1095 VS Super Blue: An Extremely Unscientific Comparison

B

B.F.U

Joined
Jan 1, 2013
Messages
8,469
I realized that my Great Eastern Cutlery Tidioute #22 Magnum and my Spyderco Super Blue LadyBug have comparable stock and edge thicknesses, and thought it would be interesting to compare the steels.

This is my first test and to be honest I did not plan it that well. Each knife was hand sharpened to an acute angle that I tried to keep as even as possible with muscle memory. I did consistent length cuts with the corrugation grain of normal cardboard in sets of 10, then 5 once the edges seemed to be dulling. It was pretty difficult for me to tell when to consider the edge too dull to push cut printer paper, as they did not dull evenly across the edges.

1095: Seemed to lose its extremely sharp edge more quickly, but kept a good edge longer. It stopped being able to push cut printer paper after 85 slices.

Super Blue: Kept its extremely sharp edge longer, but dulled more rapidly after losing that edge. It stopped being able to push cut printer paper after 75 slices.

Ankerson's infinitely better test put Super Blue in his Category 4, with the likes of CTS-XHP ELMAX and ZDP-189, so it seems absolutely unrealistic that the 1095 (hardened to 58-60 area) would have held an edge longer. It would be extremely interesting to see the results of a test on GEC's 1095 by someone who does a reputable test, such as Mr. Ankerson.

Here're some pictures:

e8Lqchxl.jpg


EQsrgLal.jpg


Lmc34cvl.jpg


lzQJ2kkl.jpg


My conclusion is that my test was not sufficient to compare the steels accurately, but did show that 1095 (specifically at the relatively high hardness to which GEC has Peter's treat it) is worth testing in relation to today's modern alloy steels.

ALLHSS
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the test. I have some fixed in 1095 and several SuperBlue Spydercos around here somewhere. I like both ZDP and SuperBlue and hope to experiment a bit with SB and its various patina color-patterns that can be "generated."
I am NOT a hard user at all, and would not even try to do a test at this point. (Note that Jim Ankerson's first test results may not have been to his liking either.)
It is obvious that you took a lot of data in your tests, and you may have some blisters for a while. I do appreciate your effort.
Start planning for your NEXT test.
 
I offer you my Extremely Unscientific thanks.
Might not be the last word on the subject but useful & it's fun to use a fine knife.
I really like 1095.
 
It is still science - repeatable and testable based on hypotheses.

You thought Superblue would hold a working edge longer. The null hypothesis is that 1095 would hold a working edge longer under these conditions.

Hence, you failed to reject the null hypothesis that 1095 would hold a working edge longer under these conditions.

Some confounding factors may be ingrained in your test, but you could work to eliminate them in a more controlled setting.

The methodology is slightly flawed but I appreciate your work! It adds to our understanding of the performance of these blades in this context.

A more appropriate technology for paper processing may be scissors or an electronic shredder :)

Your results are in line with my expectations. Superblue does retain a very fine edge. 1095's shaving edge tends to degrade quickly in my experience but it is a workhorse of a steel.
 
Last edited:
Try again if you are so inclined. I have tested knives and repeated the tests and had them change places, ie the one that held an edge longer switched. I have also been surprised a few times. I like to test sharpness along 2 locations of the edge.
 
Since 1095 is my favorite among the readily available Carbon Steel type I was glad to see your "unscientific" results mimic my own field usage experience. The base steel is one part of the equation, the Heat Treat represents an equal part of that same equation and, finally the edge grind is also an equally important challenge.

Some grinds work particularly well for certain applications. An easy example (because it's mostly what I do :) ) is game processing. There are three different grinds applicable to this type of use. Despite the blade being comprised of the same metallurgy and let's assume the HT was relatively similar for our 1095...we would still not want to substitute one grind for another because our efficiency drops like a Marble off a table.

1) Game Down - Field chore cutting for either portions or simple quartering to be packed out. Large chopper knife or, preferably, a Hatchet. Convex, Scandi or Compound Bevel. You need to part sections and not worry about tip strength or lasting edge. Strange to say but sharpness isn't the primary concern.

2) Processing - At camp and dividing portions. Backstraps, loins, roasts, chops, off fall for ground, etc... Typically this isn't the final chore but instead get's the animal processed to the point of being cooler sized. The Hollow grind is easily my selection followed distantly by the Scandi. Sorry, not a fan in general of the Scandi grind but that's likely because I don't baton blades or have them see much "hard" usage. Again, most of my work is on game.

3) Freezer Packs - This is the final stage done back in the kitchen. Cut to width, portion out gristle for the dogs or the fat for chilli and hamburger additive. Here is where I find a wicked sharp Flat grind rules. You need precision and a long lasting edge. This is the kind of thin blade right up to the spine that wouldn't survive outdoor activities (and shouldn't be subjected to them). I have a Red Label Henckel from 69 or 70, before Werhehn (sp? I forget) bought them. I pretty much can't sharpen the edge and have a guy in Bristol do it for me. It's ridiculously hard but holds an edge for at minimum a couple dozen animals.

Just random thoughts on a pretty good thread title.

YMMV

Dutch S.
 
ALLHSS said:
I believe Mr. Howard said they're 59-61 or 58-60. Can't remember which. Higher than most 1095. By Peter's Heat Treating.
Click to expand...
Hmm,1095 heat treated to a Rockwell hardness of 59-61 would be interesting. Anyone know for sure?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top