Preformance of 52100 and w2

Justin Schmidt

Justin Schmidt

Joined
Feb 18, 2016
Messages
2,209
No this isnt a flame war. Is there any noticeable difference between the two steels? I've finally upgraded my forge to have complete PID control. So I'd like to be able to forge better steel also. I only make chef knives and smaller thin edc knives. I'd much rather prefer to forge it. I have parks AAA and parks 50 so I can quench either or.
Is one easier to work than the other? Easier to heat treat? Thanks
 
I have work with both. The different would be very minor. Both are very fine grain steel, can be take to very high hardness while retain reasonable hardness ... moderate wear resistance tho (compare to something like D2) but that make sharpening a joy. If you plan to blackening your blade with acid etch etc. W2 would take darker etch.
 
This is from the HT Sticky and was part of Stacy's comments on W2 that stuck with me...The Edge retention and toughness!

W2 isn't a magic steel, and it has not particular attribute ... beyond being good for hamon. It will harden to Rc 65-66 as quenched. And can be used at Rc 64-65 for slicers. Lower hardness down to Rc 62 is used for more rugged knives. If just getting started, shoot for Rc 63-64. Edge retention and toughness are not why you pick W2, so if they are of prime importance, another steel would be a better choice. One of the main advantages of W2 is that it is cheap and readily available.
 
Busto said:
This is from the HT Sticky and was part of Stacy's comments on W2 that stuck with me...The Edge retention and toughness!

W2 isn't a magic steel, and it has not particular attribute ... beyond being good for hamon. It will harden to Rc 65-66 as quenched. And can be used at Rc 64-65 for slicers. Lower hardness down to Rc 62 is used for more rugged knives. If just getting started, shoot for Rc 63-64. Edge retention and toughness are not why you pick W2, so if they are of prime importance, another steel would be a better choice. One of the main advantages of W2 is that it is cheap and readily available.
Click to expand...
I disagree with most of that. lol. I guess not all W2 is created equal? :D
 
Busto said:
This is from the HT Sticky and was part of Stacy's comments on W2 that stuck with me...The Edge retention and toughness!

W2 isn't a magic steel, and it has not particular attribute ... beyond being good for hamon. It will harden to Rc 65-66 as quenched. And can be used at Rc 64-65 for slicers. Lower hardness down to Rc 62 is used for more rugged knives. If just getting started, shoot for Rc 63-64. Edge retention and toughness are not why you pick W2, so if they are of prime importance, another steel would be a better choice. One of the main advantages of W2 is that it is cheap and readily available.
Click to expand...

Ah I forgot about the w2 threads in the stickys!!! Thanks Mike checking them out now!
 
comet_sharp said:
Ive used 52100 for 2 years. Now i wont touch it. I like W2 better in every aspect from forging to heat treating. It even feels better to sharpen on stones. 52100 is a pain in the ass
-Trey
Click to expand...

That's actually good to hear. I just tried some cru forge v and hated it because it was such a pain to work with. I much prefer 1095 to it so I guess w2 would be a better choice for me
 
I don't forge, so can't comment on which might be easier to forge. As far as heat treating goes, W2 needs the fast oil, but you have that on hand...so no issue there. Both steels seem to have their best performance as knife steel when hardened ~1475F. W2 doesn't need much of a soak, but 52100 should get a short 10 minute soak at temp. In real world use, I don't think there is much difference at all, you'd be hard pressed to tell the difference. One may taste better than the other, however. Because we all know that different steel taste different from one another. LOL

I prefer 52100. A little more wear resistance, technically speaking. Plus it tastes like marinaded rib-eye done medium rare. Don's round stock W2 has a good reputation. There was some W2 from Aldo that was questionable. I never had any issue with it, was wondering what people were talking about...."soft spots" in a hardened blade. And then I used the last stick of 1/8" W2 I had....and experienced first hand what others were talking about. Hopefully that was just a bad batch. Never have had an issue with 52100, either Aldo's or Alpha Knife's. Both very clean, respond well in quench, and perform great.
 
Josh Rider said:
The w2 I’ve forged wasn’t tough to forge at all.
Click to expand...
Also have that pretty snazzy post anvil ;) hows that thing treating you?

Stuart: I've thought about doing stick removal on my EDC blades and if I did I'd probably just use 52100. But I just am really not a fan of grinding down steel lol
 
I can’t tell much difference in real world use. I use W2 for a hamon, and used to use 52100 for monosteel. Since I refined my heat treat of z-wear, I havent made a 52100 knife. It’s great steel, but z-wear has much better wear resistance. Customers who would have gone with 52100 now choose z-wear.
 
In that thread, I was posting about the somewhat hyped idea about W2 being the be-all/end-all of high grade knives.

Don has taken W2 to great heights and gets a fantastic hamon on it. This is partly due to his steel source (old round stock from a single batch), but mostly due to his great skill working this steel. He has testes and perfected HIS HT and knows how to repeat the results. However, it is a fact that only one of us is Don Hansen III, few of us are of Don's caliber in skills and equipment, and very few have his steel.

The comments on edge retention and toughness stand on their own merits. There are tougher and longer wearing steels. If those two attributes are the main issues a knife will need, other steels will be a better choice than W2. If making a camp knife, there may be other/better choices. If making a kitchen slicer, W2 is hard to beat. That was all I was saying.

Personally, I find W2 and 52100 about the same in performance. I find W2 more reliable in HT. (52100 has a variety of structures/conditions it comes in, and you don't always know how to HT it. Obviously, W2 gets a better hamon.

When I say I find Balvennie 21 better than Glenfiddich 18 on a cold winters night by the fire, it doesn't mean you should pour all your Glenfiddich down the drain.:);)
 
Stacy E. Apelt - Bladesmith said:
In that thread, I was posting about the somewhat hyped idea about W2 being the be-all/end-all of high grade knives.

Don has taken W2 to great heights and gets a fantastic hamon on it. This is partly due to his steel source (old round stock from a single batch), but mostly due to his great skill working this steel. He has testes and perfected HIS HT and knows how to repeat the results. However, it is a fact that only one of us is Don Hansen III, few of us are of Don's caliber in skills and equipment, and very few have his steel.

The comments on edge retention and toughness stand on their own merits. There are tougher and longer wearing steels. If those two attributes are the main issues a knife will need, other steels will be a better choice than W2. If making a camp knife, there may be other/better choices. If making a kitchen slicer, W2 is hard to beat. That was all I was saying.

Personally, I find W2 and 52100 about the same in performance. I find W2 more reliable in HT. (52100 has a variety of structures/conditions it comes in, and you don't always know how to HT it. Obviously, W2 gets a better hamon.

When I say I find Balvennie 21 better than Glenfiddich 18 on a cold winters night by the fire, it doesn't mean you should pour all your Glenfiddich down the drain.:);)
Click to expand...
Thanks for the good words Stacy! I did get into "this" W2 for the hamon potential. Then later became very surprised with the performance. Mainly with the toughness & edge retention of a very fine edge at high hardness. Over the years it just fits the bill for every type of knife. From kitchen knives, fillet knives, folders, Bowies, etc.
 
samuraistuart said:
I don't forge, so can't comment on which might be easier to forge. As far as heat treating goes, W2 needs the fast oil, but you have that on hand...so no issue there. Both steels seem to have their best performance as knife steel when hardened ~1475F. W2 doesn't need much of a soak, but 52100 should get a short 10 minute soak at temp. In real world use, I don't think there is much difference at all, you'd be hard pressed to tell the difference. One may taste better than the other, however. Because we all know that different steel taste different from one another. LOL

I prefer 52100. A little more wear resistance, technically speaking. Plus it tastes like marinaded rib-eye done medium rare. Don's round stock W2 has a good reputation. There was some W2 from Aldo that was questionable. I never had any issue with it, was wondering what people were talking about...."soft spots" in a hardened blade. And then I used the last stick of 1/8" W2 I had....and experienced first hand what others were talking about. Hopefully that was just a bad batch. Never have had an issue with 52100, either Aldo's or Alpha Knife's. Both very clean, respond well in quench, and perform great.
Click to expand...
If you had soft spots in W2 its most likely from the 1475 aust temp. I prefer 1440-1460 range for it and 1095. Especially thermal cycled, the grain is too refined, you'll push the hamon to the edge at 1475.

As far as 52100 goes, I've never had it fully harden at 1475 without a 20 minute soak and Parks50. In my shop i use the 1500-1525 austemp range into parks50 with a coat of atp641 and 15 minute soak. If using medium oil I use the 1525 to 1545 range. This is with Kevin Cashens recommended normalize and thermal cycle schedule and since I forge I do a 1250° stress relief cycle before grinding. I find the chrome inhibits carbon dissolution so unlike a less alloyed steel it requires a higher heat or longer soak to hit the targeted range of carbon in solution. That again this is in MY shop with MY tools, may be different in yours.
-Trey
 
valknut said:
Toughness is much of a concern for me. Like I said I'm just doing chefs and EDCs. I think I'll stick to 1095 for my economic EDC knives and run w2 for kitchen blades thanks gents
Click to expand...

I use 1095 for my more budget friendly kitchen knives. I get a decent hamon, but nothing spectacular. With W2, I feel compelled to refine the hamon even on a more budget friendly build. I don’t have to worry that much with 1095, as there typically isn’t as much activity anyway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top