Ranking of Steels in Categories based on Edge Retention cutting 5/8" rope

St33L said:
This is a great thread! I've been reading through it, and I probably missed it, but what is the difference between categories?

I know the top one is successively better ranked than the ones below each category, but is there a % difference between categories? Is it a small but noticeable difference where the marginal benefit of getting a production knife in category 2 is practically just as good as a production knife in category 1, or we getting into double digit % differences? I understand there are "big differences", but I'm just trying to shed some more light onto this difference. And, on that note, Ankerson mentions that Phil Wilson's knives are much better than how it is categorized currently, but just to get some perspective on his custom knife quality, where does Phil Wilson's knives rank in terms of this difference... -2 category (meaning much higher quality than category 1)?

Thanks in advance!
Click to expand...
Stayed tuned. I think in a couple of weeks, you'll be able to see some head to head comparisons if Jim's arms and wrists hold out. :D
 
Will York said:
No argument.

I've found that sometimes what appears to be amazing performance, when broken down into its fundamentals, is actually an opportunity for a learning experience--but if you are that happy with the performance why worry about "why"? On the other hand, if you look further into that performance to find out what's really going on, you may be able to better duplicate the performance again in other blades.

To me it sounds as if the blade on your 440C knife is ground very thin, which means cutting on soft materials may continue with little effort even after edge alignment is lost. Also, if it is a point or two softer than "optimal", that thin edge may become a little ragged from contact with sand/dirt particles in the hair/hide of the animals you process, developing a de-facto serrated effect which will enhance cutting even more on meat and hides. I've experienced both these phenomena in a little AUS-8A bladed AG Russell Deer Hunter which seemingly would never stop cutting on meat and hide. It wasn't until I examined the edge under 30x magnification to try and find out what was going on that I could see it was "chewed up" to the point of being visibly ragged. BUT it still cut...whether I sharpened it or not.
Click to expand...
'
I'm pretty sure you are exactly right. My "touching up" every so often just realigned the edge without actually removing much steel. And it worked for me. I wasn't chopping or anything particularly damaging and as-is the steel was perfect for what I was doing. Sorry if I am "hijacking" the thread. That's not my intention. But.....Just because a particular steel is harder or more wear resistance does not necessarily mean it will be the best for what you are gonna be using it for. IMO. And this thread was not started with that objective. But I'm afraid, after reading a lot of responses, that because a certain steel is in "category one" that the particular steel is going to be the best for you. And again, in my opinion only, that is.....well, wrong.
 
sodak said:
Stayed tuned. I think in a couple of weeks, you'll be able to see some head to head comparisons if Jim's arms and wrists hold out. :D
Click to expand...

Well this knife I am cutting with now will defiantly make that very clear once the results are up. :eek:

DSC_5141.JPG


DSC_5137.JPG
 
Added Phil Wilson Coyote Meadow, CPM 10V at 64.5 RC and .004" behind the edge.
 
Nice Jim, Is that one yours? I'm looking forward to some Vanadis 10 in the future. It has more C,Cr,Mo and 3rd gen PM. I have heard it doesn't cut as aggressive and that could impact the rope cutting, though it could be run a little harder.
 
Last edited:
waterstoneblades said:
Nice Jim, Is that one yours? I'm looking forward to some Vanadis 10 in the future. It has more C,Cr,Mo and 3rd gen PM. I have heard it doesn't cut as aggressive though and that could impact the rope cutting, though it could be run a little harder.
Click to expand...

No, it's Paul's knife. :)

I have a V10 Blade coming pretty soon I think.
 
Oi
Ankerson said:
Well this knife I am cutting with now will defiantly make that very clear once the results are up. :eek:

DSC_5141.JPG


DSC_5137.JPG
Click to expand...

Phil's heat treat and grinds are from a different planet. What's the thickness of that blade at the spine/ricasso? Full distal taper/full flat grind? Really fun to see controlled testing done with so many different blades and steels and then to see his 10V included.

Thanks Jim! :thumbup:
 
Will York said:
Oi

Phil's heat treat and grinds are from a different planet. What's the thickness of that blade at the spine/ricasso? Full distal taper/full flat grind? Really fun to see controlled testing done with so many different blades and steels and then to see his 10V included.

Thanks Jim! :thumbup:
Click to expand...

Flat Grind/Full Distal taper.

Was about .110 blade stock.
 
Ankerson said:
Flat Grind/Full Distal taper.

Was about .110 blade stock.
Click to expand...

Beautiful. Thanks again for all your work, Jim. :thumbup:

The most comprehensive look at edge holding performance I've seen since I've been on the forums, by far. I wonder if it would be possible to devise a set of tests that would as definitively test toughness/durability, and then correlate the two properties in terms of some kind of overall performance ratio. Would love to hear your thoughts on that.
 
Problem is, when you test edge retention to failure you just need to resharpen the knife. When you test durability to failure you have ruined the knife.

Maybe a custom maker could make identical blades out of all the steels you would want to test, but not put handles on them or finish them to any degree. This would keep costs down, but would still cost plenty to test a good range of blades.
 
Will York said:
Beautiful. Thanks again for all your work, Jim. :thumbup:

The most comprehensive look at edge holding performance I've seen since I've been on the forums, by far. I wonder if it would be possible to devise a set of tests that would as definitively test toughness/durability, and then correlate the two properties in terms of some kind of overall performance ratio. Would love to hear your thoughts on that.
Click to expand...


Not sure what you are asking here, toughness/ durability has more to do with geometry than the steels themselves when talking about knife blades.

When someone wants a harder use blade the geometry is generally beefed up for the task and the steels are generally taken to a lower hardness level.
 
Both of these two knives are M390.

DSC_4602.JPG



What knife would be used for slicing and what knife for harder use?

DSC_46041.JPG


DSC_4606.JPG
 
The kinds of relationships I think would be interesting have to do with understanding how much flex/impact/side load type stresses a given blade will take and still be thin and hard enough to rank competitively in edge holding. For example, I think it would be interesting to know which among your top two or three categories of knives would stand up best in chopping/prying/flex/edge-torquing/hard impact testing in their current configurations and then how much cutting efficiency/edge holding different steels will lose with different degrees of thickness/hardness modification. Sounds complicated to me, but maybe the trained engineers in our midst could suggest an approach--maybe not.

Basically understanding just how much backing off on hardness/thickness is required of different steels for them to be viable for harder-use tasks than "pure" edge holding. For example, I would assume a steel like CPM 3V would take more punishment in its geometry on the Big Chris knife than say a comparable blade in S110V.
 
Will York said:
The kinds of relationships I think would be interesting have to do with understanding how much flex/impact/side load type stresses a given blade will take and still be thin and hard enough to rank competitively in edge holding. For example, I think it would be interesting to know which among your top two or three categories of knives would stand up best in chopping/prying/flex/edge-torquing/hard impact testing in their current configurations and then how much cutting efficiency/edge holding different steels will lose with different degrees of thickness/hardness modification. Sounds complicated to me, but maybe the trained engineers in our midst could suggest an approach--maybe not.

Basically understanding just how much backing off on hardness/thickness is required of different steels for them to be viable for harder-use tasks than "pure" edge holding. For example, I would assume a steel like CPM 3V would take more punishment in its geometry on the Big Chris knife than say a comparable blade in S110V.
Click to expand...


I have a lot of individual tests/reviews on a lot of the knives at the top of the list, actually most of them in the coarse edge section.

To be competitive in this type of testing would rule out any harder use blades, choppers etc because the geometry would be too thick.

I tested some over the years and the results were not good, this type of test doesn't favor thick geometry at all.
 
Thanks for your thoughts, Jim--I really appreciate your work and the incredible level of commitment you have brought to your testing across the board. Such a valuable service to anyone who has an interest in blade performance. I've personally gained a vastly more accurate understanding through your efforts, and I'm in your debt for that along with so many others here, obviously.
 
Well have the CPM 10V Coyote Meadow sharpened back up. :)

Took all of about 5 mins using the 400 grit SIC stone on my Edge Pro taking my time. :thumbup:

Ready to send back to the owner. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top