-
The BladeForums.com 2024 Traditional Knife is ready to order! See this thread for details: https://www.bladeforums.com/threads/bladeforums-2024-traditional-knife.2003187/
Price is$300$250 ea (shipped within CONUS). If you live outside the US, I will contact you after your order for extra shipping charges.
Order here: https://www.bladeforums.com/help/2024-traditional/ - Order as many as you like, we have plenty.
Six premium grade steel edge retention test (including new ACUTO 440)
- Thread starter Sergiusz Mitin
- Start date
- Joined
- Oct 3, 1998
- Messages
- 4,842
I'm kind of surprised at your statement above, Griffon, and ZUT&ZUT's contention that ATS-55 is " 'low' carbon- stainless. Not 'really' hi-level steels."
ATS-55 has 1.00% carbon -- that 5 hundredths of a percent less than ATS-34. In other words, it's no more low-carbon than ATS-34 is, and it's got just as much as VG-10. The only really substantive difference between ATS-55 and ATS-34 is the lack of moly in ATS-55. But moly isn't the strongest carbide-former in the world, it's there mostly for making a steel high-speed, which a knife steel doesn't need to be.
So ZUT&ZUT's contention about ATS-55 being a low-carbon steel is outright incorrect. But why are you saying it shouldn't be compared with the above list? Have you found ATS-55 really performs that much below ATS-34?
Joe
My dear friends,
There might be a tiny difference between a
"low" carbon-stainless and a "low carbon" stainless....
By all means, the ATS-55 I am using is at the lower end of high performance steels. Hard, ultra brittle, finegrained, in constant need of sharpening and barely "stain-less".
Neither is ATS-55 the "big brother" of ATS-34. They are made for very different applications. Same for M-2, which ist NOT similar to A-2, even if they carry the same "2" in their name.
Maybe one of the VERY great experts cares to think about, what's in the steel AFTER heat- treating and what for. Might be a surprise.
Happy sharpening
------------------
D.T. UTZINGER
There might be a tiny difference between a
"low" carbon-stainless and a "low carbon" stainless....
By all means, the ATS-55 I am using is at the lower end of high performance steels. Hard, ultra brittle, finegrained, in constant need of sharpening and barely "stain-less".
Neither is ATS-55 the "big brother" of ATS-34. They are made for very different applications. Same for M-2, which ist NOT similar to A-2, even if they carry the same "2" in their name.
Maybe one of the VERY great experts cares to think about, what's in the steel AFTER heat- treating and what for. Might be a surprise.
Happy sharpening
------------------
D.T. UTZINGER
Ted,
From good sources, high carbon means 1% carbon content or more.
ACUTO 440 1.00%
ATS-55 1.00%
ATS-34 1.05%
VG-10 1.00%
D2 1.60%
CPM 440V 2.15%
So all would be considered "high carbon".
As for the stainless properties this has to do with the chromium left after the formation of carbides which needs to be about 12%...so 13% in content is usually considered stainless.
The statement about VG-10 having a lack of "abrasionproof carbides"...it contains trace (.1%-.3%) amounts of vanadium which form very hard carbides. Most of the new offerings from Crucible (including CPM 440V) have high amounts of vanadium and make the steel very abrasion resistant. In this test ACUTO 440, VG-10, 440-V, and D2 contain vanadium.
You may want to talk to Sal Glesser of Spyderco. The way I understand it ATS-55 was made specifically for knives and originally was a variation of ATS-34 where the expensive molybdenum was lowered from 4% to .6% and cobalt and copper added. This was to produce a premium steel that would allow a better price-point.
Jeff Jenness
From good sources, high carbon means 1% carbon content or more.
ACUTO 440 1.00%
ATS-55 1.00%
ATS-34 1.05%
VG-10 1.00%
D2 1.60%
CPM 440V 2.15%
So all would be considered "high carbon".
As for the stainless properties this has to do with the chromium left after the formation of carbides which needs to be about 12%...so 13% in content is usually considered stainless.
The statement about VG-10 having a lack of "abrasionproof carbides"...it contains trace (.1%-.3%) amounts of vanadium which form very hard carbides. Most of the new offerings from Crucible (including CPM 440V) have high amounts of vanadium and make the steel very abrasion resistant. In this test ACUTO 440, VG-10, 440-V, and D2 contain vanadium.
You may want to talk to Sal Glesser of Spyderco. The way I understand it ATS-55 was made specifically for knives and originally was a variation of ATS-34 where the expensive molybdenum was lowered from 4% to .6% and cobalt and copper added. This was to produce a premium steel that would allow a better price-point.
Jeff Jenness
- Joined
- Oct 3, 1998
- Messages
- 4,842
ZUT --
I'm not arguing about your observations in performance differences -- in fact, I'm very interested in learning more about what you've observed. I just want to correct the factual errors first.
Your claim was pretty clear, that ATS-55 is "'low' carbon stainless". ATS-55 has the same amount of carbon as VG-10, and .05% less than ATS-34. ATS-55 is high carbon, period, and has essentially the same amount of carbon as other steels which you consider to be high-carbon. So you made a factual statement that was incorrect, which you might want to correct if you so desire.
Well, sure. But I don't think anyone is so naive as to think two steels are identical because they share a number in their name. In the case of M-2 and A-2, they have a different chemical analysis. ATS-34 and ATS-55 are *very* close to identical (but not totally), except for the difference in moly, which in theory shouldn't matter for cutlery steel. ATS-55 isn't the "big brother" of ATS-34, and no one has claimed it is; rather, it's kind of the cutlery-specialized version, with the expensive but possibly-unnecessary element removed, and trace amounts of some other elements added.
But if you're seeing real-world performance differences between the two, which you describe as "the ATS-55 I am using is at the lower end of high performance steels. Hard, ultra brittle, finegrained, in constant need of sharpening and barely 'stain-less'", that is an analysis of performance. I'm interested in that comment, but I just wanted to correct your factual errors first.
So on to the performance you've been seeing with ATS-55 (and apparently, Griffon might share the same opinion). Whose ATS-55 and ATS-34 are you comparing? I'm wondering if heat treatment or the like can be the explanation for the difference in the performance. Spyderco ATS-55 (I'm guessing) versus whose ATS-34?
I haven't done ATS-55 versus ATS-34 head to head tests, but my very subjective impression is that my ATS-55 endura performs very ATS-34ish, and definitely is not rusting faster or acting more brittle than, say, Benchmade's ATS-34.
Joe
I'm not arguing about your observations in performance differences -- in fact, I'm very interested in learning more about what you've observed. I just want to correct the factual errors first.
Your claim was pretty clear, that ATS-55 is "'low' carbon stainless". ATS-55 has the same amount of carbon as VG-10, and .05% less than ATS-34. ATS-55 is high carbon, period, and has essentially the same amount of carbon as other steels which you consider to be high-carbon. So you made a factual statement that was incorrect, which you might want to correct if you so desire.
Well, sure. But I don't think anyone is so naive as to think two steels are identical because they share a number in their name. In the case of M-2 and A-2, they have a different chemical analysis. ATS-34 and ATS-55 are *very* close to identical (but not totally), except for the difference in moly, which in theory shouldn't matter for cutlery steel. ATS-55 isn't the "big brother" of ATS-34, and no one has claimed it is; rather, it's kind of the cutlery-specialized version, with the expensive but possibly-unnecessary element removed, and trace amounts of some other elements added.
But if you're seeing real-world performance differences between the two, which you describe as "the ATS-55 I am using is at the lower end of high performance steels. Hard, ultra brittle, finegrained, in constant need of sharpening and barely 'stain-less'", that is an analysis of performance. I'm interested in that comment, but I just wanted to correct your factual errors first.
So on to the performance you've been seeing with ATS-55 (and apparently, Griffon might share the same opinion). Whose ATS-55 and ATS-34 are you comparing? I'm wondering if heat treatment or the like can be the explanation for the difference in the performance. Spyderco ATS-55 (I'm guessing) versus whose ATS-34?
I haven't done ATS-55 versus ATS-34 head to head tests, but my very subjective impression is that my ATS-55 endura performs very ATS-34ish, and definitely is not rusting faster or acting more brittle than, say, Benchmade's ATS-34.
Joe
That's certainly one way of interpreting what's been said about it; Another is that it already existed for other uses and that Spyderco developed its use in knives.
I would like to point out that I've no experience at all with its actual performance, so that's not why I wouldn't include it among "premium" knife steels.
Seeing it tested is of course interesting and useful in any case, irregardless of what we call the test.
- Joined
- Nov 25, 1999
- Messages
- 1,499
Friends,
I have studied my metal technology 30 years ago and even then it was not my strongest point
so please be patient to my theoretic justification (or rather lack of it).
As to comparison ATS-34 vs. ATS-55, let's view from users standpoint. ATS-34 intentionally designed as steel for turbine blades, right? ATS-55 is intentioned as cutlery steel. The main difference should be that ATS-34 must be resistant against thermal erosion but ATS-55 - not. For knife blade performance it's not essential. Another properties of these two steels should be closely similar.
Well, thin edge of Delica might justify modest performance in pencil sharpening test, but how it could justify also modest performance in slicing test? This has not any justification for me.
I would be curious to make ATS-34 vs. ATS-55 comparison on another knives, the best way would be to compare knives from the same manufacturer, for ex. SPYDERCO Endura (ATS-55) vs. Tim Wegner (ATS-34). Unfortunately I have not suitable knives to compare. I have full sized Tim Wegner but I have not plain edged Endura.
I also would be curious to put at this comparison SPYDERCO Bill Moran Featherweight (VG-10) and Military (CPM 440V). The cutting edge length is closely comparable but edge thickness is quite different.
However end user deals with particular knife made of particular steel and not with steel properties only or even with test sample blade made of this steel. So I think this comparison would be quite sensible.
I would greatly appreciate more ideas in this matter.
I have studied my metal technology 30 years ago and even then it was not my strongest point
As to comparison ATS-34 vs. ATS-55, let's view from users standpoint. ATS-34 intentionally designed as steel for turbine blades, right? ATS-55 is intentioned as cutlery steel. The main difference should be that ATS-34 must be resistant against thermal erosion but ATS-55 - not. For knife blade performance it's not essential. Another properties of these two steels should be closely similar.
Well, thin edge of Delica might justify modest performance in pencil sharpening test, but how it could justify also modest performance in slicing test? This has not any justification for me.
I would be curious to make ATS-34 vs. ATS-55 comparison on another knives, the best way would be to compare knives from the same manufacturer, for ex. SPYDERCO Endura (ATS-55) vs. Tim Wegner (ATS-34). Unfortunately I have not suitable knives to compare. I have full sized Tim Wegner but I have not plain edged Endura.
I also would be curious to put at this comparison SPYDERCO Bill Moran Featherweight (VG-10) and Military (CPM 440V). The cutting edge length is closely comparable but edge thickness is quite different.
However end user deals with particular knife made of particular steel and not with steel properties only or even with test sample blade made of this steel. So I think this comparison would be quite sensible.
I would greatly appreciate more ideas in this matter.
- Joined
- Nov 3, 1999
- Messages
- 1,685
I have enjoyed reading your post and the subsequent replies. I started looking at the vendors that advertise on BladeForum for VG-10 knives for sale and had no luck. Could you suggest any dealers that sell a good assortment of VG-10 knives? Thanks!
Barry H.
Barry H.
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2001
- Messages
- 1,157
I saw one comment in the test that I would like to comment on. The person doing the test discovered that the serrated edge cut seat belts best. This is something that anyone with much experience in EMS or Law Enforcement experience can confirm. It is a good idea for these two trades to have a serrated knife available for emergency use at all times. Have been there and experienced the circumstances first hand more than once.
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2000
- Messages
- 3,625
NICE!!!!
------------------
Wayne.
"To strive to seek to find and not to yield"
Tennyson
Ranger motto
A few useful details on UK laws and some nice reviews!
http://members.aol.com/knivesuk/
Certified steel snob!
------------------
Wayne.
"To strive to seek to find and not to yield"
Tennyson
Ranger motto
A few useful details on UK laws and some nice reviews!
http://members.aol.com/knivesuk/
Certified steel snob!
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2001
- Messages
- 485
i've heard of agrussels dearhunter being availible at some time in the near future in several steels that were tested here, if someone can get a hold on a few of those it might clear up some of the questions we have here about blade geometry, etc. However, i have to say the results are very still very interesting even if there might be more factors involved than just the steel itself. As usual, an excellent review.
------------------
Pete Jenkins
Lefties unite!
------------------
Pete Jenkins
Lefties unite!
Great thread!!!
Would it be possible to get the exact same knife (generic, if necessary) in different steels to eliminate the edge geometry/weight differences? The heat treat would probably still be in question (I guess), but maybe have whoever is "best" at heat treating that steel to do it, and then test them?
I have a feeling that I'm over-simplifying, otherwise someone would have done this by now.
Would it be possible to get the exact same knife (generic, if necessary) in different steels to eliminate the edge geometry/weight differences? The heat treat would probably still be in question (I guess), but maybe have whoever is "best" at heat treating that steel to do it, and then test them?
I have a feeling that I'm over-simplifying, otherwise someone would have done this by now.