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

[Surfingringo]

Hey Jim, I recently got my second Phil Wilson custom in m4 and thought I would leave some preliminary thoughts here. This one is a 5 1/4" model that he's calling the Punta Gringo. This one originated as an all around utility knife for the fish cleaning table that is capable of fillet work.

This is my second Wilson in m4 and I have been very impressed with the steel. I use these knives daily cleaning fish and often do a lot of sawing and push cuts through fairly heavy bone. The first knife is at 65 and the second (Punta Gringo) is 64. I am still doing cutting tests but so far I have not seen a notable difference in edge retention between the two.

What I have really enjoyed about this steel is it seems to be really resilient to some of the heavier pushcutting. Not sure if that is a result of hardness or the properties of m4 but I have done some pretty heavy work with almost zero edge damage. Pushing through 1/8" - 3/16" bones with body weight and hand on spine and still shaves. I Even had the knife slip Last week and slammed edge first into concrete. As soon as I heard it I was afraid to look, but there was nothing.

Anyway, I use the hell out of both of these m4 knives and I've been very pleased with the edge retention and toughness but the truth is I don't really do any scientific testing. I Know you have tested some m4 before but I'm planning to get one of these in your hands in the next few months to see how it does in your testing.

So, without further ado...the Punta Gringo

 

[Ankerson]

Hey Jim, I recently got my second Phil Wilson custom in m4 and thought I would leave some preliminary thoughts here. This one is a 5 1/4" model that he's calling the Punta Gringo. This one originated as an all around utility knife for the fish cleaning table that is capable of fillet work.

This is my second Wilson in m4 and I have been very impressed with the steel. I use these knives daily cleaning fish and often do a lot of sawing and push cuts through fairly heavy bone. The first knife is at 65 and the second (Punta Gringo) is 64. I am still doing cutting tests but so far I have not seen a notable difference in edge retention between the two.

What I have really enjoyed about this steel is it seems to be really resilient to some of the heavier pushcutting. Not sure if that is a result of hardness or the properties of m4 but I have done some pretty heavy work with almost zero edge damage. Pushing through 1/8" - 3/16" bones with body weight and hand on spine and still shaves. I Even had the knife slip Last week and slammed edge first into concrete. As soon as I heard it I was afraid to look, but there was nothing.

Anyway, I use the hell out of both of these m4 knives and I've been very pleased with the edge retention and toughness but the truth is I don't really do any scientific testing. I Know you have tested some m4 before but I'm planning to get one of these in your hands in the next few months to see how it does in your testing.

So, without further ado...the Punta Gringo

Looking good Lance. :thumbup:

 

[waterstoneblades]

Nice knife Lance! Looks like a great general use knife. I'm sure Phil has the HT worked out on that M4 for your intended use. What is the thickness at the edge of the knife? looks about +- .010"

Matt

 

[nccole]

Hey Jim, I was thinking today about the "working edge" that gets thrown around a lot. I was wondering if you had data that showed # cuts vs. force required during the rest. I know you stop at 20 lbs, but curves for each steel would be very interesting. I think if you had the data you could put a number to the "working edge.". Then I would key in on steels that stay above that threshold until the very end as I found I like those steels If you have some points in between the start and end I'd be willing to put it in excel and the plot the data for whatever steels you have.

 

[Ankerson]

Hey Jim, I was thinking today about the "working edge" that gets thrown around a lot. I was wondering if you had data that showed # cuts vs. force required during the rest. I know you stop at 20 lbs, but curves for each steel would be very interesting. I think if you had the data you could put a number to the "working edge.". Then I would key in on steels that stay above that threshold until the very end as I found I like those steels If you have some points in between the start and end I'd be willing to put it in excel and the plot the data for whatever steels you have.

That's never going to happen for various reasons.

I will say that NONE of the knives tested in the coarse edge section were dull, I don't test until dull, nowhere near it.

 

[Surfingringo]

Nice knife Lance! Looks like a great general use knife. I'm sure Phil has the HT worked out on that M4 for your intended use. What is the thickness at the edge of the knife? looks about +- .010"

Matt

Hey Matt, oddly enough this knife was made for fillet work. I originally had Phil make me a 4.25" companion blade for the cleaning table. The idea was to use it for the rougher work that my fillet knife was less suited to. What I found was that I really enjoyed the wider stiffer blade for filleting certain fish like Mackerel. So the idea behind the Punta Gringo was a bit longer version with a bit thinner grind. This one is 5 1/2" and about .005 in the belly I believe. It's a real joy to work with and does the fillet work perfectly but yes, it is obviously a great "all arounder" too. Gets used quite a bit in the kitchen too.

I'm no steel expert but I have really enjoyed these two m4 knives. Apex seems to be very strong and resists chipping and deformation even when doing high pressure pushcuts through a lot of bone. I cleaned several mackerel and did some heavier push cutting on some snapper today and it would still shave my face in one pass when I got in. I like it!

 

[waterstoneblades]

Hey Matt, oddly enough this knife was made for fillet work. I originally had Phil make me a 4.25" companion blade for the cleaning table. The idea was to use it for the rougher work that my fillet knife was less suited to. What I found was that I really enjoyed the wider stiffer blade for filleting certain fish like Mackerel. So the idea behind the Punta Gringo was a bit longer version with a bit thinner grind. This one is 5 1/2" and about .005 in the belly I believe. It's a real joy to work with and does the fillet work perfectly but yes, it is obviously a great "all arounder" too. Gets used quite a bit in the kitchen too.

I'm no steel expert but I have really enjoyed these two m4 knives. Apex seems to be very strong and resists chipping and deformation even when doing high pressure pushcuts through a lot of bone. I cleaned several mackerel and did some heavier push cutting on some snapper today and it would still shave my face in one pass when I got in. I like it!

Nice lance! Seems like a great tool for the job. Looking forward to more info on that knife later. I'm sure You will get good use out of it. I have to put Mr Phil's V10 Smoke Creek through some more material yet, but I'm liking what I've seen so far.

 

[whp]

Hey Matt, oddly enough this knife was made for fillet work. I originally had Phil make me a 4.25" companion blade for the cleaning table. The idea was to use it for the rougher work that my fillet knife was less suited to. What I found was that I really enjoyed the wider stiffer blade for filleting certain fish like Mackerel. So the idea behind the Punta Gringo was a bit longer version with a bit thinner grind. This one is 5 1/2" and about .005 in the belly I believe. It's a real joy to work with and does the fillet work perfectly but yes, it is obviously a great "all arounder" too. Gets used quite a bit in the kitchen too.

I'm no steel expert but I have really enjoyed these two m4 knives. Apex seems to be very strong and resists chipping and deformation even when doing high pressure pushcuts through a lot of bone. I cleaned several mackerel and did some heavier push cutting on some snapper today and it would still shave my face in one pass when I got in. I like it!

How do you take care of the m4 to avoid corrosion with this food prep knife in the salt water? I ve had trouble with corrosion of my Gayle Bradley around here.

 

[Surfingringo]

How do you take care of the m4 to avoid corrosion with this food prep knife in the salt water? I ve had trouble with corrosion of my Gayle Bradley around here.

Just to clarify, these m4 knives don't go on the saltwater with me. M4 definitely wouldn't be a good choice for that. The first knife I got I used hot vinegar and put a fairly dark patina on it and I have been very happy with the level of corrosion resistance. I use it daily for kitchen and fish cleaning and it's often covered in food or blood for up to an hour. When done I just rinse it and wipe it dry. I really haven't had any corrosion issues at all with that one.

So when I got the second one I decided not to force a patina just to see if I would notice any difference in the corrosion resistance. I have. This one (without the patina) has been significantly more prone to red splotches and very light pitting. I have been able to clean off the worst of it but in my opinion (given the same exposure to blood and food) it requires more care and is more prone to red rust than the knife on which I forced the patina. I know there is an ongoing debate about the usefulness of patina but from what I have observed in these two m4 knives there is a relatively significant difference in corrosion resistance. This new one will be getting a vinegar bath soon.

 

[sodak]

How long of a vinegar bath? I would have to do it outside, vinegar acts as an emetic for me.

 

[The Mastiff]

Another nice Phil Wilson Lance. Looks like some nice Ironwood . Do you find you can think of about 3 or 4 combinations of Phil's designs in different steels you would like to have? I don't know anybody who is happy with just one of his customs.

I like the CPM M4 choice BTW. It does the cutting job very well. It's a good balance of wear and toughness and it's not that bad at resisting corrosion with some care.

joe

 

[Surfingringo]

How long of a vinegar bath? I would have to do it outside, vinegar acts as an emetic for me.

I think about 20-30 minutes. Get the vinegar near boiling and it seems to work much faster. Actually I think I mighht have done the whole procedure twice. Be sure to clean the blade really well with soap and water beforehand.

 

[Surfingringo]

Another nice Phil Wilson Lance. Looks like some nice Ironwood . Do you find you can think of about 3 or 4 combinations of Phil's designs in different steels you would like to have? I don't know anybody who is happy with just one of his customs.

I like the CPM M4 choice BTW. It does the cutting job very well. It's a good balance of wear and toughness and it's not that bad at resisting corrosion with some care.

joe

Ahem...yeah, they are a bit addictive aren't they? . I still need one of his fillets. I will get that one in cpm154 for sure. At some point down the line I would like an XL southfork in some fancy steel. I want a small b&t too but I'm going to wait and get the Spyderco version of that.

 

[Twindog]

Hey Jim (or anyone who knows):

You've tested the hardness of a lot of blades, and I was wondering if you have a sense of the precision of the hardness ranges advertised for blade steels?

I had a Benchmade AFCK (M4) tested for hardness. The advertised hardness range was 60-62 Rc. When tested, it turned out to be 59 Rc. At that level of precision, the actual hardness of those blades could be 59-63 Rc. Four hardness points is a huge range. I'd expect an M4 blade at 59 Rc would behave much differently than an M4 blade at 63 Rc.

Even if the advertised range of 60-62 Rc is accurate, with rounding it could be 59.5-62.4 Rc -- a difference of nearly 3 points of hardness. And if the hardness range is not accurate, the actual range could be even greater.

I've often wondered if the wildly different experiences that people sometimes report (0560 Elmax, for example) with the same knife models and steels is an artifact of poor hardness control at the factory.

 

[whp]

Hey Jim (or anyone who knows):

You've tested the hardness of a lot of blades, and I was wondering if you have a sense of the precision of the hardness ranges advertised for blade steels?

I had a Benchmade AFCK (M4) tested for hardness. The advertised hardness range was 60-62 Rc. When tested, it turned out to be 59 Rc. At that level of precision, the actual hardness of those blades could be 59-63 Rc. Four hardness points is a huge range. I'd expect an M4 blade at 59 Rc would behave much differently than an M4 blade at 63 Rc.

Even if the advertised range of 60-62 Rc is accurate, with rounding it could be 59.5-62.4 Rc -- a difference of nearly 3 points of hardness. And if the hardness range is not accurate, the actual range could be even greater.

I've often wondered if the wildly different experiences that people sometimes report (0560 Elmax, for example) with the same knife models and steels is an artifact of poor hardness control at the factory.

Seems reasonable, but I m no expert.

 

[nccole]

Hey Jim (or anyone who knows):

You've tested the hardness of a lot of blades, and I was wondering if you have a sense of the precision of the hardness ranges advertised for blade steels?

I had a Benchmade AFCK (M4) tested for hardness. The advertised hardness range was 60-62 Rc. When tested, it turned out to be 59 Rc. At that level of precision, the actual hardness of those blades could be 59-63 Rc. Four hardness points is a huge range. I'd expect an M4 blade at 59 Rc would behave much differently than an M4 blade at 63 Rc.

Even if the advertised range of 60-62 Rc is accurate, with rounding it could be 59.5-62.4 Rc -- a difference of nearly 3 points of hardness. And if the hardness range is not accurate, the actual range could be even greater.

I've often wondered if the wildly different experiences that people sometimes report (0560 Elmax, for example) with the same knife models and steels is an artifact of poor hardness control at the factory.

Just because Benchmade gives a range of 60-62, and it comes in at 59 doesn't mean you can deduce a new adjusted range of 59-63. It could actually be a real range of 58-60 or many other ranges that may not even include your example. You cannot assume much from a one piece sample size. Benchmade could be inflating a bit, they could be having accuracy or repeatability problems, or you may have gotten a fluke, or the test you had done may be off and that machine might need a calibration.

As to the ZT, it is my opinion from limited exposure that once you sharpen it a few times all is good. You can read all about that and I am sure you have, but I had issues initially and now don't. Same goes with Spyderco's S30V in my experience.

 

[Twindog]

Just because Benchmade gives a range of 60-62, and it comes in at 59 doesn't mean you can deduce a new adjusted range of 59-63. It could actually be a real range of 58-60 or many other ranges that may not even include your example. You cannot assume much from a one piece sample size. Benchmade could be inflating a bit, they could be having accuracy or repeatability problems, or you may have gotten a fluke, or the test you had done may be off and that machine might need a calibration.

As to the ZT, it is my opinion from limited exposure that once you sharpen it a few times all is good. You can read all about that and I am sure you have, but I had issues initially and now don't. Same goes with Spyderco's S30V in my experience.

Yes, I don't know what the actual hardness range would be. That's why I'm asking.

From my sample of one, I know that the hardness of the blade you buy isn't necessarily within the hardness range the manufacturer provides. And that advertised range is already pretty broad. But did I get the one blade in a million that isn't within the advertised range? Or did I get the one in three blades that isn't within the advertised range?

My sense is that there may often be a lot of variance between the hardness levels of individual blades, even when blades are of the same make and model. Given that a difference of two or three or four hardness points can make a huge difference in edge performance, maybe buying a knife is more of a crap shoot than we think.

 

[Ankerson]

Hey Jim (or anyone who knows):

You've tested the hardness of a lot of blades, and I was wondering if you have a sense of the precision of the hardness ranges advertised for blade steels?

I had a Benchmade AFCK (M4) tested for hardness. The advertised hardness range was 60-62 Rc. When tested, it turned out to be 59 Rc. At that level of precision, the actual hardness of those blades could be 59-63 Rc. Four hardness points is a huge range. I'd expect an M4 blade at 59 Rc would behave much differently than an M4 blade at 63 Rc.

Even if the advertised range of 60-62 Rc is accurate, with rounding it could be 59.5-62.4 Rc -- a difference of nearly 3 points of hardness. And if the hardness range is not accurate, the actual range could be even greater.

I've often wondered if the wildly different experiences that people sometimes report (0560 Elmax, for example) with the same knife models and steels is an artifact of poor hardness control at the factory.

The thing is that you won't really know until that one knife is tested.

The range is what it is, a range, if they say 60-62 it should be in that range someplace as the companies do check.

 

[skwurll]

Yep, yep. The knife companies are giving themselves some leeway by even stating a range. It def. should be within the stated numbers.

 

[Jens Schuetz]

Hey Jim (or anyone who knows):

You've tested the hardness of a lot of blades, and I was wondering if you have a sense of the precision of the hardness ranges advertised for blade steels?

I had a Benchmade AFCK (M4) tested for hardness. The advertised hardness range was 60-62 Rc. When tested, it turned out to be 59 Rc. At that level of precision, the actual hardness of those blades could be 59-63 Rc. Four hardness points is a huge range. I'd expect an M4 blade at 59 Rc would behave much differently than an M4 blade at 63 Rc.

Even if the advertised range of 60-62 Rc is accurate, with rounding it could be 59.5-62.4 Rc -- a difference of nearly 3 points of hardness. And if the hardness range is not accurate, the actual range could be even greater.

I've often wondered if the wildly different experiences that people sometimes report (0560 Elmax, for example) with the same knife models and steels is an artifact of poor hardness control at the factory.

How accurate is the test? Is it really 59Rc or more like 59 +/-1? Maybe repeating it a couple of times and getting an average and std deviation would be more accurate.

Also the Rockwell test can't be done on the edge but only on flat surfaces of a minimal thickness. If a knife is tested on the cheeks/flats maybe they are softer there than on the actual cutting edge. I'm not experienced in hardening but it sounds plausible that the thinner edge behaves differently during exposure to different temperatures than the thicker cheeks. Maybe the knife company accounts for that when posting their values?