MT37P - AEB-L Mule Team Dropping Soon

[rooster81]

You want to look at the more detailed chart further down the post to see the specifics in terms of actual results at respective harness levels:

https://i0.wp.com/knifesteelnerds.com/w ... =757&ssl=1

AEB-L looks slightly tougher at higher hardness to the other steels mentioned.

In that graph as the hardness goes up toughness goes down. Unfortunately, the tests for LC200N and 14C28N didn’t go as far as AEB-L for various hardness.

Correct, you'd also want to cross reference the hardness and toughness with the edge retention tests if you're looking for specific performance and want to narrow it down:

https://i2.wp.com/knifesteelnerds.com/w ... =759&ssl=1

Edge retention goes up as hardness increases, while toughness goes down as hardness increases. My understanding is that there is an optimal range and balance with steel relative to hardness and heat treat. Dr. Larrin assigns 1-10 ratings to the various characteristics of steels based on the data and gives a great approximation of comparative performance, but if you want to nerd out you can dig deeper into the data (thanks Doc!). I'm guessing the numbered scores are close enough where it'd be difficult for most of us to be able to tell a difference in knives that are close in score.

The point though is that there is slightly more nuance if you look beyond the 1-10 scales. Two different steels could be a 9 on edge retention but one would objectively perform better than the other every time. Also, if one knife received a 4 score on edge retention and another received an 8 it doesn't necessarily mean the 8 will cut twice as much as the 4.

^ these are all non expert opinions from some guy on the internet.

[AlexRus]

Thank you Kristi!

[JRinFL]

You want to look at the more detailed chart further down the post to see the specifics in terms of actual results at respective harness levels:

https://i0.wp.com/knifesteelnerds.com/w ... =757&ssl=1

AEB-L looks slightly tougher at higher hardness to the other steels mentioned.

In that graph as the hardness goes up toughness goes down. Unfortunately, the tests for LC200N and 14C28N didn’t go as far as AEB-L for various hardness.

Thanks, that’s the graph I remember and based by comment on. 10 ft-pounds is very significant considering some common steels only have 5 ft-pounds total. I had forgotten that it also showed the similar steels getting much closer at similar hardness ratings. All except 420hc, of course.

I’m still looking forward to this release, however.

[RamZar]

You want to look at the more detailed chart further down the post to see the specifics in terms of actual results at respective harness levels:

https://i0.wp.com/knifesteelnerds.com/w ... =757&ssl=1

AEB-L looks slightly tougher at higher hardness to the other steels mentioned.

In that graph as the hardness goes up toughness goes down. Unfortunately, the tests for LC200N and 14C28N didn’t go as far as AEB-L for various hardness.

Thanks, that’s the graph I remember and based by comment on. 10 ft-pounds is very significant considering some common steels only have 5 ft-pounds total. I had forgotten that it also showed the similar steels getting much closer at similar hardness ratings. All except 420hc, of course.

I’m still looking forward to this release, however.

For about the same ~61 HRC, AEB-L has a toughness in foot-pounds of ~32 and 14C28N is ~30.

There hasn’t been a Sandvik 14C28N Mule Team.

If I had to pick between the very similar AEB-L and 14C28N (in Larrin’s Ratings both have the same scores in Toughness & Edge Retention) I’d definitely pick 14C28N because it has a much better Corrosion Resistance.

[Vaugith]

There hasn’t been a Sandvik 14C28N Mule Team.

Sal has mentioned a few times that he has had difficulty getting Sandvik to work with him.

[sal]

We did get some 19C.

sal

[rooster81]

I'm super excited for this one!

[Bolster]

So: It looks like our experience of an AEBL mule will depend largely on how high it's hardened. I wonder what hardness Spyderco will use has used.

[JRinFL]

You might be able to get a close guess based on any information BBB has posted about his AEB-L heat treat recipe.

[rooster81]

So: It looks like our experience of an AEBL mule will depend largely on how high it's hardened. I wonder what hardness Spyderco will use.

Should be similar to 52100, 1084, and other similar steels unless the hardness is cranked up, right? Seems unlikely they'd go much over the 61-62 range?

[Bolster]

You might be able to get a close guess based on any information BBB has posted about his AEB-L heat treat recipe.

I wasn't able to find much of anything, sorry. I looked for awhile (lazy researcher).

This thread sounds like BBB is proposing hardness >62:
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=70973&p=1662512

[tcarltonw]

We did get some 19C.

sal

Appreciate the info Sal!

[tcarltonw]

You might be able to get a close guess based on any information BBB has posted about his AEB-L heat treat recipe.

I wasn't able to find much of anything, sorry. I looked for awhile (lazy researcher).

This thread sounds like BBB is proposing hardness >62:
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=70973&p=1662512

... and appreciate the digging Bolster

[Bolster]

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=70973&p=1662512

Page 11, sounds like BBB was not involved with the HT for the mule? BBB says "If another AEB-L run is done, I would like more involvement if possible" and Sal responds "I believe the Mules are already done. If reaction is good and our customers (ELU) want more AEB-L, I'll get you involved."

Someone want to verify my read of the thread ^ on the above?

Also, same thread, Steeltoez says: "My urban was Rockwell tested at 58.3" and he's referring to the AEB-L version.

So what does the above imply?

[TomAiello]

So what does the above imply?

That we all need to test this AEB-L Mule to find out for ourselves. :)

[Bolster]

So what does the above imply?

That we all need to test this AEB-L Mule to find out for ourselves. :)

I take it you are equally interested in the upcoming mule whether it's run (relatively) hard or soft ? I'm excited to spend $80+ if it's run to the hard side. Haven't decided yet, if it's run on the soft side. Probably yes. But please feel free to persuade me that a softer treat is worthy of the spend.

[JRinFL]

I wish the Mule Hrc was published for each run as I think it is important to know for testing, unless they are attempting more of blind test.

As I have said, I'm in for at least one, in part to test a theory I have about my actual needs vs my wants as far as steel choice goes. "Lesser" steels may be all I truly need.

[GarageBoy]

I remember the urban not being that hard. Curious about this iteration

[attila]

Interestingly, someone stated that theirs “had to be around 62 HRC” based on their experience with it. I haven’t seen any HRC tests, but I’d like to know what it actually was.

[TomAiello]

I take it you are equally interested in the upcoming mule whether it's run (relatively) hard or soft ?

I am. Honestly, my experience with AEB-L (and 12c27) is that when run soft in a fixed blade it performs well because it's tougher (fewer chips). It's not a steel that holds an edge as well as most of the steels I use regularly, even if it's at the high end of hardness, so I prefer it to be softer for a fixed blade platform, because I expect to use it in a way that will chip a harder edge quite often. I have never been able to use this class of steel without frequent sharpening anyway, so I'd rather have it be tougher but need sharpening more often. I have some relatively high hardness AEB-L fixed blades (Bradford Guardian @ 61 HRC and paring knife) in the same blades that I have in other steels (M390, 4v, Cruwear, etc) and I've found that I prefer the other steels to the high hardness AEB-L. I'd love to play around with lower hardness (i.e. higher toughness) AEB-L and see if that appeals to me more.