Kershaw Steel

C

chrome/22

Joined
Feb 27, 2010
Messages
2
I'm replacing an older Kershaw Leek I misplaced a few days ago while fishing, think it had the 440A steel. Olive handles & black coated blade.

The one I just purchased seems to have the older serration style like I had on the lost knife, so its most likely 440 as well over the new Sandvik steel ??


What is the difference tween the 440A & Sandvick C13 & C14 steels ?


Thasnks ! :cool:



c/22
 
You mean how to interpret the graph? That's quite hard :) I can just give you makeup and visual representation.
The rest is metallurgy, some of it is simple, and heat treatment which can get complicated.

Effects of the alloying elements (C, Cr, V, etc) are listed in the knife steel FAQ here and updated version is in knife steel composition chart, click the Elements button to see it.
 
chrome/22 said:
I'm replacing an older Kershaw Leek I misplaced a few days ago while fishing, think it had the 440A steel. Olive handles & black coated blade.

The one I just purchased seems to have the older serration style like I had on the lost knife, so its most likely 440 as well over the new Sandvik steel ??

What is the difference tween the 440A & Sandvick C13 & C14 steels ?

Thasnks ! :cool:c/22
Click to expand...

Both Sandvik alloys have roughly the same carbon content as 440A, but they can be heat treated to a higher hardness than 440A (56-57HRC). IIRC Kershaw runs their Sandvik steels at 59-60HRC, which should give better edge retention than 440A. I cannot speak from personal data as I have never tested them myself, but the theory is quite sound.

The Sandvik 14C28N alloy was developed solely for Kershaw. It is said to have Nitrogen in the composition, which is supposed to further improve the performance. Haven't tried it, but others have posted positive reviews.

So, either of the Sandvik alloys should offer improved edge retention compared to 440A.
 
knarfeng said:
Both Sandvik alloys have roughly the same carbon content as 440A, but they can be heat treated to a higher hardness than 440A (56-57HRC). IIRC Kershaw runs their Sandvik steels at 59-60HRC, which should give better edge retention than 440A. I cannot speak from personal data as I have never tested them myself, but the theory is quite sound.
Click to expand...

Kershaw's 13C26 is really 59-60 rc? I thought I read specs saying that it was softer, it certainly seems to be on the softer side with the rolling issues. If it's true then this would be the max hardness of 13C26 w/o cryo. 440A can be hardened to 60 rc with oil+cryo and performs excellent, but no manufacterer I know of does this.

Kershaw is the only one using Sandvik 14C28N but it's not really propietary, you can buy it in the tons.
 
I admit I'm going from memory, but in an argument with Cliff Stamp, I seem to remember Thomas saying they ran 13C26 at 59-60. Cliff remained huffy and thought they ought to be running it harder. Cliff and Thomas were best enemies and argued often. Finding the actual thread might be hard. I'll see what I can do.

14C28N was developed for Kershaw at Kershaw's request. Whether anyone else can use it, I do not know
 
Kershaw's 14C28N is some seriously good stuff. Right now, they have the exclusive contract with Sandvik for use of it. Their 13C26 isn't bad at all, but the 14C28N is a big improvement.
 
60HRC is the un-tempered hardness for 440A. Neither Carpenter Steel nor Allegheny Steel provides a heat treat schedule for 440A that provides a tempered hardness in excess of 56/57HRC. Perhaps you have seen another.
 
13c26 is a good steel that will take a great edge, hold it good and it's very easy to restore to scary sharpness if you haven't dulled it too much. I'm looking forward to trying 14c28 because I've heard it's comparable to vg10.
 
Last edited:
cotdt said:
Kershaw's 13C26 is really 59-60 rc? I thought I read specs saying that it was softer, it certainly seems to be on the softer side with the rolling issues. If it's true then this would be the max hardness of 13C26 w/o cryo. 440A can be hardened to 60 rc with oil+cryo and performs excellent, but no manufacterer I know of does this.

Kershaw is the only one using Sandvik 14C28N but it's not really propietary, you can buy it in the tons.
Click to expand...

Maybe you should call them up and give them a list of everyone's rolling issues.
Don't forget about throwing in the 440A at a hardness of 60. I'm sure they'll be
interested in your findings. ;)

manufacterer = manufacturer
propietary = proprietary
 
knarfeng said:
I admit I'm going from memory, but in an argument with Cliff Stamp, I seem to remember Thomas saying they ran 13C26 at 59-60. Cliff remained huffy and thought they ought to be running it harder. Cliff and Thomas were best enemies and argued often. Finding the actual thread might be hard. I'll see what I can do.

14C28N was developed for Kershaw at Kershaw's request. Whether anyone else can use it, I do not know
Click to expand...

I see, so basically the current ones are significantly harder than what they were listed as before. In the 2006 SHOT show the 13C26 was listed as 57-58 rc. That must be why I've had dozens of people complain to me about its softness and asking me to reharden theirs.

http://www.equipped.org/shot_show_2006_knives.htm

knarfeng said:
60HRC is the un-tempered hardness for 440A. Neither Carpenter Steel nor Allegheny Steel provides a heat treat schedule for 440A that provides a tempered hardness in excess of 56/57HRC. Perhaps you have seen another.
Click to expand...

Those datasheets don't list the higher austenization temperatures. When cryo is used, the issue of retained austenite goes away and you can use a higher temperature which increases the dissolved carbon (hardness) and chromium (corrosion resistance). You can increase the austenization temperature of 440A to 2030F w/o any grain growth, quench in oil and LN2. 340F temper and you get your 60 rc.

I've gotten 440A to 60-61 rc and 13C26 to 63 rc. These heat treats are expensive and impractical for industrial equipment, w/o oil+cryo the hardest you can get 440A is 56-57 rc. Industrial equipment heat treat in large batches and use nitrogen gas quench. They cannot achieve the maximum hardnesses predicted by thermodynamics computer simulations.
 
Last edited:
2brothers said:
Maybe you should call them up and give them a list of everyone's rolling issues.
Don't forget about throwing in the 440A at a hardness of 60. I'm sure they'll be
interested in your findings. ;)

manufacterer = manufacturer
propietary = proprietary
Click to expand...

What for? Manufacterers already know what I know, we probably speak to the same engineers from Crucible and Sandvik (who tell me a lot more about the steels than what's in the datasheets). The difference is that a large knife manufacterer has a different goal from a small custom maker who makes knives to suit a very niche purpose.
 
cotdt said:
I see, so basically the current ones are significantly harder than what they were listed as before. In the 2006 SHOT show the 13C26 was listed as 57-58 rc. That must be why I've had dozens of people complain to me about its softness and asking me to reharden theirs.

http://www.equipped.org/shot_show_2006_knives.htm



Those datasheets don't list the higher austenization temperatures. When cryo is used, the issue of retained austenite goes away and you can use a higher temperature which increases the dissolved carbon (hardness) and chromium (corrosion resistance). You can increase the austenization temperature of 440A to 2030F w/o any grain growth, quench in oil and LN2. 340F temper and you get your 60 rc.

I've gotten 440A to 60-61 rc and 13C26 to 63 rc. These heat treats are expensive and impractical for industrial equipment, w/o oil+cryo the hardest you can get 440A is 56-57 rc. Industrial equipment heat treat in large batches and use nitrogen gas quench. They cannot achieve the maximum hardnesses predicted by thermodynamics computer simulations.
Click to expand...

I'll let you take that up with Thomas W, the marketing manager for Kershaw. He's the one who posted the hardness. I'll let you call him guilty of posting a falsehood. (though it is worth noting that early Kershaw heat treats of 13C26 were to a somewhat lower hardness.)


Would that be one of your proprietary heat treats the hardness results of which you trumpet without bothering to actually test the blade on a Rockwell tester? Excuse me if I take that with a grain of salt.
 
hardheart said:
here's an old post, knarfeng
http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4064700&postcount=15
I don't know who does it, other than maybe Landes.
Click to expand...

Thanks hardheart. That still sounds like untempered to me. Allegheny gives an as-quenched hardness for 440A of 60 and a tempered hardness of 54-55.
Carpenter's tempered hardness for 440A is 56/57.

I'll drop Larrin an email. He'll know for sure whether that is tempered or untempered. I have no use for an untempered blade.
 
cotdt said:
...That must be why I've had dozens of people complain to me about its softness and asking me to reharden theirs...
Click to expand...


Dozens? :confused: I would think that if "dozens" (5 dozen? 10 dozen?) of people have complained, there might have been a thread or two on the subject on the largest knife forum in existence. Yet after extensive searching, I find none.

Your sig line is perfect for you. "Facts are misleading" yet you seem to use them by the dozen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top