Cts-xhp

[tsdevanna]

And i forgot - I am somewhere on the same page with Sal - never argue with a fool - they will drag you down to their level and then beat the living shit out of you.
Later

 

[Ankerson]

CPMS90V and CPMS60V were developed for the plastics industry - to be used where the developement of new plastics created more abrasive and corrosive environments. 154CM was developed for the aerospace industry - bearings. CPMS30V was developed specifically for knives - hunters and folders. CPM154(partical metallurgy version of 154CM) was produced specifically for the knife industry - a more user friendly knife steel(more user friendly than CPMS30V) for the custom knife makers. CPMS30V displaced/replaced CPMS60V because it was new, it performed well and we were stupid enough to price it $2.00/lb. lower than CPMS60V, ultimately killing a great grade -CPMS60V.

With a few tweaks to get rid of the brittleness and chipping problems S60V could have been really good, raise the Vanadium just a tad and lower the Chromium it really could have been something in a knife steel.

 

[JNewell]

Jim/anyone - has anyone got an Rc range for Spyderco's 154CM blades? BM specs 58-61, and seems to deliver what they promise. Spyderco often runs steels above BM, but 61 would be about the top of the normal range for 154CM.

 

[nozh2002]

Hi Vassili

From my perspective, it's not always about edge retention with the introduction of new steels. Kershaw has been first to the market on many "premium" steels over the years, and in many cases it was just to give enthusiasts a choice. None of these steels are poor performers, each has characteristics that can shine, but their best qualities are not always edge retention. This isn't bad, and to make it that is slightly short sighted. Most knife folks love choices, love that there are new steels to explore, and can't wait for the next one. It's a part of our hobby that we can really enjoy.

We shouldn't condemn mills/steels and/or manufacturers over this, we should really applaud them for their efforts in bringing something new to discover and study. If a particular steel doesn't work for you, and isn't the "best" for your specific interest or application, there are plenty of others out there to go play with, and plenty more to come.

I am not talking about experimental runs. I actually like them and I do not see any problem having higher then average price for such cases - it is experimental and so reasonable to expect. I actually think that it would be really good practice to do such runs and if results are good considers it for production. Usually I got one of the first new steel to test it. I tested your CPM D2 first and it has pretty good edge retention.

But in many cases it is not like this. As I mentioned before - CPM S30V is quite a step back from CPM S60V and just pushed to consumers as a equal or better replacement.

I do not really buying toughness arguments - knives are meant to cut and edge retention is what important, then it would be corrosion resistance, then handle ergonomics, good mechanics, nice look ..., but not toughness. I did not break any of my blades! Even so called brittle. Not ZDP189, not CPM S90V. While I saw few CPM S30V blade broken...

So edge retention and corrosion resistance is what important for steel, and my tests are about edge retention (made in US is also what I am looking for). However again - I am not telling anybody what to choose. I did my edge retention testing and results are available.

If somebody decide that edge retention is not important, then he/she may not really be interested in my tests and CATRA tests, etc...

You sad it is not only about edge retention - I am just wondering what else you consider as important blade steel property and why and what steel have that property?

What do you think about CTS-XHP? Are you going to use it in your production? I really like several Kershaw models and with CTS-XHP they will be ideal (JYDII, Tirade, ZT-302, ZT-350).

Thanks, Vassili.

 

[nozh2002]

CPMS30V displaced/replaced CPMS60V because it was new, it performed well and we were stupid enough to price it $2.00/lb. lower than CPMS60V, ultimately killing a great grade -CPMS60V.

With $2.00/lb and much lower wear resistance (much lower grinding coast), with every consumer thinking that it is better or same as CPM S60V (CATRA test was published Oct 2010) and willing to pay same or higher price - it was great grade killer for sure.

Thanks, Vassili.

 

[Noctis3880]

You know Vassili, I really love how you criticize CATRA because the results aren't published, then turn around and won't stop pointing at it because it shows better results for S60V over S30V:thumbup:.

I also like how you utterly ignored the issue of sharpening S60V VS S30V for the average consumer.

 

[Thomas W]

What do you think about CTS-XHP? Are you going to use it in your production? I really like several Kershaw models and with CTS-XHP they will be ideal (JYDII, Tirade, ZT-302, ZT-350).

We don't have any plans as of today to use CTS-XHP. We're loving on the Euro PM steels these days.

I know, I know, we're missing out...

 

[Ankerson]

CRUCIBLE CPM® S60V®
(CPM 440V®) Issue #4

Carbon 2.15%
Chromium 17.0%
Vanadium 5.5%
Molybdenum 0.4%


CRUCIBLE CPM® S30V®
Issue #4

Carbon 1.45%
Chromium 14.00%
Vanadium 4.00%
Molybdenum 2.00%


CRUCIBLE CPM S90V®
(CPM 420V®) Issue #8

Carbon 2.3%
Chromium 14.0%
Vanadium 9.0%
Molybdenum 1.0%


CPM-S110V

Carbon 2.8%
Chromium 15.25%
Vanadium 9.0%
Niobium (Columbium) 3.0%
Molybdenum 2.25%
Cobalt 2.50%

 

[nozh2002]

You know Vassili, I really love how you criticize CATRA because the results aren't published, then turn around and won't stop pointing at it because it shows better results for S60V over S30V:thumbup:.

I also like how you utterly ignored the issue of sharpening S60V VS S30V for the average consumer.

What are you talking about? CATRA is not publishing test, but sell equipment for testing. Spyderco and Buck and Case have this equipment.

Where did I criticize CATRA for not publishing results? This is industrial grade Edge holding test machine, one author did on his own CATRA testing and publish it in "Knife Illustrated" and this is only available results of CATRA testing. This tests show that CPM S30V edge holding is almost twice less then CPM S60V and that CPM S90V is little behind CPM S60V as well.

There is no difference in sharpening those steels until a clay brick is used for sharpening. It was discussed many times before.
I think I have some idea of what I am talking about, please have a look at my video on how to sharpen knife to whittle hair -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5TscN9h-1xQ

Thanks, Vassili.

 

[nozh2002]

We don't have any plans as of today to use CTS-XHP. We're loving on the Euro PM steels these days.

I know, I know, we're missing out...

Well, this is really unfortunate that "made in USA" super performing steel is rejected in favor of average performing European Imports.

Thanks, Vassili.

 

[Noctis3880]

What are you talking about? CATRA is not publishing test, but sell equipment for testing. Spyderco and Buck and Case have this equipment.

Where did I criticize CATRA for not publishing results? This is industrial grade Edge holding test machine, one author did on his own CATRA testing and publish it in "Knife Illustrated" and this is only available results of CATRA testing. This tests show that CPM S30V edge holding is almost twice less then CPM S60V and that CPM S90V is little behind CPM S60V as well.

There is no difference in sharpening those steels until a clay brick is used for sharpening. It was discussed many times before.
I think I have some idea of what I am talking about, please have a look at my video on how to sharpen knife to whittle hair -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5TscN9h-1xQ

Thanks, Vassili.

Not everyone owns a DMT plate:thumbdn:.

 

[Gator97]

Not everyone owns a DMT plate:thumbdn:.

I seriously doubt what he said. I own DMT plates and bunch of whetstones and whatever else, and even on 120 grit I can easily tell the difference between CPM 30V and 125V, or X50CrMoV15 and bunch of others. I don't think anyone having even average sharpening skills would not be able to tell difference between high wear resistance and more average stuff. Or high hardness vs. low.

And btw, part of the reason his test results are so skewed is related to sharpening jobs he does.

 

[The Mastiff]

Vassili, high sharpness edge retention, which is what you are testing, is but one part of the overall category of what we refer to as wear resistance. If you tested knives using dirty, sandy, salty 2 inch ropes used at a harbor you would undoubtedly have different results and rankings. Likewise cutting thin slices of highly acidic fruit might change your rankings. The list goes on there.

Wear resistance is but one of the 3 attributes that we knife knuts like, and desire in our knives. Corrosion resistance and toughness, the other two are equally as important to knife buyers and users. Using one small part of the idea of wear resistance alone may be enough for you to label a steel Number 1, 2, 3 etc. For most others it is just that, a small part of the way we decide what knives we like or dislike.

In your way of estimating steels these others may seem inferior. That does not mean they are inferior to others making up their minds weighing in other attributes of steels. I find nothing inferior about Elmax, for instance. You do however.

You seem unable to accept anyone elses opinions as valid which causes the reactions you get.

There's nothing wrong with the extensive work you've done. That's admirable. Your bullheaded nature does make it difficult to have meaningful dialogs, and the bottom line is that we are here for just that.

joe/raleigh

 

[nozh2002]

Vassili, high sharpness edge retention, which is what you are testing, is but one part of the overall category of what we refer to as wear resistance. If you tested knives using dirty, sandy, salty 2 inch ropes used at a harbor you would undoubtedly have different results and rankings. Likewise cutting thin slices of highly acidic fruit might change your rankings. The list goes on there.

Wear resistance is but one of the 3 attributes that we knife knuts like, and desire in our knives. Corrosion resistance and toughness, the other two are equally as important to knife buyers and users. Using one small part of the idea of wear resistance alone may be enough for you to label a steel Number 1, 2, 3 etc. For most others it is just that, a small part of the way we decide what knives we like or dislike.

In your way of estimating steels these others may seem inferior. That does not mean they are inferior to others making up their minds weighing in other attributes of steels. I find nothing inferior about Elmax, for instance. You do however.

You seem unable to accept anyone elses opinions as valid which causes the reactions you get.

There's nothing wrong with the extensive work you've done. That's admirable. Your bullheaded nature does make it difficult to have meaningful dialogs, and the bottom line is that we are here for just that.

joe/raleigh

Manila rope is most common used for testing media and I use what was mostly suggested as closest to real use. And I think this is true, I think most members here does not cut as much as I do in my single testing session.

I may agree that brittle blade would be bad for knife, but I did not see yet any steel which is brittle to the extent it affect use. I use most blamed for brittleness ZDP-189 fror cutting roots in the sandy ground with some stones and did not notice any problem:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0PHxVP6WSo

So I agree that I will not buy blade made of glass because it is brittle and will breake, but no any steel so far not tough enough to cause any problem in folder. Until of course I smash it into concrete, but I am not doing this.

I had problem with one tough steel in same digging situation - it was tough and soft so it bends edge right away and became useless, it require much more force to do job and in result I put it aside until I cut what I should not - sprinkle pipe of myself. But I am sure if I will bang it into concrete 100 times it will not break. But I can not imagine why would I do that.

So to me toughness is not an issue.

Thanks, Vassili.

 

[Noctis3880]

Not to sound arrogant, but if you're sharpening freehand and your username is not knifenut1013, I don't trust you to hold the exact same angle between all knives. Especially if you ground off a good part of the thumb studs of one of your knives in the process:thumbdn:.

 

[The Mastiff]

Manila rope is most common used for testing media and I use what was mostly suggested as closest to real use.

I agree. It's been used for decades in different widths for testing. Still, it's only one of the tests that falls under the parameters of wear resistance. Throw in grit and the vanadium steels or T-1 types ( high carbide fraction, high hardness) will likely pull to the front. Change it to very low PH environments and certain high edge stability steels dull quicker than others they would normally be measurably ahead of. Obviously red hardness too, though that doesn't really apply to hobbyist knife collectors.

A person can highly specialize and focus like a laser on one aspect, and ignore others. What's right for me may not be right for you. There's too much objectivity in ranking steels to name any best steel. All one can do is name "this is the best at"...

So to me toughness is not an issue.

In folding knives I'm in agreement with you. I also take care of knives and other tools so non stainless steels aren't a problem with me either. In fact, I like sharp, high edge stability , long wearing steels above others. Not really all that different from you I guess. It's just that I pretty much don't have any favorite steel. I like them all for the most part and can't just pick one above all the others.

What I like is pretty much irrelevant though. I'm in the minority, like the most of us knife enthusiasts here.

Vassili, you have always been decent and respectful in your dealings with me. I want to return that respect while still pointing out that you are getting pretty stubborn and hardheaded with your ideas and dealings with others. Yes, they have returned that as well.

No question you know your stuff, and have put a whole lot of time, effort and money into your testing. Let your work stand on it's own strengths. There's not a darn thing here we need to argue about.

We are all here to learn. I've collected and used knives for 40 years now and I still learn stuff here everyday.

Thank you for all the work you have done too. I keep your site bookmarked and check it regularly for updates.

Joe/raleigh

 

[wongKI]

I'll go ahead and post up some CATRA from a long time back, taken from Spyderco's forum.

440C 360-400
VG10 500-510
S30V 550-580
S90V 750
ZDP 189 750
S125V 1200

Higher is better, I believe.

If I read Vassilli's test methodology aright, he doesn't actually test to the point of total failure in terms of cutting power-just how quickly an edge that is able to push-cut thread is lost. To me, while this is useful information, it isn't quite comprehensive. I'm not quite sure if I am explaining this correctly, but a knife can lose such a razor edge real quick, but then proceed to cut with a lower-quality edge for much longer, or retain an edge capable of push-cutting thread with fractions of a poundal of force, then suddenly lose that edge and lose it quick.

It's the distinction between "cutting thread" and "cutting rope; cardboard; paper; food and other EDC tasks" that has me questioning. Is it possible that an edge can completely fail to push-cut thread and yet perform OK at the latter-mentioned tasks? In my experience-yes. Your mileage may vary.

Just my 2cents.

Back on topic: Whether or not a steel is worth it is completely dependent on how happy you are with it in the knife you bought. Is it possible for someone to be very happy with an expensive and poorly performing steel? I'd say yes. Lots of collectors buy knives and don't actually use them hard enough to test the steel to its limits. At the risk of offending members here I'd say that the steel serves a primary purpose of bragging rights, with the actual performance gains (or, if Vassilli is right, the lack thereof) less of an issue.

 

[nozh2002]

I agree. It's been used for decades in different widths for testing. Still, it's only one of the tests that falls under the parameters of wear resistance. Throw in grit and the vanadium steels or T-1 types ( high carbide fraction, high hardness) will likely pull to the front.

In practice this did not shows up. Overloaded with vanadium carbides (niobium as well) steels are not on the top - you may check results for CPM S90V (14th place) or CPM S110V (22th place), they are not on the top at all, and behind simple compositions 1095 and 52100.

Same for overloaded with tungsten T1 (23th place).

And this is pretty logical. Vanadium was added for wear resistance - it would be good for steel flour in tank garage, it will wear slow, but edge is quite different thing, and this is exposed very well in test results. Those steel are not on the top.

Same for Tungsten - it was added to higher melting temperature and it is not quite related to edge holding really. T1 is not on the top as well, and it rusts super fast - it turns red right on my eye, when I wash blade after sharpening.

Thanks, Vassili.

 

[Gator97]

Vassili, high sharpness edge retention, which is what you are testing, is but one part of the overall category of what we refer to as wear resistance.

First of all, the test is push cutting, which is very different from slicing. And one alloy can easily outperform another in slicing, and fail for push cutting.

I dunno how does he sharpen now, but last he reported, his final grit on the stone was about 2K and then he went to 0.5mic CrO loaded leather strop.
That isn't exactly high sharpness, especially for push cutting tests he does. 0.5mic roughly translates into 50-60K abrasive in grit system and the jump from 2 to 50K is way too big to consider the edge is 50K finish. Unless he spends hour or more stropping on 50K compound that edge won't even have decent mirror polish.

It might produce good or ok, even very good utility edge, but when one tests sharpness with precision to grams, then it does matter. High polish also makes difference for push cutting, better polish == better push cutting and better edge retention. Again, when the test conclusions are based on few grams of force difference, it becomes, or the test makes it more significant. Needless to say, comparison of any property of two objects is flawed when one starts with 2x value of the same property compared to other.

 

[nozh2002]

I'll go ahead and post up some CATRA from a long time back, taken from Spyderco's forum.

440C 360-400
VG10 500-510
S30V 550-580
S90V 750
ZDP 189 750
S125V 1200

Higher is better, I believe.

If I read Vassilli's test methodology aright, he doesn't actually test to the point of total failure in terms of cutting power-just how quickly an edge that is able to push-cut thread is lost. To me, while this is useful information, it isn't quite comprehensive. I'm not quite sure if I am explaining this correctly, but a knife can lose such a razor edge real quick, but then proceed to cut with a lower-quality edge for much longer, or retain an edge capable of push-cutting thread with fractions of a poundal of force, then suddenly lose that edge and lose it quick.

It's the distinction between "cutting thread" and "cutting rope; cardboard; paper; food and other EDC tasks" that has me questioning. Is it possible that an edge can completely fail to push-cut thread and yet perform OK at the latter-mentioned tasks? In my experience-yes. Your mileage may vary.

Just my 2cents.

Back on topic: Whether or not a steel is worth it is completely dependent on how happy you are with it in the knife you bought. Is it possible for someone to be very happy with an expensive and poorly performing steel? I'd say yes. Lots of collectors buy knives and don't actually use them hard enough to test the steel to its limits. At the risk of offending members here I'd say that the steel serves a primary purpose of bragging rights, with the actual performance gains (or, if Vassilli is right, the lack thereof) less of an issue.

To make things clear - I am not cutting thread. I am cutting manila rope as a test media - please, have a look on brief description I put on my page.

One more time - I am cutting a lot of manila rope, NOT HAIR, NOT COTTON THREAD. This is really frustrating to hear again and again. I think this is bit misleading, but I continue to hear about hair or thread - please have a look at my test page:

http://playground.sun.com/~vasya/Manila-Rope-Results.html

Thanks, Vassili.