The real skinny on S30V.

Yes, that is a good point that Cliff Stamp made. Maybe our focus should be on the Rc of S30V. If it is indeed "tougher" that BG42, why can't its Rc be at 60-62 also. If chipping isn't widely regarded as a problem with the BG-42, then having the same Rc with the S30V shouldn't cause any concern with brittlesess. This is the part that doesn't make sense. We allegedly have a steel that is tougher at higher Rc but it is not hardened to the level of a "lesser" steel.
An good analogy would be:
You own a 1972 Honda Civic which you drive on the interstate each day to work at a speed averaging 85 MPH. You hit the lottery and you buy a Porsche 911 Turbo but you only drive it a 55 MPH when its really capable of driving 155 MPH because you don't want to push it too hard. Now, this is an exteme analogy, but you get my point. So if S30V is a better steel, then lets use it to its potential. If not, lets just keep on driving that reliable 72 Honda.
 
Originally posted by kutch133
... So if S30V is a better steel, then lets use it to its potential. If not, lets just keep on driving that reliable 72 Honda.
Click to expand...

In principle I agree with you....but in this case, it seems CRK is offering us a Porsche (with a regulator ;)) for the same price as a Honda.... So long as the price stays the same...and the S30V is not a less capable steel, why not switch?
 
Great posts! Thanks ej!
I'm knocked out by the performance of 3V and I'll have my first S30V to play with in about a week. maybe I'll see the family resemblence :)
 
An earlier thread, from this CRK forum, wherein Chris adds his thoughts on the matter.

http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=192185

Unfortunately, I found Chris' comments to be more defensive than strictly informative or data-driven, and they didn't get to the heart of the issue of "why drop an inherently tougher steel a couple Rockwell points to gain even more toughness vs. prior steel".
 
The issue gets even sillier if you look at what it implies for the Sebenza to need S30V at 58 RC. For example how about all the large "tacticals" the custom makers are grinding? They are much heavier and longer than the Sebenza, and are fixed blades not folding knives and thus will be put to far heavier pounding, hacking, prying etc. .

If the Sebenza, needs 58 RC in order for the steel not to be too brittle, then those tacticals obviously should be tempered even lower. In fact this implies that S30V isn't even a solid choice for those knives at all if you have to drop the RC yet again. It indicates that the steel is not even as tough as ATS-34, yet it is supposed to be far tougher.

-Cliff
 
Just to add my .02. I used a mid sized FB s30v at rc 61. I even thinned out the edge to maybe 20 degrees totle, maybe even a bit thinner. No problems it is tuff steel. I was able to get it to chip, but not very easily.
 
I was ready to buy a new Sebenza in S30V. However, the decision to hold down the RC influenced me to purchase a custom folder in S30V for a few more $. Ah, well, if the CRK policy changes, there's always room for another one.
 
I'm not a metallurgist (although I am trying to become better informed about the science), so I can't debate the technical aspects of BG-42 vs. S30V. However, my experience with Chris Reeve Knives has been superb. (The Small, Classic Sebenza is my EDC) The quality of customer service, design and manufacture of products is excellent. I believe that Chris Reeve has earned our confidence regarding his business decisions. After all, he was awarded the "Manufacturing Quality" Award at the Blade Show two years in a row - 2000 & 2001.
 
Guys, haven't you listened to anything ejt has said? Hardness isn't the only factor to consider when determining edge holding.
Like I said before, BG-42 is a great steel, and even if S30V is only a slight improvement, it's still an improvement.
I doubt most of you could tell a huge difference between the two steels, anyway. S30V at 58/59 can hold an edge more than well enough for most everyday cutting jobs. I guess I'm not gonna get a sebenza anymore, because it's hardened to 58/59, not 60/61:rolleyes:
S30V at 58/59 just won't cut it:rolleyes:

Jeff
 
For one I don't really understand why so many people need to start their messages with S30V is a great steel, bettern than BG-42, etc. statements. Who's arguing? Did anyone said the opposite?

It is an improvement in general, the problem or the point is how it is used. So far custom makers had a consensus more or less, and all of them said S30V would be optimal around 60-61 HRC.
The question is how will S30V perform at 58HRC compared to BG-41 at 61. IMHO that's all folks wanted to know.

Jefroman,
Like I said before, BG-42 is a great steel, and even if S30V is only a slight improvement, it's still an improvement.
If it is a slight improvement then I am not sure that HRC lowered by 4 points will not diminish that improvement. I guess it all depends what do we call a slight improvement, nonetheless 3-4 points is not negligible IMHO.

guess I'm not gonna get a sebenza anymore, because it's hardened to 58/59, not 60/61 S30V at 58/59 just won't cut it
It will cut, but according to your logic 3 dollar pakistani cheapo with unknown hrc will cut for some time too and it's ok too, so what? Is it equal to sebenza?
 
What I have gotten out of this is that s30v WOULD BE BETTER... if it was hardened to 60+ but at 58-59 it is not reaching its full potential, and therefore NOT a forward step as the steel is there for the step to be taken, but lowering the hardness is really limiting your advantage, it is probably harder to work with at the higher hardness? Maybe? And therefore is offered in the lower hardness so as to keep the high proce from inflating? Too many questions?? remeber I am not bashing CRK here, I actually think the company is great and product great but this issue perplexes me.

JC
 
Oh yeah, just one more .01 to ad to my 2 cents. It was unbelievably easy to resharpen, touch up the edge, at 61 rc. And this was on a recurve as well. It was even not too bad to reprofile the edge angles.
 
db,
Do you mind giving more details about the use/materials the blade was put to, what it handled, what chipped it, etc?
Most of what we see is speculation. I'll take a little experience over a lot of speculation any time.
 
My experience with CRK and after meeting and talking to Chris at a couple of knife shows, I believe that when Chris makes a decision on something like this, he does so with a lot of thought. I'm no expert at making knives or the properties of different steels. I trust Chris to make the right decision, I think that too much is being made of the rockwell hardeness. I mean your only talking about 2 points. Trust Chris, he knows what he is doing. He's betting his livelyhood on this. Chris and the people at Crucible think that the steel performs better at 57-58 and I think that they are probabably right. But that's just my $.02:rolleyes: :eek: ;) :barf:
 
There are a number of very fine custom makers who work with S30V at 61-62. To continue an analogy someone started in an earlier post, the Porsche with the speed limiter may still be a fine piece of machinery, but I'd much rather have the limiter removed.

Questions about whether 57-58 is "better" than 60+ imply the answering questions, "better to whom and for what?" For a 4 in. max pocket knife, I'd prefer one that cuts better as opposed to being better for chopping. I'm not going to be chopping with a small blade anyway. I'm sure the softer version is easier on grinding wheels and has lower manufacturing costs. That's not an advantage to me.

It will be interesting to see at what hardness experienced custom knife-makers use the steel. For my own uses, this makes much more sense and is far more informative than beeing a sheeple.
 
First of all, the discussion was about 58-59, not 57-58;)

And more importantly, I hope that my post didn't offend anyone, and I'll admit that my reason for posting was just to rant about steel junkies.

Jeff
 
Note that Chris has already specifically stated that ease of machining had nothing to do with his decision. What I'm curious about is if 58-59 is better for S30V, why was 60-61 better for BG42?
 
...and my small Seb with S30V is proving it to me every day, but when we've got guys who are steeped in "steel theory," what difference is actual use gonna make?

:D

Yeah, that was a direct and lighthearted dig at the naysayers...

We've already heard testimonials from S30V Seb users who say that edge retention is better than their older BG42 Sebs, and not a word yet to the contrary. Hmmm...

Professor.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top