Cru-Wear, M4 or B75P Mule for Toughness as All-purpose

Joined
Dec 6, 2014
Messages
86
I've read many forums as i try to find the answers else wear before asking. I know a fair amount about the M4 I cannot find much info on Cru Wear or B75P or how the M4 stands up against these. Im looking to get a mule, and want toughness 1st then WORKING edge 2nd and 3rd pickiness of sharpening working the blade edge.

A knife that can take some abuse can still hold a working edge like a champ. I would go M4 but my understanding is Cru wear might be more suitable for Tough work as all purpose, woods knife. Then I have no knowledge of the B75P.

Any knowledge, Insight or opinions would be appreciated.
 
CPM-M4 has better wear resistance than Cru-Wear, and toughness is the same. They are both tool steels.
B75P is a stainless steel, by Carpenter.It's the powdered version of BG-42, made by Latrobe.
 
Ya i've been leaning towards M4, M4 it is, I've read doing a forced patina can help with corrosion. Dipping it in either vinegar or lemon juice, slicing potatoes or tomato's. is this advisable on an M4? does it hurt the RC or integrity of the blade at all?
 
Sounds like you already made your choice, but I wanted to make sure there was no confusion since I posted in your other thread.

B75P was a previous Mule run, basically BG-42. Currently only available on the secondary market.

B70P is the current Mule, available direct from Spyderco at a fraction of the cost of virtually anything on the secondary market (except maybe the 9cr one.) It is a PM derivative of CRB-7. It has been described as similar to a stainless Cruwear or an upgrade to XHP. There isn't much out there on B70P because the mule is the first production knife offered in it. Mine has been great.

I think any of the options you listed would be fine for what you want.
 
  • Like
Reactions: XYL
Hey Drebs. In theory Cruwear should have better edge stability and toughness than CPM M4. Different heat treats can change the steels in a lot of ways including going for maximum toughness. Maximum wear resistance at the expense of less corrosion resistance. Hardness makes the steel stronger but less tough. Add in the fact that in this case the Cruwear mule is ingot while the CPM M4 is powder process and any of the attributes can change putting one ahead or behind the other.

By the steel companies books CPM M4 is ahead in wear resistance and toughness. Corrosion resistance on either one isn't great, but they are far from bad compared to some other steels I've tried that rusted much faster.

I don't patina on any of my knives. If I was the CPM M4 and Cruwear don't take patinas very well at all and come out pretty ugly compared to more simple carbon alloys like W2 and 1095 which can be actually blued like a firearm. The inherent corrosion resistance of these steels is what keeps the patina from applying evenly or effectively. You end up putting more time into forcing a patina than you would just keeping the blade clean and corrosion free. What patina you do manage to get will wipe off with use unlike the more , deeper blued effect of other steels. Aside from the chrome in both steels the heat treat can make some of the other elements sort of help out with corrosion, or abrasive wear resistance depending on how it ( M4) is heat treated.

I personally like both steels and plan on keeping the knives I have in both .

CTS B75P is a powder steel processed version of BG42 which is known to be extremely clean ( vimvar process cleans out impurities and inclusions). BG42 is a stainless version of the high speed bearing steel M50. It is essentially 154cm with added vanadium and is usually between 154cm/CPM 154 and S30V in abrasive wear resistance. It was pretty much the premium stainless steel before S30V was introduced. This was before the term "super steel" began being used around the time CPM 440V was introduced into production knives.

I have no idea if B70P is a "stainless Cruwear" as I've never tried it, or it's parent CRB 7, the ingot form. I've wanted to try it in a knife for a long time but until the mule it hasn't been very available. It should have good edge stability for a stainless. Perhaps that is why it was called "stainless cruwear". I try to keep speculation to a minimum though. Either above stainless should have lower corrosion resistance than 440C.

3V also has very good edge stability and strength in addition to it's toughness. A lot of people don't understand this when they claim 3V has no place in folders, just large choppers. If the kind of use one has makes the blade microchip instead of other types of failure a higher strength steel can be used. In some cases 3V can have greater wear resistance than higher carbide steels that fail ( get dull) from too little strength though this sort of use in a folder is fairly rare. W2, O1, 1080/84/85, super blue etc. are other steels with good edge stability. Traditionally high carbide fractions which give higher abrasive wear are less strong and tough at the edge where we concern ourselves in this hobby.

You sure are getting a nice collection pretty fast. It will be interesting to see in 6 months or a year which steel pushes itself to the top of your list.

Joe
 
Geometry makes the Mule an excellent blade for fine cutting and slicing. The blade is thin, fully flat ground and the edge shoulders are fairly thin.

If toughness is your most important criterion, you may be looking at the wrong geometry. I love the Mules because of their fine cutting geometry, but if you're going to break a Mule in M4, the problem is going to be you: You're using the wrong knife for the job.
 
Just to be clear to anyone reading this thread, I was not making any direct assertions regarding B70P vs. Cruwear. I was referring to Spyderco's literature in a recent "Spyderco Byte."

Here is the quote again:

"...you’ll find that B70P’s closest cousin is Cru-Wear®—a very highly regarded Crucible®*steel that provides higher wear resistance than D2 and greater toughness than M2*high speed*steel. Although B70P does not include Cru-Wear’s tungsten and has less vanadium, it has nearly twice the chromium content (making it a true stainless steel) and adds niobium, manganese, and silicon."

Although I have knives in both steels, my Manix2 in Cruwear has a much thicker geometry than my B70P mule, so I can't claim to have made or attempted any apples-to-apples comparisons.

To Twindog's point, my B70P mule is indeed thinly ground with a very nice lean edge, thin bevel, etc... My K390 mule has a pretty heavy geometry in comparison, so I expect there is a good deal of variation from run to run and perhaps to a lesser extent even between different examples from the same run.
 
Hey Drebs. In theory Cruwear should have better edge stability and toughness than CPM M4. Different heat treats can change the steels in a lot of ways including going for maximum toughness. Maximum wear resistance at the expense of less corrosion resistance. Hardness makes the steel stronger but less tough. Add in the fact that in this case the Cruwear mule is ingot while the CPM M4 is powder process and any of the attributes can change putting one ahead or behind the other.

By the steel companies books CPM M4 is ahead in wear resistance and toughness. Corrosion resistance on either one isn't great, but they are far from bad compared to some other steels I've tried that rusted much faster.

I don't patina on any of my knives. If I was the CPM M4 and Cruwear don't take patinas very well at all and come out pretty ugly compared to more simple carbon alloys like W2 and 1095 which can be actually blued like a firearm. The inherent corrosion resistance of these steels is what keeps the patina from applying evenly or effectively. You end up putting more time into forcing a patina than you would just keeping the blade clean and corrosion free. What patina you do manage to get will wipe off with use unlike the more , deeper blued effect of other steels. Aside from the chrome in both steels the heat treat can make some of the other elements sort of help out with corrosion, or abrasive wear resistance depending on how it ( M4) is heat treated.

I personally like both steels and plan on keeping the knives I have in both .

CTS B75P is a powder steel processed version of BG42 which is known to be extremely clean ( vimvar process cleans out impurities and inclusions). BG42 is a stainless version of the high speed bearing steel M50. It is essentially 154cm with added vanadium and is usually between 154cm/CPM 154 and S30V in abrasive wear resistance. It was pretty much the premium stainless steel before S30V was introduced. This was before the term "super steel" began being used around the time CPM 440V was introduced into production knives.

I have no idea if B70P is a "stainless Cruwear" as I've never tried it, or it's parent CRB 7, the ingot form. I've wanted to try it in a knife for a long time but until the mule it hasn't been very available. It should have good edge stability for a stainless. Perhaps that is why it was called "stainless cruwear". I try to keep speculation to a minimum though. Either above stainless should have lower corrosion resistance than 440C.

3V also has very good edge stability and strength in addition to it's toughness. A lot of people don't understand this when they claim 3V has no place in folders, just large choppers. If the kind of use one has makes the blade microchip instead of other types of failure a higher strength steel can be used. In some cases 3V can have greater wear resistance than higher carbide steels that fail ( get dull) from too little strength though this sort of use in a folder is fairly rare. W2, O1, 1080/84/85, super blue etc. are other steels with good edge stability. Traditionally high carbide fractions which give higher abrasive wear are less strong and tough at the edge where we concern ourselves in this hobby.

You sure are getting a nice collection pretty fast. It will be interesting to see in 6 months or a year which steel pushes itself to the top of your list.

Joe

How did I miss this? Spot on information
 
Back
Top