Is S30V still considered a premium steel at HRC 56-58 in production knives?

Seems to me you are really worried about the hardness of the knife you want. S30V is a fine steel, but make yourself happy and get the one offered in D2. No sense in sending it out for re-heat and cryro treating at the extra cost to get the hardness you want when you are happy with D2 hardness.
 
http://www.crucibleservice.com/datash/dsS30Vv5.pdf?CFID=461237&CFTOKEN=51478835
It doesn't give you the toughness figures .
I'm surprised at that hardness and wonder why they do that.I'll have to see if mine are that low , I doubt it.
Don't have it re HT'd you can cause more problems.
I found the info for my Sebenza - 58-59 HRc. That's what I expected, that's what I would have specified and I've been happy with mine .I don't think I'd be happy with 55-56. Somebody should give them a call and ask !
The website states 58-59 HRC for the Umnumzam !!
 
Last edited:
I have a Kershaw with a CPMS30V blade that didn't seem as hard as knives we make. I checked the hardness and it came out 56. I reheat treated the blade and brought the hardness to 59. It made a difference in the knife's performance that I could recognize, but it was still doing very well at 56.

We use a good bit of S30V in our custom knives and temper them all to 59. Edge chipping is not a problem with S30V that we have experienced and we have tested many to destruction with some very thin edges. It has proven to be a very tough steel that holds an edge a long time. It is very wear resistant and that is not all about hardness.
 
IGotStabbed said:
So hard use calls for a softer steel?
Click to expand...

Not necessarily, but the standard rule of thumb is to increase the toughness lower the hardness. Some steels (CPM M4) are still incredibly tough at 62 Rc. S30V is tougher then 154CM and VG-10, but still isn't something I'd want to pry with, especially on a $300+ knife.
 
CPM S30V might surprise you with its toughness. We took one of our small hunters like the model below, and clamped an inch of its 3.5 inch blade in a vise. With the knife horizontal to the floor we hung a 5 gallon bucket through the thong hole and put 48 pounds of steel in the bucket. By this time the blade had a pronounced bend in it which did not all come out when the weight was removed. To finish the test we had to get some bigger pieces of steel and add to the bucket first but soon reached the 48 pounds. We added enough weight to get the bucket to 56 pounds and the blade held for about 5 minutes and then snapped. This blade is made from 1/8 inch CPMS30V with a 14 inch hollow ground blade. We were not disappointed with the results of our test at all.

In our experience, CPM3V is much tougher and will hold an edge longer than CPMS30V, but it is not as stain resistant.

314159619.jpg
 
cotdt said:
Independant testers have found S30V in production blades to be around HRC 56-58, on the low end of manufacterer claims. How does this steel perform in this range? Would it be worth re-hardening the steel (and cryo) to HRC 61-62?

Or should I just buy the D2 version of the knife (HRC 60-62)?
Click to expand...

I call BS!
or at least incorrect information
(to me that's the same thing.)

You still have not identified the "independent tester".
You have not identified the specific knife.

Chris Reeve hardens Sebenza S30 to 58-59
http://www.chrisreeve.com/sebenza.htm

Chris Reeve does harden the Green Beret to 55-57.
http://www.chrisreeve.com/greenberet.htm

Who has tested a Sebenza in S30V at 55?

It has been stated that the GB is hardened to a somewhat lower hardness to make it easier to sharpen in the field. It was in a thread in 2006. I don't have a link to it.
 
Hmathews said:
I have a Kershaw with a CPMS30V blade that didn't seem as hard as knives we make. I checked the hardness and it came out 56. I reheat treated the blade and brought the hardness to 59. It made a difference in the knife's performance that I could recognize, but it was still doing very well at 56.
Click to expand...

All I can say is that demeaning a big competitor (be it real or imagined) is a sure way to get your product scrutinized and never makes any friends...unfortunately they have a larger fan base.
 
J_Curd said:
All I can say is that demeaning a big competitor (be it real or imagined) is a sure way to get your product scrutinized and never makes any friends...unfortunately they have a larger fan base.
Click to expand...

You mean Kershaw? Nah... individual knifemakers and big knife companies have different niches.
 
Not if someone buys his knife and slanders his quality. Apples and apples. Tact is good.
 
When I buy a knife, the first thing I do is think about what I want to use the knife for. Next, I look for knives from reputable makers that meet my needs. Finally, when I have the knife, examine it for flaws, and then keep watching for flaws as I continue to use it. If I find a flaw, I send the knife back to the maker.

If I found that a knifemaker was being dishonest about their claims, I would first confront the maker, whether an industry leader, or a one-man operation. I would not buy one of their products and then ask someone else to fix it. This seems foolish to me.

If you want a knife that is hardened to 60, then shop for one that is hardened to 60.

FWIW, I like D2. I find it easier to sharpen than S30V. It hasn't rusted on me, but I have had some staining. It's not a big deal. I don't ever plan on using the blade as a signal mirror or anything. I just use it to cut stuff.

TC
 
S30V started life as a knife steel - and I love it. Oddly, if you check Benchmade's '09 catalog, pg 55, you'll see S30V, M2, 440C, etc, are all HRc 58-60; 154CM is 58-61; and D2 and CPM-M4 at 60-62. They even rate 1095 at 57-60! I am sure these are ranges of test samples. Buck, who uses Paul Bos heat treatment in-house, rates, according to pg 5 of the '08 Dealer's Workbook, their 154CM at 59-61; S30V and CPM154 at 59-60; 13C26 & 12C27 MOD at 58-60; and even their standard-bearer 420HC at 58.

What does this all mean? Nothing... just bragging rights. You could, perish the thought, get a 420HC - or 1095 - blade that was 58 - just like your D2, 440C, 154CM, etc could have - gads, how sad! Of course, edge retention, finer edge, stain resistance, etc, all come into play. You have to go with experience for 'the best' - your experience is best, that of a friend is good. We faceless web-sperts can really be a crapshoot.

I've had great results with S30V - only had to sharpen one - twice now - and that's my EDC for 2+ yr - a $40 WallyWorld Spyderco Native. I am ashamed at how I've abused it - but, my Sharpmaker came to the rescue. Sadly, my first two Benchmades, a 440C and a D2 bladed example, wouldn't cut butter out of the box. I thought they were a new career when I sharpened them - and I didn't get the D2 razor sharp like the S30V. I have since bought three new S30V Benchmades - all came new as sharp as a razor, as did my latest BM in D2. I pick S30V when I can. Of course, Buck's 420HC is pretty darned good...

Stainz

PS I can be swayed... my recent Kershaw buy - a 1725 JYDII in Ti/SG-2. That blade name, 'Super Gold Two', gotta be good!
 
J_Curd said:
All I can say is that demeaning a big competitor (be it real or imagined) is a sure way to get your product scrutinized and never makes any friends...unfortunately they have a larger fan base.
Click to expand...
Not sure what you are talking about. Phil Wilson tested my S110V Shallot, told me it was 58, and said that he is going to shoot for 62 in his test blades by way of the information from Crucible's data sheets. You want more performance, especially in heat treat, from a custom knife. Production knives are batch treated and there can be a few points variance, a custom maker doing their own heat treat can control it better.
 
I stated the facts as I measured them. I did not demean its quality; in fact I stated that the knife was doing very well at 56. Nor did I provide any false information. Stating that "it did not seem as hard as knives we make" indicates that I didn't think it would test as hard on the Rockwell C scale. The hardness wasn't where I take my knives and that is where I wanted it. I decided to see if I could reheat treat the blade and it worked to my satisfaction. There is risk involved in doing that and I accepted that risk. Most people would never notice the difference and I might not have either were I not looking for it. That was the question that was being asked and my response was just an experience that I thought applied.
The maker has the choice to heat treat their knives anyway they want, just as I do. They also probably put a lot of time in testing to determine what hardness they settle on so that the knife will meet the performance specs and manufacturing requirements they established for that model. The hardness they selected for that model would have been deliberate and for their reasons. I did not intend to throw rocks at the manufacturer and don't believe I did. I would buy the same knife tomorrow. After using mine for a while, I did buy three more. One for each of my sons. Theirs have not been reheat treated. Mine has taken a lot of abuse in the last year and shows no sign of giving up. In my opinion, it is a great knife.
 
Hey Harry, we understood ya:thumbup: Not sure what jcurd was even talking about:confused:


To the OP, I think your talking about CRK's S30V. Chris and crucible teamed up to develope the steel, so you can bet if your getting a CRK in s30v it will be right, and I sure wouldn't harden it further than what he does.
 
J.Mattson said:
Who did the independent testing and on who’s blades?
Click to expand...
I dunno who did he mean, but I have tested RC on several of my knives. And as usual they are at the low end of the specified RC range. If you want the specifics, Kershaw shallot 110V was 58 hrc for one blade, 59HRC for the other. BM M2 was 59 and 60HRC respectively for the two I have had tested.
I also know test results of two other blades for the same Kershaw 110V, both came out 58HRC.


J.Mattson said:
Re-hardening?
Click to expand...
What's so unbelievable about it? I asked Phil Wilson to reharden 3 blades for me, 2 M2s and 1 CPM 110V, all 3 went to 64HRC and the difference in terms of edge holding, especially at thin angles is day and night.
I wrote here back then, Ive had 2 BBM 710 folders, both M2 steel and after few years of EDC one ended up with much thicker angle than the other. Without knowing hardness. Later testing showed thicker edged blade was 59HRC and thin edge had 60HRC. That's what 1 point meant.

So, it does make a difference. ANd S30V at 55 or even 57HRC is far from its peak, at least as a light cutting knife.

IGotStabbed said:
Is there any reason Chris Reeve only temper the steel to 55?
Click to expand...
Because, logically and practically softer steel is much easier to machine, produces a lot less wear on the equipment and such.
Sebenza given its dimensions isn't that much of a hard use folder, especially given its blade grind and thin blade in general.
 
Last edited:
knarfeng said:
It has been stated that the GB is hardened to a somewhat lower hardness to make it easier to sharpen in the field. It was in a thread in 2006. I don't have a link to it.
Click to expand...

:) I call that BS, as in the justification to make the knife soft. But, you are right, that was the official explanation and I can tell you that back then the same reasoning was used to justify 55-57HRC on A2 blades. Toughness wasn't mentioned, as A2 is a strange specimen, it has higher toughness at 60HRC(vs. 55-57hrc) somehow. Otherwise I am sure it'd be there as well.

Bottom line is, if you have half decent sharpener in the field or not, even 62-64hrc blades are no big deal. Most likely in the field you won't be grinding new bevels and thinning down the edges from 40deg to 20 deg...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top