S30V really an improvement over BG 42??

rdangerer · Apr 2, 2003

Those posts by Cliff are quite good, and right on target. He's parsed out a lot of what matters in short order.

There are a lot of people on these forums who should read, digest, and then incorporate that info into their understanding and then their thinking.

Scott Dog · Apr 2, 2003

Plus you know the blade steel on the Sebenza isn't an option. It's pretty much a take it or leave it thing. A lot was made over the hardness being 58-59 and not 60-61 like the BG-42. Initially I noticed that some custom makers were bringing out S30V at 60-61. Lately they seem to have come down to the 59 range. Now I'm not an engineer, knife maker or a specailist in metalurgy, I'm just a left handed guy that likes to collect knives and to be honest I couldn't tell the difference between ATS-34, BG-42, 154CM or S30V. S30V seems to be the new darling steel, it's supposed to be "better" than BG-42 (why I couldn't tell you to save my life). According to Pat Crawford the steel is more expensive (he is charging a $50 premium to have S30V steel put on one of his knives as well as a $50 premium for a left hand version and a year long wait to get a model of my choice), but I also was told by Tom Mayo, Chris Reeve and A.T. Barr that the steel (S30V) is easier to work and takes less belts to grind, making it relatively less expensive to produce. The really high end art type makers seem to be sticking with the ATS-34. From my personal unscientific experience, I bought a small left hand silver contrast stars and stripes in S30V from Chris at Blade Show West. It was sharp but not Bob Dozier sharp. I sent it back to Idaho for a silver double thumblug and a "tune and sharpen". It came back with a Dozier edge. I'm a light user so I would expect the edge to last for a very long time but we'll see. I'm certainly not going to chop up 2X4's to test the edge nor will I put the blade in a vise to see at what angle it bends and breaks. So I'll let you all know when the edge becomes less sharp but I suppose that every time you use a knife it becomes slightly duller. And finally, I bought a large Sebenza in the S30V steel and I sent it to Hawaii to see what Tom can do with it. I should get it back this week and I will post my opinions.

rdangerer · Apr 4, 2003

Originally posted by Scott Dog
S30V seems to be the new darling steel, it's supposed to be "better" than BG-42 (why I couldn't tell you to save my life).

Because, roughly in order of significance:
1. it is tougher at a given hardness than other high alloy stainless steels
2. it contains more Vanadium for wear resistance via carbides than BG-42 (4% vs. 1.2%)
3. It is a CPM steel so should be as good or better grain structure-wise (very fine and uniform distrib of Vanadium and Moly carbides... contributes to toughness, and arguably to ease of sharpening and ability to take a refined edge).
4. And it is supposed to be more corrosion resistant that the 14-4 Cr/Mo steels (ATS34, 154CM, BG-42). (more free chrome left after heat treat).

It isn't a "darling" in any negative or hyped sense (that is not to say there won't be hype out there). It is a solidly, genuinely incremental but notable improvement over all other "stainless" class steels in overall balance of properties. It isn't as tough as 3V or A2 or especially the simpler carbon steels (O1, 1084, etc). It isn't as wear resistant as S90V or 10V. It probably isn't as corrosion resistant as 440C or 420HC. S30V's claim is overall balance for a stainless.

Originally posted by Scott Dog
It was sharp but not Bob Dozier sharp. I sent it back to Idaho for a silver double thumblug and a "tune and sharpen". It came back with a Dozier edge.

Actually, Dozier's knives come quite sharp, but I believe are just sharpened on a belt grinder. And while they shave, they are quite aggressively toothy, not polished. And they are a flat final edge bevel (hollow ground blade of course). Which is just fine for a working knife designed as they are to be.

Reeve's knives usually come even sharper but more polished and not toothy... they are of course hollow ground, but the final edge is quite polished and slightly convex, done on a hard felt wheel. I view Reeve's edges as being a fair amount more refined than what Dozier chooses to put out (not criticizing... Bob puts out his work at what is admittedly and by choice a very nice price point).

To my arm hair, Reeve and RJ Martin and Scott Cook's knives come about as sharp anyone from the custom side (Yeah, Reeve is semi-custom or high end production, whatever). I only have one Mayo and bought it used, but it had a polished and broad and slightly convex edge on it also. The Busse Custom shop sure put a great sweeping convex edge on my flat-ground Active Duty. Very sharp, and polished.

Spyderco and Microtech do a nice job out of box also. Again a flat final edge bevel like Dozier.

Klaus · Apr 15, 2003

Originally posted by rdangerer
It probably isn't as corrosion resistant as 440C or 420HC. S30V's claim is overall balance for a stainless.

No argueing about the overall superiority - but Crucible in the S30V datasheet is stating a 5x fold increase in corrosion resistance over 440C and like 3X over 154CM. No data is given against 420HC though.

Just my 2 cents

Klaus

FullerH · Apr 16, 2003

On the heat treat question, if S30V is, as I understand it to be, the current equivalent of the older CPM440V, then would not Spyderco's experience of two or three years ago be pertinent? They discovered that they needed to keep the Rc level at about 57-59, IIRC, rather than the then-common 61-63 to prevent chipping. I remember long discussions of the BladeForums Blue Native with its CPM440V blade and folks concluding that it was the vanadium carbide crystals in the matrix of the other materials that gave it the edge-keeping abilities but tht these also made it tricky to sharpen.

Cliff Stamp · Apr 16, 2003

It was difficult to sharpen and form a crisp edge precisely because it was left soft. This was also the reason that the edge rolled and dented in easily so there were complaints of poor edge holding and edge durability. Two reasons why many people formed a bad opinion of CPM-440V (S60V) - an unfortunate effect simply of the low RC used on a high alloy, high carbide steel. This makes for an edge which dents and rolls easily, forms a large floppy burr when sharpening, and is difficult to rehape and reprofile. Not a great combination. Carbides make no effect on edge retention if the edge is bent out of place. Wear resistance is a greatly overhyped aspect of steels and in general doesn't contribute significantly to edge holding in many types of cutting. It is only a factor if the steel is strong enough (high RC) so that the edge can remain crisp and inline.

-Cliff

japansteel · Apr 21, 2003

If BG42 is made without using powder metallurgical,
S30V is superior to BG42.Because Vanadium carbide is easy to become coarse at solidification process.
But both of steels is not easy to make mirror finish surface
because of hard vanadium carbide.It is recomended to use ATS34
if you want to get balance between beauty of surface and
performance of knife.

Danbo · Apr 23, 2003

???? ATS34 is being recommended over BG42 for it's ability to take a better mirror finish? Sounds like somebody is confused, as BG42 is the cleaner steel, having been double vacuum melted. Of the few complaints people may have had about BG42(harder to sharpen, etc...), I have never heard anybody mention it being hard to finish. In fact, I have heard almost everybody rave about how clean the steel is, and how well it takes a nice finish.

Gator97 · Apr 23, 2003

Originally posted by rdangerer
Because, roughly in order of significance:
1. it is tougher at a given hardness than other high alloy stainless steels

I am having hard time believing that. If my small sebbie BG-42 at 61hrc has no chipping problems and my other BG42 blades at 61-62 hrc don't chip either, and as mentioned in this thread CRK and other makers are bringing down the hardness to 58-59 HRC how is the statement above true?
To my understanding it is that simple, steel A doesnt' chip at 61 HRC, steel B chips. Doens't that mean A is tougher than B at 61 hrc?

Originall when CRK announced they were switching to S30V I was excited and planned to swap the blade on my seb. Later once HRC was announced and all the debate started I hesitated. I wanted S30V at 61 HRC, as many others, because that was what crucible folks and other makers were saying. I admit, CRK was right back then choosing lower hardness. But, at the end of the day, we have a steel which can't be brought to 61 hrc, and I donno if it will be more wear resistant than BG-42 at 61 HRC. In small knives I don't care about toughness that much for obvious reasons. And that ease of sharpening is highly overrated IMHO>

Now I don't believe I am gaining anything by that swap...

GELADEN! · Apr 23, 2003

.........FINALLY someone got the slant to my original post and my take on the whole matter all along!!!!!!!!!! It's hype!!!!!!!!!

OwenM · Apr 24, 2003

Yeah, of course it's just hype. What would those makers who've extensively tested it, or the people who've been using it for the last year know?
Poor saps, they're just deluded

Gator97 · Apr 24, 2003

Come on Owen

I am not trying to slam S30V or CRK, in fact I said the opposite that CRK was right choosing 58 and I was wrong asking for 61.

Judging from this thread, it rather was me who was deluded and wrong, but it's not like I saw in my dreams that HRC 61 was optimal for S30V.

That's how it was marketed and promoted at the time. CRK choose lower hardness at that time, and now seems like many other makers are lowering hardness as well.
Can that be qualified as a hype? At least that was not correct info, and saying S30V is as tough as BG-42 at the same hardness is not correct info either?
I have not used S30V, and it might be working very well for its users, nevertheless based on what's being said about the makers lowering hrc to 58-59, it isn't as tough at BG-42 61 hrc

GELADEN! · Apr 24, 2003

...never said they were delusional Owen......I just think the buying public was led to believe that this "better" steel was better for us users and my point was I think it's "better" , for the knifemaker, because it's a "better" performer in the sense of fabbing the steel but not necessarily holding true as a better using steel from our side of the fence. My beef is twofold 1)that it has arrived on the scene at the exclusion of BG42 and not it's inclusion, which is a shame.........2)I don't (my opinion, humble of course, head bowing...)appreciate a snowjob. Respectfully to all...........

Cliff Stamp · Apr 25, 2003

Gator97 :

... seems like many other makers are lowering hardness as well.

On knives similar to the Sebenza? What were the problems with the higher hardness? Have those makers used BG-42, which hardness did they run it at. Has R.J. Martin lowered the hardness he is using?

-Cliff

Klaus · Apr 25, 2003

Cliff,

AFAIK Buck (with both steels heat-treated by Paul Bos) has been doing the BG42 in the 60-61 range whereas the S30V on the new Buck/Mayo TNT is specified at 59.5-60 giving you roughly a 1 point difference.

Regards

Klaus

OwenM · Apr 25, 2003

Originally posted by Gator97
...nevertheless based on what's being said about the makers lowering hrc to 58-59, it isn't as tough at BG-42 61 hrc

Here's another perspective. Different steels perform optimally at different hardnesses. CRK uses a lower Rc on their A2 fixed blades, including the smaller ones, but we won't see anyone saying that BG-42 is tougher than A2 because of that. For that matter, I haven't personally seen anyone say that S30V isn't as tough as BG-42@61Rc. Maybe they've just chosen a hardness that they believe gives the best overall performance, but people make all these assumptions, without giving it a try.
We all hate those "I've never used/handled/seen one, BUT...." posts about the Sebenza, right?

How people form their opinions is up to them, but someone else's words printed on a page have never impressed me when it comes to knives, or anything else. Got to see for myself.
I've got three S30V blades, and have been using two of them for about 11 months. Used it awhile to see whether I liked it or not. Decided I like it enough that the knife I've got on order is S30V, too.
The best thing about it is that it keeps me from arguing endlessly with myself about whether to go with D2 or BG-42

Gator97 · Apr 25, 2003

Originally posted by Cliff Stamp
Gator97 :
On knives similar to the Sebenza? What were the problems with the higher hardness? Have those makers used BG-42, which hardness did they run it at. Has R.J. Martin lowered the hardness he is using?
-Cliff

Cliff, I was referring to S30V, to be precise I was referring to the messages in this thread stating that sevral makers lowered HRC on their S30Vs from 60-61 to 58-59. I donno exactly what knives were affected though.

Gator97 · Apr 25, 2003

Originally posted by OwenM

Here's another perspective. Different steels perform optimally at different hardnesses. CRK uses a lower Rc on their A2 fixed blades, including the smaller ones, but we won't see anyone saying that BG-42 is tougher than A2 because of that.
Agree. However there are some basic rules, or trends, whatever you call it. Besides, I was comparing the same property at the same hardness.

For that matter, I haven't personally seen anyone say that S30V isn't as tough as BG-42@61Rc.
Agree. I was not following S30V developments lately, but in the beginig it was introuced as tougher, more corrosion resistant, easier to sharpen, etc... Except, the same metal can be optimized for the use in smaller blade vs. large. Again, the imression I got from this thread was that S30V had probs at 61 hrc, and so on.

Maybe they've just chosen a hardness that they believe gives the best overall performance
R.W Clark mentioned in once that there was no point bringing S30V above 58HRC, it'd be just more brittle. I believe CRK choose lower hardness based on something like that, i.e. optimum performance.

but people make all these assumptions, without giving it a try.
We all hate those "I've never used/handled/seen one, BUT...." posts about the Sebenza, right?
Agree

But you can't do 100% all time. Especially when we're talking about the new alloy, I'd have to buy few S30V blades, differently heat treated, sort of too much for a user

OwenM · Apr 26, 2003

Originally posted by Gator97
Agree But you can't do 100% all time. Especially when we're talking about the new alloy, I'd have to buy few S30V blades, differently heat treated, sort of too much for a user

Know what you mean

I wanted a TTKK, and was going to buy a used one in D2 or BG-42, but Trace posted on my WTB thread, and said he was just making some in S30V, so I ordered one. Worked out pretty good, because it let me get the handle the way I wanted it. I also wanted a DDR ALB, and planned to buy a used one, or order one in D2M, but Darrel sold me a double ground proto he had at Blade, and it was S30V.
Recently got a Cook small Owyhee hunter (my new EDC) off the forums in it, but I probably would have bought the knife if it had been BG-42, or even 420V, too.
Any of those steels would have been fine, but I sort of "happened into" them in S30V.
Don't get me wrong, I wanted them in S30V, but I really can't afford to go buying a bunch of knives in every new material that comes out. It just worked out that way, this time. If something "better" comes out tomorrow, it'll probably be years before I get to try it.
Regardless, it was interesting, getting to check out the new steel, and it gives me something to post stuff about, I guess

Cliff Stamp · Apr 28, 2003

Gator97 :

I was referring to S30V

Yes, my point was that you need a comparison. Were any of those makers using BG-42. If the value for its hardness that they were using was lower than what Reeve was using you would expect them to have at a lower S30V value. To reinforce the Reeves viewpoint, the other makers would have had to be running BG-42 at 61+ RC as well and finding that the S30V has better (and indescribable) abilities at a lower hardness.

Which of course begs the question, how were these abilities actually inferred, and why can't the results of this evaluation process be discussed. This should not be a religious issue where a maker steps in and what he speaks is taken as divine law when no supporting facts are presented. Did Reeve ever use S30v at 61 RC like the BG-42? How was the performance? Of what form (and magnitude) were the gains in dropping the hardness 2-3 points.

Owen :

CRK uses a lower Rc on their A2 fixed blades, including the smaller ones, but we won't see anyone saying that BG-42 is tougher than A2 because of that.

They are vastly different knives intended for different purposes. Both the BG-42 and S30V blades in question are Sebenzas and I have seen no commentary by Reeve that the S30v blades were designed for different tasks than the BG-42 ones.

In the A2 blades, the hardness was significantly dropped mainly to make the blades easier to file, by the argument that being able to file the blades is an essential requirement for ease of field sharpening.

Are a lot of people filing the S30V blades to sharpen them? Were a lot of the BG-42 blades being broken in prying due to ductility issues? Were the edges getting excessively damaged by fracture due to a lack of impact toughness?

These are the points that would make a lower hardness attractive. This of course begs the question - why didn't Reeve lower the hardness on the BG-42 blades? I severely doubt that it peaks in toughness at 61 RC .

Owen :

Yeah, of course it's just hype. What would those makers who've extensively tested it, or the people who've been using it for the last year know?

First off - they are selling you a product, and are thus hardly an unbiased source of information. As a critical point, look at the makers who are heavily pushing the "super tough" S30V, and see which ones were not using ATS-34 in large tactical blades, machetes, swords and even axes. Now if a makers position in the past was that ATS-34 was too brittle for such blades, but S30V does well - then that is an argument for its enhanced durability.

In addition, how many of these makers are doing their own heat treatment. All Bos makers tend to use the same heat treatment (it is one of the selling points), and thus this huge pool of makers is essentially one. Of course if every maker independently had Bos look at different RC schemes this isn't true, but this isn't the case based on what I have read. In fact a lot of makers have written that they simply let Bos decide .

-Cliff