I think we put WAY too much emphasis on alloys...

michaelmcgo said:
Sorry about the single misused word in "wall of text", but you're right about that mistype totally eliminating the validity of my entire point, my education, and the years I've spent in this field. :jerkit:

I'm not trying to ruffle feathers, merely pointing out a few observations.



If you read my post, you'll notice that I talked about a standard alloy steel (154CM) has to be left in the austenitic phase long enough for the alloys to completely disperse within the steel. When steel is at it's crystalization or austenitic phase, alloys and carbon flow from regions of high concentration to regions of low concentration until the entire steel body is at equilibrium. If you don't let the steel soak for long enough, it won't be at full equilibrium when it is quenched and it will have large formations of alloys.

Where did you see the micrographs? Were they put out by CM by any chance?
Click to expand...

Are you saying the (as I stated in my first reply) that Crucible has been somehow able to fool the steel community in general into buying their CPM steels?
 
Thanx for the post.

I can't speak steelgeek, but I do remember when 440C was the most "advanced" steel available, "the all new miracle steel". And everybody was making upswept drop point blades out of it. Then it was 154CM, then it was a string of other steels.

In my opinion, unless there is a function specific need, like resisting saltwater corrosion, steel, even more than blade design, is pretty much just fashion. Again my opinion, most people, myself included, don't use a knife enough to reach the limit of even 1095.

My latest fashion statement? Carbon steel Frost/Mora.
 
Pretty much sums up how I feel about blade steel choice these days. As long as it's an appropriate steel for the knife and given a good heat treatment I could care less what they call it. :p

And to think I used to be a steel snob! Gimme 1095, AUS8, 440C, ZDP-189...I really don't care anymore--it's all good!:thumbup:
 
There is a difference in alloy performance. Hardness is not the only variable, composition really does have an impact. But I think there is a tendency to overemphasize the importance of alloy composition in the list of variables of what makes a good knife. There's balance, the comfort of the handle for your particular hand and preferred grip, blade thickness at the spine, blade thickness just above the bevel, overall shape of the blade and how well it performs specific functions, lock style, fit and finish, and general aesthetics (does it look nice to you, the owner).

I sometimes think there is a tendency to emphasize alloys because it is an easy thing to get to. Most makers will list the alloy. fewer of them list hardness spec. No production maker lists the hardness of an individual knife. Nobody lists their geometry, which is the most important factor of all. We tend to focus on the data we have at hand.

Personally I ave a love for carbon steels and low alloy steels. I also enjoy lots of different stainless steels. And I also like uber CPM steels. They are all good stuff. But I hear so many folks say the equivalent of, "oh it's a terrible knife. the blade is only XXX." That is why I agree with the title of your post. There is a difference in alloy performance. But I feel that often too much emphasis is placed upon it.
 
Josh K said:
No, and probably because at that RC it would be impractical. How many small folders are made of 1095? Almost none. How about large fixed blades? Many.
Click to expand...

Case CV is pretty much 1095 if I'm not mistaken. There are a LOT of Case CV knives out there. There are several other manufacturers making folders out of 1095 as well....Queen...GEC etc.
 
morrowj_98 said:
Case CV is pretty much 1095 if I'm not mistaken. There are a LOT of Case CV knives out there. There are several other manufacturers making folders out of 1095 as well....Queen...GEC etc.
Click to expand...

I thought Queen primarily used D2. I wasn't sure what Case CV is, probably close enough to 1095.

I had forgotten about the traditional folders. :o

A better phrasing would be How many small folding knives with Rc 66 1095 blades are there?
 
Josh K said:
No, and probably because at that RC it would be impractical. How many small folders are made of 1095? Almost none. How about large fixed blades? Many.

I don't believe people get hung up, I believe that there is an honest difference. There may not be a huge difference, but it's there and it's discernible.

Edge holding = wear resistance? Wear resistance = grindability?
Click to expand...


Wow, we got a lot of alloy fanboys in here :D

My point is not that alloys don't add some stability at super high hardness (as well as instability at even low hardness), I am saying that the trend is now high hardness at the cost of brittleness. My point is that you can have a small 1095 blade at Rc 64 with awesome edge hardness. Sure it will be brittle (yes, more brittle than some of the new high alloy steels), but my point is that all steel become more brittle as they get harder, it's the way things work. My point is not alloys suck! My point is we base many knife steels solely on the alloys within them with out even looking at the hardness rating or method heat treat!
 
michaelmcgo said:
Wow, we got a lot of alloy fanboys in here :D

My point is not that alloys don't add some stability at super high hardness (as well as instability at even low hardness), I am saying that the trend is now high hardness at the cost of brittleness. My point is that you can have a small 1095 blade at Rc 64 with awesome edge hardness. Sure it will be brittle (yes, more brittle than some of the new high alloy steels), but my point is that all steel become more brittle as they get harder, it's the way things work. My point is not alloys suck! My point is we base many knife steels solely on the alloys within them with out even looking at the hardness rating or method heat treat!
Click to expand...

I will agree that some people will judge a knife solely on what the blade steel is instead of more important factors.

Your initial post seemed to be bashing alloys in general.
 
It's good to get different opinions and perspectives on steels. I find myself only purchasing knives with S30V blades. I'm sure 1095 or aus8 would be just as good for my edc and would sharpen in a snap with my diamonds but I tend to classify knives by the steel used. Right or wrong? I'm going to try ans step out of that thinking because there are a lot of very cool knives that don't uses s30v.
 
I think a lot of people see that a steel like CPM125V has a ton of vanadium in it and automatically assume that vanadium makes steel strong all by itself (vanadium is actual a very weak material by itself). Vanadium is one of the alloys that I talked about in my second paragraph. When vanadium is added to steel it slows the grain growth as steel transitions from Austenite to Martinsite during quench. If plain old 1095 is quenched is able to be quench in the proper amount of time, it will have the exact same grain size (strength) as a steel with vanadium added. The drawback to quenching 1095 this fast is cracks can form. Vanadium does not make a steel stronger in itself, it merely makes it easier to make the steel strong.

The reason CMP125V is so hard to grind in its "annealed" state is because it does not anneal nearly as well as 1095. The same characteristics that allow CPM125V to be quenched in a longer period of time cause the annealing process to increase in time exponentially. To truely fully anneal CPM125V, you would have to slowly decrease its temperature from 1600 F to room temperature over the course of days in a controlled oven. That's a lot of gas...
 
Josh K said:
I thought Queen primarily used D2. I wasn't sure what Case CV is, probably close enough to 1095.

I had forgotten about the traditional folders. :o

A better phrasing would be How many small folding knives with Rc 66 1095 blades are there?
Click to expand...

Queen does use a lot of D2 but they also do contract or SFO work and use a lot of 1095. The 2010 Traditional Forum knife is a Queen moose with 1095 blades. :)

1095 at Rc 66? That sounds like fun to sharpen. :p
 
michaelmcgo said:
I am currently toward the end of my engineering degree an have had a few metallurgy classes so already. I am half way through a fairly advanced Metals Selection course and a lot of what we deal with is the molecular makeup of steels. I am finding out that a lot of what knife/steel companies tell us is total bullcrap.
Click to expand...

Good to know that someone with a few metallurgy classes can keep us straight when all the PhD's working for knife and steel companies obviously don't know nearly as much as you do.

michaelmcgo said:
Steel companies put out a lot of literature that makes it seem like the newest steels are vastly better, but for the most part I think it's in our heads.
Click to expand...

Try telling that to many people on this forum who do exhaustive testing, and knife companies who use CATRA testing.


michaelmcgo said:
Now ZDP-189 is hardened to 65-66 Rc. It holds a great edge, but what do you know: IT'S BRITTLE! It took me a lot of science to realize that steels aren't really getting much better, the heat treat and metallurgy are simply getting more precise and allowing us to achieve higher hardness.
Click to expand...

Brittle? I've never had a problem with brittleness with my ZDP, and I grind them very thin. I will agree with you on the precision, but that's not the only answer.

michaelmcgo said:
That's odd: Hardness = edge retention (who wudda thunk it)
Click to expand...
That's been discussed on this forum for over 10 years. Glad you finally figured that out.

Other than to stir up trouble, what is the meaning of this thread? Alloys can make a significant difference, maybe they'll cover that in your next class....
 
Josh K said:
I wasn't aware that 1095 had any alloys in it other then Carbon and traces of others. I thought that the 10XX series are all considered "simple" carbon steels.
Click to expand...

1095 CV doesn't make any sense in metallurgy terms because all 10XX class steels are only iron + carbon. If you add alloys, you get an alloy number (5160).
 
sodak said:
Good to know that someone with a few metallurgy classes can keep us straight when all the PhD's working for knife and steel companies obviously don't know nearly as much as you do.
Click to expand...

Are you surprised that somebody trying to sell something may overstate it a bit?
 
I'm not knowledgeable about steels, but here's my opinion anyway. Maybe 1095 can be hardened to 66 Rc but it may take a very involved and exacting process that may not be commercially viable. Maybe these new steels are easier to get to that level of hardness, hence better to the manufacturer and bonus to the consumer who otherwise might not have access to high performing steels, whatever they are, at that price point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top