are all Buck knives their 420HC

[Morrow]

Didn't Case go to surgical stainless steel??? IMO Surgical is a no go...

There isn't one steel that falls under the classification of "surgical steel" but it is however synonymous now with cheap stainless steel. Many knives marked "surgical stainless" were/are 420 regardless of HT.

[mbjannusch]

I don't pretend to be a steel expert so I have to look things up and from what I've read the recipe for "surgical stainless steel" has specific quantities of key elements. Weather that equates to 420HC or its already 420HC to start with I don't know. What I do know is, that anything I have ever seen that says Surgical stainless steel has turned out to be a piece of crap.

Brace yourselves, But even Case knives went down the hill, when they changed their knife steel. IMO

[Morrow]

I don't pretend to be a steel expert so I have to look things up and from what I've read the recipe for "surgical stainless steel" has specific quantities of key elements. Weather that equates to 420HC or its already 420HC to start with I don't know. What I do know is, that anything I have ever seen that says Surgical stainless steel has turned out to be a piece of crap.

Brace yourselves, But even Case knives went down the hill, when they changed their knife steel. IMO

It depends on what application we're talking about in regards to "surgical stainless steel." For actual medical applications a variety of steels are used with the only real common trait (besides being steel) is extreme corrosion resistance. They are also almost always disposable so things knife people care about aren't important...edge retention..ease of sharpening etc.

I agree with you though that most times anything labeled "surgical stainless steel" is to be avoided. Case's SS isn't terrible but I don't find myself buying any of it. I do however buy Bucks with 420HC.

[Jeff O]

I agree with you though that most times anything labeled "surgical stainless steel" is to be avoided. Case's SS isn't terrible but I don't find myself buying any of it. I do however buy Buck's with 420HC.

Agreed.

[mbjannusch]

I Love 420HC and will usually choose it over the "premium steels"...

[Obsessed with Edges]

I don't pretend to be a steel expert so I have to look things up and from what I've read the recipe for "surgical stainless steel" has specific quantities of key elements. Weather that equates to 420HC or its already 420HC to start with I don't know. What I do know is, that anything I have ever seen that says Surgical stainless steel has turned out to be a piece of crap.

Brace yourselves, But even Case knives went down the hill, when they changed their knife steel. IMO

They didn't change anything about their steel. It's the same stuff they've been using for a long time. They branded it 'Case Tru-Sharp' (sometimes called 'Tru-Sharp Surgical Stainless'), but it's been the same 420HC for at least a couple decades, if not longer. Case has verified this, when asked. There've been a few posts in the Traditional forum about this. From a usability standpoint, the biggest difference I see between Case's version, and Buck's, is that Case's tends to hang on to wire edges more tenaciously, so it takes a little longer to clean those up. And that can easily be attributed to the difference in the heat treat. Otherwise, one gets just as sharp as the other.

The generic 'surgical stainless' moniker is as non-specific as it could possibly be, and has often been applied to literally any stainless steel with relatively high chromium content (beyond the minimum ~12% or so, to be called 'stainless'). It's even been used to describe 300-series steels, often used for plumbing, nuts/bolts/screws, tableware (knives/forks/spoons) and liners/bolsters on many knives. So, if a knife is labelled as just 'surgical stainless', it can imply a huge range of either good or not-so-good quality. I remember a lot of Parker-branded, Japanese-produced knives back in the '90s or earlier that were labelled that way. They were wicked slicers, and I'd bet the steel was very similar to 420HC. Edges on those knives looked & cut very similarly to the edges seen on current Bucks, and sharpen up as easily.

[David Martin]

Yes, agreed, 'attributed to the difference in heat treat'. Specifically, It could be Buck's cryogenic cycle. As this greatly improves cutlery steel and helps to prevent burr formation. DM

[knarfeng]

I think the question is already well answered, but I will add the following:

I have measured ~ 4 Buck 420HC blades. They each measured 59HRC.
I have measured several Case un-krinked blades. They measured 55HRC.

I find the difference in hardness noticeable in everyday use.

Buck used to publish their hardness spec. It was 58 ±1 HRC.

[mbjannusch]

They didn't change anything about their steel. It's the same stuff they've been using for a long time. They branded it 'Case Tru-Sharp' (sometimes called 'Tru-Sharp Surgical Stainless'), but it's been the same 420HC for at least a couple decades, if not longer. Case has verified this, when asked. There've been a few posts in the Traditional forum about this. From a usability standpoint, the biggest difference I see between Case's version, and Buck's, is that Case's tends to hang on to wire edges more tenaciously, so it takes a little longer to clean those up. And that can easily be attributed to the difference in the heat treat. Otherwise, one gets just as sharp as the other.

The generic 'surgical stainless' moniker is as non-specific as it could possibly be, and has often been applied to literally any stainless steel with relatively high chromium content (beyond the minimum ~12% or so, to be called 'stainless'). It's even been used to describe 300-series steels, often used for plumbing, nuts/bolts/screws, tableware (knives/forks/spoons) and liners/bolsters on many knives. So, if a knife is labelled as just 'surgical stainless', it can imply a huge range of either good or not-so-good quality. I remember a lot of Parker-branded, Japanese-produced knives back in the '90s or earlier that were labelled that way. They were wicked slicers, and I'd bet the steel was very similar to 420HC. Edges on those knives looked & cut very similarly to the edges seen on current Bucks, and sharpen up as easily.

Seems as though you may be a Case fan( maybe just a bit) But I have spoken to several Case collectors that won't buy the newer knives starting right around the early 2000s. They all say the knives went down hill when they changed the blade steel. I don't collect Case or any other brand knife for that matter. In my experience I stay away from surgical stainless marked knives. As far as 300 series knives, I have never seen anything describe the blade steel as surgical stainless. Schrade and Camillus made knives for Buck, and if you have any of those you know the blades aren't stainless. Camillus made Buck knives all the way up to 2000. After that Buck took the knives in house and I would imaging they went with the current in house steel, and that was 420HC.

[pinnah]

MB, the Schrade & Camillus made 300s weren't stainless? Are you sure? Now that would be super interesting. I know both companies made stainless as well as carbon and that with Schrade it was 440A from roughly the 70s to mid to late 80s when they switched to 420HC. But I had no idea that the 300s they made were carbon.

Regarding Case SS, I have only 1 case and Knarfangs description jives with my experience. My Case is more like my 420HC Bucks but does loose its edge faster when carving. But, it is still more like Bucks 420HC than, say either Bucks 440C (much harder) or Victorinox's Inox or Camillus'a 440A (both hold wicked wire edges for me). I've no problem believing Cases SS is 420HC with an inferior heart treatment.

[mbjannusch]

I may have misspoke on the 300 series knives made for Buck, but I have a few Schrade and Camillus knives that aren't stainless, that was where I got the idea from...

[Obsessed with Edges]

At least some of the old Camillus-made 300 knives had stainless blades and carbon backsprings. I have one of the Camillus-made 307s configured as such. The springs take a very dark, even patina, and the blades remain as shiny as ever. I've never heard of any of the 300-series Bucks featuring carbon steel blades, though.

[Obsessed with Edges]

Seems as though you may be a Case fan( maybe just a bit) But I have spoken to several Case collectors that won't buy the newer knives starting right around the early 2000s. They all say the knives went down hill when they changed the blade steel. I don't collect Case or any other brand knife for that matter. In my experience I stay away from surgical stainless marked knives. As far as 300 series knives, I have never seen anything describe the blade steel as surgical stainless. Schrade and Camillus made knives for Buck, and if you have any of those you know the blades aren't stainless. Camillus made Buck knives all the way up to 2000. After that Buck took the knives in house and I would imaging they went with the current in house steel, and that was 420HC.

I know for certain, no changes were made to Case's stainless in their recent history, especially as recent as 2000. I have Case stainless knives going back as far as 1980, and haven't seen any differences in steel appearance or performance, or how they sharpen up. The '70s and earlier knives were different in many respects (flat grinds, thicker edge grinds, and different edge finish). Collectors do tend to favor those older ones, but it has more to do with the aesthetics of those knives, and also that many of those older patterns were widely available in carbon steel. The perceived 'change' in steel may've had something to do with Case's shifting many patterns from carbon to stainless steel in later years (many collectors heavily favor Case's carbon 'CV' steel over the stainless). But the stainless steel since then ('80s and later), has always been the same stuff. Don't know what perception some have regarding other changes that've might've happened. I've actually favored Case's offerings in the post-2000 era, as they did make a better effort at more acute edge grinds (much like Buck did with their 'Edge 2000' changes). I avoided some of Case's knives during the '90s, as the edge grinds were a disappointment at that time. Steel makeup hasn't changed in at least 30 years, though. Of that, I'm sure.

BTW, the reference to the '300-series' steels, as I intended in my earlier reply about 'surgical stainless', is not referencing the steel in the Buck 300-series knives. It's a reference to steels named in the '300' class of stainless (such as 304 stainless steel, 316 stainless steel, etc.). Nothing to do with the 440A/420HC that was used in the 300-series Bucks from Camillus. In this particular forum, I can see how that would be confusing, in retrospect.

[knarfeng]

I've never seen nor heard of a carbon steel bladed Buck 300 series knife. 300Bucks would have to have the final word on that one, though.

According to Case, they have never changed the Tru-Sharp alloy composition. However, you might look at this thread, which shows that there has been some variation over the last 65 years.

http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/sh...el-for-WR-Case

[Plumberdv]

I don't normally chime in on these steel discussions, but I have a number of older Buck (pre-inhouse) slippies and I noticed that most, if not all, of the used ones have a fair amount of "patina" on the springs but none on the blades at all. If the blades weren't stainless of some sort, I'd expect them to show the same thing.

[300Bucks]

As stated, some Camillus contract Buck 300 series knives have carbon springs. No factory production carbon blade issues, have I ever encountered or heard about. I do not have listing of dates and models for the carbon springs. Guess I should do that eventually.... 300

[mbjannusch]

I may have misspoke on the 300 series knives made for Buck, but I have a few Schrade and Camillus knives that aren't stainless, that was where I got the idea from...

Did anybody read this, I miss spoke, and was thinking of the springs in the Camillus and Schrade contracted knives, in addition to other knives produced by these companies. There shouldn't be any misunderstanding, just read the thread.

[pinnah]

MB, read a thread? Are you crazy, man? That would take all the fun out of forums!

I think the question is already well answered, but I will add the following:

I have measured ~ 4 Buck 420HC blades. They each measured 59HRC.
I have measured several Case un-krinked blades. They measured 55HRC.

I find the difference in hardness noticeable in everyday use.

Buck used to publish their hardness spec. It was 58 ±1 HRC.

Knarfeng, a link a couple of questions....

First the link... Buck still has numbers posted on their FAQ page. They're currently saying 58-61 Rc.
http://www.buckknives.com/index.cfm?event=why.faq

Some questions about comparing current 420HC to older 440C....

I found some old threads by you from the 2008 time frame in which you were testing Rc values for several knives. I recall you had a 60s vintage 112 with 440C but couldn't find anyplace where you tested it. Do you have any idea what Rc value Buck used to temper 440C to?

More to the point... My understanding is that blades dull primarily from either a) chipping (more likely if the steel is very hard) or b) the edge folding over (more likely if the steel is less hard/brittle). [see: http://zknives.com/knives/articles/wssteeling.shtml]

I also understand that wood carving tends to put tremendous lateral stress on blades. [asserted by Talamadge among others here: http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/sh...828-Steel-FAQ]

I've noticed that when carving, my 440C Bucks hold an edge longer than my 420HC Bucks and carbon steel knives, but I can't restore the 440C blades with stropping alone like I can with the 420HC and carbon steel. I can bring back the 440C blades by touching them up with 600 grit stone (Lansky - Back bevel is 17 degrees and cutting edge is 20)

Is the likely scenario that the old 440C was tempered too hard (becomes brittle) and that this combined with a 20 edge and wood carving is causing the edge to fracture, thus requiring stone sharpening to restore?

Or it more likely that the that edge is folding and that my stropping technique & compound need to be improved to be able to realign 440C (even though I can with 420HC and carbon)?

Thanks for any insight you could shed.

[BG42EDGE]

Regarding 440C......the old stuff was less consistent than the blades of today, so individual knives can vary a lot--and yes, some of them have some of the problems you mention.

I understand (have heard in the past) that Buck does not sharpen the 440C to Edge 2000 specs like they do with more recent steels.

Must be a reason for that.

[Alberta Ed]

Buck's 420HC is tough, highly stain-resistant, takes a fine edge and is easier to sharpen than many of the so-called super-steels like S30V. Most of those will hold an edge longer but for day to day use, 420HC is perfectly good, and much more affordable.