"Super steels" vs standard. Not THAT impressed.

[FortyTwoBlades]

No doubt there is a lot of misinformation out there, but I think poor sharpening skills is what turns people off to high-performance steels. And remember, you can get much better toughness and strength, with high-performance steels, not just better wear resistance.


With the right geometry, the right skills and the right sharpening equipment, high-performance steels are easy to keep sharp -- you just don't have to sharpen them as often.

I've always found it curious that on a knife-enthusiasts' form, so many people prefer low-performance steels to high-performance steels. It's like people on a NASCAR forum arguing that it would be more fun to watch minivans race.

High wear resistance ≠ high performance. Wear resistance is only one of a number of factors affecting edge retention under various applications. Edge retention is, in turn, only one factor of many that affect total performance of a cutting tool.

It's worth noting that just because you can go longer between sharpening sessions doesn't necessarily mean that you're spending less total time sharpening. Two equal blades of high and low wear resistance respectively, brought to equal dullness through wear, will both take different amounts of time to resharpen. The greater wear resistance that allowed the one knife to cut longer before reaching the established level of edge degradation will also cause that knife to take longer to restore to its original level of sharpness. I'd be interested in seeing comparisons of edge wear rate in different steels vs. time required to resharpen.

 

[Twindog]

High wear resistance ≠ high performance. Wear resistance is only one of a number of factors affecting edge retention under various applications. Edge retention is, in turn, only one factor of many that affect total performance of a cutting tool.

It's worth noting that just because you can go longer between sharpening sessions doesn't necessarily mean that you're spending less total time sharpening. Two equal blades of high and low wear resistance respectively, brought to equal dullness through wear, will both take different amounts of time to resharpen. The greater wear resistance that allowed the one knife to cut longer before reaching the established level of edge degradation will also cause that knife to take longer to restore to its original level of sharpness. I'd be interested in seeing comparisons of edge wear rate in different steels vs. time required to resharpen.

You misunderstand my points. High-performance steels can be high performance because they improve wear resistance or toughness or strength or edge stability or any combination of those or other traits, compared to simple steels.

Also, I said that high-performance steels can often support a more acute edge geometry, improving cutting performance and wear resistance. In addition, that more acute geometry can make high-performance steels just as easy or easier to sharpen with high-performance diamond sharpening tools, compared to simple steels that need more obtuse edge geometry and are being sharpened with softer traditional stones.

But yes, as you suggest, if you decide to waste the performance of high-tech steel by using the same obtuse geometry that low-performance steels need -- and if you insist on using only soft traditional stones for sharpening, then the simple steels will much easier to resharpen. The point is that you don't have to restrict your edge geometry and sharpening equipment to old technology and can instead use today's modern technology to improve virtually any aspect of knife performance, including sharpening.

 

[welsh]

I'm sure lots of people on NASCAR forums drive minivans back and forth to work every day.

In all the endless steel debate, I think sometimes we forget that there's no point in paying a premium for a steel that you'll never really take advantage of. For the guy who uses his pocket knife to cut open the odd package and slice tomatoes for his sandwich, maybe M390 is like owning a Ferrari you never take out of second gear.

 

[FortyTwoBlades]

You misunderstand my points. High-performance steels can be high performance because they improve wear resistance or toughness or strength or edge stability or any combination of those or other traits, compared to simple steels.

Also, I said that high-performance steels can often support a more acute edge geometry, improving cutting performance and wear resistance. In addition, that more acute geometry can make high-performance steels just as easy or easier to sharpen with high-performance diamond sharpening tools, compared to simple steels that need more obtuse edge geometry and are being sharpened with softer traditional stones.

But yes, as you suggest, if you decide to waste the performance of high-tech steel by using the same obtuse geometry that low-performance steels need -- and if you insist on using only soft traditional stones for sharpening, then the simple steels will much easier to resharpen. The point is that you don't have to restrict your edge geometry and sharpening equipment to old technology and can instead use today's modern technology to improve virtually any aspect of knife performance, including sharpening.

Standard low alloy steels can be brought much thinner than most knives on either the custom or production market without any issue. My scythes, for instance, have edges that are hollow-ground (yes--the edge, not a primary grind) with a straight-line angle (as in the angle made by a straight line from the edge to the bevel shoulder) of only about 7-9° per side and many of them were made over a hundred years ago. These thin edges on what you would classify as "low performance" steel are capable of taking out green saplings as thick as your thumb or mature burdocks an inch and a half thick. Based on this I'm led to believe that either you haven't tried low angles on low-alloy steels or else are talking about poorly heat treated or non-cutlery grade steels. While it's true that you can take some of the steels commonly classed as super steels thinner than low-alloy steels is, in the current market, a regrettably moot point for the most part because knives just aren't being taken thin enough for you to get into that range in the first place.

Also, perhaps I missed it but I don't think I saw anyone advocating what I presume you mean to be natural stones. Synthetic stones hit the market in, if I remember correctly, the 1890's, and I'm a strong advocate of synthetics over natural stones for a variety of reasons. However, even with diamond stones you will find that low-carbide steels will sharpen faster than high-carbide steels.

Again, to be clear, I'm not saying that "super steels" aren't super or that they don't have advantages and appropriate applications where they provide superior performance...but rather that we tend to be operating in a context that does not allow those differences in material properties to have a significant and noticeable effect because other factors are having much greater influence on our perception.

 

[Twindog]

I don't know about 100-year-old scythes. And I didn't know that they had hollow ground edges. I wonder how they did that? I may still have a really, really old one that I found on my homestead (which was first homesteaded out in 1890) and may be that old, but it's rusted badly and I've never used it. Edges 7-9 degrees per side may work for grass, but I use a power mower for grass. In the rain forest, I have to keep back the salmon berries and elders and thimble berries and such. They can be quite tough and put a lot of lateral pressure on edges and blades.

I do use a machete to keep my road open. From a long time, I used a basic machete with what I think is 1075 steel. Never chips. Rolls like a marble. When I upgraded to a machete/bolo kind of blade in 3V steel with an edge at 30 degrees inclusive, my chopping performance of woody plants improved by a vast amount. The 3V blade stayed sharp a lot longer and withstood knots and changes in grain direction without damage. I don't hand sharpen it because a refined edge isn't needed. I use a WorkSharp. Doesn't take long. My old machete I sharpened with a file. Didn't take long.

To me, that's a big advantage for the high-performance 3V steel. It has both good toughness and good wear resistance, both much better than my old machete.

In my kitchen, I like to use a super thin Takada in Super Blue Aogami taken to 64 Rc. The blade geometry is probably more important than the edge geometry.

But for my EDCs, I really like the newer steels.

 

[asdf12345]

Even for occasional tasks that no one would classify as "hard use", I can still tell the huge difference between "super" steels and standard ones.

I agree with the comments about less wear resistant steels needing more obtuse edge geometry. I experienced light rolling and loss of sharpness very quickly on two of my ATS-34 knives which were V ground and brought to a thin edge. These were custom hand-ground blades with excellent heat treat to boot. My tasks do not involve anything heavy - just normal EDC things such as cardboard, twine, clamshell packaging, etc.

The similarly thin edges of my knives in steels such as M390, Elmax and S35-VN had no such loss of sharpness and I feel that I could have gone months without any touch up to the edge, compared to my blades in ATS-34 which needed touch ups within the week.

As far as ease of sharpening - let's be real, if you're living in a first-world country with hundreds to thousands of dollars of disposable income to spend on knives and the time to use a computer and argue about knives on the internet, a few minutes more working the stones isn't going to matter at all. In fact, less frequent sharpenings that take more time to complete might actually be more convenient for a lot of modern users.

 

[knarfeng]

I'm sure lots of people on NASCAR forums drive minivans back and forth to work every day.

In all the endless steel debate, I think sometimes we forget that there's no point in paying a premium for a steel that you'll never really take advantage of. For the guy who uses his pocket knife to cut open the odd package and slice tomatoes for his sandwich, maybe M390 is like owning a Ferrari you never take out of second gear.

I agree with this. I have a lot of knives (how surprising for a moderator on a knife forum). Some have "super steel" blades. Most don't. Most of the time the things I do with a knife are as easily done with 1095 or 420HC as with M390. Every once in a while I come across jobs which benefit from the use of a blade with truly superior edge retention. That's when it's worth having a knife with high end steel in the stable.

Trust me, I don't mind sharpening. But I want to be able to choose the timing of it. If I have a gnarly job, I don't want to have to stop part way through and touch up my blade, and maybe have to do that a couple of times.

The original post in this thread was about some fella who had tried two knives and was ready to throw in the towel on "super steels" because he didn't think S30V was all that much better than AUS 8. My answer is that
1) he has insufficient data upon which to base such a sweeping generalization
2) There actually is a difference (and that it might help if he actually used a "super steel" instead of S30V which really doesn't qualify)
3) Most folks don't need a "super steel" most of the time. But sometimes it's handy stuff to have.

 

[FortyTwoBlades]

I don't know about 100-year-old scythes. And I didn't know that they had hollow ground edges. I wonder how they did that? I may still have a really, really old one that I found on my homestead (which was first homesteaded out in 1890) and may be that old, but it's rusted badly and I've never used it. Edges 7-9 degrees per side may work for grass, but I use a power mower for grass. In the rain forest, I have to keep back the salmon berries and elders and thimble berries and such. They can be quite tough and put a lot of lateral pressure on edges and blades.

I do use a machete to keep my road open. From a long time, I used a basic machete with what I think is 1075 steel. Never chips. Rolls like a marble. When I upgraded to a machete/bolo kind of blade in 3V steel with an edge at 30 degrees inclusive, my chopping performance of woody plants improved by a vast amount. The 3V blade stayed sharp a lot longer and withstood knots and changes in grain direction without damage. I don't hand sharpen it because a refined edge isn't needed. I use a WorkSharp. Doesn't take long. My old machete I sharpened with a file. Didn't take long.

To me, that's a big advantage for the high-performance 3V steel. It has both good toughness and good wear resistance, both much better than my old machete.

In my kitchen, I like to use a super thin Takada in Super Blue Aogami taken to 64 Rc. The blade geometry is probably more important than the edge geometry.

But for my EDCs, I really like the newer steels.

As far as the hollow edges go, they established the initial hollow on a wet grinder and then honing is performed with a scythe stone, which has a canoe-like shape. A rolling action of the wrist is used to mimic the action of a wheel, maintaining the hollow. Eventually the bevel will likely become a bit rounded (usually from the effects of under-rolled strokes) and then it's back to the grinding wheel to reestablish a fresh hollow. The goldenrod in this video were mature and very woody-stemmed, as were the burdocks. At the end of the clip I hold up a slice I took from the base of one of the stalks so you can see how thick it is.

[video=youtube;_AmYZkKSSYU]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_AmYZkKSSYU[/video]

With machetes I personally run an edge of about 12-15° per side and don't run into any rolling issues. Personally I do think that a refined edge provides a lot of benefit with machetes, so long as you are prudent enough in your use not to ram the edge into rocks or dirt too often. I rarely have to touch up my machetes in the field, and when I do it's just a few swipes of a fine DMT Diafold to get back to my preferred level of sharpness, so long as I don't have actual edge damage to repair. It's actually very possible to get a dry-shaving edge without much issue using a file if you use a light touch, let alone if you have other sharpening tools at your disposal.

 

[Twindog]

Thanks for that video. I can see where you wouldn't expect much rolling or edge damage from that kind of cutting. My environment is different. Salmon berries are much tougher, and even with a sharp scythe, I doubt you'd get far. More blade speed it needed for clean cuts. Some of the shrubs here are ocean spray, often called the hardest wood in the forest. Indians used to make arrows from it.

Years ago, I was slashing at pencil-thick overhanging branches on my road as I walked my dogs. I was using a Cold Steel Voyager X2 in AUS-8 steel. I didn't noticed it when it happened, but I must have hit a knot of a branch with a change in grain pattern. The result was a roll in the edge and blade about the size of a half penny. Destroyed that AUS-8 blade. It could not be repaired.

Anyway, a lot of what we experience is a function of our skill, our equipment and the task at hand. For almost any given task these days, we have a high-performance steel that will outperform a simple steel -- sometimes by a little, sometimes by a lot. For me, changing from 1075 to 3V was a big step up in performance. For cutting weeds and grass with a scythe, I suppose wear resistance would be the main issue. I'd guess that any number of the high-wear powder steels would hold an edge better than whatever that old scythe is made of, but if you're using a canoe-shaped stone to sharpen it, maybe the increase in wear resistance wouldn't be worth the extra effort in sharpening.

For me, with a full set of diamond stones, sharpening my EDC in M390 steel is no problem. My carbon kitchen knives are so thin-edged that it's not hard to sharpen them on anything, even though their hardness is in the mid 60s Rc. Plus, I'm a vegan so my kitchen knives don't get much of a workout.

I see you defending simple steels, and they still do make great tools. I have been defending high-performance steels which I felt the OP was attacking without good cause. Technology is moving so fast these days that it's a shame not to keep up with it. Steel technology has made a lot of advances, I enjoy trying out new steels as much as I do trying out new knives.

 

[B34NS]

Seems like you miss titled the thread. Should be: "S30V, the only 'super-steel' I've tried, isn't that much better than AUS8".

exactly. No one wants to admit they may need to refresh their sharpening technique. Blame the tool, not the user.

 

[FortyTwoBlades]

Thanks for that video. I can see where you wouldn't expect much rolling or edge damage from that kind of cutting. My environment is different. Salmon berries are much tougher, and even with a sharp scythe, I doubt you'd get far. More blade speed it needed for clean cuts. Some of the shrubs here are ocean spray, often called the hardest wood in the forest. Indians used to make arrows from it.

Years ago, I was slashing at pencil-thick overhanging branches on my road as I walked my dogs. I was using a Cold Steel Voyager X2 in AUS-8 steel. I didn't noticed it when it happened, but I must have hit a knot of a branch with a change in grain pattern. The result was a roll in the edge and blade about the size of a half penny. Destroyed that AUS-8 blade. It could not be repaired.

Anyway, a lot of what we experience is a function of our skill, our equipment and the task at hand. For almost any given task these days, we have a high-performance steel that will outperform a simple steel -- sometimes by a little, sometimes by a lot. For me, changing from 1075 to 3V was a big step up in performance. For cutting weeds and grass with a scythe, I suppose wear resistance would be the main issue. I'd guess that any number of the high-wear powder steels would hold an edge better than whatever that old scythe is made of, but if you're using a canoe-shaped stone to sharpen it, maybe the increase in wear resistance wouldn't be worth the extra effort in sharpening.

For me, with a full set of diamond stones, sharpening my EDC in M390 steel is no problem. My carbon kitchen knives are so thin-edged that it's not hard to sharpen them on anything, even though their hardness is in the mid 60s Rc. Plus, I'm a vegan so my kitchen knives don't get much of a workout.

I see you defending simple steels, and they still do make great tools. I have been defending high-performance steels which I felt the OP was attacking without good cause. Technology is moving so fast these days that it's a shame not to keep up with it. Steel technology has made a lot of advances, I enjoy trying out new steels as much as I do trying out new knives.

It may not be apparent in the video because of how easy the work looks to the casual observer, but the goldenrods I was cutting were hard enough that it was something akin to trying to cut through bamboo skewers. It's only because of how thin and fine the edge is and my technique that I was able to take swaths that wide and deep. It's also why, in combination with the forward curve of the blade, that high velocity was not required. If trying to use a machete on that stuff you'd need a long and light blade to get the required tip velocity but that's not the case with a scythe.

The stone I was using is a synthetic made of fairly fine grit silicon carbide. It would sharpen high carbide steels fine. Indeed, a higher end steel wouldn't be something I'd be against in a scythe blade, but there would be the added challenge that it would have to be a steel that could be forged with relative ease because scythe blades have a complex cross section not able to be reasonably obtained through stock removal. For a little perspective, the apprenticeship period for a factory bladesmith at a scythe manufacturer was about 5 years.

My defense of simple steels stems mostly from the fact that they are often underestimated to a fairly gross degree.

 

[Sunyata]

I prefer ease of sharpening. When you are using the knife, the edge is going to go fast irrespective of how super your steel is, and not all cutting choirs require the same edge. It is a lot easier to reach for a small sharpening stone, where a few unconscious swipes, gets you to the edge that you want on the knife when you are using it; then to rely on something that may require exotic tools and a lot of effort to re-sharpen.

n2s

I'm no expert by any means and I use easily available tools (My DMT plates came from Amazon, my dia folds and small diamond plates (1"x3") came from Lowes).

I re-profiled my S110v Manix and CPM M4 Gayle Bradley in a couple minutes. Not a lot of effort for either knife.

If feel they've lost that pop a couple passes on my strop (ordered from Flexxx) and back in business, if i needed too i couple make a few passes over a small plate and get back to work.

I love both knives, I got bored trying to beat up the Manix's S110v.

It goes with me on all outdoor tasks because aside from trying to push cut a rock the edge will be fine.

 

[not2sharp]

These guys probably did more cutting than any of us ever will; they didn't have super steels, yet many of the knives they used have survived to present day.

n2s

 

[ursamajor]

These guys probably did more cutting than any of us ever will; they didn't have super steels, yet many of the knives they used have survived to present day.

n2s

Part of the reason is, they did not sharpen, or use stropping compound every time their knife lost that hair popping edge-they reached for the steel. A knife steel does not remove any steel. It just re aligns the edge. A stone, or a strop w/ compound, removes steel, and shortens the life of the knife.

We may have fancy steels, but our grandfathers knew a crap ton more about how to sharpen a knife, and keep it that way, as well as how to use them.

 

[FortyTwoBlades]

Steels do remove at least some metal--how much depends on the cut of the steel. Slicks (polished groove-less steels), however, do not.

And folks back then used up knives all the time, in part because of the sheer volume of cutting tasks they had to perform on a regular basis.

 

[pinnah]

Steels do remove at least some metal--how much depends on the cut of the steel. Slicks (polished groove-less steels), however, do not.

And folks back then used up knives all the time, in part because of the sheer volume of cutting tasks they had to perform on a regular basis.

My great-great-great-great grand-something or another had a knife/axe factory/mill in northern VT in the 1870s. They produced about 1,500 knives a year there for several years.

G H Mann knives by Pinnah, on Flickr

These are simple tools. Basic steel. Stick tang. Turned wooden handle.

It would be wrong to say they considered them to be disposable, like we think of Bic lighters. But more wrong to think they thought of them as heirlooms. They got sharpened and used up.

 

[FortyTwoBlades]

^That's a beauty right there! And I totally agree.

 

[ursamajor]

Steels do remove at least some metal--how much depends on the cut of the steel. Slicks (polished groove-less steels), however, do not.

And folks back then used up knives all the time, in part because of the sheer volume of cutting tasks they had to perform on a regular basis.

Everything technically removes some steel-some steel is lost in the material it cuts etc-hell even a stiff breeze removes some microscopic amount of steel. My point is, I have never seen visible shavings in my knife steel-unlike a rod, a stone, or a strop w/ compound. Basically an insignificant amount of steel. Not enough to be perceivable in a human life span.

 

[FortyTwoBlades]

Everything technically removes some steel-some steel is lost in the material it cuts etc-hell even a stiff breeze removes some microscopic amount of steel. My point is, I have never seen visible shavings in my knife steel-unlike a rod, a stone, or a strop w/ compound. Basically an insignificant amount of steel. Not enough to be perceivable in a human life span.

I think, perhaps, that the steels you have used were either worn out or not of good quality. A high quality steel is similar to a file with the direction of cut of the "teeth" running perpendicular to the length of the rod. Every good quality steel I've used was able to produce noticeable metal particles when used on knives of appropriate hardness range. The finer the cut and.or the lighter the touch you use the less of that effect you see, but it's the reason why they make different cuts of steels, including ones with different cuts on the same steel. Even coarse cut steels are very fine compared to common files, but they do remove metal unless they're dull, are softer than the knife, or are a slick rather than a steel. Often steels become magnetic over time from the repeated strokes, and the metal fines will build up at the tip, making it very obvious.

 

[ursamajor]

I think, perhaps, that the steels you have used were either worn out or not of good quality. A high quality steel is similar to a file with the direction of cut of the "teeth" running perpendicular to the length of the rod. Every good quality steel I've used was able to produce noticeable metal particles when used on knives of appropriate hardness range. The finer the cut and.or the lighter the touch you use the less of that effect you see, but it's the reason why they make different cuts of steels, including ones with different cuts on the same steel. Even coarse cut steels are very fine compared to common files, but they do remove metal unless they're dull, are softer than the knife, or are a slick rather than a steel. Often steels become magnetic over time from the repeated strokes, and the metal fines will build up at the tip, making it very obvious.

I dunno-I go in for Victorinox's professional steels. They get the edge back easily. They are my preference, and work for me.