Spyderco Forums

Evil D wrote:The problem with the knife community is people want one knife to do everything. They want to shave their face and then pry a door off the hinges then scrape an engine gasket off and then go back to shaving their face and expect the steel to hold an edge through all that. If you give people a steel that will take a great edge for shaving, it probably won't hold it long enough for the other BS they wanna use their knife for. Then they complain that the steel is garbage and won't hold an edge.

^^This^^

My daily carry at work has been revolving between my FFG Delica 4 in VG10, a Kershaw Dividend in M390, and a Benchmade Bugout in S30V. All 3 are light, unobtrusive, and overkill for my daily cutting needs. Of course working in hospital admissions & registrations my knives only see use opening an occasional box or cutting packing strips on said boxes. I've also used them in lieu of scissors to cut portions of important medical information out of memos to post up somewhere visible. Far different uses from when I worked in the back at urgent care clinics, teching on an ambulance, or caring for soldiers in the field. While there are knives that can blur the lines between prybar & scalpel, I prefer carrying a knife better suited to the expected job at hand. As an added bonus this allows me to buy multiple knives - fueling my knife nut personality disorder.

And to steer back on topic, here is a pic of my one knife in AEB-L steel - Small Northern Hunter by L.T. Wright. I've only carried it on a couple of hiking trips and one campout. Steel was easy to get very sharp just using my Spyderco medium grit benchstone, followed up on the fine grit side of my Doublestuff stone. Used it to cut cordage, whittle some stakes, and some camp kitchen use. Stayed plenty sharp through all those tasks.

elena86 wrote:CPM-Cruwear and AEB-L just because they have superb balance of properties and very good edge stability.
Marius

FYI, those are two radically different steels. Cruwear was a product of the Crucible marketing campaign for vanadium over chromium. It still has about as much carbon as S35vn, which is a lot. Carbide pullout is actually more severe in vanadium steels because of the vanadium greater hardness.

FYI, those are two radically different steels. Cruwear was a product of the Crucible marketing campaign for vanadium over chromium. It still has about as much carbon as S35vn, which is a lot. Carbide pullout is actually more severe in vanadium steels because of the vanadium greater hardness.

Yes they are very different steels.

S35Vn has 1.35 % carbon. Cruwear is around 1.12%. Not a huge difference. The way it gets heat treated will make a larger difference.

Crucible marketing had nothing to do with the development of the steel. It was originally developed by Vasco Pacific ( Vascowear) and Crucible began making their version when Vasco Pacific got out of that side of the business. The composition was already set in stone so to speak and the demand was already there. Crucible did do a better job of catering to the cutlery industry than most other companies during that time frame .

Crucible then made it better with the powder process which enhanced it's grain structure making a tough, wear resistant steel even better for our industry. It is tougher, cleaner and the carbides are more evenly distributed than the ingot version and powder steels seem easier to me to grind and process.

As far as carbide pullout something tells me you don't understand it as well as you think you do. There are some good reasons for wanting vanadium carbides instead of chrome. Or Tungsten. Or Moly. There are other times one might want combinations of chrome and vanadium carbides.

I'm wondering how much experience you would have with Cruwear? If you are comparing Cruwear with S35VN I'd say not any experience. It is not for everybody or best at all applications it's true but it makes great Spydercos.

Joe

So, about 2 years later is AEB-L any closer to a production knife Sal?

I'm curious too. I actually considered bumping this thread myself a few days ago.

I think AEB-L would be an interesting steel for a Sprint Run or Exclusive.

Sign me up for this. I'd be down for trying out an AEB-L Endura (among other models).

If I were the boss, this would be on the docket.

I'll just leave this here:

http://knifesteelnerds.com/2018/03/16/m ... and-aeb-l/

Nate wrote: ↑

Wed May 30, 2018 1:16 pm

I'll just leave this here:

http://knifesteelnerds.com/2018/03/16/m ... and-aeb-l/

Thanks for sharing that link. It's interesting to see what's going on at the microscopic level.

I am not really sure how this whole AEB-L thing got started but from what I have seen from testing.

One of the worst steels made as far as edge holding goes, below AUS-8 and BD-1 and all others people tend to complain about so it would be backtracking to before the 440C days as far as performance goes.

Horrible to HT as it warps terribly.

Not enough carbon to create any Chromium Carbides.

Real performance won't be near what some people are trying to push people to believe, it's actually horrendous.

Maybe the fact that it is used in one of the most ubiquitous cutting tools in existence (safety razor blades)?

Maybe some people look at requirements and properties instead of preposterously low sample sizes?

Ankerson wrote: ↑

Thu May 31, 2018 12:16 pm

I am not really sure how this whole AEB-L thing got started but from what I have seen from testing.

One of the worst steels made as far as edge holding goes, below AUS-8 and BD-1 and all others people tend to complain about so it would be backtracking to before the 440C days as far as performance goes.

Why is edge retention the only property that matters?

Not enough carbon to create any Chromium Carbides.

That is an incorrect statement.

Real performance won't be near what some people are trying to push people to believe, it's actually horrendous.

That depends on what type of "real performance" people are claiming. There are many people that enjoy using knives from O1, 1095, and 52100. None of those steels have high wear resistance. They are easy to sharpen and have good toughness. AEB-L has higher toughness than the majority of commonly used stainless steels. It is extremely easy to sharpen. If you are comparing its wear resistance with S30V or even 154CM or 440C you are going to be disappointed. Calling its performance "horrendous" based only on edge retention is misguided.

Edited to add: Take the AEB-L thinner and harder than your "high edge retention" steels and it will cut longer and better.

Larrin wrote: ↑

Thu May 31, 2018 1:24 pm

Ankerson wrote: ↑

Thu May 31, 2018 12:16 pm

I am not really sure how this whole AEB-L thing got started but from what I have seen from testing.

One of the worst steels made as far as edge holding goes, below AUS-8 and BD-1 and all others people tend to complain about so it would be backtracking to before the 440C days as far as performance goes.

Why is edge retention the only property that matters?

Not enough carbon to create any Chromium Carbides.

That is an incorrect statement.

Real performance won't be near what some people are trying to push people to believe, it's actually horrendous.

That depends on what type of "real performance" people are claiming. There are many people that enjoy using knives from O1, 1095, and 52100. None of those steels have high wear resistance. They are easy to sharpen and have good toughness. AEB-L has higher toughness than the majority of commonly used stainless steels. It is extremely easy to sharpen. If you are comparing its wear resistance with S30V or even 154CM or 440C you are going to be disappointed. Calling its performance "horrendous" based only on edge retention is misguided.

Edited to add: Take the AEB-L thinner and harder than your "high edge retention" steels and it will cut longer and better.

Ha, that is classic. Thank you.

Edit to add:

HAHAHAHAHA! That is so great. You just rained on a parade that has been going for years. And the best part? You know what you're talking about and you just put a man in his place that collaborated a knife project with your father based on his popularity rather than his knowledge! And he's the main progenitor of this mentality? Hahaha! This is the greatest post I've read in a knife forum in a long time. Thank you again.

Also, Larrin, it would be very awesome if you contacted Luong La, aka Bluntcut, and tested his blades. I'd love to see what you had to say about what he's doing. Ankerson basically crapped all over his blades and i don't think it was justified. I'd absolutely love to see an unbiased, scientific result.

Hey Some1,

As stated elsewhere, you're entitled to your opinions, but this rudeness to Jim Ankerson is uncalled for. You may disagree with him but you should be able to voice your disagreement respectfully.

I'm just saying, if you keep going on in this vein, you probably won't get much out of your time here on the forum.

I’m not trying to put anyone in their place. I’m just discussing steel.

Larrin wrote: ↑

Thu May 31, 2018 1:24 pm

Ankerson wrote: ↑

Thu May 31, 2018 12:16 pm

I am not really sure how this whole AEB-L thing got started but from what I have seen from testing.

One of the worst steels made as far as edge holding goes, below AUS-8 and BD-1 and all others people tend to complain about so it would be backtracking to before the 440C days as far as performance goes.

Why is edge retention the only property that matters?

Not enough carbon to create any Chromium Carbides.

That is an incorrect statement.

Real performance won't be near what some people are trying to push people to believe, it's actually horrendous.

That depends on what type of "real performance" people are claiming. There are many people that enjoy using knives from O1, 1095, and 52100. None of those steels have high wear resistance. They are easy to sharpen and have good toughness. AEB-L has higher toughness than the majority of commonly used stainless steels. It is extremely easy to sharpen. If you are comparing its wear resistance with S30V or even 154CM or 440C you are going to be disappointed. Calling its performance "horrendous" based only on edge retention is misguided.

Edited to add: Take the AEB-L thinner and harder than your "high edge retention" steels and it will cut longer and better.

Actually it won't, I did those tests also using customs AND production blades over the years.

YES, it is easy to sharpen.

It's cheap and easy to grind for the makers.

All it is really is a strip steel designed for razor blades.

No, it doesn't have enough carbon to draw in the Chromium to make carbides, I got that directly from the people who make the steel, it was developed that way on purpose.

Anyhow I am done with this thread, not worth the effort.

Ankerson wrote: ↑

Thu May 31, 2018 2:53 pm

No, it doesn't have enough carbon to draw in the Chromium to make carbides, I got that directly from the people who make the steel, it was developed that way on purpose.

Anyhow I am done with this thread, not worth the effort.

You may have misunderstood what the Uddeholm representative said, or perhaps you were given bad information. AEB-L and 13C26 were designed to have a small volume of chromium carbides in the heat treated condition. I am not speculating, the micrographs are available to see here: http://knifesteelnerds.com/2018/03/16/m ... and-aeb-l/

I don’t believe I have been unkind in expressing my disagreement. I firmly believe that there are very few “horrendous” steels, only steels with different sets of properties and price points. I hope you reconsider your decision to disengage.

Larrin wrote: ↑

Thu May 31, 2018 3:04 pm

Ankerson wrote: ↑

Thu May 31, 2018 2:53 pm

No, it doesn't have enough carbon to draw in the Chromium to make carbides, I got that directly from the people who make the steel, it was developed that way on purpose.

Anyhow I am done with this thread, not worth the effort.

You may have misunderstood what the Uddeholm representative said, or perhaps you were given bad information. AEB-L and 13C26 were designed to have a small volume of chromium carbides in the heat treated condition. I am not speculating, the micrographs are available to see here: http://knifesteelnerds.com/2018/03/16/m ... and-aeb-l/

I don’t believe I have been unkind in expressing my disagreement. I firmly believe that there are very few “horrendous” steels, only steels with different sets of properties and price points. I hope you reconsider your decision to disengage.

Not worth the effort because the properties and development of AEB-L are too well known and have been for a very long time.

So it's not worth the effort going back over the same points over and over.

As far as I know no production maker is using 13C26 or AEB-L anymore, Kershaw used it for awhile however.

Ankerson wrote: ↑

Thu May 31, 2018 3:19 pm

Larrin wrote: ↑

Thu May 31, 2018 3:04 pm

Ankerson wrote: ↑

Thu May 31, 2018 2:53 pm

No, it doesn't have enough carbon to draw in the Chromium to make carbides, I got that directly from the people who make the steel, it was developed that way on purpose.

Anyhow I am done with this thread, not worth the effort.

You may have misunderstood what the Uddeholm representative said, or perhaps you were given bad information. AEB-L and 13C26 were designed to have a small volume of chromium carbides in the heat treated condition. I am not speculating, the micrographs are available to see here: http://knifesteelnerds.com/2018/03/16/m ... and-aeb-l/

I don’t believe I have been unkind in expressing my disagreement. I firmly believe that there are very few “horrendous” steels, only steels with different sets of properties and price points. I hope you reconsider your decision to disengage.

Not worth the effort because the properties and development of AEB-L are too well known and have been for a very long time.

So it's not worth the effort going back over the same points over and over.

As far as I know no production maker is using 13C26 or AEB-L anymore, Kershaw used it for awhile however.

Sandvik developed 14C28N for Kershaw because they wanted better corrosion resistance.