What the hell happened to Buck? 12c27 vs 420HC vs 154cm

[bubblewhip]

So I work at a store that sells knives and binos, and we noticed some of the buck alphas or ergo hunters and other models with rosewood handles had 12c27 steel. DESPITE the box saying it has 154CM. My question is what happened that they changed the steel to this? I read up the composition and there's indication that 420HC is actually a superior steel to 12c27. Is it an upgrade, downgrade from 420HC? And Why'd they replace 154CM with it?

 

[andrewthetuba]

12C27 is a little better than 420 IMO. 154cm is a upgraded version of either 440 or 420, I can't remember. I just noticed your title looks like some equation

 

[Dorito Monk]

I read up the composition and there's indication that 420HC is actually a superior steel to 12c27. Is it an upgrade, downgrade from 420HC? And Why'd they replace 154CM with it?

I can't see 12C27 being any sort of upgrade from 154CM, but it's much better than 420HC, imho. Buck does a good job with 420HC from all indications, but it's still a pretty awful steel compared to what's out there nowadays.

 

[bubblewhip]

I can't see 12C27 being any sort of upgrade from 154CM, but it's much better than 420HC, imho. Buck does a good job with 420HC from all indications, but it's still a pretty awful steel compared to what's out there nowadays.

12c27 has basically the same amount of carbon (about 0.05% higher on average) and 420HC has vanadium in it vs 12c27 which doesn't. That should make 420HC more wear resistant and technically a "better" steel in terms of realistic use. I fail to see how 12C27 is "a lot" better than 420HC. It seems to me to be equal or even a downgrade.

 

[Dorito Monk]

12c27 has basically the same amount of carbon (about 0.05% higher on average) and 420HC has vanadium in it vs 12c27 which doesn't. That should make 420HC more wear resistant and technically a "better" steel in terms of realistic use. I fail to see how 12C27 is "a lot" better than 420HC. It seems to me to be equal or even a downgrade.

http://zknives.com/knives/steels/steelgraph.php?nm=420HC, 12C27&gm=0

According to this chart, 12c27 has more carbon, more chromium, as well as small amounts of sulphur and phosphorous. At any rate, knowing what's in a steel and knowing from experience how it performs are two very different kettles of fish. If you haven't actually used these steels, don't make assumptions about which will perform better.

Take, for example, 154CM and CPM154. Very similar steels, almost identical, chemically speaking. Ask anyone who's used them both and you'll find people will tend to point to CPM154 as the superior steel by a long shot. I've heard people mention that they're wildly different steels in practice, due to (as I understand it) CPM154 being a powder metal, while 154CM is not. You can't judge a book by it's chemical composition.

 

[benyaM95 Ranger Knif]

Take, for example, 154CM and CPM154. Very similar steels, almost identical, chemically speaking. Ask anyone who's used them both and you'll find people will tend to point to CPM154 as the superior steel by a long shot.

you do realize, that CPM 154 "overpowers" 154CM not due to the different chemical composition? but by more even distribution of all components.

 

[bubblewhip]

http://zknives.com/knives/steels/steelgraph.php?nm=420HC, 12C27&gm=0

According to this chart, 12c27 has more carbon, more chromium, as well as small amounts of sulphur and phosphorous. At any rate, knowing what's in a steel and knowing from experience how it performs are two very different kettles of fish. If you haven't actually used these steels, don't make assumptions about which will perform better.

Take, for example, 154CM and CPM154. Very similar steels, almost identical, chemically speaking. Ask anyone who's used them both and you'll find people will tend to point to CPM154 as the superior steel by a long shot. I've heard people mention that they're wildly different steels in practice, due to (as I understand it) CPM154 being a powder metal, while 154CM is not. You can't judge a book by it's chemical composition.

Both I assume use the Bessemer traditional processed steels. So unless the sandvik folks have some process similar to CPM that gives wildly different properties, I have no reason to suspect that the chemical makeup of 12c27 is superior to that of 420HC. The increase in carbon is negligible and the more critical factor of vanadium that makes the CPM steels like S30V and S90V so good are absent in 12C27 vs 420HC. The addition of phosphorus and sulfur isn't that encouraging both decrease cutlery function in terms of toughness and wear resistance without giving anything in return. All that is written about it is that it is a very pure alloy meaning that the carbides are evenly distributed making a very fine edge. But there is no indication that given the same manufacture heat treat by buck that 12C27 preforms better than their 420HC.

 

[Dorito Monk]

you do realize, that CPM 154 "overpowers" 154CM not due to the different chemical composition? but by more even distribution of all components.

That is exactly what I was saying. Evaluating a steel by its chemical composition alone does not take into account other significant characteristics of a steel.

And bubblewhip, I reiterate: Use both steels yourself and determine which is "better" yourself. If you haven't done that, I don't see much value in your claims as to which one is preferable.

 

[Flatlander1963]

I hate to throw a wrench in this intense steel discussion but the steel that Buck is transitioning to is Sandvik's 12C27M and not 12C27.

 

[Incahiker]

Well, I have both knives in both steels and they perform pretty equally. Sandvik is very clean metal and the grain size is unbeliviably small, so you can get an ultra sharp edge on it.

Here is a picture of 13c26 that shows it's grain size

Here is D2

Notice how huge the carbides are in D2, those things get pulled out while cutting leaving not a very keen edge, but a sawtootch type edge..

 

[res1cue]

Wow Incahiker, those pictures tell a lot!

Is there an archive where there are more of these? I would love to see CPM 154 vs 154CM, and also Aus8 out of curiosity, because I have heard so much about how finely grained it is.

 

[me2]

Both I assume use the Bessemer traditional processed steels. So unless the sandvik folks have some process similar to CPM that gives wildly different properties, I have no reason to suspect that the chemical makeup of 12c27 is superior to that of 420HC. The increase in carbon is negligible and the more critical factor of vanadium that makes the CPM steels like S30V and S90V so good are absent in 12C27 vs 420HC. The addition of phosphorus and sulfur isn't that encouraging both decrease cutlery function in terms of toughness and wear resistance without giving anything in return. All that is written about it is that it is a very pure alloy meaning that the carbides are evenly distributed making a very fine edge. But there is no indication that given the same manufacture heat treat by buck that 12C27 preforms better than their 420HC.

The small amount of vanadium in 420HC is not there for the same reasons as in S30V and S90V. Phosphorus and sulfer are not added to these steels. They are impurities that are in virtually all steels. Rest assured there is some in both steels, but they may not be mentioned because they are not added intentionally. Their concentrations can be minimized, but completely removing them is very difficult (read expensive). Some steels do add them, but these two aren't in that group.

 

[Sep]

Both I assume use the Bessemer traditional processed steels. So unless the sandvik folks have some process similar to CPM that gives wildly different properties, I have no reason to suspect that the chemical makeup of 12c27 is superior to that of 420HC. The increase in carbon is negligible and the more critical factor of vanadium that makes the CPM steels like S30V and S90V so good are absent in 12C27 vs 420HC. The addition of phosphorus and sulfur isn't that encouraging both decrease cutlery function in terms of toughness and wear resistance without giving anything in return. All that is written about it is that it is a very pure alloy meaning that the carbides are evenly distributed making a very fine edge. But there is no indication that given the same manufacture heat treat by buck that 12C27 preforms better than their 420HC.

The increase in carbon is negligible? Really? Difference of 0.14% in carbon content is significant enough to separate 440A from 440B. Sandvik has at least 3 distinctly different steels with mere 0.05% difference.

12C27 is 0.6% C and 13.5% Cr
13C26 is 0.65% C and 13% Cr
14C28N is 0.7% C and 14% Cr

If 0.05% difference in carbon content doesn't matter, Sandvik wouldn't bother selling them as different types.

 

[StretchNM]

Buck began the Alpha Hunters (et al) with 12C27 and then upgraded to 154CM. That may be why some of the boxes say 154CM but the knife will be made of another steel.

I doubt seriously (seriously) if there's a marked difference (noticeable in use) between 420HC and 12C27. BUT! There will be a noticeable difference between those two and 154CM. At least, I know I can tell between my 154CM knives and the other two, both in edge holding and in sharpening.