1095...So what's the verdict?

cotdt said:
I don't know about that. Ancient steel also had vanadium, chromium, manganese, cobalt and nickel.

If you really want to eliminate all the variables you can just quench 1095 with water. For thicker blades I never get warping, only with blades thinner than 1/8"
Click to expand...

But is there not also the variable of micro-cracks in the steel from water quench and even more warping?
 
R.C.Reichert said:
But is there not also the variable of micro-cracks in the steel from water quench and even more warping?
Click to expand...

I read a paper once that said the microcracks had more to do with impurities in the steel than the actual quench. Rob at knifemaker.ca can use flourescent dyes to check for microcracks though. Personally it's never been a problem for me, I do bend tests and the water-quenched blades hold up fine.
 
cotdt said:
I read a paper once that said the microcracks had more to do with impurities in the steel than the actual quench. Rob at knifemaker.ca can use flourescent dyes to check for microcracks though. Personally it's never been a problem for me, I do bend tests and the water-quenched blades hold up fine.
Click to expand...

By water, do you mean like a brine? Can I still make 1/8" blades from 1095 and brine quench without trouble with cracks or severe warping?

On a side note, I do highly recommend Ranger Original's. They are very helpful and very nice people to deal with. I appreciate their service.:)
 
R.C.Reichert said:
By water, do you mean like a brine? Can I still make 1/8" blades from 1095 and brine quench without trouble with cracks or severe warping?
Click to expand...

Water and brine both work. I don't know which is better. 1/8" is just fine. You quench it with some agitation, pull it out just as it turns black, and check if it is straight. You can straighten it if it is not. Then put it back in the water until room temperature. I put it in something colder before tempering because the Mf of 1095 is below zero.
 
Josh Dabney said:
Is warp even a problem ? Meaning does it adversely affect the steel if you straighten a little warp right out of the quench or right out of the temper? IF so, how does that effect the performance of the blade ?
Click to expand...

As far as I understand it, as long as you straighten before Ms, it doesn't hurt anything. Now, how you go about straightening an edge that's turned into a snake before you're down to 400F or so is a good question. I've seen that happen with edges that are thin and I've never come up with anything better than re-HT and pray. I find it's easier to eliminate the variables that increase my chances of warpage by leaving things a little thicker and using an oil that extracts heat more evenly and quickly.

Is there another reason not to grind a blade thin before HT other than fear of warp or decarb?
Click to expand...

Fear of cracking? When you have a thin cross section being pulled all over the place by quenching stress, there is more of a chance of cracking. Not much can be done to fix a blade cracked in the quench.

Too those whose opinion is that your not making the best blade you can with 1095 unless your using a commercial quenchant- I'm taking this to mean that it's your opinion that reguardless of the situation (thickness of the blade especially) that it is IMPOSSIBLE to get a full martinsite transformation using canola oil ???
Click to expand...

Who said impossible? I'm pretty sure Matt and myself talked of "reducing variables" and improving consistency and repeatability of results. Part of the early focus of this thread came from R.C.'s statement:

I would like to be able to use 1075/1080, but for now I can only get it in 1/8" thickness. I want to forge some large bowie blades.
Click to expand...

Well, given the concerns from the OP, yes, it's much more difficult to get complete conversion with large bowie blades. So, based on that, I stand by my earlier comments. Once things get to 1/8" stock and very thin edges, it can be a very different deal.

I ask because to me this is NOT an apples to apples question. I can grind to any thickness I want before HT to compensate for the speed of the quench if it's going to achieve equal results.
Click to expand...

I'll just chalk this up to a philosophical difference. If you would like to add variables in order to work around something and raise the level of difficulty, have at it! In my non-knifemaking life I'm a geek, technical computer wizard, and problem solver. It's just a simple fact that the more variables that exist in a system, the more difficult it is to understand and predict the outcome of actions in said system. IMHO, making a good knife is hard enough without stacking the deck against myself, so I choose the more controllable, predictable route.

I honestly mean no offense Deker but 1 gallon of Canola at Walmart = about 8 bucks. 5 gallons of Parks #50 to my door from Patriqq = Approx. $ 180
Click to expand...
None taken. Cost of living near me may be higher and that makes a difference. Again, it goes back to things I've said earlier about doing the best you can with what you have available to you. If what you have available doesn't include the money to buy a useful tool, do the best you can until you get there. In my experiences, with the timing I've had, Parks #50 has been easy to come by and priced on par with mineral oil, peanut oil, ATF, etc. In one case it was even cheaper (I picked up 2 buckets of about 4 gallons each for $60 at Ashokan last year).

I am also aware that most would recommend using one of the other 10xx series steels but the question remains- Is it Possible or Impossible to get equal results to #50 using canola oil.
Click to expand...

That's not an apples to apples question. You're asking if you can achieve equal results from things that are not equal. Treated in exactly the same manner, these two oils will behave very differently, thus your outcome will be very different. Now, can you achieve acceptable results from canola oil (and to avoid any further philosophical debate on what's "acceptable " let's call acceptable "harder than a Walmart knife") sure you can. It takes extra care and more juggling of variables, but it can be done. Nobody's argued that. But, when we're talking about superlatives and best possible achievable output, it's possible to do better. To make it clear what I mean by "better", I'm using the following definition:

of superior suitability, advisability, desirability, acceptableness, etc.; preferable: a better time for action.
Click to expand...

Do I find a commercial quenchant to be more suitable? Yes. It's designed for the job in question. Advisable? Yup! It reduces variables, which makes a difficult thing a little easier. Desirable? Yes, the right tool for the job is usually desirable isn't it? Acceptable? Ok, somebody will pick a fight about this one I'm sure, but 3 out of 4 ain't bad right? :)


-d
 
Deker,

Thanks ALOT ! That is IMHO a very helpfull and clarifying post so I thank you for making it and answering my questions.

I probably should have mentioned this in my earlier post but I'm not above paying the $$ for Parks oil but I was considering going with McMaster Carr 11 second oil. I found myself thinking... How do I know that oil if fast enough ??? LOL. I suppose this is one of the things you guys mean when you say reducing variables.

Thanks again, Josh
 
deker said:
As far as I understand it, as long as you straighten before Ms, it doesn't hurt anything. Now, how you go about straightening an edge that's turned into a snake before you're down to 400F or so is a good question. I've seen that happen with edges that are thin and I've never come up with anything better than re-HT and pray. I find it's easier to eliminate the variables that increase my chances of warpage by leaving things a little thicker and using an oil that extracts heat more evenly and quickly.



Fear of cracking? When you have a thin cross section being pulled all over the place by quenching stress, there is more of a chance of cracking. Not much can be done to fix a blade cracked in the quench.



Who said impossible? I'm pretty sure Matt and myself talked of "reducing variables" and improving consistency and repeatability of results. Part of the early focus of this thread came from R.C.'s statement:



Well, given the concerns from the OP, yes, it's much more difficult to get complete conversion with large bowie blades. So, based on that, I stand by my earlier comments. Once things get to 1/8" stock and very thin edges, it can be a very different deal.



I'll just chalk this up to a philosophical difference. If you would like to add variables in order to work around something and raise the level of difficulty, have at it! In my non-knifemaking life I'm a geek, technical computer wizard, and problem solver. It's just a simple fact that the more variables that exist in a system, the more difficult it is to understand and predict the outcome of actions in said system. IMHO, making a good knife is hard enough without stacking the deck against myself, so I choose the more controllable, predictable route.


None taken. Cost of living near me may be higher and that makes a difference. Again, it goes back to things I've said earlier about doing the best you can with what you have available to you. If what you have available doesn't include the money to buy a useful tool, do the best you can until you get there. In my experiences, with the timing I've had, Parks #50 has been easy to come by and priced on par with mineral oil, peanut oil, ATF, etc. In one case it was even cheaper (I picked up 2 buckets of about 4 gallons each for $60 at Ashokan last year).



That's not an apples to apples question. You're asking if you can achieve equal results from things that are not equal. Treated in exactly the same manner, these two oils will behave very differently, thus your outcome will be very different. Now, can you achieve acceptable results from canola oil (and to avoid any further philosophical debate on what's "acceptable " let's call acceptable "harder than a Walmart knife") sure you can. It takes extra care and more juggling of variables, but it can be done. Nobody's argued that. But, when we're talking about superlatives and best possible achievable output, it's possible to do better. To make it clear what I mean by "better", I'm using the following definition:



Do I find a commercial quenchant to be more suitable? Yes. It's designed for the job in question. Advisable? Yup! It reduces variables, which makes a difficult thing a little easier. Desirable? Yes, the right tool for the job is usually desirable isn't it? Acceptable? Ok, somebody will pick a fight about this one I'm sure, but 3 out of 4 ain't bad right? :)


-d
Click to expand...

Good post.Thank you! :)
 
cotdt said:
Water and brine both work. I don't know which is better. 1/8" is just fine. You quench it with some agitation, pull it out just as it turns black, and check if it is straight. You can straighten it if it is not. Then put it back in the water until room temperature. I put it in something colder before tempering because the Mf of 1095 is below zero.
Click to expand...

I thought the problem with using water or to a lesser extent, brine, was the vapour jacket formation at high temps which prevents cooling of the steel fast enough to get under the pearlite nose. I also thought that the mostly austenitic blade will survive thermal shocks pretty well; after all, it is austenite.

Yes agitation will help but there's only something like a second to duck under the pearlite nose with 1095, right?

By the way I don't heat treat myself anymore! I'd like to... which is why I'm trying to learn.
 
Don Hanson III said:
Just to throw a wrench in the mess. Don Fogg quenchs 1095 in Brownell's Tough Quench....
Click to expand...

Sure Don, but like I said, #50 isn't the only game in town. :)

Now, Tough Quench *IS* expensive though. When last I looked it was ~$60/gal....of course, that's what you get when you buy from Brownells...

-d
 
R.C.Reichert said:
Would light mineral oil be any better than canola? Or is it about the same?
Click to expand...


If you are looking for a real quench oil you can get Houghto Quench K from a place in Airdrie; Can Four I believe they're called.

I wouldn't say that I had good results with canola. If it rockwells at 63-64 out of the quench then there is something besides martensite which is undesireable in the steel, probably perlite which probably isn't good for a blade edge. Ideally you would shoot for getting it as hard as you can without causing other problems such as warping or cracking and then temper it down to desired hardness rather than starting with a mediocre quench and trying to work with a crippled blade.
 
Last time I bought canola it was about $8 a gallon at the grocery store, but I usually pay about $10 a gallon. I try to get it when it’s on sale.

I used to try and eliminate variables, but it just made things boring. So, I don't mind dealing with some variables. It helps keep things more interesting. If you really want to get rid of the variables,... get rid of the knifemaker. :)
 
Last edited:
Price aside.

Tough quench is much slower than Park's 50 and probably slower than Canola. Yet Fogg gets great results with 1095.
Wrench in the mess :D
 
69 knives,

I'm curious if a Rockwell test after the quench is a POSITIVE indication of a mixed structure on the edge of the blade ?

Meaning that there is no chance that the blade has actually realized an auto-temper and the few points drop in RC could possibly be tempered martinsite ?

Again this goes back to the variables that come into play and these ?'s are based on READ knowledge, not Experience.

Thanks, Josh
 
69_knives said:
If you are looking for a real quench oil you can get Houghto Quench K from a place in Airdrie; Can Four I believe they're called.

I wouldn't say that I had good results with canola. If it rockwells at 63-64 out of the quench then there is something besides martensite which is undesireable in the steel, probably perlite which probably isn't good for a blade edge. Ideally you would shoot for getting it as hard as you can without causing other problems such as warping or cracking and then temper it down to desired hardness rather than starting with a mediocre quench and trying to work with a crippled blade.
Click to expand...

For whatever it's worth, the 63-64 readings my buddy got were without agitation or circulation.
 
Tai Goo said:
I used to try and eliminate variables, but it just made things boring. So, I don't mind dealing with some variables. It helps keep things more interesting. If you really want to get rid of the variables,... get rid of the knifemaker. :)
Click to expand...

Always like to hear stuff like that, even though personally I would use unaltered canola for quenching only as a last resort. ;)
 
Josh Dabney said:
69 knives,

I'm curious if a Rockwell test after the quench is a POSITIVE indication of a mixed structure on the edge of the blade ?
Click to expand...

Well, I'm far from being an expert on the subject but from what I've read the maximum hardness attainable for 1095 should be around 66 HRC. So, barring an autotemper I would assume a mixed structure but, yes, there are too many variables to be absolutely sure without a pricey lab setup and analysis of every piece of steel for composition and structure. I would also assume that unless it was specifically stated that there was an autemper, that there was not or at least not an intentional autotemper.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top