S30v

[Larrin]

Is it a good thing that Crucible gives out information on steels. Sure, any factual information is a good thing. However just accepting what someone selling you on a product says is a very problematic viewpoint. Just because other manufacturers are not going to the US cutlery trade shows doesn't mean you have to ignore them. You can read their published research, talk to them, and go to their trade shows.

Crucible has always put top metallurgists in their knife market, and has consistently tried to please with new sizes and steels. The sales people (especially the past few years) have been extremely knowledgeable and helpful. Dealing with a company like Timken is a completely different story. Bohler-Uddeholm (the tool steel part, not strip steel) is starting to get in to the knife market, and are also much better than companies like Timken. Hitachi, being a Japanese company, is even worse. All we're trying to say is, Crucible has had a genuine interest in the knife market.

Cashen has a webpage on steels and extrapolates on their behavior based on fundamental principles of metallurgy. This is actually the primary goal of scientific research, determine a pattern and predict behavior. Steels with coarse carbides have low edge retention at acute angles because the carbides tear out. This you learn from studying enough of those materials to understand the pattern. You then predict how other steels with the same structure will follow this pattern. Verhoeven has worked with the high alloy high carbide stainless steels of course, that is what he compared AEB-L to and how he deduced it was a carbide problem. Landes has worked with the CPM steels specifically and other powdered metals.

Not trying to dispute what Cashen has said, but he has a major bias to forging steels, not to say that they are bad, but that is the emphasis of his studies. I don't think you implied it, but his findings are in no way comprehensive of steels and heat treatments. The perfecting of his preferred steels is to be commended.

Verhoeven's book was mostly written before S30V came out (the stainless section is largely unchanged from a 2001 edition that we have), and I don't think he had much experience with a "good" CPM stainless. Verheoven didn't even acknowledge the existence of CPM steels in his book. I don't know what you know about Verhoeven, but his expertise was never in stainlesses, he used other colleagues to help him with those sections. Maybe we should e-mail him and ask him his opinion on S30V and CPM154? If I remember correctly, his requirements for a good stainless cutlery steel were: 63-64 as quenched; fine, evenly distributed carbides; and good toughness and corrosion resistance. S30V and CPM154 both fit the bill, but maybe he greatly prefers the <1 micron carbide size of AEB-L to a <6 micron carbide size of a stainless CPM, or maybe he doesn't like steels with carbide volumes as high as 14-17% like S30V and CPM154, and maybe he doesn't like the idea of vanadium carbides in a knife steel as in S30V. As far as I've been able to read, he didn't give his opinion for any of the above.

The bottom line is, AEB-L may have finer edges than S30V and CPM154 due to finer carbide size. It's wear resistance is going to be lower than S30V and CPM154 because of a 5-6% carbide volume (that's an estimate) versus a 14-17%, though the harder K2 carbides may get it closer than I might imagine, just look at 3V, only 5% carbide volume, but because the vanadium carbides are so hard, it has quite good wear resistance. AEB-L will almost definitely get better toughness from a smaller carbide volume and carbide size. Corrosion resistance of AEB-L will be at least as good if not better. Ease of sharpening, grinding, and finishing will all be easier with AEB-L than S30V and CPM154.

I still don't think that S30V has any toughness problems, makers that do their own heat treating and testing (i.e. Phil Wilson) all feel that it has as great a toughness as could be expected from such a steel, while all of them found that it has the excellent edge retention that they would expect. The toughness gotten from the steel correlates well to a steel that has 14.5% carbide volume along with a large amount of chromium in the matrix (which reduces toughness). That's why even though it has about the same carbide volume as D2, plus having smaller carbides, it still has about the same amount of toughness because of the higher amount of chromium in the matrix.

The size, volume, and type of carbides are all paramount in the understanding of these steels. Of all the testing that's been done, it all correlates to the size, volume, and type of carbides. There are of course other factors such as amount of carbon and chromium, among other metals in the matrix, but IMO, after the amount of carbon in the matrix, the biggest single factor in what makes one steel different than another is the size, volume, and type of carbides in the steel.
I think we're trying to make this too complicated. S30V is a fine steel, CPM154 is a fine steel, AEB-L is a fine steel, and there are many, many, fine steels out there. You can select your steel based on your requirement of wear resistance, toughness, ease of sharpening, corrosion resistance, etc.

 

[Cliff Stamp]

Not trying to dispute what Cashen has said, but he has a major bias to forging steels, not to say that they are bad, but that is the emphasis of his studies.

Cashen is actually quite frank in that hammer forging steels is not the extreme performance engine commonly argued by Fowler and company. My point in the above was how people will readily extrapolate behavior which Steven strongly contended. In fact you are doing it based on how you understand steels.

S30V and CPM154 both fit the bill, but maybe he greatly prefers the <1 micron carbide size of AEB-L to a <6 micron carbide size of a stainless CPM

Do you have independent micro-graphs of CPM-S30V/154CM because the carbides in RWL-34 are above 6 microns. Ignore the median/mean carbide size that is quoted as that is meaningless as you need a by-volume central tendancy measurement.

It's wear resistance is going to be lower than S30V and CPM154 because of a 5-6% carbide volume (that's an estimate) versus a 14-17%, though the harder K2 carbides may get it closer than I might imagine, just look at 3V, only 5% carbide volume, but because the vanadium carbides are so hard, it has quite good wear resistance.

CPM-3V has 5% primary vanadium carbide; when heat treated according to Verhoeven/Landes, AEB-L has no primary carbide, the very fine sub-micron carbides are secondary precipitates and chroimum rich so are very soft compared to vanadium. In a standard wear resistance test AEB-L vs S30V should be no contest because the fine secondary precipitates just get torn out by the abrasive. It would be similar to 52100 vs D2. However in a knife edge, which is very acute, which is highly polished - it is a different matter.

I still don't think that S30V has any toughness problems ...

For custom makers which very low volume there are few reported problems. However there are few such problems reported with any steel so it is hard to argue on that basis due to lack of critical inspection.

I think we're trying to make this too complicated.

I think it is being made far too simplistic actually because defining better is far more of an intricate process than commonly infered/promoted and any characteristic which is better usually has a worse counterpart.

You quote Kevin, but you argue with him, relentlessly.

Yes we have disagreements, this is to be expected when two independent people discuss an issue and they are not identical clones. Walk into a reasearch lab and ask a question on method and see if everyone there gives you the exact same answer - and they all work together, now go to another lab and ask the same question. Do you really think when they discuss methods/interpretation of data at a conference they don't disagree. Cashen invited me to Swordforums, like all people who are interested in knowledge and not faith they want to see their ideas critically examined. He has no desire to be surrounded by a bunch of yes-men who blindly swallow everything he says - that does nothing to advance knowledge.

Kevin told me specifically that he extrapolates nothing concerning stainless steels, because he does not work with them, and has no interest in them. There is nothing on his page that I saw concerning stainless steels.

Read Cashen's page on steels and do you really think he has made knives/swords out of all those steels, it is clear that he hasn't with some of them but still comments on the steel based on its composition and known materials properties. He extrapolates based on his understanding of metallurgy constantly. Ask Cashen if T15 would make a good sword, in fact ask any sword maker. Of course they will extrapolate as will any maker/user based on what they know and of course they will also likely note its confidence if this is an issue.

Did Verhoven work with CPM steels?

No, however the steels he worked with have the same basic issues with carbide size/segregation reducing edge integridity. Landes used them directly and studied the same process. There isn't anything inherently magical about the CPM process that means you can ignore the carbide size. CPM S60V is more coarse and less stable at the edge than ingot AEB-L. Look at the fundamental behavior and the underlying cause.

The work Johnston did with ATS-34 vs 1095 over a dozen years ago studied the exact same behavior and he reached the exact same conclusions as Landes and Verhoeven. Of course this is the exact same thing you find in tool steel books on steels designed to hold a fine cutting edge which you would expect and why those steels have knives listed as one of their applications.

My point about the work of Landes, Verhoeven, Johnston, is that it opposes a fundamental viewpoint of the cutlery industry held by many makers which is that steels like 440C are superior to 440A. Early on in this thread Thomas of Kershaw argued that S30V had to be a superior steel because everyone was using it, Steven then propsed the idea that opposing this meant you were saying all those manufacturers were decieving the users.

I was using the edge stability work to show how an idea can be extremely popular but still opposed by actual science. This of course is not the only such example, Cashen's commentary on forging is another. A lot of people constantly promote forging for being able to make better steel but Cashen gives a metallurgical background for why this arguement has severe problems.

Simply because something is popular doesn't mean it good and simply because a lot of people say something doesn't mean it is right. Now something can be superior and popular, but one can't be used to infer the other.

-Cliff

 

[Larrin]

Do you have independent micro-graphs of CPM-S30V/154CM because the carbides in RWL-34 are above 6 microns. Ignore the median/mean carbide size that is quoted as that is meaningless as you need a by-volume central tendancy measurement.

I know that S90V's carbides are less than 6 microns from micrographs in its patent, so I can only imagine that S30V's and CPM154's will be the same size or smaller. S30V especially was created by basically the same principle as S90V, plus with CPM steels the carbide size seems to increase with carbide volume (based on looking at micrographs in patents), so S30V should have the same size or smaller carbides. CPM154 is just an assumption.

CPM-3V has 5% primary vanadium carbide; when heat treated according to Verhoeven/Landes, AEB-L has no primary carbide, the very fine sub-micron carbides are secondary precipitates and chroimum rich so are very soft compared to vanadium. In a standard wear resistance test AEB-L vs S30V should be no contest because the fine secondary precipitates just get torn out by the abrasive. It would be similar to 52100 vs D2. However in a knife edge, which is very acute, which is highly polished - it is a different matter.

I think you may have repeated what I just said, only I didn't mention anything about primary carbides. I did say that the carbides are very small, and that S30V should have greater wear resistance.

For custom makers which very low volume there are few reported problems. However there are few such problems reported with any steel so it is hard to argue due to lack of critical judgement.

I have the problem of thinking that people are stupid while a person is smart, which is why I give more weight to the testing of an actual maker such as Phil Wilson rather than some perceived performance by a user. I don't know what the user was doing with the knife, what he had done to it in the past, what knives/steels he has used in the past, or what knife with what heat treatment he was using. If Phil Wilson says it's good, I'm going to believe him every time. I also still believe that the number of complaints of S30V has been blown up to be a higher number than what it actually is on this forum.

 

[Cliff Stamp]

I know that S90V's carbides are less than 6 microns from micrographs in its patent ...

Yes, I am aware of them but those are not independent micro-graphs. I was interested in verification, especially on *random* samples of the steel from Crucible.

I have the problem of thinking that people are stupid while a person is smart, which is why I give more weight to the testing of an actual maker such as Phil Wilson rather than some perceived performance by a user.

The performance isn't percieved by the users, it is seen and measured and even photographed. They will also tell you exactly what they are doing if you ask. In fact they are usually willing to give you an abundance of details.

If Phil Wilson says it's good, I'm going to believe him every time.

In regards to his knives yes.

I also still believe that the number of complaints of S30V has been blown up to be a higher number than what it actually is on this forum.

You believe there is a mass conspiracy and that people are lying about the problems? I can call up threads where people report defect rates which are massive, multiple defects, defects returned and replaced with defects, etc. .

-Cliff

 

[kapt kopter]

Man after reading all this info on s30v steel, I wonder how it will hold up to use in Leathermans new Charge?
Multi tools as we all know are among the most abused blades in the knife world.................was s30v a good choice for Leatherman?

Kap

 

[3Guardsmen]

Man after reading all this info on s30v steel, I wonder how it will hold up to use in Leathermans new Charge?
Multi tools as we all know are among the most abused blades in the knife world.................was s30v a good choice for Leatherman?

Kap

For the Charge, yes! I say that because the Charge is geared and marketed more towards "steel snobs" than it is towards the type of people (mass market) who would abuse a lower end, more value-priced multi-tool. Just look at what the draw is towards that particular item, "Leatherman has upgraded their blade steel from 154CM to S30V on their Charge model." Most of the people who would abuse the blade on multi-tool would not be willing to fork over the large amount of cash required to purchase a Charge, and furthermore, probably think that S30V is the latest, greatest, high performance motor oil.

Regards,
3G

 

[db]

&#8220;
Cliff said&#8230;
R.J. there have been lots of reports of problems with S30V, much more so than any other cutlery steel. This is real and factual data unless you want to
argue some sort of mass conspiracy.

Are you forgetting about ATS-34 witch had way more reports about problems with the steel in the early mid and late 90&#8217;s than S30V is having? I&#8217;ve even seen you refer to the past posts on it&#8217;s heat treating debate. Also CPM 154 had way more reported problems with it, than S30V is, in the 80&#8217;s so much so that many companies and makers quit using it. I think you are the one who is trying to turn conspiracies into real and factual data.
&#8220;
Cliff said..
It is the same thing with heat treatment, S30V was designed specifically to allow ease of heat treatment by knife makers, as opposed to tool steels which can require much more complex/demanding treatments. It is supposed to again be better, not worse in this
respect.

Acording to Phil Wilson it is.
&#8220;
Phil Wilson said&#8230;
It &#8220;is&#8221; easy to heat treat compared to 154CM, S90V , S60V and 10V .
&#8220;
Larrin said..
I give more weight to the testing of an actual maker such as
Phil Wilson rather than some perceived performance by a user. I don't know what the user was doing with the knife, what he had done to it in the past,
what knives/steels he has used in the past, or what knife with what heat treatment he was using.

I couldn&#8217;t agree more.
&#8220;
I also still believe that the number of complaints of S30V has been blown up to be a higher number than what it actually is on this forum.

I think your right it&#8217;s the hot steel and everyone seems to forget or they just don&#8217;t have an interest in reporting other steels problems right now. If you look hard enough you will find reported problems with just about every steel. S30V is getting the ink right now but that doesn&#8217;t mean it has a larger problem than any other steel. I&#8217;d even guess from what a lot of makers say they are having much less problems than they have had with other steels they worked with. Some sort of mass conspiracy?

 

[Cliff Stamp]

[ease of heat treatment]

Acording to Phil Wilson it is.

Yes db that was the point. CPM promoted it for ease of heat treating and grinding as did many makers origionally, thus where there are problems reported with the steel in use you can't then say it is because of it being demanding in those areas.

I think your right it’s the hot steel and everyone seems to forget or they just don’t have an interest in reporting other steels problems right now.

People reporting problems on S30V are comparing them to other steels specifically and finding much more problems with S30V. They are duplicating the work with other knives and not having the issues.

-Cliff

 

[allenC]

All of this technical data is very interesting, for the most part.

But I would much rather hear how the opinions of those who use their S30V knives on a regular basis.
I believe that no amount of scientific data can replace the knowledged gained from actually USING the knife.

All of the S30V knives that I use, or have used, had no problems whatsoever.
So, It's a good blade-steel IMHO.


As best as I can determine from the various responses on this thread, it seems that most who have used or carry an S30V blade are happy with its performance:
Unsatisfied: approx. 7
Undecided: approx. 4
Satisfied: approx. 16

Cheers,
Allen.

 

[Larrin]

You believe there is a mass conspiracy and that people are lying about the problems?

No, not a mass conspiracy, just you. Every single thread on S30V you're reminding everyone of any and all problems with S30V. Whey aren't you doing that with any of the other steels?

 

[Knife Outlet]

I would say that people who have problems with S30V have samples with a wrong or bad heat treatment or are abusing the knives. Sorry, I've used enough S30V to know it's a really excellent blade steel. No, I don't chop down trees or cut concrete blocks with knives. Neither should you.

 

[Tim Galyean]

I can call up threads where people report defect rates which are massive, multiple defects, defects returned and replaced with defects, etc. .

-Cliff

Sure the threads are out there, as with all the other steels.

Is it me? Or does it seem that Cliff has a personal vendetta against
Crucible/S30V.

 

[Cliff Stamp]

I would say that people who have problems with S30V have samples with a wrong or bad heat treatment or are abusing the knives. Sorry, I've used enough S30V to know it's a really excellent blade steel. No, I don't chop down trees or cut concrete blocks with knives.

Those are not the types of problems being reported Fred, they are cutting plastics, cardboard, and corn stalks. There is some light chopping however considering how the steel is promoted this could hardly be argued to be abusive especially since they are doing the same work with other steels and not having problems. I would agree that since it has been done with S30V blades with problems you can conclude that the blades are not indicitative of its optomial performance. The problem is why is the frequency of problems so high.

On an amusing note, your stance is somewhat ironic considering :

"... I'll challenge your comments about Boye Dendritic as well. The material is no longer available because nobody would use it (except Boye himself) and the reason was that it was too brittle and too delicate (something you get sometimes with high edge retention.) Personally, I had two Boye Dendritic blades and both of them snapped, not while prying, but while slicing. It was certainly a high tech version of 440C but it wasn't a good one for knife blades. The knife industry won't miss it. "

This is you contending Swaim's praise of D-440C. Now how is what you reported and concluded there any different from what people are doing with S30V. You go even further and say it should not be used for knives in general.

Every single thread on S30V you're reminding everyone of any and all problems with S30V.

That is simply a lie.

http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=416630

Do I mention it has a high report of problems, sure if this is being ignored, just like if it was being ignored that people are having solid performance I would point that out as well.

Whey aren't you doing that with any of the other steels?

I do when such information is available, such as I noted Thom and Sodak's work with VG-10 at low angles when someone asked me about it and my experiences were different than theirs. I didn't just focus on what I did and ignore that others were having problems or assume they were lying or exaggerating.

I reference the problems as well as the positive with any steels. The commentary on ZDP-189 for example references problems people have reported with corrosion and sharpening. If you know of *publically* reported problems which I have missed with any steels then send me the links and I'll include them. Or or course actual public data of any kind, good or bad.

-Cliff

 

[OwenM]

All of this technical data is very interesting, for the most part.

But I would much rather hear how the opinions of those who use their S30V knives on a regular basis.
I believe that no amount of scientific data can replace the knowledged gained from actually USING the knife.

All of the S30V knives that I use, or have used, had no problems whatsoever.
So, It's a good blade-steel IMHO.

I've been reading about how "bad" S30V is since before it came out, and also using it since over four years ago when makers first began selling knives in that material. Guess I'm just lucky, since over a dozen S30V blades from various manufacturers, and three or four custom makers later, I've yet to have a problem that wasn't solved by a proper sharpening.
Probably sound like a broken record to anyone who's read my posts about it before, but...oh well.
Never considered myself a "fanboy" of any person or product, being more of a skeptic, even cynic, about most things. I saw the bandwagon crank up when S30V was first being introduced, and figured I'd see what the fuss was about. At that time, I didn't have much of a life beyond work and my hobbies, or anything better to do(kind of miss that sometimes, now), so I bought some knives to check out this S30V stuff, and it has always worked well for me, though I've limited it to blades ~4.5" or less, while sticking with INFI or common carbon steels for most larger blades.
My work and EDC folders, from Spyderco and Benchmade, both have S30V blades. My two favorite fixed blades, with HT from Paul Bos and Darrel Ralph, both have S30V blades.
I won't downplay anyone else's negative experiences, as I don't doubt most of them, and have had an "unusual" problem or two with individual knives in the past, but I've used S30V every day for years and in a wide variety of knives, personally have no complaints, and am inclined to think that the problems that some people have had are due to improper manufacture, HT, sharpening, etc, rather than inherent to the material itself. Not to mention the fact that sometimes performance, good or bad, tends to get blown way out of proportion on the internet-seen it with guns, cars and performance upgrades for them, exercise equipment, stereo equipment, flashlights, and yes(perish the thought!)...even knife steels.

I planned to sharpen my BM 940-Ti this morning, since it hasn't seen a stone in a few months, and has been getting the majority of my knife use. It's cut cord, rope, sectioned cardboard and a couple of pieces of carpet, plastic packaging, stuff off the vacuum cleaner drum thingie, cleaned treads on shoes, cut water hose, wrist protectors off gloves, line for my weed trimmer, marked places to drill holes in plywood, landscaping timbers, and 2x4s, trimmed edges of the same, removed staples, cut strings and paper, opened packages, mail, a bag of sand and a couple of concrete, the little seals on bottles of everything from oil treatment stuff to vitamins, cut limbs off shrubs, a switch for my girlfriend's kids, and probably some other things typical for a homeowner/do-it-yourselfer/all-around active person.
Hosed the blade with WD-40 and got most of the gunk off with a paper towel, examined the edge and tip, gave it a couple of strokes on a butcher's steel, shaved a little arm hair, shrugged, and put it back in my pocket.
While it's one of my favorite knives, performance-wise I've always considered my Benchmade the worst of the S30V blades that I regularly use, with the Spyderco and customs all doing better when I compared their cutting ability and edgeholding on cardboard some time ago.
Like I said, no complaints.

 

[Kaizen1]

Can we get a list together about which specific models in S30V have had this issue?

 

[Deadhead Archer]

Can we get a list together about which specific models in S30V have had this issue?

Such a list wouldn't reliably tell you a thing. For every 1 user reporting troubles with one specific model you'll find 10 that haven't had any trouble with the same model. Just read through this thread and you can see examples of models that "failed", and see where others refute it as having no problem at all with their models.

Such a listing also can potentially blacklist a manufacturer or their products. Reporting that S30V chipped on a plastic bag is different than reporting S30V chipped while slicing a vehicle battery cable.

Creating such a list is a BAD idea IMO. How would you feel if your favorite new knife made the list if just one person had a lemon?

 

[hardheart]

How would you feel if your favorite new knife made the list if just one person had a lemon?

I shouldn't feel anything. I could say,"I have the same knife, it has no problems." but to actually get emotionally involved is foolish.

 

[Larrin]

Such a list is nearly impossible to make, unreliable, and we don't need to badmouth any manufacturers on this thread. There's a 99% chance that the knife you purchase in S30V will be just fine. If it chips out in "normal" use, then send it back, it should be covered by the warranty.

 

[Deadhead Archer]

I shouldn't feel anything. I could say,"I have the same knife, it has no problems." but to actually get emotionally involved is foolish.

I'm guessing that the intention ignoramus is presenting is to create a list of lemons so people avoid buying them.

But you know what they say about people who assume...

 

[allenC]

Can we get a list together about which specific models in S30V have had this issue?

I think that this is a great idea.

I understand that it would not be without flaws, but if most of the forum members who have had trouble with S30V all list the same knife, I think that would be useful info to anyone considering that particular knife.

....and we don't need to badmouth any manufacturers on this thread.

But we should not become "cheerleaders" for the manufacturers either (the knife magazines already have that job!:grumpy: ).
And again, if the same knives come up again and again, it would probably be something the manufacturers would want to know.
I know for a fact that Sal Glesser of Spyderco has always sought feedback from the members of this forum.

The S30V knives that I have had NO problems with are:
Alaskan Guide Buck 110
Spyderco Native
Spyderco Military
Microtech UMS

The S30V knives that I have had problems with are:
None.

Allen.