Super Steels: What's the point?

I'm more interested in heat treatment than alloy. I have had 3V blades that broke very easily and I have a 1080 blade that is almost impossible to do any damage to. I think "super" steels are mainly a way to continually satisfy the public's demand for new, different, and theoretically better, although we all know that a basic tool or high carbon steel does the job in most situations.

Danbo had a good point though - "super" steels seem to definitely perform better when ground thin, as they won't require sharpening as often as a carbon steel or chip as easily as a lower cost stainless steel. I speak from experience but also understand that everyone's results will vary based on their use, the alloy, the blade geometry, and the heat-treatment of any given blade.

So basically the answer to "what's the point" is "it depends, and if you don't want to figure out the point from your own particular angle then stick with whatever already works for you."
 
somber, I'd have to agree. When we restrict our criteria sufficiently, it can be done, but I'm no longer of the opinion that I know better for myself or anyone else when something else is around the corner that can change our perceptions.

That sounds so much like a cop-out, :p
 
Not at all, I think that's just the truth of the matter. Knife making isn't as black and white as people believe. Ankerson, I hope this doesn't come across as harsh; I find opinions like this...

Ankerson said:
The Steels are what they are so taking into count a knife from a good reputable Company or Knife Maker along with a good solid HT and tempering process we can expect a certain level of performance out of the different steels.
Click to expand...

... a little bit too romantic and not founded on real-world results, just speculation.
 
somber said:
Not at all, I think that's just the truth of the matter. Knife making isn't as black and white as people believe. Ankerson, I hope this doesn't come across as harsh; I find opinions like this...



... a little bit too romantic and not founded on real-world results, just speculation.
Click to expand...

There is actually some truth to Ankerson's statement, IMO. I buy Buck knives for their performance, largly based on the heat treats as done by Bos formulas and Buck's expertise in edge designs. I have yet to be disappointed by a Bos heat treat and consider him the 'gold standard' of the art. Toss in Buck's 'Forever Warranty' and you have everything I look for in a good performing knife.
 
And if Bos were heat treating a steel that he doesn't have very much experience working with? How would that compare to someone who has 20+ years working with that steel? Too many variables...
 
Talley1013 said:
On the other hand, I could carry a lesser steel in my after work and weekend EDC and probably not tell a difference. I choose to carry a super steel for these knives for the cool factor and the fact that I know its the best.
Click to expand...

Me, too.
Sonny
 
Ankerson said:
Likely a sharpening issue then, something going on with that edge.

There is no way that 1095 will out cut S30V on rope unless there was a problem.

If you lived close by I would prove it to you in person however many times you would need to see it on your rope with your knife compared to a basic S30V military that I sharpened.
Click to expand...

Seems to me, Jim, that maybe Pete1977 should send his s30v Military to one of the forum members here, who is adept at sharpening, and then Pete can check it out once it's returned to him. And, however it turns out, Pete could post his comparative results in a future (and interesting) thread.

The man is a fisherman who cuts a lot of rope. It would be extremely valuable for him to know how to have the sharpest and longest-lasting blade-steel available. For him, it's MUCH MORE than just a hobby.

Would be nice if one of the guys here could make him an offer.

I can't volunteer, because I'm an absolute idiot at sharpening. Just starting to get together some equipment...

Sonny
 
Last edited:
I think expectations are fine, to have as we make our purchase decisions based on them, and we also use anecdotes in part to form them. Ankerson does have experience with Spyderco S30V, so he wouldn't be really out of line. With the right parameters, 1095 can outperform S30V, but the flipside is of course true as well. The individual material properties will not change, and they will influence performance accordingly.Reasonable expectations and understanding they won't always be met are more important, imo
 
hardheart said:
It is still important to get real world results and to understand the limits of testing. I have test results where 420HC outperforms BG-42. I have results where 154CM outperforms S125V. That's why I can believe damn near any results now, because the variable are entirely too overwhelming in their effects. That's why I posted earlier that two or three times the performance of one alloy over another seemed high. I haven't seen a difference between alloys greater than the difference between changing edge angle on identical blades. It's why people can say such and such company's AUS8, 420, 8Cr, etc are good - the geometry is good.

The results of tests don't equate to results in use. Not unless you control for the same variables and have a full description of the conditions.
Click to expand...
hardheart said:
Anything with a thin edge will hold an edge longer with better performance, you never want a thick edge for cutting. The point for any knife steel is to take it as thin as it will go with as low an edge angle as you can work with. The point of super steels is increased wear resistance, and they aren't cutlery steels. They have been adopted to our use by same makers/customers.

I have nearly 60 pages of CATRA test results and 16 test blades waiting metallurgical analysis, so don't back-talk me :D
Click to expand...

hardheart, you are making a heck of a lot of sense to me.

On another note though, I am curious about the FINE edge holding properties of super and non-super steels. By "fine edge" I am referring to an edge that can whittle hairs. I don't have the experience to know yet... Do most super steels lose their fine edge at about the same rate as non-super steels? If so, it makes a good argument for using non-super steels. If you always want to have a hair whittling blade and you don't care about a long lasting utility edge, then there is no point in having so much edge retention, because it would never be used. Again, this is just for people who want to always have a knife with an extremely fine edge.

Thoughts?
 
All steels seem to exhibit rapid edge degradation on the first cuts. So if hat is all you want, I would go with high hardness and low carbide volume.The martensite will wear and the edge radius will increase, so if you are looking to fix that often, then the carbides wil just be in the way. Plane blades and straight razors usually aren't made of high vanadium steels.
 
Last edited:
Much learning to do I have:D.

To be honest, I like the idea of being prepared for both long cutting tasks, and easy ones. If only they made a stockman pattern with multiple steels at multiple hardnesses, I would have the perfect knife. The primary blade would have the long lasting edge, and the other two blades would be easy to sharpen and take a very fine edge.

Thanks for the help.
 
It's a real non sequitur to say that the steel isn't a real factor because of all the other variables involved. A factor in the equation doesn't cease to be a factor just because there are others involved. It would be equally ridiculous to say that, say, the bevel angle doesn't matter because the steel, hardness, edge polish, or whatever are usually different.
 
jeffphansen77 said:
It's a real non sequitur to say that the steel isn't a real factor because of all the other variables involved. A factor in the equation doesn't cease to be a factor just because there are others involved. It would be equally ridiculous to say that, say, the bevel angle doesn't matter because the steel, hardness, edge polish, or whatever are usually different.
Click to expand...

I don't think it was said that the steel doesn't matter; it's that the end result [read: performance] of the knife isn't solely based on the characteristics of the steel, but everything else that goes into making that knife. Hence, it's not as black and white as saying S30V is a better than CPM 154CM. Your comment was really difficult to comprehend, by the way.
 
I was responding to the idea that it was all "speculative" because of all the other factors involved (as if the steel wasn't a known or knowable factor), & the notion that super-steels are just some marketing gimmick. These notions come close to dismissing the steel as a real factor in the knife's performance. Obviously the end product is a result of all of these factors, the steel not necessarily being the biggest. You're right. It's never black & white like that, as much as many of us try to simplify it that way.
 
jeffphansen77 said:
It's never black & white like that, as much as many of us try to simplify it that way.
Click to expand...

Yep, this is the only point that I'm trying to make. Speculating that X steel is better than Y steel completely ignores EVERYTHING that makes a knife a knife. It's fun to discuss steels, sure, but pointless because it ignores too many variables that actually produce the end result [read: performance]. (Which is what everyone is discussing.)
 
somber said:
Yep, this is the only point that I'm trying to make. Speculating that X steel is better than Y steel completely ignores EVERYTHING that makes a knife a knife. It's fun to discuss steels, sure, but pointless because it ignores too many variables that actually produce the end result [read: performance]. (Which is what everyone is discussing.)
Click to expand...

Yes, but that's not the same as saying that X knife is better than Y knife. That's a completely different question. The discussion of steel quality really has to assume that all other factors are equal, otherwise there's no point in the discussion at all.

That being said, what I think jeffphansen77 is saying is that you can't dismiss the entire discussion just because the other factors aren't always (or even often) equal. It's still worth talking about, you just have to take it with a grain of salt.
 
Last edited:
and that is where the issue arose, a comparison between a Schrade slipjoint and a Spyderco was made and then conclusions were drawn about steel performance. It was really about knife performance, and performance under very particular circumstances that we do not have full clarification on. I would not expect the reported results if things were optimal, but then things probably were not optimal.

Some steels are better than others, they are designed to do thongs and have properties that improve upon other steels. What we confuse is when we look to say what knives are better or what steels are better, and to fail to specify exactly what they are better at.
 
somber said:
Yep, this is the only point that I'm trying to make. Speculating that X steel is better than Y steel completely ignores EVERYTHING that makes a knife a knife. It's fun to discuss steels, sure, but pointless because it ignores too many variables that actually produce the end result [read: performance]. (Which is what everyone is discussing.)
Click to expand...

It isn't pointless speculating when we have hard data demonstrating the differences in the steel's properties & performance. The steel is a big part of what makes a knife a knife. You're right about not being able to jump to big conclusions based on pure steel comparisons, but that isn't always what we're doing here. I think you're responding to the never-ending stream of "Which steel is better", "Best steel" threads that make you want to start head-butting your keyboard. You've put in the time & effort to understand how knives & cutting performance actually work & are sick of seeing the subject oversimplifying it in the same dumb way. That is what happens most of the time & it's way over-simplistic.
 
Pseudonym said:
I suspect you worded this wrong. 420HC with a 20 degree inclusive edge will not hold it as long as S30V with the same edge angle. It will perform better than S30V with a 40 degree angle, but it won't hold the edge longer.

Also, I don't think you understand the definition of "back-talk". ;)
Click to expand...


He is correct there, I have seen it personally in testing myself and more than a few times and with different steels.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top