CPM S110V still up there?

Most of the charts that rank steels are a bit random. Some, like knife informer and blade hq are just garbage.

I would tend to believe knife steel nerds over the rest, but remember that it is always a generalization. You aren't guaranteed to get what you would expect based on the charts.

The thing you can say about knife steel nerds charts is that it is a like for like comparison. It doesn't necessarily tell you whether the knife you are buying is going to be as good as the numbers in those charts. It just gives you a point of reference for what is close to what you should expect based on an optimal sample, and even then it is not always what you would expect.
Most edge retention charts neglect the HRC which is quite pertinent to edge longevity.
 
Again, I question what data these rankings are derived from. Larrin uses a CATRA machine on blades that have the same edge geometry. He's a metallurgist, so I would take his word over a review blog or even a knifemaker.

I am not vouching for the correctness of the steel comparison charts, rather pointing to the range of opinions which get confusing in the scarcity of test parameters.
 
I’m a big fan of S110V. I do not currently have any knives in that steel but the Military and Manix2 I had with blurple and S110V were great. I should look into picking one up again. I wonder who else makes knives with S110V other than Spyderco.
ZT and Kershaw both offer/offered S-110-V blades. I had a couple of custom S-110-V blades made for the Buck 110 format knives. The custom maker does not want to make more of them.
 
They have S30V/ S35VN grouped into one category lol why not just include Elmax then too? Either way this isn’t accurate, the S3xVx steels should be moved up about 6 spots on that chart
Also, how does VG-10 get a rating that is 5 spots below 154CM or 440C?
The other chart someone posted looks more accurate
My VG-10 knives perform a lot like 440-C.
 
Most edge retention charts neglect the HRC which is quite pertinent to edge longevity.
Sure, but most steels have an optimum heat treatment and hardness range that is specific to the steel, and hardness doesn't necessarily equate to edge retention. There are a lot of factors that are not part of rating charts for obvious reasons though. Ratings charts are supposed to be concise.

BTW, you can multi-quote posts to save posting multiple times if that helps using the "+Quote" button rather than "Reply". Ignore me if you knew that already.
 
Sure, but most steels have an optimum heat treatment and hardness range that is specific to the steel, and hardness doesn't necessarily equate to edge retention. There are a lot of factors that are not part of rating charts for obvious reasons though. Ratings charts are supposed to be concise.

BTW, you can multi-quote posts to save posting multiple times if that helps using the "+Quote" button rather than "Reply". Ignore me if you knew that already.
Many steels used for knives were not developed for that application, so recommended HRC’s can be tentative. Hardnesses often equate to edge retention (major contributor). I haven’t figured out the nuances of the quote button.
 
Many steels used for knives were not developed for that application, so recommended HRC’s can be tentative. Hardnesses often equate to edge retention (major contributor). I haven’t figured out the nuances of the quote button.
I'm not sure what you mean by tentative. The steels that are used for knives have heat treatments and hardness ranges that have almost universally been optimized for knives. There are some "special" heat treatments that claim to improve some steels in knife use, but they are rare.

Hardness does generally improve edge retention when you are comparing the same steel if toughness/edge stability doesn't fall too far down in a particular heat treatment, in which case edge retention will also suffer at that point. If you compare different steels, hardness is not a major factor. Steels that have a high carbide volume at high 50's HRC will almost always have significantly better edge retention than more basic low carbide steels at low to mid 60's HRC for example.
 
ZT and Kershaw both offer/offered S-110-V blades. I had a couple of custom S-110-V blades made for the Buck 110 format knives. The custom maker does not want to make more of them.
I’ve read that working on S110V can be a nightmare.
 
There are several kindergarten level takeaways for me in this thread:

There seems to have been significant advances in the metallurgy and materials science in the past few decades. This has resulted in a number of very sophisticated formulations of cutlery steels. Despite that, there is no escaping the toughness-edge retention trade off. A really tough knife or a durable edge can be had, but not both. No doubtt, knives can be made today from most of these steels that are superior in performance to knives made in the 1950s, '60s and '70s to pick a time period for reference.

The second takeaway is that knives made from "stainless s"teels can be made todsy that are superior in performance to blades made from carbon steels of any formulation even when corrosion resistance is disregarded a performance parameter.
 
This is an older post from when I was stationed in Spain. I was still using a 2x42 Craftsman belt sander and hand tools. S110V is a pain to work with, but absolutely doable, of course it translates to higher end cost as well based on tool wear and belt/abrasive usage.

 
Creely rates S-110-V higher in edge retention than Maxamet.

That's a pretty old chart that predates some of the better catra testing data available- this would be a little more accurate (although it is due for a few updates with new testing data). I actually think there was a mistake with Maxamet in that old chart.
Chart+1.png
 
Back
Top