Thoughts on SF100 versus AEBL or one of the Swedish steels?

S

Sid Post

Joined
Oct 14, 1998
Messages
4,720
I am looking for a modest-priced Lambsfoot slip-joint style knife in the classic English/British pattern from Sheffield. I am looking in the $100~$150 range so, no common production or truly custom knife versions. I am trying to work with one knifemaker in Sheffield but, we have had some email/technology challenges.

The email I received from him suggests AEBL and SF100 are the two stainless steels he has access to. Research suggests it is similar to Sandvik 13c26 and similar steels so, with good heat treatment either should be good options for a 9CM or 3.2" blade.

What should I expect from either of those two steels in normal "real-world' use, is their anything to recommend SF100 or AEBL over the other? I am leaning towards SF100 for its Sheffield connection but, AEBL would be a fine choice too except I had one in the past that was poorly heat treated so, I am a bit biased about it.

Anything specific to suggest one is better or worse than the other?

TIA,
Sid
 
When it comes to steels of identical composition the differences come down to impurity levels (like phosphorus and sulfur) and microstructure, especially carbide size and distribution, that results from hot rolling and annealing. Uddeholm has that dialed in for AEB-L as does Sandvik with 13C26. My tests of Buderus-produced steel with the same composition had somewhat worse carbide structure which meant a change to heat treatment behavior and toughness. It wasn’t terrible, but I believe the Uddeholm and Sandvik processing is superior. There is no information out there I have seen on the quality of the SF100.
 
Larrin said:
There is no information out there I have seen on the quality of the SF100.
Click to expand...

Yep, SF100 seems to be a locally produced and used version of an AEBL'ish steel for legacy Sheffield manufacturers. Regarding impurities and quality in general, it seems to be a bit of a unicorn without any real data about its performance.
 
I recently did some edge retention testing with SF100 cutting 1/2” rope on a endgrain cutting board. I’ve tested several steels like this to get an idea of real world use, I do the test with a kitchen knife profile ground to the same geometry and sharpened the same way. I’ve tested 8670 which did 1400 cuts at 62rc, ApexUltra did 1900 at 66rc, SF100 did 2600 cuts at 62rc, and Nitro-V did 2900 cuts at 62rc. I continue cutting rope in rounds of 100 cuts until the blade is completely dull and will no longer cut paper at all, I then see if I can strop the edge back or if there was any damage to the edge and all of the steels except ApexUltra stropped to a perfect edge. Apex had micro chipping and likely if I wanted to continue testing it I would say 66rc is too high for a knife making contact with a cutting surface. But SF100 did very well only slightly behind nitro-v which is another steel often compared to aebl.
 
Joshua Fisher said:
I recently did some edge retention testing with SF100 cutting 1/2” rope on a endgrain cutting board. I’ve tested several steels like this to get an idea of real world use, I do the test with a kitchen knife profile ground to the same geometry and sharpened the same way. I’ve tested 8670 which did 1400 cuts at 62rc, ApexUltra did 1900 at 66rc, SF100 did 2600 cuts at 62rc, and Nitro-V did 2900 cuts at 62rc. I continue cutting rope in rounds of 100 cuts until the blade is completely dull and will no longer cut paper at all, I then see if I can strop the edge back or if there was any damage to the edge and all of the steels except ApexUltra stropped to a perfect edge. Apex had micro chipping and likely if I wanted to continue testing it I would say 66rc is too high for a knife making contact with a cutting surface. But SF100 did very well only slightly behind nitro-v which is another steel often compared to aebl.
Click to expand...
That's interesting. Have you done this test with 26C3 by any chance?
 
Joshua, looking forward to the test results with perhaps AEB-L...... and 14C28N? Both steels are fairly similar. Seems Sandvik says 14C28N was basically 13C26 with addition of N for corrosion resistance (and a couple others). If you don't have the 14C28N on hand I'd be happy to send you a piece for testing.

edited to correct the carbon steel 26C3 to a SS. When Hubert mentioned 26C3 for some reason Sandvik steels came to mind and boy did I get on wrong track
 
Last edited:
I knew something was wrong with that 26C3 I wrote. I had Sandvik steels in my mind, like 12C27, 13C26 & 14C28N. 26C3 is that "spicy white" high carbon steel. I use that for San Mai Cores sometimes. Good steel.
 
Last edited:
Ken H> said:
Joshua, looking forward to the test results with perhaps AEB-L...... and 14C28N? Both steels are fairly similar. Seems Sandvik says 14C28N was basically 13C26 with addition of N for corrosion resistance (and a couple others). If you don't have the 14C28N on hand I'd be happy to send you a piece for testing.

edited to correct the carbon steel 26C3 to a SS. When Hubert mentioned 26C3 for some reason Sandvik steels came to mind and boy did I get on wrong track
Click to expand...
I’d be happy to test any steels, can’t promise it would be fast as I tend to do the testing between orders and mostly have done it for steels I use in my own production.
 
Larrin said:
When it comes to steels of identical composition the differences come down to impurity levels (like phosphorus and sulfur) and microstructure, especially carbide size and distribution, that results from hot rolling and annealing. Uddeholm has that dialed in for AEB-L as does Sandvik with 13C26. My tests of Buderus-produced steel with the same composition had somewhat worse carbide structure which meant a change to heat treatment behavior and toughness. It wasn’t terrible, but I believe the Uddeholm and Sandvik processing is superior. There is no information out there I have seen on the quality of the SF100.
Click to expand...
Larrin said:
When it comes to steels of identical composition the differences come down to impurity levels (like phosphorus and sulfur) and microstructure, especially carbide size and distribution, that results from hot rolling and annealing. Uddeholm has that dialed in for AEB-L as does Sandvik with 13C26. My tests of Buderus-produced steel with the same composition had somewhat worse carbide structure which meant a change to heat treatment behavior and toughness. It wasn’t terrible, but I believe the Uddeholm and Sandvik processing is superior. There is no information out there I have seen on the quality of the SF100.
Click to expand...
Should there be a difference in the heat treating protocol. In other words, if Bos (for example) were to heat treat SF100 in identical fashion to AEB-L what might the expected differences be?
 
None. They are almost identical steels, and if both were hardened to an equal hardness, I doubt anyone would know any difference without scientific testing. And even then, the difference between the two would be extremely small.
 
I would like to follow up with my last comment right above....

My mind is usually in the ceteris paribus mode, "All things being equal". But I should revise my comment, especially after discussing this with the fine people at Alpha Knife Supply.

Not all AEB-L is the same. Some knife suppliers buy their AEB-L from Voestalpine company, other knife supply houses order their AEB-L from other steel companies, like maybe Buderus. Some knife makers have noticed that the heat treat response between one supplier's AEB-L is not the same as from another supplier. I think Larrin has even discussed this in one or more of his fine articles from Knife Steel Nerds.

I do not, at all, want to get into who has the best AEB-L and who has AEB-L with different heat treat responses, or even problems with the steel. Not my point in this post.

My point is that if all things were equal, if all of the mills had the composition of "AEB-L class" steels where they should be, and they have processed/annealed it correctly, including steels like SF100, Nitro V, 14c28n, AND the knife maker did their diligent job in heat treating them properly to identical hardness, I don't think the average user would be able to differentiate those steels from one another.

But that is just simply not the case in the real world. Not everyone's AEB-L is identical, and so there is that to consider.

Maybe Alpha Knife will chime in. Just wanted to clear the air about that, as I didn't want any confusion.
 
Stuart Davenport Knives said:
I would like to follow up with my last comment right above....

My mind is usually in the ceteris paribus mode, "All things being equal". But I should revise my comment, especially after discussing this with the fine people at Alpha Knife Supply.

Not all AEB-L is the same. Some knife suppliers buy their AEB-L from Voestalpine company, other knife supply houses order their AEB-L from other steel companies, like maybe Buderus. Some knife makers have noticed that the heat treat response between one supplier's AEB-L is not the same as from another supplier. I think Larrin has even discussed this in one or more of his fine articles from Knife Steel Nerds.

I do not, at all, want to get into who has the best AEB-L and who has AEB-L with different heat treat responses, or even problems with the steel. Not my point in this post.

My point is that if all things were equal, if all of the mills had the composition of "AEB-L class" steels where they should be, and they have processed/annealed it correctly, including steels like SF100, Nitro V, 14c28n, AND the knife maker did their diligent job in heat treating them properly to identical hardness, I don't think the average user would be able to differentiate those steels from one another.

But that is just simply not the case in the real world. Not everyone's AEB-L is identical, and so there is that to consider.

Maybe Alpha Knife will chime in. Just wanted to clear the air about that, as I didn't want any confusion.
Click to expand...

I had an AEB-L chef's knife that was terrible. I assumed heat treat was bad but, other people with the same knife said theirs was awesome. Mine had poor edge holding, chipped, though it seemed a bit soft to me. This was using it on ordinary vegetables too, not frozen stuff or boned meats.

Nitro V and I didn't get along well but, I suspect I was as big a part in that as the knife steel and knife itself were. My 14C28N experiences have all been very good, mainly in folding knives but my Garberg and that obscure Scandinavian Bushcrafter are both really solid knives in that that steel.
 
Imitation alloys are a problem. Imitators copy the name and/or the composition of Voestalpine (Bohler/Uddeholm) alloys. This problem is largely ignored. But it is getting worse.

This example is AEB-L. Some companies are copying the composition of the alloy, but the manufacturing processes are not the same. Quoting Dr. Larrin Thomas:

“When it comes to steels of identical composition the differences come down to impurity levels (like phosphorus and sulfur) and microstructure, especially carbide size and distribution, that results from hot rolling and annealing. Uddeholm has that dialed in for AEB-L as does Sandvik with 13C26.” [emphasis added]
Click to expand...

What does this mean to knifemakers? Feedback we get from knifemakers is the toughness is lower and there is more chipping. We’ve also heard the edge holding is not as good. The common scenario is the knifemaker has used Voestalpine AEB-L previously and then tries an imitation. When they are not happy with the performance of the imitation, they call or talk to us at a show.

Some of the imitated alloys are AEB-L, 15N20 and 26C3. These three alloys are only made by Voestalpine (Bohler/Uddeholm). All other steel mills making copies are producing lesser quality imitations.

Chuck
 
Alpha Knife Supply said:
Imitation alloys are a problem. Imitators copy the name and/or the composition of Voestalpine (Bohler/Uddeholm) alloys. This problem is largely ignored. But it is getting worse.

This example is AEB-L. Some companies are copying the composition of the alloy, but the manufacturing processes are not the same. Quoting Dr. Larrin Thomas:



What does this mean to knifemakers? Feedback we get from knifemakers is the toughness is lower and there is more chipping. We’ve also heard the edge holding is not as good. The common scenario is the knifemaker has used Voestalpine AEB-L previously and then tries an imitation. When they are not happy with the performance of the imitation, they call or talk to us at a show.

Some of the imitated alloys are AEB-L, 15N20 and 26C3. These three alloys are only made by Voestalpine (Bohler/Uddeholm). All other steel mills making copies are producing lesser quality imitations.

Chuck
Click to expand...

I've been having a terrible time with a batch of knives made from imitation AEB-L.

Up until now, I've only sourced my materials from AKS. I thought AEB-L was the same across the board, so I tried a new supplier because they offered some extra services.

What a huge mistake. It's been six months of headaches and finger-pointing, and accusations suggesting the heat treat was at fault. (For the record, I only use BOS for heat treating, and I trust their process completely.)

I'm not going to name the vendor just yet, as I'm still hoping we can find a solution. But if you want more details, feel free to reach out to me directly, and I'll be happy to share specifics.


Rick D.
Honest Knife Co
honestknives.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top