloys, so finding a version of 440a, b, or c that is actually made to exacting standards is trickier. One of the reasons that steels like Bg-42 and 52100 are held in such high regard is that they're manufactured--consistently--to such tight tolerances because they're used for precision ball bearings in very expensive pieces of equipment and thus had damned well better perform. As such, when they claim to have X amount of carbon, Y amount of Vanadium, etc. you can bet that it'll be REALLY close to that from batch to batch. When the 440 steels were new, they were state of the art, and held to high standards. As they're now the cheap alternative to other alloys, they can vary a fair bit in their composition, which makes it difficult to get really stellar performance out of it unless you buy a very large quantity from the same batch and test/adjust your heat treatment until you've perfected it. That is an area where S30V or S35VN are absolutely superior, in that the quality/standards these alloys are held to are very high, but so also is 12c27 from Sandvik. I think there are more useful and ergonomic designs out there, but if I were choosing between a GB in S35VN at 55-57 Hrc and one in 12c27 at 57-59 HRC for exactly the same money, I'd take the latter. Now, a Nyala on the other hand, in S35VN at 57-59 HRC, is damned near perfect, both in the hardness range chosen and matching the alloy to the size and purpose of the knife.

I've had lots of good luck with Sandvik 12c27 honestly. And although some people hate 8c13mov, a lot of my cheaper workhorse blades with that steel have performed really really well. Sure I wouldn't expect to find these steels in higher priced knives, I'd want something different. But for great bargain, economy or whatever you want to call them knives, as good users and beaters, these steels have been good for me.

 

[A Justice]

The guard is not a good thumb ramp - I hold mine with my thumb against the guard sometimes, but it negates a lot of resistance to twisting, and even more the contact area between your hand and the handle. Not to mention that using the guard as a thumb ramp to increase longitudinal grip moves your forefinger away from the front guard, and the guard is a thin point of contact for a thumb at that angle, making the grip precarious if your thumb slips over the guard or to either side. Look at the Pacific - Reeve improved the thumb ramp tremendously on that model. I do not see any advantage to the thumb ramp on the GB over more conventional thumb ramps that are seen on Reeve's other models and many other modern knives.

Reeve has said that the choice of S35VN was based on the wide array of properties that it offered. Three of the most important properties were resistance to edge deformation, rust resistance that was unparalleled by the other steels included in the testing, and machinability. It's also plenty tough for a knife. With the thickness, it's a pretty strong hunk of steel.

The problem here is that too many members reference steel data sheets, and apply a bunch of theoretical knowledge to a product that through many different properties often contradict assumptions people have derived from purely theoretical information. You can use theoretical data to make some very accurate guesses if you're testing for a single property with a stack of knives that are optimally heat treated and have similar geometries. It doesn't work so well in this case though. The GB is going to pry better than a 1095 knife that is as thin as a filet knife - bending doesn't always mean good at prying. Also, you could take a 2' bowie made of 1095 and cut more 3/4" rope than a 2" blade made out S30V - just use a different 2" of the machete each time, and get 10x more use than a test where you tape off a 2" section. A2 is would have made a tougher knife than S35VN? That's great, but there is no data sheet that can give you a definitive answer that whatever formulation of A2 Reeve would have used will make a better GB for the uses that SFOD-D put it through than S35VN that is tempered to a lower hardness than most S35VN would be.

 

[t1mpani]

Interesting. I assume Reeve had his reasons for his initial choice of soft S30V, too, though whatever they were they don't interest me in light of the performance my knife exhibited. Of course, I'm entirely sure you'll lump my experience in with those who "just don't get it." Cutting wood in a controlled manner and having the knife get dull/damaged absurdly quickly is, doubtless, too theoretical a premise upon which to base a conclusion.

 

[Nellem]

In the links I provided in an earlier thread Bill stated the following:

"The Green Beret knife by CRK has been subjected to a long duration salt atmosphere test by the United States Navy Testing and proving facility. It came back with a written PASS."

This test indicates that the DoD spec for knifes to be submitted for evaluation demanded long duration use in salt atmospheres. That clearly disqualified any steel not capable of meeting this very specific requirement. Why do people go on and on with "the GB would have been a better hard use knife if such and such non-corrosion resistant steel were use"? The GB is a knife designed to meet very specific requirements and if a civilian buyer needs something that meets different requirements then he/she/it must get something else. To criticize the GB for not meeting requirements it wasn't designed for is just silly and results in these silly debates.

 

[t1mpani]

Because the OP specifically asked why the knife faired poorly in terms of durability, you're the only one who keeps bringing up military testing. Things like titanium nitride coatings have also been helping non-stainless steels pass saltwater tests for a very long time.

Now, a word on what I'm guessing he saw which was the Noss videos: I believe in destructive testing, but I consider Noss's videos to be "tests" only in the loosest sense of the word. If you hit one knife directly, perfectly perpendicularly on its spine for 70% of your hits and glance to the side on the rest, and then "test" another knife but are tired or just not paying attention and now you only hit it straight 50% of the time, you've subjected that second knife to WAY more torque and shearing forces than the first knife. There is nothing measurable in what he does, and SO much is left to human error that only extremely broad conclusions can be drawn: a knife that stands up to that insane treatment for a long time is extremely tough, one that only lasts a few seconds is not as tough. Personally, while I strongly question Reeve's HT choices on his large fixed blades, I don't think either the steel choice or the hardness is what sunk his fixed blades so quickly with Noss, but rather the serrations. Serrations are enormous stress risers on a blade, just like perforations in a cardboard box make sure that it breaks along a specific line when you pull. If I'm remembering right, both CRK fixed blades that he tried (GB and Project 1 in A2) were serrated, and both broke off almost perfectly straight, right in line with the serrations. Now, you can't get the GB in a non-serrated version that im aware of, but back when Reeve was making the Project knives, plain blades were available on every model and I think a non-serrated version would have faired far better. I really don't care for serrations on knives, but I know some folks love them, and they do offer improved cutting performance on very fibrous materials, you just need to be more careful of the stresses you put on them. In terms of prying with a knife (which is not what they're made for, are very bad at, etc) the serrations won't actually come into play as all the force is in line with the spine, but do much heavy chopping or batoning with a serrated knife and you're kind of asking for failure, and the longer the blade is the more trouble you're in, because the lever arm in front of those stress risers is greater. Use of proper batoning techniques, and NOT using a bigass steel hammer will help too, of course.