S110V vs S90V

[Bodog]

Say two blades have the same grinds, angles, and thickness with optimal heat treats for wear resistance performed.

Would one see a difference in real world abrasive wear resistance?

Adhesive wear resistance?

Is one tougher?

Stronger?

I know S110V should exhibit somewhat higher corrosion resistance.

What about price per foot?

Processing costs?

Availability?

Thanks for the answers.

[Ankerson]

S110V will have more abrasion resistance, real world use in my own experience over a variety of knives.

I also believe S110V is tougher, but that could be subjective.

S110V will cost a lot more per foot AND processing knife blades.

Availability will depend on runs, schedules etc.

[SpyderNut]

Isn't S90V also more of a bear to grind/drill compared to S110V? (I could've sworn I read that just recently).

[Ankerson]

Isn't S90V also more of a bear to grind/drill compared to S110V? (I could've sworn I read that just recently).

Other way around. :)

I have actually had knife makers tell me that S110V is a lot harder to work with than 10V is.

[Bodog]

So an S90V blade should cost less than an S110V blade with a correlated decrease in performance. Does the decrease in price and performance carry approximately the same ratio as S110V? To clarify, say two knives are the same in all respects except for the steel. The S90V blade costs 20% less to manufacture. Is there only a 10% reduction in performance? If there was a 30% reduction in overall performance then I'd think S110V would be a better steel. If there was only a 10% reduction in performance then S90V would be a better steel. I'm talking about large production of knives where you want to put the best steel in people's hands at the best price possible, not small scale production where people are willing to spend any amount to get the best performance possible.

[SpyderNut]

Isn't S90V also more of a bear to grind/drill compared to S110V? (I could've sworn I read that just recently).

Other way around. :)

I have actually had knife makers tell me that S110V is a lot harder to work with than 10V is.

Ah, thanks for the correction. :) (I imagine they're both no picnic to work with. They probably eat up belts like crazy too).

[Ankerson]

So an S90V blade should cost less than an S110V blade with a correlated decrease in performance. Does the decrease in price and performance carry approximately the same ratio as S110V? To clarify, say two knives are the same in all respects except for the steel. The S90V blade costs 20% less to manufacture. Is there only a 10% reduction in performance? If there was a 30% reduction in overall performance then I'd think S110V would be a better steel. If there was only a 10% reduction in performance then S90V would be a better steel. I'm talking about large production of knives where you want to put the best steel in people's hands at the best price possible, not small scale production where people are willing to spend any amount to get the best performance possible.

There are a lot of factors involved in pricing other than just the steel used.

[Bodog]

Isn't S90V also more of a bear to grind/drill compared to S110V? (I could've sworn I read that just recently).

Other way around. :)

I have actually had knife makers tell me that S110V is a lot harder to work with than 10V is.

Is that due to actual grindability or other variables like warpage during the heat treat process, getting appropriately thick stock, rolling into appropriate quality sheets?

[Ankerson]

Isn't S90V also more of a bear to grind/drill compared to S110V? (I could've sworn I read that just recently).

Other way around. :)

I have actually had knife makers tell me that S110V is a lot harder to work with than 10V is.

Ah, thanks for the correction. :) (I imagine they're both no picnic to work with. They probably eat up belts like crazy too).

Saw blades and drill bits too. :eek:

Have to cut some S110V and 10V to send out here soon, not looking forward to it. LOL

[Bodog]

So an S90V blade should cost less than an S110V blade with a correlated decrease in performance. Does the decrease in price and performance carry approximately the same ratio as S110V? To clarify, say two knives are the same in all respects except for the steel. The S90V blade costs 20% less to manufacture. Is there only a 10% reduction in performance? If there was a 30% reduction in overall performance then I'd think S110V would be a better steel. If there was only a 10% reduction in performance then S90V would be a better steel. I'm talking about large production of knives where you want to put the best steel in people's hands at the best price possible, not small scale production where people are willing to spend any amount to get the best performance possible.

There are a lot of factors involved in pricing other than just the steel used.

Yeah, that's why I'm trying to keep all things equal aside from the steel itself so that the other variables aren't a factor.

[Bodog]

I guess I'll be blunt and ask why Spyderco chose S90V for several of its latest models over S110V if S110V is a higher performing steel in the same class and the decrease in overall costs and ease of production of the steel itself is a negligible issue. I'm guessing that the cost to benefit ratio is better for S90V and I'm trying to work it out if that's the case. Put more top tier knives into more people's hands rather than put the highest tier knives into fewer people's hands due to excessive costs kind of thing

[Ankerson]

Nothing is really that clear cut.

[Donut]

Almost every S90V model was requested by a dealer.

So, they asked for it and they got it. I don't know if there was supply available of S110V at the time.

[Brock O Lee]

My honest opinion is that you will be hard pressed to notice a difference between the two if you used them for casual EDC.

You might notice the better edge retention of S110V if you cut a huge amount of abrasive materials on a regular basis.

I prefer M4 to both... But lets not open a new can of worms... :D

[Cliff Stamp]

Would one see a difference in real world abrasive wear resistance?

The difference in properties in these steels is so small that even materials tests have difficulty in telling them apart. For example here is the abrasive wear resistance (pin on disk) :

S90V : 2150/975 F : 61.5 HRC : 37 mg
S110V : 2150/975 F : 62.5 HRC : 34 mg

The wear resistance is measured by material loss in mg. These numbers are not statistically different. However compare this to the change in properties in S90V due to a variation in HT :

S90V : 2150/500 F : 59 HRC : 52 mg
S90V : 2150/975 F : 61.5 HRC : 37 mg

The wear resistance there changes by ~50% . Note the low tempered S90V did not have deep cooling hence the lower hardness due to retained austenite.

I know S110V should exhibit somewhat higher corrosion resistance.

How often do you hear people complaining about corrosion on S90V? People even use it to make salt water fillet knives.

--

In short, with proper hardening on both, with similar knives, it would be difficult to tell them apart as even materials data will struggle to see a difference. If however the HT varies from one knife to the next then that could easily make a large influence as would even small changes in geometry of quality of sharpening.

Just think about an edge at 0.018"/15 degrees vs one at 0.020"/16 degrees? Are you likely to even see that difference in the knives, it is hard enough to measure even it is so small. However the difference in stiffness is ~30% and the change it would make in edge retention could easily be larger than the difference between S30V and 420HC.

[bdblue]

I guess I'll be blunt and ask why Spyderco chose S90V for several of its latest models over S110V if S110V is a higher performing steel in the same class and the decrease in overall costs and ease of production of the steel itself is a negligible issue. I'm guessing that the cost to benefit ratio is better for S90V and I'm trying to work it out if that's the case. Put more top tier knives into more people's hands rather than put the highest tier knives into fewer people's hands due to excessive costs kind of thing

Spyderco also has used M390, CTS20 and CTS204 in recent models. They are all high performance steels and it will be hard for the average user to tell the difference in any of them. I have 4 of those 5 steels as well as M4 and I like them all. I have had to sharpen the S110V and M4 blades because I intentionally dulled them cutting a lot of cardboard. Neither was difficult to sharpen with good DMT diamond stones. My comparison test of S110V vs. M4 was very unscientific and M4 came out ahead. I have read other tests that were opposite.

[KevinOubre]

In my experience, there is no appreciable difference between S110V and S90V. On paper S110V has more carbide and thus higher corrosion resistance, but in practice with a pocket knife, you would have to cut an astronomical amount or material to see a functional difference. Same with corrosion resistance. I use my Southfork in the kitchen all the time and the S90V hasn't come close to discoloring. As for toughness, I haven't seen any real comparisons on that since both a on the more brittle end in terms of absolute toughness and many people haven't really bothered to do those tests, at least from what I have been able to find. Im sure Cliff could come up with something though. Also from what I have read, while both are expensive, S110V is even more expensive to produce and work with than S90V. Though, I believe that S90V is more available than S110V since it is used more.

[Ankerson]

In my experience, there is no appreciable difference between S110V and S90V. On paper S110V has more carbide and thus higher corrosion resistance, but in practice with a pocket knife, you would have to cut an astronomical amount or material to see a functional difference. Same with corrosion resistance. I use my Southfork in the kitchen all the time and the S90V hasn't come close to discoloring. As for toughness, I haven't seen any real comparisons on that since both a on the more brittle end in terms of absolute toughness and many people haven't really bothered to do those tests, at least from what I have been able to find. Im sure Cliff could come up with something though. Also from what I have read, while both are expensive, S110V is even more expensive to produce and work with than S90V. Though, I believe that S90V is more available than S110V since it is used more.

For most people that would buy the knives they will be about the same give or take depending on actual use etc.

I use both S90V and S110V in the kitchen and I can tell the difference, but that's subjective due to comparing customs and production knives.

Also just added a Custom in CPM S35VN @ 62.5 that I am using.

All of them are thin as in the .005" range behind the edge.

[Cliff Stamp]

In my experience, there is no appreciable difference between S110V and S90V. On paper S110V has more carbide and thus higher corrosion resistance, but in practice with a pocket knife, you would have to cut an astronomical amount or material to see a functional difference.

I assume you means higher wear resistance there, but quite frankly the difference between S110V and S90V in that respect is smaller than the compositional variances, let alone the process variation and this doesn't even factor in the random/systematic errors that are going to come into play in hand comparison cutting on non-standard materials. It simply isn't possible, anyone who is claiming to see that difference is just showing confirmation bias, the math is high school statistics.

Imagine if I give you a normal bathroom scale which measures +/- 0.5 lbs or so and I lay 10 glasses in front of you and tell you that five of them contain 1000 grains of sand and 5 contain 900 grains of sand. Now can you tell which ones are which given than 100 grains of sand weigh far less than 0.5 lbs? The scale just shows them all basically the same. In fact the first thing you might think on is that it is in fact easily possible that 900 grains of sand even weigh more than 1000 as not all grains are identical.

The same is true of cutting random material. Even if you do 1000 cuts with one knife and 900 cuts with another and you have some way of knowing they are the same sharpness when you stop, and you somehow take the uncertainty of that into account (which isn't easy) do you actually know that the first 900 out of the 1000 cuts "weight the same" as the 900 cuts you did with the other knife? It should be obvious that isn't at all the case even if the material is the same, you are not going to cut the same.

The amount of wear on a blade, even cutting the same material is going to be dependent on the force that you apply, the speed of the blade, the angle it makes - how consistent do you think these are from cut to cut? Even if you think you are really controlled, it is going to be ~10% or so and they keep adding up, every factor you think, it keeps added up.

Steve Harvey was one of the first public "testors" (people gave him knives to review) who admitted that even when doing controlled cutting on stock material (cardboard) he could tell apart S90V and 420 HRC in the same knife, anything beyond that was not certain. To a lot of people this seems unreasonable given the promotion of steels, but again a quick look at the materials data and some basic physics shows it is obvious. Plus if you do blind cutting it is really obvious.

I haven't seen any real comparisons on that since both a on the more brittle end in terms of absolute toughness and many people haven't really bothered to do those tests...

There isn't a lot of data that I have seen. Based on the carbide volume I would expect S110V to be less, but both are so low in toughness/stability it isn't a practical question. It would be like aggravating Mike Tyson, having him take a swing at you and wondering if the uppercut is going to be worse than the cross. In practical terms if either one lands you are not going to be having a good though, though in his prime his uppercuts were a thing of beauty to watch .

[Surfingringo]

Tyson cross vs uppercut = hospital vs. morgue. Sometimes a hundred grains of sand can be the difference. hah