Rockwell Hardness Tester

JTR357

JTR357

Gold Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2007
Messages
14,580
I searched for this & couldn't find it. This guy has his own Rockwell hardness tester & he posts the results completely unbiased. Hinderer & Strider got super low scores. Spyderco flies high.

steel hardness lab . com

ETA: Hinderer was a 2018
 
Last edited:
Thank you for this data source. Really cool. I wouldn't say -- and neither would the tester -- that lower Rc readings are bad or high Rc readings are good. Lots of factors go into a good heat treat, and there are good reasons for knife makers to choose different Rc levels.
 
Thanks for that. Everyone should read their FAQ.

Precision measurement is a career, not a hobby. Well, you can see the results when you get into big manufacturing.

I remember an ad: "It was only a small error, but they made it a million times."
 
Last edited:
I'm not buying some of the numbers. Whoever heard of running 154CM at 62?

And some of those machines from which he is pulling data do not conform to the standard ASTM method for Rockwell hardness measurement.
Note: "Superficial Rockwell Hardness" is not the same measurement as "Rockwell Hardness".

The standard ASTM method for measuring Rockwell hardness of metals is ASTM E18. Look up the specs for each machine. If it does not include ASTM E18, then you are getting approximations or conversions from other test methods that are actually measuring different properties. Mixing and matching data from different measuring methods is not acceptable.

And how were those machines calibrated? Were they in calibration? Were the calibration standards traceable to the national standard?
 
JTR357 said:
I searched for this & couldn't find it. This guy has his own Rockwell hardness tester & he posts the results completely unbiased. Hinderer & Strider got super low scores. Spyderco flies high.
Click to expand...
Saw this a few months back (ETA - on the Spyderco home forum). Why do you say Hinderer “got super low scores”?
 
knarfeng said:
I'm not buying some of the numbers. Whoever heard of running 154CM at 62?

And some of those machines from which he is pulling data do not conform to the standard ASTM method for Rockwell hardness measurement.
Note: "Superficial Rockwell Hardness" is not the same measurement as "Rockwell Hardness".

The standard ASTM method for measuring Rockwell hardness of metals is ASTM E18. Look up the specs for each machine. If it does not include ASTM E18, then you are getting approximations or conversions from other test methods that are actually measuring different properties. Mixing and matching data from different measuring methods is not acceptable.

And how were those machines calibrated? Were they in calibration? Were the calibration standards traceable to the national standard?
Click to expand...
That’s what I’ve heard as well. The machines some of these YouTubers are using are like the dollar store/Temu versions of real RC Hardness machines which are properly calibrated. It’s not that I don’t like the numbers. I just personally don’t trust their numbers.
 
SpyderPhreak said:
Saw this a few months back (ETA - on the Spyderco home forum). Why do you say Hinderer “got super low scores”?
Click to expand...
I just seen one instance of Hinderer's 20CV at 59. It's not terrible but I wouldn't say it's the hardness I would expect 20CV to be at.
 
knarfeng said:
I'm not buying some of the numbers. Whoever heard of running 154CM at 62?

And some of those machines from which he is pulling data do not conform to the standard ASTM method for Rockwell hardness measurement.
Note: "Superficial Rockwell Hardness" is not the same measurement as "Rockwell Hardness".

The standard ASTM method for measuring Rockwell hardness of metals is ASTM E18. Look up the specs for each machine. If it does not include ASTM E18, then you are getting approximations or conversions from other test methods that are actually measuring different properties. Mixing and matching data from different measuring methods is not acceptable.

And how were those machines calibrated? Were they in calibration? Were the calibration standards traceable to the national standard?
Click to expand...
All great questions I would have never thought to ask. I've never spoke with him personally, but it doesn't seem like he's got an agenda from what I've read. He just wants to put the information out there. I should ask him to open an account here so we can all pick his brain.
 
Here's the Strider's that were tested. With their lowest being the S30V at 55.7. He states the machine he's using & the pin. I know nothing about this. I just thought it was interesting. Apparently he's getting a lot of flack from manufacturers which is to be expected. The machine he's using is a Mitutoyo HR-530. Is that an accurate machine?
 
Delgadonine said:
JTR357, let that person speak for themselves. Maybe ask that the thread be closed until they do.

Don't put yourself out on a limb for them.
Click to expand...
Yeah good idea. I'm going to close it. ETA: Actually I opened it back up, because I think his account approval went through. I'll let him respond to this thread.
 
knarfeng said:
I'm not buying some of the numbers. Whoever heard of running 154CM at 62?

And some of those machines from which he is pulling data do not conform to the standard ASTM method for Rockwell hardness measurement.
Note: "Superficial Rockwell Hardness" is not the same measurement as "Rockwell Hardness".

The standard ASTM method for measuring Rockwell hardness of metals is ASTM E18. Look up the specs for each machine. If it does not include ASTM E18, then you are getting approximations or conversions from other test methods that are actually measuring different properties. Mixing and matching data from different measuring methods is not acceptable.

And how were those machines calibrated? Were they in calibration? Were the calibration standards traceable to the national standard?
Click to expand...
Here is a link to ASTM E18, I would recommend purchasing it and reading up on it fully before attempting to discredit properly done testing further. https://store.astm.org/standards/e18
 
Got my account to work. For some reason the confirmation email was going to my spam folder. I had JTR357 relay a message for me, as I felt discredited. The attempt to discredit me while not having an understanding on the subject matter at hand is confusing to me. Do you work in the materials testing industry by chance? @Knaferfang?
 
TaylorHardness said:
Got my account to work. For some reason the confirmation email was going to my spam folder. I had JTR357 relay a message for me, as I felt discredited. The attempt to discredit me while not having an understanding on the subject matter at hand is confusing to me. Do you work in the materials testing industry by chance? @Knaferfang?
Click to expand...
Glad to hear your account is activated, Taylor. It might be a good idea to start a new thread to introduce yourself and share what you do in the General Knife Discussion. You’ll be a great addition to the community. Welcome to Bladeforums!
 
JTR357 said:
Glad to hear your account is activated, Taylor. It might be a good idea to start a new thread to introduce yourself and share what you do in the General Knife Discussion. You’ll be a great addition to the community. Welcome to Bladeforums!
Click to expand...
Appreciate it! Thanks for making this thread in the first place. Kind of odd I have to immediately defend myself from a “supermod” who has no idea what he’s talking about, but whatever. I’ve been sort of avoiding this forum due to the moderstors I’ve seen, and the overall vibe I get from the people on here. Doesn’t seem like a very welcoming place, nor does it seem that a lot of factual information is being shared on here. I chose Reddit as my primary platform due to the younger general age demographic. The younger generation is typically more open to learning, but I’ll give it a shot regardless. Thanks again!
 
TaylorHardness said:
Appreciate it! Thanks for making this thread in the first place. Kind of odd I have to immediately defend myself from a “supermod” who has no idea what he’s talking about, but whatever. I’ve been sort of avoiding this forum due to the moderstors I’ve seen, and the overall vibe I get from the people on here. Doesn’t seem like a very welcoming place, nor does it seem that a lot of factual information is being shared on here. I chose Reddit as my primary platform due to the younger general age demographic. The younger generation is typically more open to learning, but I’ll give it a shot regardless. Thanks again!
Click to expand...
This is definitely an older crowd but there is an extreme amount of knowledge here. Give it a chance. I'm sure you'll grow to love it here.
 
TaylorHardness said:
Appreciate it! Thanks for making this thread in the first place. Kind of odd I have to immediately defend myself from a “supermod” who has no idea what he’s talking about, but whatever. I’ve been sort of avoiding this forum due to the moderstors I’ve seen, and the overall vibe I get from the people on here. Doesn’t seem like a very welcoming place, nor does it seem that a lot of factual information is being shared on here. I chose Reddit as my primary platform due to the younger general age demographic. The younger generation is typically more open to learning, but I’ll give it a shot regardless. Thanks again!
Click to expand...
Also, Knarfeng has a lot of knowledge about knife steels. If you look through his posts, he has done extensive testing. I think you guys just got off on the wrong foot. I wouldn't take it to heart.
 
JTR357 said:
Also, Knarfeng has a lot of knowledge about knife steels. If you look through his posts, he has done extensive testing. I think you guys just got off on the wrong foot. I wouldn't take it to heart.
Click to expand...
I’m totally open to it, I went full circle on Metal Complex, and me and him are now working together. But the immediate attempt to discredit something he knows nothing of is very telling of his character IMO. We’ll see how he responds.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top