double post

quote:

Why use a steel that provides superior cutting performance at 63-64 HRc at a sold to the consumer hardness of approximately 60 HRc? Is the performance at the lower hardness justifying the usually increased cost?

If a person chooses to focus only on the advantages of increasingly higher hardness levels w/o considering the disadvantages inherent in that focus (that being increasingly reduced toughness) that is perfectly fine-- but not everybody views it that way. Any hardness level chosen in any steel is a compromise, and many, myself included, would want toughness considered in that decision.

quote:

Originally posted by ryxlyx:

quote:

Why use a steel that provides superior cutting performance at 63-64 HRc at a sold to the consumer hardness of approximately 60 HRc? Is the performance at the lower hardness justifying the usually increased cost?

If a person chooses to focus only on the advantages of increasingly higher hardness levels w/o considering the disadvantages inherent in that focus (that being increasingly reduced toughness) that is perfectly fine-- but not everybody views it that way. Any hardness level chosen in any steel is a compromise, and many, myself included, would want toughness considered in that decision.

That's nice, but you fail to address the issue of cost.

If you seek high toughness with HRc levels around 59, why not save money and simply use one of the cheaper steels such as A2, O-1, or even S-7 (all fine steels, BTW); or how 'bout some of the W steels?

The whole reason for using steels like M2, M4, zdp-189 etc. is that they are supposed to be able to hold an edge at a high hardness level and perform better at the hardness. And that is why people are willing to pay more for them.

Is it more costly to harden 2 more points on a steel.
How much tuffness are we really talking about loosing by doing so?
I would like a very tuff knife...
I would like great edge retention ...

I don't want to spend an hour sharpening everyone it needs it.

OK! LOOK no one steel does it all.
Certain steels are more suited for certain applications.
It's why I own and carry multiple knives.

I usually carry a beater/ loaner
A medium use.
Light duty/ non-user

quote:

That's nice, but you fail to address the issue of cost.

If you seek high toughness with HRc levels around 59, why not save money and simply use one of the cheaper steels such as A2, O-1, or even S-7 (all fine steels, BTW); or how 'bout some of the W steels?

The whole reason for using steels like M2, M4, zdp-189 etc. is that they are supposed to be able to hold an edge at a high hardness level and perform better at the hardness. And that is why people are willing to pay more for them.

You have one definition for "performance", I have another. If, for example, A2 (which I use) and M4 were both hardened to 59, I would expect better performance in the M4 over the A2 that would to me be worth the extra cost-- M4 at 59 would be tougher than A2, and it would also hold an edge better than A2. I'm not suggesting optimal hardness for M4 is 59, I'm just saying that I'm going to receive some combination of toughness a/o better edge holding that to me is worth extra $$ paid for premium blades--

No, I don't think it is more expensive to produce a blade with higher RcH. The final hardness is a matter of the tempering cycle.

I have not owned a 63-64 RcH M-2 blade, so I don't have any first hand knowledge of the toughness, but any steel is going to be significantly tougher at 61 RcH than it is at 63.

The objective is performance. At 61 RcH, M-2 is MUCH tougher than 154CM, and is still a lot more wear resistant 154CM. If the blades were 63 RcH, they would be even more wear resistant, but significantly? Would it still be tougher than 154CM?

I dunno.

So at 61 RcH M-2 or M-4, Benchmade offers a blade that performs better all round, rather than one that just wears a long time but may chip if abused, and may cause a lot of customers trouble in sharpening. I think 61 RcH is a very effective compromise, especially for "tactical" knives which are meant for hard use.

That's all I Was say'n

quote:

Ryxlyx wrote...M4 at 59 would be tougher than A2, and it would also hold an edge better than A2

I too use both steels, maybe more than any others. A2 is not used because it is cheap. Yes, it might cost $20, or so, less per knife than S30V, M4 or 154CM, but it will also do things they won't...like chopping and prying. These are things that you get with the added toughness of A2. The trade-off is that you will have to sharpen A2 more often, but there again, if you need to, you can sharpen A2 in the field much easier than the others.

The bottom line for me is that the A2 coming out of Bark River Knives is doing exactly what I want it to and the M4 coming out of Benchmade is also doing exactly what I want it to...even though they are quite different, one from the other.

quote:

Originally posted by ryxlyx:
...
M4 at 59 would be tougher than A2, and it would also hold an edge better than A2

...

Where do you find data that indicates M4 at that hardness is tougher than A2 at that hardness?

And, as often happens, you neglect to consider that wear resistance drops as hardness is lowered for a given steel.

quote:

Originally posted by Po - The Dragon Warrior:
...any steel is going to be significantly tougher at 61 RcH than it is at 63.

The objective is performance. At 61 RcH, M-2 is MUCH tougher than 154CM, and is still a lot more wear resistant 154CM. If the blades were 63 RcH, they would be even more wear resistant, but significantly? Would it still be tougher than 154CM?

I dunno.

So at 61 RcH M-2 or M-4, Benchmade offers a blade that performs better all round, rather than one that just wears a long time but may chip if abused, and may cause a lot of customers trouble in sharpening. I think 61 RcH is a very effective compromise, especially for "tactical" knives which are meant for hard use.

Any steel is going to be "significantly tougher" huh? Where is a graph showing this "significance"? And what qualifies as "significant"?

And where are these M2 and M4 blades at 61 HRc?

Poo - the Puff-N-Stuff watcher - (There is no charge for nothing) - has already indicated a lack of ability to sharpen harder steels. No reason to continue stressing this lack of ability.