heat treat 52100 on a stock removal blade?????

C

chad2

Joined
Sep 2, 2011
Messages
1,000
so i have taken some advice and did some extensive web searching on 52100 heat treating and yes there is a lot of stuff on it but most of this is coming from forgers. i am just going to be doing stock removal and would like to know if the the normalizing is nessecary for my blade or can i go straight to heat 1550 degrees F and oil quench then next day same thing. doing this three times.

then tempering 400 degrees F then air cool then freezer for 24 hours and repeating this procces three times also.

or is it still nessecary that i do the normalizing after all the grinding?

if this heat treat is wrong what would be best for a stock removal blade?

my brain is kind of fried reading through all of the forum threads on this subject and not only from bladeforums lol

also is the freezer supposed to be done in between the triple quenching to?:confused:
 
I do 2 normalizing cycles 1 quench. No need for a triple quench ever imo, if you do it right the first time I think its just hocus pocus type stuff. Also 400 seems quite low. I normally temper between 450-475 depending on what it is being used for and how good i did in my heat treat. This is if I forge or stock remove which I do both. All in a forge until a get a kiln however. Oh any a freezer won't do anything worthwhile the temperatures it reach wouldn't affect the steel you'd need at least dry ice temperatures.
Check out www.cashenblades.com/steel/52100.html
 
ok i was just following ed fowlers directions on the freezer thing i had heard that to but he says that he put it into his freezer over night every time but if this is wrong than its wrong. thank for the info :)
 
What do you want the knife to do? Some makers using 52100 want it to do nonknife things. If you just want it to cut and take and hold a very fine edge, the heat treatment is very different than what others do.
 
yes every day use. dont want to have to sharpen all the time nothing crazy, just a scary sharp edge for a long time :)
 
xmtgx said:
I do 2 normalizing cycles 1 quench. No need for a triple quench ever imo, if you do it right the first time I think its just hocus pocus type stuff. Also 400 seems quite low. I normally temper between 450-475 depending on what it is being used for and how good i did in my heat treat. This is if I forge or stock remove which I do both. All in a forge until a get a kiln however. Oh any a freezer won't do anything worthwhile the temperatures it reach wouldn't affect the steel you'd need at least dry ice temperatures.
Check out www.cashenblades.com/steel/52100.html
Click to expand...

You can pretty much wrap it up, right here.:thumbup:+1

If you have a kiln, pre-HT thermal cycling is a good idea, even for a stock removal maker. I would shy away from the higher austenizing temperatures. The few extra HRC points you gain are hardly worth the risk of overheating and unnecessary if you set up the structures prior to the final quench.
 
Last edited:
Not wanting to muddy the answers, I'm sure the answers given are right on the money. However I was just watching Ed Caffrey's basic bladesmithing DVD literally 20 minutes ago.. and he was demonstrating with 5160 but kept mentioning 52100 as seemingly a similar alternative. He didn't go too detailed but mentioned the tempering colors were almost the same.. but more importantly he said with 5160 he would temper at 350 for 2 hours, 3 times.. and 52100 would go a bit higher to 375.

He's suggesting 100F lower than you guys, and I'm wondering why. My thought is that he's using an acetylene torch and mineral oil, so may not be reaching the ~66HRC it could potentially hit.. so a lower temp and longer soak time (2 hours) might bring it down to about the same hardness as a shorter soak at higher temps with a higher starting hardness? He also differentially heat treated (edge quenched), whether that affects soak times or not, I'm not sure.

Maybe you more experienced guys can shed some light on this?

He also seems to subscribe to the triple quench/temper voodoo.. which is interesting.
 
Ed C. is on board with Ed F.

Don't accept it as "voodoo" until you've made an educated descision that it is. You seem uncertain. Ask the right questions. How do they justify these these temps, times and results? Is there concrete evidence/data to back the claims? Have other independant studies come to the same conclusions? I tend subscribe to practices that are peer reviewed, scrutinized, consistant, controlled, repeatable, explainable and realistic. Anything else is just for fun.
 
Perhaps voodoo was a poor choice of words, and an attempt at a little humour after my wall of questions. I suppose in a roundabout way that is what I was meaning to ask, for some clarification. But point taken, thanks.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top