1080 for first serious go round?

V

vikingextreme93

Joined
Nov 2, 2006
Messages
250
Alrighty I have read alot of good stuff and feel I got a decent start on knowledge, Now to start applying! Just wondering what a good inexpensive choice would be for refining and working on my first complete knife build (heat treat myself included) I checked around and it looks like 1080 seems to be a very good low cost choice. Just wondering other input? 1095 also right there? Pros and cons help please. I did a search and the 1080 posts in the past are far and few between as well as lacking input from more than one or two knifemakers. Thanks!
 
I prefer to work with 1095 bieng a begginer without a heat oven. I have played around with sending things to be heat treated but like 1095 because its so easy to heat treat. I'm shure the more experienced guys will chime in with bettter info but dont be afraid to jump into using some 1095 as it works great.
 
1080 does in fact have some advantages when heat treating yourself. It also makes a very good knife blade . A very good choice for the beginner.
 
1080 "replaced" 1084 from some suppliers a year or two ago when availability of the latter plummeted. Some places switched to 1075 instead. That's why you don't see it mentioned here a lot.

It is what's called a "eutectoid" steel, meaning the carbon is there in just the right amount chemically.

It's a better steel to start with than the "more difficult to get heat treated right" 1095, IMO.
 
1080 is a fine knife steel, very easy to forge and to heattreat. be sure to read K. Cashens heattreat for 1084 steel www knivesby.com
 
Hmm 1080 is easier to heat treat than the 1095 you say. Good to know, I got turned on to 1095 by a guy who started me out and havent used 1080. Im going to have to see if my local supply guy has some.
 
Jim, 1095 has a little excess carbon, so it needs more of a soak. That's tougher to do for someone new to this and without a furnace (need good control is my point). It also has to be quenched VERY quickly to get the most out of it, on the order of 1 second to get it below 900F from the time you start it in the quench.

It also likes to crack. It's a shallow hardening steel and can build a lot of stresses quenching. You 'll hear of "the dreaded ping" of HT self destruction more often with 1095 than pretty much any other steel.

It is a great steel, but it needs to be handled properly if you want to get all its potential realized. You may get a good blade, but more likely not everything it could be. It is also prone to turning south quickly if you don't get it right. As such I feel it is better to start on something a little easier for a novice, who could use a little more room on the dance floor, so to speak. 1084/1080/1075 is excellent for someone starting out (or as their only steel ever) and can make one helluva blade. Many, many people pass their ABS JS testing with "1080-ish" steel.

This is my opinion. Others mileage may vary.
 
It's a good steel to start off with. Another is O1 as it comes precision ground and spherodised annealed -which makes it easy to grind.
 
I have had a few problems with HT already and this is good advice. It seems like switching over for me would be good. I'm not selling knives but I would still like to get the best results for my time and effort. I am trying to focus on blade shaping, bevel grinding, and hadle work for the moment but am trying to pick up as much about HTing as possible. Theres so much information out there to get through but I love it.
 
Yes, as mentioned by all, 1080/1086 is generally considered easier to HT for a number of reasons. I prefer it.

It's interesting to note, however, that there seems to be some 'carbon inflation' hitting these simple carbon steels, meaning that when you buy 1095 and have a piece analyzed, you might well find it actually only has .86 or .88 carbon in reality. I bought a large quantity of "1075" that, when analyzed, only had something like .67 carbon. I don't know if this is industry wide, but I've learned that the "acceptable range" of actual carbon content is much wider today than it was 30 years ago, at least when compared with ranges specified in my "ASM Atlas of Isothermal Transformation" from that time. When complaining to the supplier, I was told this is "normal".
In short, I suspect (without having performed an industry-wide study of actual carbon content in plain carbon steels) a lot of folks using "1095" and loving its characteristics are very possibly actually using something closer to the favorite 1084/1086.
 
JCaswell said:
It's interesting to note, however, that there seems to be some 'carbon inflation' hitting these simple carbon steels, meaning that when you buy 1095 and have a piece analyzed, you might well find it actually only has .86 or .88 carbon in reality. I bought a large quantity of "1075" that, when analyzed, only had something like .67 carbon. I don't know if this is industry wide, but I've learned that the "acceptable range" of actual carbon content is much wider today than it was 30 years ago, at least when compared with ranges specified in my "ASM Atlas of Isothermal Transformation" from that time.
Click to expand...


I think I remember reading somewhere on the forums that the 1084 that Aldo Bruno is selling actually analyzed with .88 C, which was higher than some of the 1095 tested!

Would this imply that HT requirements for 1084 at this %C would be more akin to the steps of 'conventional' 1095?
 
The increased manganese of Aldo's steel over AISI 1095 is an important difference, Mr. Purple. It affects the synergy markedly.

For the newbies who may not have seen this before, here is a great primer on metallurgy for the bladesmith. Created by a college professor friendly to the knife world, it is something all knifemakers can benefit from to even just get an overview of what goes on in steel. I recommend everyone take the few minutes to download it and burn it to a disc for future reference, even if you have no intention of reading it through right now. It's even worth taking the disc to Office Depot or wherever and spending the $20 or so to have the 200+ pages printed out.

http://mse.iastate.edu/fileadmin/www.mse.iastate.edu/static/files/verhoeven/7-5.pdf
 
For what it is worth, I have worked with W2, 1095, 15n20, 1060, 1084, 1080, 1095, O1, L6, 5160, 52100 and few others over the years. I have settled down with 1084, 1095, O1 and L6. If I were stranded somewhere and had to use just a fire, whatever oil I could find to quench into, and wanted the best knife I could make under those circumstances, I would go with the 1080 or the 1084. The heat treat is as simple as is gets and it forges and grinds very nicely, and while I can makes blades in my shop that will out-perform it, I have a few made from 1080 and 1084 that I have abused for years and keep going strong.
 
Hey Kev, was wondering when you'd show up! Where the heck ya been? ;) So what are your thoughts for heat treating 1084? It's not like you to post a simple comment like that and NOT go into detail!:eek: :D

I completely overlooked the Manganese content, Mike... I should know better by now. Must be the metal plate in my head. It's content would help to explain why getting anything even vaguely like a hamon has been impossible, as well.

A word of caution regarding the link that Mike posted... take it slowly, and digest each little bit before plunging forward! I actually forced myself to put the text away for a bit, as I was skimming it and not getting the whole picture, and then wondering why the next three pages didn't make any sense!
 
I also strongly endorse 1084 and 1080 which has been pretty much the only steel I have forged for the last year aside from some 5160. I have had no problems with warping or cracking. It is very forgiving and easy to work w/o annealing after forging.

Anytime I see someone just starting out learning to forge they almost like clockwork go for 1095,52100 or 01. I guess they see the pros using it and fiqure they will also. You are asking for alot of problems if you start out with those steels. Don't ask me how I know that.:foot:
 
That leads me to a question, MrPurple. If one soaks plain high carbon steel at exactly the proper excess temperature for the correct amount of time, do all the grain boundaries coalesce and one ends up with monocrystalline steel? ;) Then what happens? :D
 
I'm working on it.

More importantly, will I be able to bend it back and forth 400 times before it fails?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top