1095 vs D2

[chazbo88]

What are the pros and cons of both 1095 high carbon and D2 steels. Which one would you rely on in a survival situtation. Which steel is right for the price. What type steel do you prefer?

 

[shotgunner11]

I would take the High carbon steels any day. D2 isn't really good with impacts, chips the edge.

 

[Jim Craig]

I really love D2 in Bob Dozier's knives. They just keep cutting, and are still pretty easy to sharpen. Maybe a bit biased as Doziers are my favorite. I don't mind being more careful with them.
That said, if you are going to be very hard on the knife, go with 1095. It is more impact resistant, as already noted, plus it is cheaper.
Again, it depends on what you do to survive, but 1095 is real easy to sharpen and nice and tough. I'm with Shotgunner11.

 

[Cliff Stamp]

What are the pros and cons of both 1095 high carbon and D2 steels.

D2 is optomized for wear resistance, it has a very high carbide fraction, this also makes it difficult to grind and it will in general fracture readily under impacts and isn't very flexible, Swamp Rat's heat treatment of D2 tends to make theirs a lot tougher than others though.

1095 is a plain carbon steel, its main benefit for knives is that it can get very hard, 66 HRC and takes a very fine edge and works well at low angles. It can be spring tempered for toughness but if that is what you want there are better steels than underhardening 1095.

If you want toughness then look at steels like A8, L6, S7, 1045, etc. . M2 makes a better cutting steel than D2, it also works well at low angles like 1095 but has a much higher wear resistance. Essentially it combines the strongest aspects of both.

-Cliff

 

[James Green Dragon]

Cliff, when you mention tough steels below you listed 1045, presumably as tougher than 1095.

Would it be wrong to imply then that the lower on the carbon scale you go (is that even the right way to say that?) the tougher, i.e.; would 1085 be tougher than 1095? The difference is the carbon content, correct?

Thanks!

 

[Cliff Stamp]

Yes pretty much, as the carbon content increases then martensite switches (gradually) from lathe to plate which is more brittle and there is a much higher carbide content.

-Cliff

 

[trout #2]

So D2 sounds like it is not the optimal steel to use in large field/survival/etc knives, but it seems like there are quite a few different manufacturers that make large D2 blades. Is there some other reason that you see this? I've always been kind of confused about that.

 

[Cliff Stamp]

Yes D2 is optomized for the exact opposite set of properties that you need in a large field/survival knife. Knives of that type rarely blunt by wear, they deform and fracture. However there is a lot of misconceptions about steels, what is needed for performance. D2 was brought in as a replacement/upgrade for the high carbon stainless and you could argue it is better than them for that role, but this is like arguing if you were attacked by a grizzly bear is it better to punch him in the throat or throw an elbow to the eye. One of them may be more effective than the other, but in the end the difference isn't significant to the outcome.

-Cliff