I Tested the Edge Retention of 48 Steels

navman said:
Depends on the steel and use of the blade. Magnacut is optimized at 61-64 HRC, with a balance of toughness and hardness. This would be for anything up to (roughly) a 6 inch hunting style knife. Anything designed for heavy chopping would, of course, be better optimized at a lower hardness, but that would not be where a high alloy steel shines.

Take AEBL for example (one of my favorite lower alloy steels). At high hardness it still support a thin edge (62-64 HRC) while remaining relatively tough (equal to 52100 bearing steel). In a larger blade, I would lower that to around 60 HRC as it would likely absorb more abuse. S90V I run at 61-62 as it was designed as a high performance cutting steel, not a tough chopping alloy.

Point being, general statements like "58 HRC is the best thing ever." are patently wrong for most steels and uses that a knife would/should be expected to perform.

Follow the science. Doc Larrin has done quite a bit of research and testing...I highly recommend the read (link at the front of this thread - post #1).
Click to expand...
At same ticknes and heat treament S35VN has allmost two time better toughness than AEBL. 58Hrc is not best thing ever. Its optimal hardness for all blade steels.Optimal does'n mean best. It's crossroad. You can't have right results when you sharpen knife and when you cutting with same knife if you rase only one variable (hardness). CPM125V is everything but optimal steel. Magnacut can be.
 
Seedy Lot said:
Z zorandjurkic I find the strength increase in higher hardness in knives to be beneficial to a point. Give me Magnacut any day at 62 Rc vs 58. At 58 I will have edge roll with sloppy butchering bone contact but at 62 I do not. Big difference in my world.
Click to expand...
Give me 62 Hrc any steel and i will destroy it on bone, stone, other steel, wood. German meat cleaver cuts bone on 56Hrc better than knife on 56 Hrc. If you cut paper with knife or shave hair with knife that doesn't mean that is knife better than scissors or razor. This is real meaning " right tool for job", not different knife or steel.
 
Your initial statement was that an Elmax knife at 58 HRC was the best. The numbers don't lie, and that is patently false. Elmax is optimized for use in the 62-64 HRC range. Below that you lose the benefits of that alloy and essentially have a easy to sharpen sub-par knife. This thread is about the comparison of steels in the category of edge retention not toughness. However, I would like to address the s35VN vs AEBL claim. Take AEBL vs S35VN at a hardness range between 60 to 62.5. AEBL demonstrates toughness ratings between 40 (at 60 HRC) down to 20 Foot/pounds. S35VN from 10 down to 7, less than half the toughness of the lower alloyed steel.

A 56-58 HRC steel in the same alloy, same geometry will absolutely NOT hold an edge longer than the same at a higher Rockwell. Properly tempered, A higher hardness steel will not be brittle. I have used and have had many pro-hunters use S90V at 62 HRC to skin out and process many game animals without major edge damage, that includes running the edge up against bone and carving seasoned wood. Can't speak to smashing it into stone or steel. The benefit to high hardness is more cuts before needing to be sharpened.

A skinning knife at 56 HRC just won't cut it (pun intended) and many of them report processing 2-3 times the number of animals as a commercially available skinner (unknown hardness, but assuming lower than 60 HRC based on what I know at least 3 of them used in the past).

I'm out. You are, as I said, set in your opinion, and I have knives to grind.

For an independent test check this out and see where Elmax scored at 58 HRC: https://www.bladeforums.com/threads...ed-on-edge-retention-cutting-5-8-rope.793481/
 
navman said:
Your initial statement was that an Elmax knife at 58 HRC was the best. The numbers don't lie, and that is patently false. Elmax is optimized for use in the 62-64 HRC range. Below that you lose the benefits of that alloy and essentially have a easy to sharpen sub-par knife. This thread is about the comparison of steels in the category of edge retention not toughness. However, I would like to address the s35VN vs AEBL claim. Take AEBL vs S35VN at a hardness range between 60 to 62.5. AEBL demonstrates toughness ratings between 40 (at 60 HRC) down to 20 Foot/pounds. S35VN from 10 down to 7, less than half the toughness of the lower alloyed steel.

A 56-58 HRC steel in the same alloy, same geometry will absolutely NOT hold an edge longer than the same at a higher Rockwell. Properly tempered, A higher hardness steel will not be brittle. I have used and have had many pro-hunters use S90V at 62 HRC to skin out and process many game animals without major edge damage, that includes running the edge up against bone and carving seasoned wood. Can't speak to smashing it into stone or steel. The benefit to high hardness is more cuts before needing to be sharpened.

A skinning knife at 56 HRC just won't cut it (pun intended) and many of them report processing 2-3 times the number of animals as a commercially available skinner (unknown hardness, but assuming lower than 60 HRC based on what I know at least 3 of them used in the past).

I'm out. You are, as I said, set in your opinion, and I have knives to grind.

For an independent test check this out and see where Elmax scored at 58 HRC: https://www.bladeforums.com/threads...ed-on-edge-retention-cutting-5-8-rope.793481/
Click to expand...
Elmax on 58 Hrc is not best steel or best steel hardness, it's optimal. Edge holding is not edge quality. Longer edge holding means much harder sharpening, chiping of the blade and easy breaking of the blade. But, again, 58 Hrc is not best thing ever. It's optimal thing ever and only for knife blades. I don't know what is optimal hardness for ball bearings. You use AEBL and it's ok. S35VN is still twice better on toughness. And it's not because i say that.
 
zorandjurkic said:
Elmax on 58 Hrc is not best steel or best steel hardness, it's optimal. Edge holding is not edge quality. Longer edge holding means much harder sharpening, chiping of the blade and easy breaking of the blade. But, again, 58 Hrc is not best thing ever. It's optimal thing ever and only for knife blades. I don't know what is optimal hardness for ball bearings. You use AEBL and it's ok. S35VN is still twice better on toughness. And it's not because i say that.
Click to expand...


zorandjurkic said:
At same ticknes and heat treament S35VN has allmost two time better toughness than AEBL. 58Hrc is not best thing ever. Its optimal hardness for all blade steels.Optimal does'n mean best. It's crossroad. You can't have right results when you sharpen knife and when you cutting with same knife if you rase only one variable (hardness). CPM125V is everything but optimal steel. Magnacut can be.
Click to expand...
(bold added by me to highlight the statement)

I'm not sure if you understand what optimal means.

1762174130360.png
 
zorandjurkic said:
Give me 62 Hrc any steel and i will destroy it on bone, stone, other steel, wood. German meat cleaver cuts bone on 56Hrc better than knife on 56 Hrc. If you cut paper with knife or shave hair with knife that doesn't mean that is knife better than scissors or razor. This is real meaning " right tool for job", not different knife or steel.
Click to expand...
Geometry has to be ruled out.
 
beeinak said:
How is ‘testing’ a previously broken knife even considered valid? Just curious
Click to expand...
I sead that isn't proof but all tre knives were broken on handle and he tests blades (they haven"t been broken). Maybe he tests two different steels. How should i know? It seems that doesn't lie or have any reason to. But he is not testing machine. So it isn't proof. If we test two blades (AEBL and S35VN) at 58Hrc we will know ( not at 57 or 59). Beside why we even do this? If you have knife with blade of 8 inch in combat its not bad but if you have knife of 20 inch blade that would be better. 20 inch knife is sword. That prooves that swords are actually knives. :-)
 
zorandjurkic said:
I sead that isn't proof but all tre knives were broken on handle and he tests blades (they haven"t been broken). Maybe he tests two different steels. How should i know? It seems that doesn't lie or have any reason to. But he is not testing machine. So it isn't proof. If we test two blades (AEBL and S35VN) at 58Hrc we will know ( not at 57 or 59). Beside why we even do this? If you have knife with blade of 8 inch in combat its not bad but if you have knife of 20 inch blade that would be better. 20 inch knife is sword. That prooves that swords are actually knives. :-)
Click to expand...
Not if grappling! Lol.

The ‘testing’ was very unscientific, and my point about the previously broken knife being tested is that it is not divulged how it was broken (for one thing), and if it had been previously bent/straightened- it would possibly cause a weak spot.

Anyway- no disrespect intended, but there are experts and great knifemaker’s commenting here, and l take their opinions as gospel.
 
zorandjurkic said:
I must admit that i don't understand.
Click to expand...
It shows.

You should start a new thread with your own testing to show us more objectively your claims.

Your testing can be refined through criticism if you have the maturity to grow from it.

Regardless, I feel this subject has grown and is no longer pertinent to this thread.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top