CPM-154CM, why not more love?

I was under the impression CPM-154 can take a higher hardness then CPM-S35V while been just as tough, but I'm no bladesmith, I just like how the steel behaves in use and on the sharpmaker.
 
Bmurray said:
because there's S35vn available
Click to expand...

A very good portion of BF forum members (custom guys, Kershaw, Spyderco guys etcetc) would tell you that they'd want to see more CPM154 knives come into production. That's regardless of what they think of S35vn (some like it, some hate it).
 
nccole said:
Isn't the RWL-34 a Japanese steel? If so, that's what we could see realistically.
[



Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

disregarding the followup that RWL-34 is, in fact, not Japanese, I do think you for pointing out the obvious fact that the Stretch is a Seki knife, and therefore must use a Japanese steel.

So, since I'm not up on Japanese steels, is there a powdered version of ATS-34 being made?
Do I assume correctly that with ATS-34 being so similar to 154CM, that a powdered version would offer similar advantages as CPM154 vs. 154cm?

I wonder what would happen if they did a similar powdering process to VG10...
 
I have had a few knives in CPM-154 and i really enjoyed it. There was a noticeable difference between it and 154 cm. I would be thrilled if Spyderco began using it regularly.
 
archieblue said:
I've had a few knives in CPM-154. CPM-S30V holds an edge better but is more difficult to sharpen. CPM-S35VN theoretically adds toughness while being slightly more stainless, getting a few more slices between sharpening without notice of more work on the stones. CTS-204P approaches the edge holding of CPM-S90V (in comparison with those previously mentioned) but is easier to sharpen. CPM-154, in contrast, would be between CPM-S30V and VG-10. I could see how it would hit the "sweet spot" for some... especially if they tend to dull their blade between sharpening sessions. For me, VG-10 fills this roll beautifully with S30V/S35VN being my personal "sweet spot." I have had a sprint Millie in CPM-S90V, and while it was incredible, I prefer my current offerings in CPM-20CV (Survive!). My CTS-204P Millie has been outstanding. So far it would be hard to say I like any other steel better... but I haven't let it get dull yet. I have pushed my CPM-20CV to the shiny edged, very dull state and while the sharpening was no picnic, it was not that bad.
Click to expand...

Thanks for this info. I don t have experience with cpm154, but from my reading here I understand it has similar edge holding to s30v but is tougher. If that is so, cpm154 is a nice steel.
 
42pixels said:
Yes, CPM-154 is the powder metallurgy version of 154cm, and its a pretty solid upgrade. I think it would be the perfect steel for a Manix 2 LW, as it stays affordable but is a definite upgrade from BD1. I'd love to see most of their knives in CPM-154, its my favorite stainless and its a brilliant all rounder of a steel.
Click to expand...

I think it's perfect for damn near everything. By far and away my favorite stainless as well.
 
I ran S35VN across the brown stones to get it shaving again and it was taking too long. (First sharpening ever) So I got the diamond stones out and made a few swipes at 30° to enable a 40° micro, and those few swipes put micro chips in 20% of the edge length. S30V has done the same thing. Never used 154, but XHP behaves so much better on the same stones and it sounds like 154 does too. I'd be happy if Spyderco never used S30V again.

Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
TLE,
Does CPM-154 keep a "shaving sharp" edge longer than S30V?
To make clear - I know S30V holds a "working edge" longer, but just loses that shaving sharp edge really fast.
 
nccole said:
I ran S35VN across the brown stones to get it shaving again and it was taking too long. (First sharpening ever) So I got the diamond stones out and made a few swipes at 30° to enable a 40° micro, and those few swipes put micro chips in 20% of the edge length. S30V has done the same thing. Never used 154, but XHP behaves so much better on the same stones and it sounds like 154 does too. I'd be happy if Spyderco never used S30V again.
Click to expand...

For what it's worth, I experienced this very thing just recently with a sage 1. The factory edge went away quick. The best way I can describe it is, the edge was "crumbling" as I was sharpening it with diamond plates. I almost gave up and chalked it up to bad metal, but being my stubborn self, and really liking the knife in general, I kept on. I would say after a couple hours and a lot of metal removed, it started doing right. It now takes a good edge quickly, holds it fairly well, even polishes good. I've even thinned out the edge a little and it's holding up ok.

I had heard about this problem with s30V before. I have 2 benchmades with this steel and had no problems with them so was puzzled with the complaints. I think I understand now.

If you want to keep the knife, continue removing steel. Hopefully it will settle out like mine did.
The sage is one of my favorite knives, just wish it came in a steel I prefer.

As for cpm/154cm, it's an ok steel, easily takes a fine edge, but doesn't hold up to my use/abuse as well as I'd like.
 
They work with other Crucible steels you would think CPM-154 would be a natural choice for at least a sprint run.
 
Wolverine666 said:
I was under the impression that there was a difference between 154CM and CPM-154. The thread title indicates that they're one in the same. I always thought that CPM-154 was Crucible's special process of turning plain 154CM into powder then made into solid billet. As opposed to just allowing the hot liquid 154CM cool and harden up and calling it a day.

I could be wrong. But I seem to recall reading this on an old thread here on the forums years ago.
Click to expand...

154CM and CPM 154CM are made with the same ingredients, at least on paper. If you equate it to concrete then 154CM just has bigger rocks in it though they're the same type of rocks found in CPM 154. 154CM also has a little more random crap in it that doesn't get listed as an ingredient unless there's a specific chemical analysis done of a given melt. Basically CPM154 is cleaner and its official, generic ingredient list is more accurate.

Anyway, I think its technical name is CPM 154CM. It's 154CM that's melted with the crucible particle metallurgy process. They just shortened it to CPM154, probably because the full name is a mouthful and sounds redundant.

Anyway, the RWL34 mule team shows just how much marketing plays onto what people think of these different steels. RWL34 is almost identical to CPM154 yet people say that CPM154 doesn't have enough wear resistance for them while really liking RWL34. Hardcore placebo effect. Makes me really question most of what people say about how much they like steels. Maybe they like a steel, not because it's actually better, but because the vast majority of people say it's better and they just follow the herd.
 
Last edited:
gull wing said:
TLE,
Does CPM-154 keep a "shaving sharp" edge longer than S30V?
To make clear - I know S30V holds a "working edge" longer, but just loses that shaving sharp edge really fast.
Click to expand...

There's too many variables to say really. Bevel angle, heat treat, etc. I THINK so, but your mileage may vary.

I've often had problems with s30v chipping out, especially at angles below 18dps. Which may equate to the working edge description as it will still certainly chew through rope or cardboard, but won't shave.
 
bodog said:
154CM and CPM 154CM are made with the same ingredients, at least on paper. If you equate it to concrete then 154CM just has bigger rocks in it though they're the same type of rocks found in CPM 154. 154CM also has a little more random crap in it that doesn't get listed as an ingredient unless there's a specific chemical analysis done of a given melt. Basically CPM154 is cleaner and its official, generic ingredient list is more accurate.

Anyway, I think its technical name is CPM 154CM. It's 154CM that's melted with the crucible particle metallurgy process. They just shortened it to CPM154, probably because the full name is a mouthful and sounds redundant.

Anyway, the RWL34 mule team shows just how much marketing plays onto what people think of these different steels. RWL34 is almost identical to CPM154 yet people say that CPM154 doesn't have enough wear resistance for them while really liking RWL34. Hardcore placebo effect. Makes me really question most of what people say about how much they like steels. Maybe they like a steel, not because it's actually better, but because the vast majority of people say it's better and they just follow the herd.
Click to expand...

Very informative thank you. Is there a resource available that 1) describes both what ingredient and how much ingredients of all the popular steels we use (perhaps a spreadsheet of some sort) and 2) is there a resource available that describes the effect each ingredient (ingredient 1 does this, ingredient 2 does that etc...) has on a blades characteristics? I've found a number a resources like this but find they are incomplete/fragmented.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
speedseeker said:
Very informative thank you. Is there a resource available that 1) describes both what ingredient and how much ingredients of all the popular steels we use (perhaps a spreadsheet of some sort) and 2) is there a resource available that describes the effect each ingredient (ingredient 1 does this, ingredient 2 does that etc...) has on a blades characteristics? I've found a number a resources like this but find they are incomplete/fragmented.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I use the aforementioned steel composition app more than I'd like to admit. I refer back to it at least once a week.

Also, here's something pretty good and gives some decent comparisons and descriptions:

http://bestpocketknifetoday.com/knife-steel-composition-chart/

And more info:

http://www.knives-reviews.eu/contents/steels/39-english/content-info/steels/109-steels-comp.html

As far as how much a certain type of steel deviates from the official list of alloying ingredients, that's a common problem. Certain steel distributors demand a chemical analysis on every large batch they buy to ensure what they're selling is within the manufacturer's stated tolerances and that it's going to perform up to expectations. Really good knife makers take into account the varying ingredients from batch to batch but theoretically they want to have the exact same composition every time they pick up a steel bar that listed as a specific steel. But that's not the case so they like to see just how much they have to tweak their heat treatments. Different steels have a different tolerance set for them. The higher grade premium steels have tighter tolerances, hence the earlier statements about 154CM vs CPM 154CM. The CPM version is a higher grade than ingot.

When they do a melt of steel there can be recycled steel thrown in and that'll change the final product, even if just barely, and as long as the final steel is within tolerance it's sold as that type of steel. When you get to the premier steels that goes way down, hence the term "cleaner" steels. It's because there's a guarantee that it has less unwanted crap in it.

And I'm no expert. There are many guys lurking that have a far better understanding than I have. Hopefully they'll pop up and give us all a whatfor.
 
Last edited:
The Knife Steel Composition Chart is available for iOS via the App Store, as well as on Android. Very handy reference to have.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top