"Super steels" vs standard. Not THAT impressed.

[Twindog]

Let's say you need a 5-inch bladed bushcraft knife that is tough because you might need it for some chopping or other hard use. You could use traditional (and excellent) A2 steel because it is tough -- tougher than a simple carbon steel like 1095. And you could sharpen it with a soft Arkansas bench stone. You would probably want a 40 degree inclusive edge bevel because you need toughness.

As an alternative, you could choose a high-performance powder steel like 3V. It's tougher than A2. It holds an edge better than A2. You could heat treat it a bit harder than A2 and it will still be tougher, as well being stronger. And the wear resistance will also be better. Edge stability will also be better.

Instead of a 40-degree edge, you could put on a 30-degree inclusive edge with a 40-degree microbevel, which you touch up with a pocket diamond stone.

The more acute edge geometry will make it a better cutter and extend it's wear resistance. It would be tougher. It would cut better. It's edge would be more stable. It would be more corrosion resistant. And I'd argue that it would be easier to keep the microbevel on the 3V blade sharp with a pocket diamond stone than it would be to keep the A2 blade with the full 40-degree edge sharp with the Arkansas stone.

 

[PURPLEDC]

Is s30v really considered super anymore? Good? Sure. But i would look at both s30v and s35vn as just really decent premium steel. I reserve the term "super" for anything that laughs at my edgepro.

 

[Charr]

S30V is an excellent knife steel, but it's fussier about its heat treat than other steels. I have had chippy S30V blades that I hated, but when heat treated well, S30V is a great steel, easily superior to AUS-8 for most EDC purposes.

Ankerson's thread shows how much better high-performance steels are for wear resistance, but his tests also show that blade geometry has a large effect, too. The high-performance steels allow us to use a more aggressive blade and edge geometry that amplifies the steel's ability to retain a sharp working edge for much, much longer than more simple steels.

My sense is that people who complain about the lack of performance in their high-performance steels are not taking advantage of the acute geometry that these steels can achieve -- no are they using the proper sharpening techniques and equipment that makes keeping super steels sharp relatively easy.

VERY true. I myself was hesitant to have my Shirogrov 95T thinned down from the rather obtuse starting angle (~23-25dps) to something that was much better designed for cutting (18dps), but once it was done, the M390 started to perform exponentially better. I would always recommend getting it done professionally if you don't have the experience yourself.

Thinner edges might not be as good for tougher cutting tasks that might risk edge damage, but they actually do increase edge retention, and you should probably have at least an 18dps edge bevel if you really want performance in edge retention out of the steel you're using. I learned that the hard way.

Would suggest you use the "Sharpie" trick to see what angle is necessary to strop the bevel. Also, as was said earlier by Charr in post 10 is relevant. To avoid convexing the edge, do not use much downward force on the blade, especially if the leather is thicker and pliable. You would do well with a harder, thinner leather which is very flat on the support-board. IMO.
Shotgun, above, was right on target in explaining why you might see the same steel is several different categories. Usually, the hardness is also noted. Harder steels will keep their edge longer, but may be more prone to chipping.

I would definitely say you are dead on, Sonnydaze.
The only thing I might add is that the OP might want to consider putting a professional convex edge on the knife in question, so that they can increase the overall performance, at least given the needs and the lack of performance that they seem to have encountered so far.
The convex edge would help to prevent micro-chipping, and should allow for more support for the primary edge bevel, as well as give more ease in maintainance. Having the edge done proessionally means that the bevel would be consistent and even, which is likely not the case right now if the OP has been sharpening free-hand.
It's a lot easer to strop a knife that has a convex edge as well, which would likely help with any issues that the OP is having with stropping. In most cases, the issue people encounter there is simply missing the edge bevel, or like Sonnydaze said here, pushing too hard and accidentally damaging the edge by bending the apex of the edge.

 

[hollar44]

yea I was deciding on Bucks new Assit flippers Momentum and enertia and Momentum has S30V and Enertia has 440C personally I like the 440C better (easier to sharpen to a Razor edge) and I am pretty good a getting razor edge on both but 440C to me gets sharper and holds decent edge. They put a real good heat treatment on them at Buck.

 

[FortyTwoBlades]

Let's say you need a 5-inch bladed bushcraft knife that is tough because you might need it for some chopping or other hard use. You could use traditional (and excellent) A2 steel because it is tough -- tougher than a simple carbon steel like 1095. And you could sharpen it with a soft Arkansas bench stone. You would probably want a 40 degree inclusive edge bevel because you need toughness.

As an alternative, you could choose a high-performance powder steel like 3V. It's tougher than A2. It holds an edge better than A2. You could heat treat it a bit harder than A2 and it will still be tougher, as well being stronger. And the wear resistance will also be better. Edge stability will also be better.

Instead of a 40-degree edge, you could put on a 30-degree inclusive edge with a 40-degree microbevel, which you touch up with a pocket diamond stone.

The more acute edge geometry will make it a better cutter and extend it's wear resistance. It would be tougher. It would cut better. It's edge would be more stable. It would be more corrosion resistant. And I'd argue that it would be easier to keep the microbevel on the 3V blade sharp with a pocket diamond stone than it would be to keep the A2 blade with the full 40-degree edge sharp with the Arkansas stone.

Or you could just run either of them at 30° included angle and still be fine...I use a 12-15° per side edge on machetes and have never run into trouble even when using them for heavy chopping duties. And of course a microbevel would be easier to touch up than maintaining a full bevel--you have a drastically reduced contact surface.

The big question as I see it is not whether or not a given knife can be made thinner through the use of higher performance steel, but rather if it is made thinner. Often knives, whether factory or custom, are given a geometry that greatly minimizes the difference between moderate-performance and high-performance steels, rather than truly incorporating their material properties into the design. Think of how thin many knives were historically despite being made only from very basic carbon steel vs. how thick many knives made of high-performance steel are today despite being able to be made thinner. Our material science has made great leaps since the days of yore, but our designs in many cases have decreased in the refinement of their form factor. How often have you seen someone tout a given knife as "superior" to another based purely on steel when the design of the "nicer" knife was actually a step down in cutting performance despite the better material? A lot of this does have to do with matters of efficiency vs. resiliency, as in recent years the trend has been towards less efficient, more resilient designs, particularly in the tactical and bushcraft market sectors.

 

[craytab]

Is s30v really considered super anymore? Good? Sure. But i would look at both s30v and s35vn as just really decent premium steel. I reserve the term "super" for anything that laughs at my edgepro.

And that would be the other flaw with the title and the entire premise here. Super-steel is a relative term.

 

[Charr]

Is s30v really considered super anymore? Good? Sure. But i would look at both s30v and s35vn as just really decent premium steel. I reserve the term "super" for anything that laughs at my edgepro.

Considering that the very concepts of the terms is entirely subjective, you are absolutely right.

The issue is that anyone who says that one steel is super and another is not is also probably right to some degree or another. Once we acclimate to something, we constantly want something better, no matter how good what we already have is.
440C was once thought to be a "super steel"...not to mention that someone owning something like and Edge Pro or a Wicked Edge at that time would have been a little rediculous for EDC knives.

 

[Charr]

Or you could just run either of them at 30° included angle and still be fine...I use a 12-15° per side edge on machetes and have never run into trouble even when using them for heavy chopping duties. And of course a microbevel would be easier to touch up than maintaining a full bevel--you have a drastically reduced contact surface.

The big question as I see it is not whether or not a given knife can be made thinner through the use of higher performance steel, but rather if it is made thinner. Often knives, whether factory or custom, are given a geometry that greatly minimizes the difference between moderate-performance and high-performance steels, rather than truly incorporating their material properties into the design. Think of how thin many knives were historically despite being made only from very basic carbon steel vs. how thick many knives made of high-performance steel are today despite being able to be made thinner. Our material science has made great leaps since the days of yore, but our designs in many cases have decreased in the refinement of their form factor. How often have you seen someone tout a given knife as "superior" to another based purely on steel when the design of the "nicer" knife was actually a step down in cutting performance despite the better material? A lot of this does have to do with matters of efficiency vs. resiliency, as in recent years the trend has been towards less efficient, more resilient designs, particularly in the tactical and bushcraft market sectors.

Thus my entire issue with the whole "overbuilt" fad that has been going around lately. Make a knife that is built like a tank, and cuts like one too, then slap a fancy steel on it and BAM! Everyone wants it.
Stupid. Knives are cutting tools, and should be treated and built like them. Sure, a knife can be strong. Hell, my Shirogrovs will handle more than I could ever reasonably ask a knife to handle, but the point is that they aren't built out of steel that's .25" thick on a folder, and they don't weigh so much they make my pants sag. Thin out the edges a little, and they cut superbly, but are still built to an excellent level or precision, and to withstand a lifetime of use and possibly abuse.

I do agree with you that we have pretty much wasted the revolutionary technologies that are right at our fingertips on designs that blatantly do not use the best of the attributes of the materials encorporated into them.
Don't get me wrong, I get it when it comes to production knives. It would be a little impractical for some production facilities to have a different angle for each steel or a different type of grind, so that they could get the best out of all of the steels they use, and that's also why most manufacturers only use one or two types of steel. They also don't usually hit the optimal heat treat when doing it in the large batches that companies like Benchmade, Spyderco, and Zero Tolerance have to have their blanks treated in, but that is somewhat to be expected.

If I want a thick knife, it better be made for chopping, or have a grind that takes advantage of the thickness to come to a keen edge that will perform well and offer superior strength. There has only ever been one EDC knife that I have ever gotten with a thicker blade than 4mm, and that is a Blackheart custom Pike fixed blade, wich is .21" thick. I will have to see how I like it, but I have seen nothing but great things out of Rich's ability to thin down the edge to a fine and excellent bevel that cuts very well in all of his knives I have seen or handled, so I am not nearly as concerned about it in that case.
For a folder, 4mm is pretty much the tickest I want my blade stock, and you damn well better bring it to a thickness behind the egde that is reasonable, and not leave me with a wedge instead of a blade.

My Grimsmo Norseman is an excellent example of a knife that uses the best of the designs for performance. It doesn't look pretty, no, but you know what? It is the most useful folder I have ever had, and it is also one of the thinnest, lightest ones I have ever handled in it's sixe category. Also sports some amazing engineering and machining experience encorporated into the design, as well as a very nice edge that does utilize theproperties of RWL-34.

 

[ursamajor]

If you intend to carry and use your knife, I suggest putting one of these

On your key ring, and worry less about the steel that the blade is made from. 95% of the time an edge loses it's keeness, it needs to be honed, not sharpened. I sharpen a daily carry, and well used knife with a blade made of AUS8A, maybe twice a year. The rest of the time, I give it a few licks on a steel. You will also get a greater life out of your blades if you do this-you don't remove steel from the blade when using a steel.

Design, heat treat, and blade/edge geometry have far more to do with how a knife will perform the tasks it was designed, than the blade steel.

 

[Charr]

If you intend to carry and use your knife, I suggest putting one of these

On your key ring, and worry less about the steel that the blade is made from. 95% of the time an edge loses it's keeness, it needs to be honed, not sharpened. I sharpen a daily carry, and well used knife with a blade made of AUS8A, maybe twice a year. The rest of the time, I give it a few licks on a steel. You will also get a greater life out of your blades if you do this-you don't remove steel from the blade when using a steel.

Design, heat treat, and blade/edge geometry have far more to do with how a knife will perform the tasks it was designed, than the blade steel.

Alternative to honing is also using a strop, which we have mentioned here a little already. Very similar to usign a steel, but a steel does not always work as well on high-carbide steels since the material is so wear-resistant and strong, so the compounds in a strop will work better than a steel will. Also doesn't remove steel from the blade, again much the same as honing.

 

[FortyTwoBlades]

Design, heat treat, and blade/edge geometry have far more to do with how a knife will perform the tasks it was designed, than the blade steel.

Absolutely.

Does specific blade steel matter? Yes, but not nearly as much as a slew of other factors that get far less attention. As I like to say, Benjamin Franklin may have been right when he said "there never was a good knife made from bad steel" but he neglected to note that many a bad knife was made from good steel and some truly excellent knives have been made from "good enough" steel.

 

[ursamajor]

Alternative to honing is also using a strop, which we have mentioned here a little already. Very similar to usign a steel, but a steel does not always work as well on high-carbide steels since the material is so wear-resistant and strong, so the compounds in a strop will work better than a steel will. Also doesn't remove steel from the blade, again much the same as honing.

That is true. I prefer blades that are more forgiving (will roll or flatten, instead of chip), as in real world use, they are easier to maintain, and are more resistant to inadvertent abuse.

 

[ursamajor]

Absolutely.

Does specific blade steel matter? Yes, but not nearly as much as a slew of other factors that get far less attention. As I like to say, Benjamin Franklin may have been right when he said "there never was a good knife made from bad steel" but he neglected to note that many a bad knife was made from good steel and some truly excellent knives have been made from "good enough" steel.

I'm more pragmatic when looking at steels. That does not mean, that I cannot appreciate, or desire a knife made of high end materials-but I do not dismiss other knives, based on steel. If I like a knife, I like it-the steel just does not matter so much to me. Unless all things are equal (design, blade geometry, edge geometry, quality and accuracy of heat treat) you will not be able to see the true differences between the steels.

This is an extreme example, but it illustrates that it is design over materials, when it comes to how a knife will perform a specific task:

If I wanted to peel a bucket of potatoes, and I had to choose between an $8 Victorinox paring knife, and an $800 Busse Battle Mistress, which one is going to do the job better?

 

[FortyTwoBlades]

I'm more pragmatic when looking at steels. That does not mean, that I cannot appreciate, or desire a knife made of high end materials-but I do not dismiss other knives, based on steel. If I like a knife, I like it-the steel just does not matter so much to me. Unless all things are equal (design, blade geometry, edge geometry, quality and accuracy of heat treat) you will not be able to see the true differences between the steels.

This is an extreme example, but it illustrates that it is design over materials, when it comes to how a knife will perform a specific task:

If I wanted to peel a bucket of potatoes, and I had to choose between an $8 Victorinox paring knife, and an $800 Busse Battle Mistress, which one is going to do the job better?

Bingo.

 

[ursamajor]

Let's say you need a 5-inch bladed bushcraft knife that is tough because you might need it for some chopping or other hard use. You could use traditional (and excellent) A2 steel because it is tough -- tougher than a simple carbon steel like 1095. And you could sharpen it with a soft Arkansas bench stone. You would probably want a 40 degree inclusive edge bevel because you need toughness.

As an alternative, you could choose a high-performance powder steel like 3V. It's tougher than A2. It holds an edge better than A2. You could heat treat it a bit harder than A2 and it will still be tougher, as well being stronger. And the wear resistance will also be better. Edge stability will also be better.

Instead of a 40-degree edge, you could put on a 30-degree inclusive edge with a 40-degree microbevel, which you touch up with a pocket diamond stone.

The more acute edge geometry will make it a better cutter and extend it's wear resistance. It would be tougher. It would cut better. It's edge would be more stable. It would be more corrosion resistant. And I'd argue that it would be easier to keep the microbevel on the 3V blade sharp with a pocket diamond stone than it would be to keep the A2 blade with the full 40-degree edge sharp with the Arkansas stone.

Here is the thing-there are truly very few makers left in the knife market. It is not the art that sword making has been through history. In truth, current knife makers are really grinders. They have zip to do with the steel in their knives-they re-purpose steel made by foundries, into knife blade materials. Back in the day, sword makers would make their steel in a crucible, from raw, impure iron, and through techniques would purify it, add carbon, and do all the steps in taking raw elements and making a functional wok of art.

Current knife makers just don't do that. There are a handful of makers, who innovate through design, but most can only generate and maintain buzz by throwing materials at existing designs. They reach for newer and newer steels (which weren't designed for knives anyway) and make them into blade designs ill suited for their properties. Furthermore, the greater the extent of the alloying of a steel, the more precise the heat treatment needs to be, to make the steel into a functional blade. If the heat treatment is off, even by a little bit, the alloying materials will act as nothing more than slag in the steel, weakening the blade.

 

[Shotgun]

Or you could just run either of them at 30° included angle and still be fine...I use a 12-15° per side edge on machetes and have never run into trouble even when using them for heavy chopping duties. And of course a microbevel would be easier to touch up than maintaining a full bevel--you have a drastically reduced contact surface.

The big question as I see it is not whether or not a given knife can be made thinner through the use of higher performance steel, but rather if it is made thinner. Often knives, whether factory or custom, are given a geometry that greatly minimizes the difference between moderate-performance and high-performance steels, rather than truly incorporating their material properties into the design. Think of how thin many knives were historically despite being made only from very basic carbon steel vs. how thick many knives made of high-performance steel are today despite being able to be made thinner. Our material science has made great leaps since the days of yore, but our designs in many cases have decreased in the refinement of their form factor. How often have you seen someone tout a given knife as "superior" to another based purely on steel when the design of the "nicer" knife was actually a step down in cutting performance despite the better material? A lot of this does have to do with matters of efficiency vs. resiliency, as in recent years the trend has been towards less efficient, more resilient designs, particularly in the tactical and bushcraft market sectors.

I agree. I see a lot of fanboys of particular makers touting how awesome the steel is but the knives that are made are WAY too obtuse for actual use. Talking outdoor knives here. Anyone who's beaten on a mora knows this. A mora is about 11 degrees per side, usually with a slight microbevel, and they hold up just fine. Very few makers truly capitalize on the premium steel they use IMO. There's a reason you see thread after thread of edge mods in those forums.

Unless all things are equal (design, blade geometry, edge geometry, quality and accuracy of heat treat) you will not be able to see the true differences between the steels.

I have to disagree here. There are differences. I would agree that the CASUAL user(which is most people) probably won't notice. That's for sure.


For me. I appreciate both types of steels. I want a grubbing knife of soft steel paired with a "clean" knife that has a super steel in it. The grubbing knife is for rough use and is more likely to take edge damage so I want something to roll rather than chip. My clean knife is used for food, wood work, and whatever I know has a small likelihood of causing edge damage.

 

[Shotgun]

Here is the thing-there are truly very few makers left in the knife market. It is not the art that sword making has been through history. In truth, current knife makers are really grinders. They have zip to do with the steel in their knives-they re-purpose steel made by foundries, into knife blade materials. Back in the day, sword makers would make their steel in a crucible, from raw, impure iron, and through techniques would purify it, add carbon, and do all the steps in taking raw elements and making a functional wok of art.

Current knife makers just don't do that. There are a handful of makers, who innovate through design, but most can only generate and maintain buzz by throwing materials at existing designs. They reach for newer and newer steels (which weren't designed for knives anyway) and make them into blade designs ill suited for their properties. Furthermore, the greater the extent of the alloying of a steel, the more precise the heat treatment needs to be, to make the steel into a functional blade. If the heat treatment is off, even by a little bit, the alloying materials will act as nothing more than slag in the steel, weakening the blade.

I dunno. I'd rather a maker pulled some CPM steel off the shelf than a home brew personally.

 

[ursamajor]

I agree. I see a lot of fanboys of particular makers touting how awesome the steel is but the knives that are made are WAY too obtuse for actual use. Talking outdoor knives here. Anyone who's beaten on a mora knows this. A mora is about 11 degrees per side, usually with a slight microbevel, and they hold up just fine. Very few makers truly capitalize on the premium steel they use IMO. There's a reason you see thread after thread of edge mods in those forums.

I have to disagree here. There are differences. I would agree that the CASUAL user(which is most people) probably won't notice. That's for sure.

Maybe you misinterpreted what I wrote, because you agree with what I said in the first 7 sentences of your post. There is a difference, but the blades need to be identical in everything else, but the type of steel, for the performance differences to be noticeable.

 

[Sunyata]

If you intend to carry and use your knife, I suggest putting one of these

On your key ring, and worry less about the steel that the blade is made from. 95% of the time an edge loses it's keeness, it needs to be honed, not sharpened. I sharpen a daily carry, and well used knife with a blade made of AUS8A, maybe twice a year. The rest of the time, I give it a few licks on a steel. You will also get a greater life out of your blades if you do this-you don't remove steel from the blade when using a steel.

Design, heat treat, and blade/edge geometry have far more to do with how a knife will perform the tasks it was designed, than the blade steel.

A couple passes on my strops (covered in dia-paste) gets the keenness right back

 

[FortyTwoBlades]

Here is the thing-there are truly very few makers left in the knife market. It is not the art that sword making has been through history. In truth, current knife makers are really grinders. They have zip to do with the steel in their knives-they re-purpose steel made by foundries, into knife blade materials. Back in the day, sword makers would make their steel in a crucible, from raw, impure iron, and through techniques would purify it, add carbon, and do all the steps in taking raw elements and making a functional wok of art.

Current knife makers just don't do that. There are a handful of makers, who innovate through design, but most can only generate and maintain buzz by throwing materials at existing designs. They reach for newer and newer steels (which weren't designed for knives anyway) and make them into blade designs ill suited for their properties. Furthermore, the greater the extent of the alloying of a steel, the more precise the heat treatment needs to be, to make the steel into a functional blade. If the heat treatment is off, even by a little bit, the alloying materials will act as nothing more than slag in the steel, weakening the blade.

Actually, back in the day it was quite common for the process of knife and sword making to be very split up and those that had their hands in the whole process from smelting to embellishment were a rarity. There were those that manufactured or sourced the raw materials for production, those that made components, and those who assembled and decorated them, and those who made sheaths or scabbards...there are sword blades that have been found with the tang comprised of a thick nub that are thought to have been made by a blade smith for trade/export so that the tang could be forged out to the length and width that the cutler who outfitted the blade with a hilt desired. That way they could have more control over manipulating the balance short of just adjusting pommel size.