S30V vs S60V

[Cliff Stamp]

I think the answer is to try to get an lower initial hardness to start with and maybe end up at RC 63 or so.

I think the problems may be worse at the lower hardness by underhardening as this may leave more primary carbide which could produce edge stability problems. You might get a better responce by going hotter to dissolve more of the primary carbide and induce a stronger secondary hardening response and develop a structure similar to HSS which cuts very well and sharpens exceptionally well at 65/66 HRC.

-Cliff

 

[XIECHENG]

S60V better, much better, I think.

 

[marcinek]

S60V better, much better, I think.

Maybe, you could tell us why you think it is better and what it is better for? :thumbup:

 

[goodeyesniper]

S60V better, much better, I think.

thanks for this brilliant insight into a 7 year old thread.

PS: lol at busse getting his panties in a twist for people speculating as to what steel INFI is made from in this thread. when you rename a steel and then market it like Busse does that is to be expected.

 

[JNewell]

He's basically a troll. Sorry, hate to use that word, but look at his posting habits. Most of his posts excavate long-dead threads with absolutely worthless little bits of troll-bait, then he disappears again. :thumbdn:

 

[M.FREEZE]

These were hollow-ground 0.125" test blades heat treated by Bob Dozier to Rc 60-61. There's a five page article about sharpening and cardboard cutting after the CATRA test, but here are the objectively measured results. The test is cutting against stacks of 5% silica cards with a 50 newton force applied throughout a 40mm cutting stroke at 50mm/sec. Here is the CATRA page with a video example at the bottom http://www.catra.org/pages/products/...level1/slt.htm

Steel - Total cards cut
10V - 1044
S60V - 1030
S90V - 1014
3V - 682
S30V - 541
154CM - 468