SR 101 compared to CPM 20cv?

Agith

Agith

Joined
Nov 29, 2010
Messages
345
So I've got a neck knife which is currently being made, and my scrapivore from a few years back.

The new knife is being made in CPM 20cv (The EK&T Companion), and I was wondering how that steel compared to the SR-101 used by scrapyard.
They're both of similar specifications size wise, with the companion having handle scales to add to a bit more comfort. So I am simply curious how those two steels compare when used in the sub 3 inch blade category

It's worth keeping the cost differential in mind, however I am more interested in this from a pure performance perspective
 
Last edited:
I can't speak for what you'll see but for a sub 3 inch knife 20CV would be better for me. I can't see any job for a sub 3 inch knife that 52100 (SR101) would be better for unless the 52100 was extremely hard, coated with DLC, and really thin and then it'd come down to the type of work performed which would show better performance. I don't believe Busse does any of those things so I'd go with 20CV unless the guy heat treating the 20CV was an amateur or didn't know what he was really foing. Then I'd go with a reground SY with SR101. Other than that 20CV will likely perform at a more satisfactory level in all areas with a small EDC type of knife. But YMMV.
 
Last edited:
Bodog made good points. If the 20cv is treated right it will be better overall for a small knife. However, Busse's HT is incredible so that SR101 should work well and be much tougher. But you do not need a lot of toughness in a 3 inch blade.
 
bodog said:
I can't speak for what you'll see but for a sub 3 inch knife 20CV would be better for me. I can't see any job for a sub 3 inch knife that 52100 (SR101) would be better for unless the 52100 was extremely hard, coated with DLC, and really thin. I don't believe Busse does any of those things so I'd go with 20CV unless the guy heat treating the 20CV was an amateur or didn't know what he was really foing. Then I'd go with a reground SY with SR101. Other than that 20CV will likely perform at a more satisfactory level in all areas with a small EDC type of knife. But YMMV.
Click to expand...

Scrapyard did run those scrapivores a few points harder, but I don't recall the exact Rockwell. Still, I think you're right and that the 20CV will shine in a small blade. Although a guy might be trading the longer edge retention of 20CV for the ease of resharpening SR101. I've sharpened a lot of the latter and it responds pretty fast and takes a screaming edge. The former, I have only one blade, a GSO 2.7 that I have not had to resharpen yet, so can't say. The 20CV is going to be WAY more stainless though.
 
Scrapivore = 62Rc. They cut like a laser with the right edge geometry. :thumbup:
 
There is no comparison. SR101 is 52100, likely with the now common lower austenizing temperature heat treatment. CPM 20CV is almost identical in composition to M390.
 
Cobalt said:
I did not realize they were so hard. That changes things. But still the SS steel on a small knife is nice to have.
Click to expand...

Yep, this is what was in my mind, and why it makes this particular comparison more unique than just 20CV vs SR101. I knew the scrapivores were over 60, but 62 is pretty dang hard. I've got a lot of mileage on Swamp Wardens (and so does SP) but they're not run as hard as the scrapivores.
 
52100 using the low temperature austenizing HT had very good fine edge stability and is pretty tough to boot. That is why it has caught on in the kitchen knife world. Guys like Bob Kramer and Jerry Busse had apparently known this for a while, but they didn't necessarily "publish" that information far and wide. Kevin Cashen, who wouldn't know a "trade secret" if it bit him in the backside, did some research with 52100 and made his results available. The funny part is that initially, he was, at least in part, trying to dispel what he considered to be some of the questionable claims surrounding the steel.
 
I would think a 62 rockwell would make it a complete bastard to sharpen. Though I don't have the experience with 20cv just yet to be able to say.

Is SR-101 considerably toughter than 20cv?
 
It is a low alloy carbon steel, so it is not going to be that hard to sharpen.
Agith said:
I would think a 62 rockwell would make it a complete bastard to sharpen. Though I don't have the experience with 20cv just yet to be able to say.

Is SR-101 considerably toughter than 20cv?
Click to expand...
 
So which would take better to being used as a bushcraft tool when paired with a saw and hatchet?

Dedicated slicer/detail work knife.

Ideally I'd love to be able to use one or the other for that as well, since I am finding myself not really using any longer blades when I have a hatchet for the heavy stuff.
 
Cobalt said:
I did not realize they were so hard. That changes things. But still the SS steel on a small knife is nice to have.
Click to expand...

Agreed and agreed. Though as you know, SR-101 isn't that bad when it comes to staining, as long as you don't abuse it and try to keep it somewhat clean.

Hard Knocks said:
Yep, this is what was in my mind, and why it makes this particular comparison more unique than just 20CV vs SR101. I knew the scrapivores were over 60, but 62 is pretty dang hard. I've got a lot of mileage on Swamp Wardens (and so does SP) but they're not run as hard as the scrapivores.
Click to expand...

My only complaint about the Swamp Wardens is I wish they would have run them as hard as the Scrapivores. But I still love 'em. Just bought another... :foot:

Agith said:
I would think a 62 rockwell would make it a complete bastard to sharpen. Though I don't have the experience with 20cv just yet to be able to say.

Is SR-101 considerably toughter than 20cv?
Click to expand...

Not that bad to sharpen. Thin down the shoulders, yeah, that's harder, but nothing compared to something like S110V or M4.

I would suspect SR-101 is tougher than 20CV, especially with Busse's heat-treat.
 
I also went ahead and took a close up view on the tip of the scrapivore. Were these meant to be asymmetrically ground? Because I haven't sharpened this since I bought it (namely due to my having lost it in my garage attic for a solid few years up until just recently). I am probably going to reprofile this entire edge anyway but it's interesting to look at.

(sorry about the edges of my microscope, couldn't get them out of the shot).
20160922_003800.jpg
 
No, those were not intended to be ground assymetrically like some other models.

Definitely needs that reprofile job.
 
Agith said:
So which would take better to being used as a bushcraft tool when paired with a saw and hatchet?

Dedicated slicer/detail work knife.

Ideally I'd love to be able to use one or the other for that as well, since I am finding myself not really using any longer blades when I have a hatchet for the heavy stuff.
Click to expand...

Stainless dedicated slicer for use in skinning, etc = 20CV
Easy to sharpen dedicated slicer for use in whittling = 52100
 
jdm61 said:
52100 using the low temperature austenizing HT had very good fine edge stability and is pretty tough to boot. That is why it has caught on in the kitchen knife world. Guys like Bob Kramer and Jerry Busse had apparently known this for a while, but they didn't necessarily "publish" that information far and wide. Kevin Cashen, who wouldn't know a "trade secret" if it bit him in the backside, did some research with 52100 and made his results available. The funny part is that initially, he was, at least in part, trying to dispel what he considered to be some of the questionable claims surrounding the steel.
Click to expand...

Good info. I just switched over from the SS to 52100 on a small knife. Interesting. And I am not even the one having to make the decision.
 
So is CPM20cv particularly hard to sharpen in the field? Or is it a matter of it being a degree harder but still feasible given a decent field stone (I use a fallkniven DC4 in the field for example).
 
Agith said:
So is CPM20cv particularly hard to sharpen in the field? Or is it a matter of it being a degree harder but still feasible given a decent field stone (I use a fallkniven DC4 in the field for example).
Click to expand...

With diamonds it should be as easy any other steel, or close to it. With silicon carbide it'll be a little harder but not bad. With aluminum oxide it'll be harder. With natural Arkansas type stones you'll probably notice a marked increase in difficulty though still doable.

Just get an eze-lap bar or equivalent and toss it in your field bag. They cost like 20 bucks and you won't need to worry about difficulty anymore
 
Last edited:
I'll probably favor the companion more then. It's got a bit more of a belly as well
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top