Best PM2 in either M390/204P/20CV

[Bloke]

Of the three steels you mention, I reckon the only thing that’s likely to distinguish one from the other is how they have been sharpened.

[dan31]

Bento Box M390. Problem solved.

[Tiquito]

From the ones I have, my opinion is that in real world use any difference you’d notice is from a difference in how it’s sharpened. I don’t think there is any legit way for someone to say one batch is meaningfully better than another. I don’t anyone here has a significant sample size of each to make a legit conclusion even if they believed the personally perceived a difference.

[desmodue]

I'm sure that with strict controls it would be possible to differentiate performance of those 3 versions. As a "typical" user whatever that is...I can't tell any difference. Buy whichever one you can find or the color scales you like.

The OEM scales on mine are long gone, sold at what now seems like the peak PM 2 sprint craze. I was shocked at what people would pay for the stock colored G10 scales, especially the bidding on the Para 3 Rex 45 scales.

[Gtscotty]

About the only resource I could find was a guy's spreadsheet with results from his Youtube cutting tests (sorry don't recall the channel right now). He seems to have a reasonable system.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... =990688885

From his numbers M390 consistently outperforms 20CV by a pretty good margin in his cutting tests.

Unfortunately he only has rockwell numbers for a couple PM2 samples in M390, both coming in at 62 and 62.5. As I recall for the other two steels, I have seen numbers more in the 60-61 range, which seems less than ideal.

I don't think I would base too much on that data, the variance in there crazy, kind of a random number generator.

[TomAiello]

I own the 20cv and m390. I can't tell the difference between them. I prefer my m390 because I've dressed it in the amazing scales I got from Aramis Akhmedov (he makes the best aftermarket scales in the world, in my opinion, and I've owned lots of different aftermarket scales).

I own the military in m390 and 204p, and I actually do have a preference for the 204p there, but my guess is that it's just in my head, and if I did some controlled testing they'd be the same.

[Eli Chaps]

About the only resource I could find was a guy's spreadsheet with results from his Youtube cutting tests (sorry don't recall the channel right now). He seems to have a reasonable system.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... =990688885

From his numbers M390 consistently outperforms 20CV by a pretty good margin in his cutting tests.

Unfortunately he only has rockwell numbers for a couple PM2 samples in M390, both coming in at 62 and 62.5. As I recall for the other two steels, I have seen numbers more in the 60-61 range, which seems less than ideal.

I don't think I would base too much on that data, the variance in there crazy, kind of a random number generator.

I missed that link before. Yeah, any "data" from those guys doesn't mean squat to me. After their roles in the lionSTEEL fiasco I pay them zero attention.

Turn off YouTube and go have fun with your knives. :)

[chrisjohn]

M390.

[chrisjohn]

Good luck finding one.

I'd get a K390 Police.

[salimoneus]

Good luck finding one.

I'd get a K390 Police.

I have PM2s in all three steels, they are still NIB and just looking to bring one into the regular rotation. Leaning towards M390, the heat treatments seem to be consistently more ideal.

[Accutron]

Peters confirmed the bad Lionsteel HT. The guy who did the Rockwell testing isn't a member of the knife community, and his technical background has been fully vetted.

That table is by far the most comprehensive database of knife HRC currently available, and there is no valid reason to question its veracity. There's certainly nothing 'random' about the numbers, and they fall within expected norms for the given manufacturers and steels. They also coincide with independent tests by BBB and others, as well as the HRC targets occasionally stated by Sal on here and BF.

[TomAiello]

Does someone have a link to a discussion of this Lionsteel issue? I'm totally unaware of it. I only own a few Lionsteel knives (less than 5, certainly) and have never had bad experiences with them.

[Eli Chaps]

Peters confirmed the bad Lionsteel HT. The guy who did the Rockwell testing isn't a member of the knife community, and his technical background has been fully vetted.

That table is by far the most comprehensive database of knife HRC currently available, and there is no valid reason to question its veracity. There's certainly nothing 'random' about the numbers, and they fall within expected norms for the given manufacturers and steels. They also coincide with independent tests by BBB and others, as well as the HRC targets occasionally stated by Sal on here and BF.

Yes, Peters did verify it but their handling of that entire situation went way beyond that one knife. There were video apologies, even though in some cases they are no longer up. There was a small vendor who got called out in extremely negative ways and it was completely uncalled for.

They also had tests done that as I recall, didn't support their assertions and then attacked the testing.

Steve got his rocks off attacking the community and it got old real quick. I even agreed with him on some things but his conduct was ridiculous.

Also, and again, there will always be variance in batch treated and tested blades.

I stand behind my original assertion that the end user, all things being equal with geometery, will not notice a difference.

[Pokey]

I think short of rockwell testing data, most opinions here are purely subjective and probably based more on the action that the blade performance. I seriously doubt anyone can look you in the eye and tell you the KJ 20CV is better than the BBS M390 as far as cutting performance or sharpenability goes.
The three steels are 99.5% the same steel so heat treat is the biggest variable. Since most of these runs were less than 1000 +/- units, heat treating was probably done at the same time so I doubt there is any variability between the heat treat.
All three steels will perform **** near the same.
Don't overthink this. Just buy one and enjoy.
The only M390s were the smurf blue Bento Box Shop and the red DLT Trading runs.
204P was a REC run in Olive Green with a brown/tan DLC coating (big bucks on secondary) and 20CV was a Knife Joy neon green run.
None are currently in production so the secondary market is your only option for a PM2 in one of these steels.

But wait, there’s more!

[Chuck James]

This is the one I've beat on the most and it's held up very very well....20CV.

I'd very much like to have one with M390 to try out as well.

[TkoK83Spy]

204P...because it's less common and the scales are an awesome, and pretty unique shade of green.

[Chuck James]

204P...because it's less common and the scales are an awesome, and pretty unique shade of green.

I do like that green.

[Deadboxhero]

These steels have the same chemistry, any nuisances will come down to differences in how you sharpen, and how sharp they are when you started. Next is whatever hardness range your exact knife is at. So until thats ruled out, its silly to argue about something that's basically the same.

The same steel will have batch to batch variation as well within a tolerance.

So don't argue about things that are basically statistical scatter.

[Tucson Tom]

You can't go wrong with any of them. I carry my 20CV often and it always works real good and cuts stuff.

I think the advice of going by scale color is probably the soundest -- or going for whichever one you can get your grubby hands on at a price you find agreeable.

[salimoneus]

These steels have the same chemistry, any nuisances will come down to differences in how you sharpen, and how sharp they are when you started. Next is whatever hardness range your exact knife is at. So until thats ruled out, its silly to argue about something that's basically the same.

The same steel will have batch to batch variation as well within a tolerance.

So don't argue about things that are basically statistical scatter.

Firstly, I literally covered every single point you made in my initial post.

Secondly, I'm not arguing anything. I'm just looking for data and opinions from people with actual real world experience. You are free to believe everything is the same simply because the composition says it should be equivalent, but I prefer to dig a little deeper. I'm just overly curious to a fault I guess.

But thanks for your thoughts and the scolding.