Ultimate axe head steel

J W Bensinger said:
I have yet to make an axehead or 'hawk out of 80CrV2 but it makes phenomenal JEST bolos and choppers if HT'd right.
Guess I need to forge a little hatchet head and see what happens.
Click to expand...
What is the thickest 80CrV2 stock that you have been able to find. I was looking at the Bestar website and didn't see that they offered in round bars as a standard option. I don't know where Chuck sources his "1080+" from.
 
.375 is the thickest I've seen it. I've upset that down pretty thick for integral bolsters, you could likely get at least hatchets from it.
There's always composite/forgewelded construction with your choice of bit steel, too.
 
S7 or 5160 from my experience.

I've made hundreds of knives from S7 and don''t find the edge holding to be lacking. The same goes with 5160 and both are just crazy tough. I run them both on the harder side too.

It would be cool to try out CPM 3V in this application..
 
I'd be happy with 5160, L6, 4140 or S7. I've used all of them a good bit in large choppers (12-15" blades, .025-.045 thick edges at ~15dps) except for the 4140 which was in a Council Tools axe, and I can't tell much of a difference in any of them. They all dull by hitting a knot or dirty wood long before they lose their edge from the actual chopping. Even some Austempered 1095 at 52-54 RC I have holds a great edge. I'd be happy with 80crv2 based on it's chemistry too.

To my mind the higher hardness you seem to be after (please correct me if I'm wrong...I don't want to misunderstand) would serve two purposes: 1. increase wear resistance which is a moot point with choppers...they don't slowly wear through abrasion, and 2. increase strength and stability to allow for thinner cross sections. However, I would think on an axe you're likely to get that stability from the geometry (stiff is cubic in relation to the thickness). I just don't see one being that thin at the edge. So, with the strength and stability provided by the geometry, I'd rather go for the toughest steel I can get in the upper 50s.

I don't know, just some thoughts. I like steel and like to try different types, but I've seen no real distinguishable performance in chopping between any of the steels mentioned...like I mentioned, it's the dirt or knots or nail I hit that determine edge retention in my experience

Depending on the size of the axe too, given the volume of steel that will be at and behind the edge, I would give good priority to grindability. If and when you do get that bad swing and damage the edge, it's not fun fixing 52100 (I've done it on a 18" machete once) when you don't have a belt grinder.
 
.045 is too thick for my tastes, even on a chopper. I see very few axes, even ones made from "premium steel" like 5160 run any higher than about 55. I seem to recall some axes with say an L6 bit in a mild steel body where the bit was up around 58. The problem with some of the other steels is that you don't want to leave them that SOFT. I mentioned CruForgeV. I have heard that you really don't want to leave that stuff any softer than 58 or so. I have also heard that some steels, maybe 1095, have orange whee they are less than ideal compared to harder or softer levels of hardness. The thing I like about the specs of 5160 is that it appears that you can "zone" temper it "softer than say L6. According to Mr. Cashen's website, L6 requires some pretty high temps to get it down to the low 50Rc range, like 650F. I see people talking about "austempered" 1095, but I am not sure how you would actually do that. 1095 is so shallow harding that i would be concerned that what you have is not austempered steel but steel that has not been sufficiently converted to martensite.
Camber said:
I'd be happy with 5160, L6, 4140 or S7. I've used all of them a good bit in large choppers (12-15" blades, .025-.045 thick edges at ~15dps) except for the 4140 which was in a Council Tools axe, and I can't tell much of a difference in any of them. They all dull by hitting a knot or dirty wood long before they lose their edge from the actual chopping. Even some Austempered 1095 at 52-54 RC I have holds a great edge. I'd be happy with 80crv2 based on it's chemistry too.

To my mind the higher hardness you seem to be after (please correct me if I'm wrong...I don't want to misunderstand) would serve two purposes: 1. increase wear resistance which is a moot point with choppers...they don't slowly wear through abrasion, and 2. increase strength and stability to allow for thinner cross sections. However, I would think on an axe you're likely to get that stability from the geometry (stiff is cubic in relation to the thickness). I just don't see one being that thin at the edge. So, with the strength and stability provided by the geometry, I'd rather go for the toughest steel I can get in the upper 50s.

I don't know, just some thoughts. I like steel and like to try different types, but I've seen no real distinguishable performance in chopping between any of the steels mentioned...like I mentioned, it's the dirt or knots or nail I hit that determine edge retention in my experience

Depending on the size of the axe too, given the volume of steel that will be at and behind the edge, I would give good priority to grindability. If and when you do get that bad swing and damage the edge, it's not fun fixing 52100 (I've done it on a 18" machete once) when you don't have a belt grinder.
Click to expand...
 
The problem appears to be finding 80CrV2 in the right sizes. As far as I know, you can get L6 in round bar, the Crucible Champalloy stuff for sure. Not sure about the other stuff with no moly.
shqxk said:
L6 or 80CRV2
Click to expand...
 
jdm61 said:
.045 is too thick for my tastes, even on a chopper. I see very few axes, even ones made from "premium steel" like 5160 run any higher than about 55. I seem to recall some axes with say an L6 bit in a mild steel body where the bit was up around 58. The problem with some of the other steels is that you don't want to leave them that SOFT. I mentioned CruForgeV. I have heard that you really don't want to leave that stuff any softer than 58 or so. I have also heard that some steels, maybe 1095, have orange whee they are less than ideal compared to harder or softer levels of hardness. The thing I like about the specs of 5160 is that it appears that you can "zone" temper it "softer than say L6. According to Mr. Cashen's website, L6 requires some pretty high temps to get it down to the low 50Rc range, like 650F. I see people talking about "austempered" 1095, but I am not sure how you would actually do that. 1095 is so shallow harding that i would be concerned that what you have is not austempered steel but steel that has not been sufficiently converted to martensite.
Click to expand...

I understand you don't want to leave some of the other steels that soft (you enter into tempered martensite embrittlement from what I understand). I just also don't think its necessary to have a steel that hard given the geometries, and I also have a hard time seeing why the abrasion resistance provided by some of those steel would be necessary. As for the austempering, I can't speak for what it actually is as I haven't had it analyzed, but the industrial company that does Omnivore's heat treating in salt pots advertises it as such. Regardless of what it is, there's a lot of evidence of it performing.

I guess my thought then is, why do you want to use something like Cruforge V in an axe? What do you think it will provide that the classic alternatives won't? In general, what are you trying to improve on that the existing alternatives are lacking in performance wise? Can you be more specific on "tough as nails" and "carving edge"? In my experiences, the basic steels I mentioned will easily do a couple hours of work and still slice phonebook paper easily, and usually shave to some degree, so in what toughness tests are they failing, and after what quantity/type of work are they losing their edge?

And I agree .045 is thick, but I mentioned a range much wider than that. And sometimes the durability it nice.

Along those lines, I guess the other question is how big of an axe are we talking here? A tomahawk in the range of a large chopper or a real axe? An edge with 1 lb of steel behind it versus a 4lb felling axe are going to need different edge geometries regardless of preference on choppers.
 
Last edited:
Also, you may want to talk to Liam Hoffman. He is doing really well with his axe business right now, and he uses 4142 with great results, hardened to 57 I believe. He's got some youtube videos demonstrating use and some shows of edge retention.
 
jdm61 said:
I see very few axes, even ones made from "premium steel" like 5160 run any higher than about 55. I seem to recall some axes with say an L6 bit in a mild steel body where the bit was up around 58. The problem with some of the other steels is that you don't want to leave them that SOFT.
Click to expand...

Then you're looking in the wrong places. Try an antique mall. ;) American made axes from the golden age were routinely 56-58 Rc at the edge, and I have a couple that I could swear are at least 59-60, if not more. Only one of my vintage Americans has an edge that I'd estimate to be around 54-55.

And of course, they were all using plain carbon steel of some kind. So if a 10XX steel does the job, then I'd be looking toward getting the edge harder without sacrificing impact toughness. Maybe try to push for 61-62 Rc. Which alloy has the best impact resistance in that range? The geometry lends a lot of support to prevent gross damage, but the very edge can get rolled much easier. Wear resistance is not a factor in a tool like this, as far as I'm concerned. That's not how the edge degrades in normal use, and even if it does, that sort of wear can be fixed in seconds with 3 passes per side on a fine hone.

I like the suggestions of L6, 5160, and don't rule out S5 (which can obtain much higher hardness than S7 but still has crazy toughness), or other silicon alloys. Also check out the "chipper steels"- used for making blades that chip wood into pulp in mills; it seems like they should be basically engineered exactly for this application.
 
Camber said:
To my mind the higher hardness you seem to be after (please correct me if I'm wrong...I don't want to misunderstand) would serve two purposes: 1. increase wear resistance which is a moot point with choppers...they don't slowly wear through abrasion, and 2. increase strength and stability to allow for thinner cross sections. However, I would think on an axe you're likely to get that stability from the geometry (stiff is cubic in relation to the thickness). I just don't see one being that thin at the edge. So, with the strength and stability provided by the geometry, I'd rather go for the toughest steel I can get in the upper 50s.
Click to expand...

I think Camber's above comments are spot on. The right heat treatment and edge geometry with any of the above-mentioned tough steels will significantly outperform even the greatest ultimate super-steel if your geometry and/or heat treat are wrong.
 
I don't want to mess up my hardness tester, so just checked with a file. File skidded near edge on my Woodslasher Kelly Works axe, it has to be 60+rc. My fell axe also probably 60+rc.

I sure would want strongest & sufficient toughness steel possible that supports optimal geometry for indented tasks. So for example if optimal working geometry call for 0.025" edge thick, 18dps bevel with apex ~750nm thick, 1" cross section 3" above edge, 3.5lbs head. Where indented task - chops 95% sap+core, 5% knots+crazy hard stuff. Easy to see high strength is a must in this case, as long as toughness is sufficient for tasks. In designing this geometry, perhaps stride for balance among cut; smush/smash; wedge; so on, with highest work efficiency (minimize energy expenditure).

For general purpose axe (thin & thick profile and edge geometry) - steel with working ht hardness > 62rc.
Low corrosion steel: W2, 52100
High Cr: aebl class

It would be sad to have a big chunk of metal, then end up with a mushy edge axe. If I want to smash/squash things, well just leave a thicker apex and I want this edge stays at designed/indented thickness as long as feasible.
 
The sales speil from most of the current axe manufacturer is that the "industry standards" are 45-55Rc 1 inch back from the edge and their pitch is we go to 50-55 1.5 inches back. i would not be at all shocked to find old axes that were harder at the edge and I know that there were "miners axes" that actually had a hardened pole back in those days. Try finding one today that doesn't just have the "flame hardened edge" to quote on maker. ;) I am not sure about the availability of the chipper steels like A8 and its spawn in correct sizes. Buses supposedly uses a variant of that steel, but they are big enough to apparently be able to do small custom smelts. For the rest of us, when you start looking for stuff like 80CrV2 in sizes you might like, you end up at he website of Bestar or some Chinese mill who would be happy to sell you as LITTLE as one ton. :eek:
the possum said:
Then you're looking in the wrong places. Try an antique mall. ;) American made axes from the golden age were routinely 56-58 Rc at the edge, and I have a couple that I could swear are at least 59-60, if not more. Only one of my vintage Americans has an edge that I'd estimate to be around 54-55.

And of course, they were all using plain carbon steel of some kind. So if a 10XX steel does the job, then I'd be looking toward getting the edge harder without sacrificing impact toughness. Maybe try to push for 61-62 Rc. Which alloy has the best impact resistance in that range? The geometry lends a lot of support to prevent gross damage, but the very edge can get rolled much easier. Wear resistance is not a factor in a tool like this, as far as I'm concerned. That's not how the edge degrades in normal use, and even if it does, that sort of wear can be fixed in seconds with 3 passes per side on a fine hone.

I like the suggestions of L6, 5160, and don't rule out S5 (which can obtain much higher hardness than S7 but still has crazy toughness), or other silicon alloys. Also check out the "chipper steels"- used for making blades that chip wood into pulp in mills; it seems like they should be basically engineered exactly for this application.
Click to expand...
 
True. The heat treatment would be critical. As best as I can tell, what some manufacturers appear to do today is straighten out the damage that they did in the drop forging process with some thermal cycles and then austenize and quench the edge only using propane of induction heating. I have seen a few people on line wondering where they can find an newly made axe with a hardened pole.
Wulf said:
I think Camber's above comments are spot on. The right heat treatment and edge geometry with any of the above-mentioned tough steels will significantly outperform even the greatest ultimate super-steel if your geometry and/or heat treat are wrong.
Click to expand...
 
Bailey Bradshaw forged some 3V back in the day and I was told by someone who makes PM damascus (can't remember if it was Hoss, Markus Balbach or someone else) that even the temps required for forge welding that witches brew of alloys that don't want to stick together wouldn't really do anything to the particulate structure of those PM steels. The problem with 3V is that if you think that $25 for enough raw steel to make a 4 pound axe head out of L6 is expensive, try $80 for 3v if you forge and probably more like $100 if you are grinding/machining away everything that doesn't look like an axe head. :eek: I did a price comparison for making full tang tactical hawks from .275 3v and the only way that it remotely made sense cost wise is if you were able to nest your cuts in a way that you could also water jet some big choppers and such from the "waste" areas of the sheet of steel. That would work even better with say .312 L6 or .375 80CrV2 sheets as you could more easily forge the knives to the size, shape and thickness that you wanted from waste pieces.
Willie71 said:
Have you thought of 3v? It's not great for forging, but is available in large sizes here: http://www.hudsontoolsteel.com/site...make an axe out of a big chunk of 3v.[/QUOTE]
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
jdm61 said:
Bailey Bradshaw forged some 3V back in the day and I was told by someone who makes PM damascus (can't remember if it was Hoss, Markus Balbach or someone else) that even the temps required for forge welding that witches brew of alloys that don't want to stick together wouldn't really do anything to the particulate structure of those PM steels. The problem with 3V is that if you think that $25 for enough raw steel to make a 4 pound axe head out of L6 is expensive, try $80 for 3v if you forge and probably more like $100 if you are grinding/machining away everything that doesn't look like an axe head. :eek: I did a price comparison for making full tang tactical hawks from .275 3v and the only way that it remotely made sense cost wise is if you were able to nest your cuts in a way that you could also water jet some big choppers and such from the "waste" areas of the sheet of steel. That would work even better with say .312 L6 or .375 80CrV2 sheets as you could more easily forge the knives to the size, shape and thickness that you wanted from waste pieces.
Click to expand...

3v would be about $350.00 for a block big enough to make a splitting maul sized axe, 2"x4"x6".
 
Willie71 said:
3v would be about $350.00 for a block big enough to make a splitting maul sized axe, 2"x4"x6".
Click to expand...
Zoinks, yo!!!! I was just going by per pound cost for a 4 pound axe head when I said $80-100+!!!! the L6 that Hudson has was $6 a pound which is about a 50% premium over the cost of O1 and I thought I remembered the 3V being $20.
 
1.5% Ni in L6 has a huge advantage over many steels (3V included) when operating below freezing temperature. 3V doesn't has that much advantage over L6 beside corrosion resistance and minor wear resistance. With a decent ht, L6 grain can easily match 3V or even better. Hard to justify investment in a big block of PM steel to use mostly for weight.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top