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

michaelmcgo is right and if don't agree with him you have something to sell to my brain.
Ten years ago nobody knew what's was supersteel, today all the experts are here in this forum...Hooo shit I miss cliff stamp:foot:

Broos said:
Before you state that, you have an obligation to tell us what your definition of sharpness is! I'll bet that if you can define it, there is a way to get and confirm the blades are at equal sharpness.

I think the starting point of ER testing, or more accurately the starting point of an ER comparison, is an interesting issue. The FFD2 tests raised an interesting point about it - they defined sharpness as a CATRA REST test, made the blades equal at the start of the test, then found that some blades outcut others right at the start of testing. So if you want to start the test at equal cutting performance levels, you may have two blades at the beginning of the test at unequal sharpnesses!
Click to expand...

People still waiting for you scientific test:yawn: big mouth?
 
Ten years? You're off by about 30 or so, at minimum. Gerber & Loveless being just two quick examples of 'super' steel users (Vascowear, ATS-34, etc)
 
demoteamone said:
michaelmcgo is right and if don't agree with him you have something to sell to my brain.
Ten years ago nobody knew what's was supersteel, today all the experts are here in this forum...Hooo shit I miss cliff stamp:foot:

B]
Click to expand...

Or you (I) think the gains come from more than just hardness, and the steel companies and the companies that use their products have done their own independent research and found that there indeed have been large (relatively) improvements in what steels can do. Oh, yea, throw in the American Society of Metals, since they publish and support a lot of the research that shows those gains. ITS A CONSPIRACY MAN...
 
This all has to be revised since global warming turns out to be a BIG fraudulent conspiracy !
 
michaelmcgo said:
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.
Click to expand...
Please tell us what you think once you've finished.

Steels with lower carbon content (420, 440A/B, 1045, etc.) don't have enough carbon to bond with all the iron atoms and therefore are automatically "tempered" of sorts and can only achieve 50-55 Rc even with perfect heat treat.
Click to expand...

I wonder what Kershaw was thinking when they hardened 13C26 to Rc 64.

it's good old carbon and heat treat that does almost EVERYTHING for the edge, good or bad.
Click to expand...

And then we have H-1 getting above Rc 60 with almost no carbon at all!

Let's take a walk down history lane:
5000BC-3000BC: Flint tools are very hard, but very brittle. Does not apply to this rant.
1700-1980's: Old knives and Chinese knives tend to be heat treated to around 50-55 Rc (420, 440A, etc.) and they could bend all day long and be hammered back to straight.
1980's-1990's: The last few decades saw a big jump up to the 58-60 Rc level (154CM, S30V, VG-10, etc.) but we started to see edge chipping and broken blades. This may be a result of increased brittleness or maybe just ninjanitis.
2000-present: Now we are seeing super steals up to 66 Rc (ZDP-189, M2, etc.) but these knives are usually quite brittle and suffer from edge chipping whenever they encounter resistance.
Future: Light Saber technology is finally refined enough to make pocket sized light daggers viable. Law's immediately ban concealed light sabers.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure D-2 was developed during World War 2. Then you have Wootz and Russian Bulat from hundreds of years ago that are hardened in the mid 60's Rc range.

That's odd: Hardness = edge retention (who wudda thunk it)
Click to expand...

What about CPM S60V? It still has incredible wear resistance at Rc 56.

The last myth: powdered metals. Crucible Metals wants us to believe their cutting edge metal mixing technology is the Mutt's Nuts because alloys and carbon are perfectly distributed in a steel AFTER heat treat.
Click to expand...

I just want to make sure you understand that powder metallurgy does things that are impossible with cast ingot steel. CPM 15V is 3.4% carbon and 23% carbides by volume (http://www.crucibleservice.com/datash/PlasticsBrochure.pdf).
That stuff would be a useless crumbly lump without powder metallurgy.
 
demoteamone said:
blah blah blah....
Click to expand...

Your first point has already had holes shot all over it in this thread, and the little insult you offer is third grade logic.

But your missing of cs is of course not exactly adding anything to the discussion. Maybe you are capable of answering some of the questions I asked cliff that he never answered? Or maybe you can clear up some of his indefinite and unclear numerical analysis (it was pretty funny to an engineering geek when the Professor asked him specific questions about the numerical method that cs was using!). If you can actually bring some kind of pertinent info to the table instead of some lame put-down, let's hear it. :yawn:

Or maybe you are just another guy trying to say that one must do a test to be able to understand the science behind it (or just comment on it)? Where are your tests? By your third grade logic, you should have to do your own tests before you can criticize someone elses lack of testing, right? :D:rolleyes:
 
I guess the point the OP is trying to make is that higher edge retention is due to steels being heat treated to higher hardness and that it probably has nothing to do with CPM tech or different alloys allowing these steels to reach a higher hardness without being as brittle as "plain old" 1095 or other lesser steels? Or that even that these super steels probably don't have better edge retention than other steels when both are at the same lower hardness? What other proof do you need besides what has been provided in this thread that super steels and new technology are allowing for things to happen that weren't possible before?
 
sunday morning so far away from when this all started. i do'nt have any earthshaking info just some general views.the o.p. certainly has tenacity which if carried on in his lifelong pursuits will be a positive contribution to his production.FlaMtnBkr certainly makes a good point way into this discussion. but as far as i'm concerned ; a reply to one of my statements from many months back is probably as revealing as any thing else. i posted--" most members can probably do 95% of what they desire in knives with triple tempered 1095" the reply from the forum was:" you are probably correct but that would mean we are not knifenuts"
 
My latest thing is to find the best cheap knife that looks and cuts good. I'm down under $2 on nice lockback folders from BudK--probably 420 steel but boy can they cut. Also, they feel, look, and work great. I can pretend to be magnanimous and give these things away to friends or even aquiantances. Most people don't know the difference or even care.

Ok, the Rockwell hardness measure (HRC--I can never remember this acronym) seemed irresistible when I first got interested in knives, sharpness, etc. Or maybe it was the percent carbon. Anyway, after spending about $300+ on several different types of steel alloy pocket knives, my wife brought home an under $10 Rough Rider that took a great edge and cut rope great. I figured out it was 440 A or B. Then I got a "440C S&W 24-7" for under $20. It got as sharp as most of my high priced folding knives. I did cutting tests on various kinds of rope for all kinds of powdered steel, tool steel, you-name-it blades. There didn't seem to be that much difference based on different types of steel or price. Actually, my Shun kitchen knife (VG-10 I think) and an unknown Japanese vegetable/chef's carbon steel knife cut through the rope somewhat better than ZDP-189, CPM D-2, etc. The Opinel #8 carbon steel lockback (price less than $10) also cut as good as the much higher priced blades.

OK, my point is really simple: If you want the best bang-for-the-buck, buy a cheap knife, make a small investment in a sharpening stone, and learn how to sharpen. But it's not as much fun as purchasing lots of different knives and getting the first-hand experience.

BTW, did I mention I'd like to get my hands on a Wootz for under $300.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top