Is 80crv2 a good beginners steel

When you start with martensite, you already have some % of carbon in solution due to the previous hardening treatment. So the next hardening procedure....puts more carbon in solution. The triple quench procedure is used to put ever increasing carbon in solution, but the way I see it, it is not as controllable as doing it in one shot. Not ideal. It can yield a fine structure, but it's not the only way to do it (cycling), and brings it's own problems. I have found no performance increase whatsoever using a triple quench procedure vs cycling and single quench (Aldo's 52100 and W2).

How important is the soak? Well, there is not a whole lot of alloying in 80CrV2, but with that small Cr % it should receive a soak. If using a higher aus temp, shorten the soak. If using 1550+, I probably would just equalize and quench. If using 1500F, use a short 5 minute soak.

Yep, "technically" speaking, 80CrV2 is HYPEReutectoid, just by a hair. Was going to mention that myself, but let it be. You can make a hypereutectoid steel a eutectoid (or even hypoeutectoid) by the heat treatment you give it. I suppose you could even make a hypo or eutectoid steel into a hypereutectoid by introducing carbon to it somehow (carburizing?).
 
Can you elaborate on the part about heat treatment. I don't think that's how it works. Perhaps we're using different meanings for the same words.
 
If I use my forge to harden with I'm not really going to be able to soak it. Will I get more performance than 1084 with my simple heat treatment? My quench is cannola.
 
skillgannon said:
If I use my forge to harden with I'm not really going to be able to soak it. Will I get more performance than 1084 with my simple heat treatment? My quench is cannola.
Click to expand...

IMO whether you soak it or not, or whether you use a temperature controlled oven or a simple backyard forge, you're still going to end up with a great performing blade either way. Any difference in performance would be nominal.
 
The introducing amount of carbon in the solution at austenitizing is not the right way to classify eutectoid, hypo and hypereutectoid steel. Its the structure at annealed state that do the work.

And amount of carbon is control by temperature. So multiple quench wouldn't put to much carbon in the matrix if you know what you are doing. The different of grain size between single vs multiple quench is can be seen by eye with a broken piece. The HRC also higher too.
 
I have used 80CrV2 because I could not find 1084 thinner than 1/8". 1/8" is a little thick for a paring/kitchen utility knife. if you have a forge, make a 'muffle' for your blade, a piece of thick wall tube big enough for the blade to fit in. also get a thermocouple and display. the temperature inside the muffle will change slower as it is protected from the flame. with a temperature display, you should be able to keep the temperature inside the muffle +/- 20F.
don't be concerned with multi step heat treat at this point. Get 1080+/80CrV2 from AKS. get the temperature inside the muffle to 1475F/800C. put knife in. when blade is same color as muffle, soak for 5 minutes. quench in 120F canola oil. Temper at 375F for Rc61-62.
 
shqxk said:
The introducing amount of carbon in the solution at austenitizing is not the right way to classify eutectoid, hypo and hypereutectoid steel. Its the structure at annealed state that do the work.

And amount of carbon is control by temperature. So multiple quench wouldn't put to much carbon in the matrix if you know what you are doing. The different of grain size between single vs multiple quench is can be seen by eye with a broken piece. The HRC also higher too.
Click to expand...


You can accomplish the same fine grain with thermal cycling without the quench.
 
shqxk, to clarify I wasn't saying that was the PROPER way to classify the steels. Some comments have been made calling O1 a eutectoid steel (when it is very much hyper..), because you can heat treat it and only put a eutectoid amount of carbon in solution. But that it is still a hyper eutectoid steel, regardless of how you heat treat it. It's defined when in the annealed state, not the hardened state.

Yes, you can definitely control the amount of carbon in solution by the temperature. I disagree with the grain size thing (cycled vs multi quench). My experience in comparing the 2 methods (52100 and W2), the grain is not discernible by eye at all. Comparing fractured samples were identical to the grain structure you would find in a drill bit or file. Maybe finer by closer examination (microscope), but not by eye.
 
me2, I apologize, yesterday I missed your post. I didn't convey my point well. My point was that I believe that many who use the approach of triple quenching are the guys who use torches and forges to HT, and I think what they are trying to do is sort of walk in the carbon content they're after (besides small aus grain). Like we walk up to a target hardness in tempering. First quench is right at magnetic, the next slightly above (hotter), the next cycle even slightly higher.....aiming for a target carbon %. And the accuracy of hitting that desired carbon % would not be as accurate (precise? I forget which is which now) as a tightly controlled austenitizing temperature, single quench. I may be wrong on that, perfectly willing and able to concede such. One of the main reasons I do post replies on HT threads is to help others who are beginning, and to learn more by the input/correction of others who have studied and know HT stuff way more than I.
 
samuraistuart said:
me2, I apologize, yesterday I missed your post. I didn't convey my point well. My point was that I believe that many who use the approach of triple quenching are the guys who use torches and forges to HT, and I think what they are trying to do is sort of walk in the carbon content they're after (besides small aus grain). Like we walk up to a target hardness in tempering. First quench is right at magnetic, the next slightly above (hotter), the next cycle even slightly higher.....aiming for a target carbon %. And the accuracy of hitting that desired carbon % would not be as accurate (precise? I forget which is which now) as a tightly controlled austenitizing temperature, single quench. I may be wrong on that, perfectly willing and able to concede such. One of the main reasons I do post replies on HT threads is to help others who are beginning, and to learn more by the input/correction of others who have studied and know HT stuff way more than I.
Click to expand...

i agree stuart, we are answering the same questions we asked 4 or 5 years ago. that is why I suggested getting a thermocouple and display. you can maintain +/- 25F in a gas or charcoal forge especially if you use a muffle. if you can maintain 1500F +/-25, you can HT this steel(or 1084 or 15N20 or O1) in one go. why fill a newbie's head with tales of multiple quench and heathen RA. why not show them how to spend $50 on items they can use as long as they do HT.
some previous discussions of this steel
http://knifedogs.com/showthread.php?34557-80Crv2-and-AlphaKnifeSupply-1080
http://www.hypefreeblades.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=640&p=5336&hilit=80crv2#p5336
best buy on a thermocouple. I use 18" 14ga Type K less than $11 https://www.mcmaster.com/#thermocouples/=17urrqc
basic display($28) http://www.ebay.com/itm/Digital-K-t...655399?hash=item48792d45a7:g:ayYAAOSwk5FUxoay
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top