M2 stell - pros/cons compared to ATS34?

[Tuff]

I asked this a while ago, forgot some of what I was told, need to be reminded

 

[e_utopia]

Well, it should be better in pretty much everything except corrosion resistance, and maybe sharpening. I say maybe because I prefer steel which is 'more difficult' to sharpen, as I feel that I can have better control of the edge.

--JB

------------------
e_utopia@hotmail.com

 

[Sergiusz Mitin]

I had the strange experience comparing edge retention: ATS-34 blade outperformed M2 slicking hemp rope!
My BM 750 Pinnacle has ATS-34 blade and my BM 145 Nimravus Cub - M2 one. I sharpened both with equal sharpening angle using SPYDERCO 204 Tri-Angle Sharpmaker and Joe Talmadge's method: 30-degree back bevel first until the burr rises, then main edge with 40 degrees. Both knives were sharpened to shaving sharpness, then I started to slick 1/2-inche thick hemp rope. In first try ATS-34 blade lost shaving ability after 85 cuts and M2 blade - after 75 cuts.
I "steeled up" both knives to shaving sharpness and tried again. ATS-34 lost shaving ability after 80 cuts and M2 - after 70 cuts.
Here I stopped because I hadn't more rope

Subjectively I had impression that ATS-34 blade cut rope more aggressively than M2 one although both were finished on the same grit stones.
I have no comments so far, I'll get more rope and then I'll play this game with more steels.

------------------
Sergiusz Mitin
gunwriter
Lodz, Poland

 

[evasion]

Sergiusz, if you go to www.benchmade.com
and read the article about m2 steel, someone compared an m2 afck to a ats-34 afck to a 440v starmate in terms of edge retention and toughness. In the end it was said that even though m2 held an edge and was more tough than ats-34, for some odd reason ats-34 cut pine trees more aggressively. I also heard something about m2 having a finer grain. Definately interesting...

 

[Walt Welch]

The most rigorous, carefully controlled edge retention data of which I am aware are those of Wayne Goddard. He explains his methodology, and lists data for cryo'd and non cryo'd alloys. Here is the URL:
http://www.ameritech.net/users/knives/edge.htm

If anyone else has knowledge of similar data, please advise me. Walt

 

Please take into consideration, that BOTH, ATS-34 AND M-2 are "high speed steels".
They can be heat-treated in "three different" ways, will show approximately "the same HRc hardness" but will otherwise behave "completely different".

1) Heat up, hold, quench, temper (once/twice).
2) Heat up, hold, quench, temper, deepcryo, temper once/twice more.
3) Heat up, hold, quench, temper to secondary hardening (twice).

1) is the most brittle, but least rusting 2) is clearly tougher, 3)will be toughest, but most sensitive to rusting.
(of course ATS-34 will be inherently MORE stainresistant than M-2 but also MUCH more brittle)

As a well informed "steel man" once said:
heat treating is 80%, picking a "wondersteel" just 20% of success. Happy testing

------------------
D.T. UTZINGER

 

[Samurai6]

Walt,

Thanks for the link to that Wayne Goddard info, that was real interesting.

Tuff,

If you are trying to decide between an ATS-34 Benchmade knife, or a M-2 Benchmade knife, the pros and cons are pretty simple. If you are hard on your edges, cut wire, metal, dirty stuff with sand and rocks in it, you will probably prefer the toughness of the M-2 blade. It will come coated with BT2, and isn't an agressive ruster anyway unless you really neglect it.

Unless you use your knife hard, all day, you probably won't notice a difference in edgeholding between Benchmade ATS-34 and M-2. Benchmade's ATS-34 holds an edge very well.

So the pros and cons, the ATS-34 will be a little more stain resistant, the M-2 will be a lot tougher.

I like the edge I get on M-2 also, it seems finer to me. It should be finer. This type of edge cuts rope well. I think I notice that ATS-34 cuts better on hard wood, maybe due to the different grain structure of the steel, maybe just a subtle edge geometry difference, maybe just my imagination.

 

[Sergiusz Mitin]

Thanks Evasion, I have read this article (by Steve Harvey) some time ago and now I have read it once more. The finer grain of M2 steel could answer the question of cutting aggressiveness, I agree. But what causes that M2 lost shaving sharpness faster than ATS-34? Steve Harvey affirmed near the equal edge retention. But in my test difference between 80 and 70 cuts is about 15% - quite noticeable. Very strange!
Next week I'll try to get opportunity to watch these blades with 300-times magnification and try to make photos.

 

[Gator97]

Hi there

I thought I'd add my 0.02$ worth.
I have 2 axis 710, in M2 & ATS-34. I resharpened them both, myself using DMT & leather strop. Both were push shaving. for test purposes I've used one more blade, United Cutlery made Special Ops utility knife, also made of ATS-34, but unlike the axis blade which has RC 59-61 this one had 56-57.
To be short, I did cuts on cardboard, plastic & finally pierced some canes. First went dull Special Ops. wasn't unexpected though. RC 56-57 not too much

Then ATS-34 axis.after cuting some plastic it was noticably dull, while M2 still was able to shave, well it'd miss some hair but still.
I didn't do any rope cutting though

So at least to me M2 is much better than ATS-34 becaus eit can be sharpened to the finer edge, holds it better + I do not really care about stain resistance.



------------------
Have Fun,
Alligator

 

[rdangerer]

Zut & Zut said:

"As a well informed "steel man" once said:
heat treating is 80%, picking a "wondersteel" just 20% of success."

I have several knives that prove this point, an expensive custom folder in ATS-34, etc.

I didn't want to believe this a couple years ago when I first read it. I tried to deny that a mediocre heat treat on supersteel could matter that much. I have learned with age and experience. Shame it takes that most of the time. Guess part of it is that I've asked opinions too often, and too often gotten lousy answers that I only figured to be lousy when I learned for myself later. (Don't ask opinions of those who aren't rigorous/analytical is one lesson, don't ask opinions if you will offend if you end up going the other way is the 2nd).

Now you know why some of the custom makers advertise "heat treated by Paul Bos" bother to do so. They know enough to know Paul is a pro's pro, and better, their volume is such and they care enough about performance to let Paul do it for them, consistently.

(there are plenty who do their own heat treat and do it RIGHT, Chris Reeve a notable example, Phil Wilson, Dunkerly, Ed Fowler, Benchmade, many many others, but you never know until you try their blade).

------------------
rdangerer@home.com

 

[Tuff]

..

[This message has been edited by Tuff (edited 06-01-2000).]

 

[Tuff]

Originally posted by Steve Harvey:
Walt,

Thanks for the link to that Wayne Goddard info, that was real interesting.

Tuff,

If you are trying to decide between an ATS-34 Benchmade knife, or a M-2 Benchmade knife, the pros and cons are pretty simple. If you are hard on your edges, cut wire, metal, dirty stuff with sand and rocks in it, you will probably prefer the toughness of the M-2 blade. It will come coated with BT2, and isn't an agressive ruster anyway unless you really neglect it.
.

wow, mindreader.....

yeah, was comparing Strykers, deabating if the M2 version is worth the extra $35 or so...