Toughness of S35VN and ELMAX

Elmax is significantly more corrosion resistant.
 
Twindog said:
Yes, that test shows S30V being tougher than S35VN, even at higher Rc.

Heat treats are complicated and there are peaks and double peaks in various qualities. Toughness is resistance to chips and breaking. Strength is the resistance to bending or rolling. Strength is strongly correlated to hardness. Sometimes, you have to lose toughness to gain strength, or vice versa. But some steels and methods of steel processing can improve both.
Click to expand...
Is there a link to what the actual testing was?
 
bluelighthawaii said:
Hey me2, I was sort of thinking the same thing that they are essentially very similar. Being rather inexperienced, doubt that I would be able to tell a difference. Just was curious to know more without having to purchase more knives than I already have. Sold most of my other knives, only to have another wave of desire for new knives. Now curious about obtaining knives in each of these "super steels".
Click to expand...

A collection of steels is a worthy goal. I'm not really interested in super steels, though I was when S60V was a super steel. If I may makes a suggestion, keep a couple good knives in 440C and 1095 around for comparison. The differences may be smaller than you'd imagined.
 
Cereal_killer said:
Not sure anyone else caught it... Single best post on BFc of 2017! Thank you sir for restoring my faith in humanity!
Click to expand...

I just watched that movie a week ago. Kind of close to home though. We . . . some how . . . now actually have a president who has participated in Pro Wrestling. Just a matter of time before the shiny wrestling shorts and the machine gun appear at the podium.
 
You will not be disappointed with either, and both are plenty tough. You can chop and baton with both. You can chop and baton with M390/20CV. It all depends on the heat treat and blade geometry.
 
shinyedges said:
Sweet, you came back. Any chance you brought information to corroborate your assertions you made?
Click to expand...

Higher carbon and carbide forming elements reduces toughness.

Lots of metallurgy reading all points to this as being one the biggest reasons why s90v isn't as tough as CPM 154



The argument is that the 3rd gen PM process used by BU allows for a tougher product then should be possible for a steel that has 1.70 carbon and high amounts of carbide forming elements.
But I think there is alot of marketing hype on BU's part.

Also I'm not pulling opinions out of thin air, in my experience with using Elmax on folders and fixed blades the edges would break down from mircochiping.

For some reason Elmax gets a pass because of it's reputation and enough people repeating what they hear makes it true.

I'm not saying it sucks.

I love Elmax.

I'm just not going to run out and get a chopper made out of it.

I think that a real test should be done when I get some extra money.

I'll order some steel from Chuck and have Brad heat treat to 60hrc with a a 1975 aus and cryo.
There is a place that does some metallurgy testing down the road.

The other pieces can be ground into cold chisels or knives and used to whack hard objects to see which one does better.

A bit of caveman testing and a bit hard data from metallurgy testing.



I think the biggest reason why this wasn't done sooner is that this all costs about $300.

Another option is to buy two ZT 566 one in Elmax and one in S35VN and do some destructive testing.
 
DeadboxHero said:
Higher carbon and carbide forming elements reduces toughness.

Lots of metallurgy reading all points to this as being one the biggest reasons why s90v isn't as tough as CPM 154



The argument is that the 3rd gen PM process used by BU allows for a tougher product then should be possible for a steel that has 1.70 carbon and high amounts of carbide forming elements.
But I think there is alot of marketing hype on BU's part.

Also I'm not pulling opinions out of thin air, in my experience with using Elmax on folders and fixed blades the edges would break down from mircochiping.

For some reason Elmax gets a pass because of it's reputation and enough people repeating what they hear makes it true.

I'm not saying it sucks.

I love Elmax.

I'm just not going to run out and get a chopper made out of it.

I think that a real test should be done when I get some extra money.

I'll order some steel from Chuck and have Brad heat treat to 60hrc with a a 1975 aus and cryo.
There is a place that does some metallurgy testing down the road.

The other pieces can be ground into cold chisels or knives and used to whack hard objects to see which one does better.

A bit of caveman testing and a bit hard data from metallurgy testing.



I think the biggest reason why this wasn't done sooner is that this all costs about $300.

Another option is to buy two ZT 566 one in Elmax and one in S35VN and do some destructive testing.
Click to expand...


UDDEHOLM ELMAX
2100 0F, 15-20 minute soak, Deep Freeze, 2 tempers at 390-480 0F, 60-62 HRC
1985-2010 0F, 30 minute soak, Deep Freeze, 2 tempers at 390-480 0F, 57-60 HRC
http://www.bucorp.com/media/KNIFEHEATTREATSUM2.pdf
 
Last edited:
bluntcut said:
Cool DbH! Which steels are they (pic too tiny)? It would be great if you would test these at 64rc then gradually walk down to 60rc :thumbsup:
Click to expand...
That would be sweet, but I think I'm going to go for just a 60-61 rc for all three.

The steels are

CPM154
S35VN
And Elmax.

I'll send them to Brad for heat treatment
All will get a 2000°f aus for 30min
Immediate cryo.
Double temper at 350-400 depending on as quenched hardness for each steel.
I'm thinking a neck knife and some testing coupons to send to a lab.
Testing will be done by end of summer as I get the cash flow to pay for it through working overtime at work.

Let's see what the toughest is since there is so much disagreement.
 
I/we appreciate your effort.

It will be fairly hard to differentiate toughness among 3 steels at 60-61rc because toughness curve converge as hardness is lowering. I envision 60rc like 100m jog, performance differences will be small and could be smaller than test error margin.
DeadboxHero said:
That would be sweet, but I think I'm going to go for just a 60-61 rc for all three.

The steels are

CPM154
S35VN
And Elmax.

I'll send them to Brad for heat treatment
All will get a 2000°f aus for 30min
Immediate cryo.
Double temper at 350-400 depending on as quenched hardness for each steel.
I'm thinking a neck knife and some testing coupons to send to a lab.
Testing will be done by end of summer as I get the cash flow to pay for it through working overtime at work.

Let's see what the toughest is since there is so much disagreement.
Click to expand...
 
bluntcut said:
I/we appreciate your effort.

It will be fairly hard to differentiate toughness among 3 steels at 60-61rc because toughness curve converge as hardness is lowering. I envision 60rc like 100m jog, performance differences will be small and could be smaller than test error margin.
Click to expand...

I have one of Dead/Malanika's 4V puukko's hardened to 64 Rc. I have coming a puukko in 80CrV2 hardened to 63 Rc. That should make a good test of powder vs more traditional steels in non-destructive tests. I think I can test for toughness without doing more than minor damage to the edge.
 
Twindog said:
I have one of Dead/Malanika's 4V puukko's hardened to 64 Rc. I have coming a puukko in 80CrV2 hardened to 63 Rc. That should make a good test of powder vs more traditional steels in non-destructive tests. I think I can test for toughness without doing more than minor damage to the edge.
Click to expand...
Nice, I've yet to test 80crv2 at high hardness, only at 59.

Ive been using a piece of brass rod to carve into to test the edge stability.

4v has been the most stable steel I've ever used at extreme geometry even at 64hrc, no chipping or rolling, the edge seemed to only take a micro ripple much like 3v does but it cuts more.


All the ingot carbon steels I've tested where only at 60hrc and with similar geometry and had the Apex deform on the brass rod and lost there bite fast.

The 4v was still hungry with lots of bite and no rolling.

I've also been testing some 8 inch gyutos in 4v at 64 HRC

Also very impressive. Great strength without the brittleness. But not something to sharpen on King waterstones. Feels like glass on stones hahaha.

What's great though is that we get less dulling on the cutting board.
Much like Hap40 "voodoo" steels claim to fame.
 
bluntcut said:
I/we appreciate your effort.

It will be fairly hard to differentiate toughness among 3 steels at 60-61rc because toughness curve converge as hardness is lowering. I envision 60rc like 100m jog, performance differences will be small and could be smaller than test error margin.
Click to expand...
Thanks brother, I've always appreciated the help and advice you've always given me when I needed help
 
Shawn,

Are you saying that HAP40 reputation is similarly hyped up like 4V? Sorry, I'm not very clear with the last sentence.

My own experience with it (HAP40) is a bit of mixed results but that's how it is in using it and not a methodical test. Sometimes it behaves like M4.
 
Chris "Anagarika" said:
Shawn,

Are you saying that HAP40 reputation is similarly hyped up like 4V? Sorry, I'm not very clear with the last sentence.

My own experience with it (HAP40) is a bit of mixed results but that's how it is in using it and not a methodical test. Sometimes it behaves like M4.
Click to expand...
I'm taking about kitchen knives, the Hap40 on the spyderco stuff is softer then what you get on 8" inch gyutos like the kohetsu Hap40 in my experience. Naniwa chosera stones feel glassy with the kohetsu hap40 and 4v at 64hrc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top