440A - I need an education

TLARbb

TLARbb

Joined
Jan 24, 2010
Messages
3,919
Folks, back in the 70's when I first got into knives, the stainless steel everybody (except Buck) was talking about and using was 440C. 440C was and is a pretty good knife steel. At least I've been pretty happy with most of miine that have that steel.

I was just reading a thread here regarding dull Queen blades of D2 and it was mentioned that Queen was using 440C at one point then moved to 440A. I also see where a lot of manufacturers are using 440A.

So, my questions are why are manufacturers using 440A instead of 440C and what are the practical differences between the two? I know everything is a compromise and I suspect that 440A is maybe less expensive or easier to fabricate or maybe more forgiving in the heat treating process, but these are just guesses. I would think that 440C has been around long enough that it should not be a lot more money than 440A.

Ed
 
i was looking at this the other day.i never really found an answer.

what you can do is email kabar and ask them.the reason i say kabar is because i emailed them and asked about 1095 crovan compared to regular 1095.kabar is a great company to ask about steel.and they email you back hella fast.

and if you dont email them someone will tell you.

sorry i could be more help.
 
if anyone is switching to 440a it's news to myself. this alloy is about = to aus6 & certainly not a great performer. the 8 series chinese steels out perform 440a by a large margin.
dennis
 
440A is a lower carbon steel, and not very good quality. It won't hold an edge nearly as long as 440C and is a much cheaper steel.
Buck uses 420HC which is also not quite as good as 440C, but is probably cheaper for them to work. They do a good job of hardening the 420HC, and so it is a decent blade.
Personally, I wouldn't buy a blade made from 440A. I do have some knives made from 420HC, but would prefer better steel. I have a knife made from AUS 8A, but that is as far down on the steel chain that I am willing to go right now.
440A is steel that I won't buy - it can't be heat treated to give anywhere near the edge retention that you can get from better steels, like 440C.
 
i have a becker remora in 440a. and i dont have any problems with it. its has a good heat treat.

its only a 2 1/4 inch blade so i dont mind the inferior steel.i would tell people to buy it.
 
I have a Kershaw with a blade of 440a and it performs very well in my opinion.
Jim
 
I think that cost is one of the major factors for a company changing the steel they're using, from time to time. That said, i also think that heat treating has come a long way since the 50's, and as such, companies can take a lower-grade steel, and create a decent blade from it. Sure, it won't hold an edge like a higher-grade steel, but if the cost is kept down, it helps the company stay in business. That's my two cents worth. As always, YMMV.
 
440A is okay, but not a preferred steel. Camillus used 440A on their Remington models in the 80's and 90's.
 
DennisStrickland said:
if anyone is switching to 440a it's news to myself. this alloy is about = to aus6 & certainly not a great performer. the 8 series chinese steels out perform 440a by a large margin.
dennis
Click to expand...

Dennis, this is the post that got me to wondering about this and is in reference to blunt factory edges on Queen D2 blades:

http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8521425&postcount=69

So after using 440C for several years, Queen moved to 440A before moving to the current D2. And it got me to wondering why they moved from 440C to 440A. Kershaw uses 440A on Leeks and probably others. Most of the Chinese built knives are Aus 8 or 8C13MoV or some such or 440A.

After looking at the steel charts and data, it looks like probably material cost was the major factor with a machinability factor probably involved to a lesser extent.

I appreciate everyone's input here, so thanks to all who replied. I knew going in that 440A was a low end steel but did not know what the reasoning would be for a maker to use 440A instead of the better 440C. I've gained some insights to the reasons, but none of them make me feel like rushing out to buy a knife with 440A.

Ed
 
440A is often compared to 12c27 due to carbon content and other material factors...so, given a proper heat treat it can certainly make a good serviceable knife.

Not a super steel but certainly not something unworthy of consideration given the right application.
 
Shore08 said:
So with a hardness of around 58 or 59, would that make it more serviceable?
Click to expand...

I think the normal range is 55-57. I don't know enough about the metallurgy of 440A to know its characteristics if pushed to 58 or 59. Too brittle? Not tough enough? Prone to chip?

This is something that the folks over in the "maker's forums" would deal with and have a better handle on.
 
Blues said:
440A is often compared to 12c27 due to carbon content and other material factors...so, given a proper heat treat it can certainly make a good serviceable knife.
Click to expand...

That's true, but I've had a much better experience with the 12c27 Laguiole that I have compared to the 440A blades that I've used in the past.
 
kamagong said:
That's true, but I've had a much better experience with the 12c27 Laguiole that I have compared to the 440A blades that I've used in the past.
Click to expand...

I'm not endorsing it, Christian, merely noting that it has its utility. ;)
(I like 12c27 myself.)
 
Blues said:
I think the normal range is 55-57. I don't know enough about the metallurgy of 440A to know its characteristics if pushed to 58 or 59. Too brittle? Not tough enough? Prone to chip?

This is something that the folks over in the "maker's forums" would deal with and have a better handle on.
Click to expand...

Hi,

The 440A Rough Riders I've tested all checked out at 57-58Rc. So they at least do a good job with it. And I don't think 440A can reach 59-60Rc and be usable.

I find 440A to be a useful steel in smaller slip-joints like a Peanut or Pen knife. But once they get to be heavier duty, like say medium Stockmen or bigger, then I don't like it so much.

Dale
 
dalee100 said:
Hi,

The 440A Rough Riders I've tested all checked out at 57-58Rc. So they at least do a good job with it. And I don't think 440A can reach 59-60Rc and be usable.
Dale
Click to expand...

Good stuff, Dale. :thumbup:
 
I used a small Boker lockback in 440A for a while -- they'd apparently done a decent job with the heat treatment. It would sharpen up quite easily and very well -- true, it wouldn't hold an edge for more than a few cuts, but for light use it was fine. BTW, you'll see makers claim "440" steel to try to get you to assume that it's 440C, but "440" means 440A. A big reason for makers to use 440A is to reduce the stress and strain and wear on their blanking dies and machinery - being cheaper is a bonus. There is really no good reason for using it beyond that - it's basically a bare minimum "adequate" stainless knife steel.
 
Thank you Dale. I didn't know that RR 440 was that hard. No wonder it has a decent reputation for edge holding. Is it possible that it is actually 440 B, with as much as .95% Carbon? Most of the steel charts show 440 A at 55-57 HRc. Either it is 440 B, or they have a really good HT for it.
 
Hi,

I think Rough Rider has a good HT. They seem to get the best out of 440A. But then so do other cutlers like Kershaw, (my older Scallion checked every bit as hard).

A caveat for everyone to remember. Heat treating isn't an exact science. Which is why hardness is expressed as a range, i.e. 56 to 58Rc. And every hardness tester can vary a bit in readings. What is important is getting a consistent reading.:) My tester may read a bit higher or lower than another machine. And both can still be in calibrated specification.

But from my observations during use and sharpenings and testing results of other 440A blades, is that the numbers are pretty accurate.

Dale
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top