440A vs. 420HC

Status
Not open for further replies.
Good question. In many respects, 440A and 420HC are comparable in their composition and applications. Both are good quality stainless steels. I would speculate that 420HC is often praised because of Buck's use of it. The 420HC that Buck uses is well heat treated, and it is used in high quality knives. Also, a lot of manufacturers now use 440C or AUS-8 for their knives. Both 440C and AUS-8 are somewhat more complex alloys which can make better knife blades than possible with 440A.

Combining the above with 1) improvements in alloying steels (ATS-34, S30V, etc.) over the past 20 years, 2) forums like this that help to educate users about the various alloys, and 3) a little "steel snobbery" results in the disdain of several very good steels including 440A.
 
Thirteenth Star said:
Why is it that 420HC receives a fair amount of praise on this website, while 440A is often looked at with disdain and contempt?
Click to expand...

420HC tends to be used in higher end knives so it has a better image.

-Cliff
 
GoodGuy said:
I would speculate that 440HC is often praised because of Buck's use of it. The 440HC that Buck uses is well heat treated, and it is used in high quality knives.
Click to expand...

Buck uses 420HC, with the exception of the new Chinese made "370" series slipjoints, those are 440C.
 
Thirteenth Star said:
Why is it that 420HC receives a fair amount of praise on this website, while 440A is often looked at with disdain and contempt?
Click to expand...

I think they're both crap.

Ahhhh. Feels good to get that off my chest.

I grudingly continue to own and use knives in both steels since I can't afford to replace them right now, but I have never been entirely happy with their performance. Some of us just have different definitions of "good".
 
Neither one is what anyone should consider a high quality steel.

I think that the main reason that 420HC is more respected is because Buck uses it extensively and puts a really good heat treatment on it, and thus producing a knife that is inexpensive and still has a reletively good edge holding ability.

440A is pretty much the polar opposite. It is generally used by companies that make cheap crappy knives that you buy from a Bud K catalog for $2, and its heat treat is crap. It holds an edge good enough to slice through an apple, and then needs to e resharpened. What do you expect for $2 though?

Now this is not to say that no reputable companies use 440A, as I believe there are a few that use it on occation, but it is pretty uncommon.
 
ginshun said:
Neither one is what anyone should consider a high quality steel.

I think that the main reason that 420HC is more respected is because Buck uses it extensively and puts a really good heat treatment on it, and thus producing a knife that is inexpensive and still has a reletively good edge holding ability.

440A is pretty much the polar opposite. It is generally used by companies that make cheap crappy knives that you buy from a Bud K catalog for $2, and its heat treat is crap. It holds an edge good enough to slice through an apple, and then needs to e resharpened. What do you expect for $2 though?

Now this is not to say that no reputable companies use 440A, as I believe there are a few that use it on occation, but it is pretty uncommon.
Click to expand...

Kershaw uses 440A on a lot of their knives, and I wouldn't call them cheap or crappy at all.

Most of the cheap Bud K stuff is 420J2.
 
ginshun said:
Neither one is what anyone should consider a high quality steel.

I think that the main reason that 420HC is more respected is because Buck uses it extensively and puts a really good heat treatment on it, and thus producing a knife that is inexpensive and still has a reletively good edge holding ability.

440A is pretty much the polar opposite. It is generally used by companies that make cheap crappy knives that you buy from a Bud K catalog for $2, and its heat treat is crap. It holds an edge good enough to slice through an apple, and then needs to e resharpened. What do you expect for $2 though?

Now this is not to say that no reputable companies use 440A, as I believe there are a few that use it on occation, but it is pretty uncommon.
Click to expand...

You seems to contradict yourself a bit. Neither should be considered high quality, but then go on to say that Buck uses 420HC with good results. Also, it should be noted that SOG uses 440A on some models with good results.

Do you think that in some instances heat treat might be a bit more important than how expensive the steel is?

There was a thread recently on S30V not living up to its hype, and it was chipping rather easily considering what it was supposed to be capable of. Would you clasify this as possible bad treatment, or junk steel? Is it automatically good stuff because it costs a lot?
 
Buck uses 420HC with good results. Also, it should be noted that SOG uses 440A on some models with good results
Click to expand...

Kershaw uses 440A on a lot of their knives, and I wouldn't call them cheap or crappy at all.
Click to expand...

Again, some of us just have a different definition of "good". ;)
 
i have a couple of 'cheaper' knives simply labelled '420' or '440 SS'. i am assuming that the 440 SS is 440A? what is the 420 then?
cheers,
-gabriel
 
the possum said:
I think they're both crap.

Ahhhh. Feels good to get that off my chest.

I grudingly continue to own and use knives in both steels since I can't afford to replace them right now, but I have never been entirely happy with their performance. Some of us just have different definitions of "good".
Click to expand...


Yeah, what he just said.
 
Blackhearted said:
i have a couple of 'cheaper' knives simply labelled '420' or '440 SS'. i am assuming that the 440 SS is 440A? what is the 420 then?
cheers,
-gabriel
Click to expand...

This is not for sure, but I would put my money on it being 420J2. When a steel is only described by the number it is usually the bottom of the line.
 
440A and 420HC are fairly similar in daily use when they are both made right. The reason 420HC has a better image than 440A is that 420HC is used more exclusively (mainly by Buck) and is therefore more consistent in its quality. 440A on the other hand is used in $2 knives and $50 and the blade quality varies widely. Unless you are specifically referring to 440A as used by a reputable company (like Kershaw, which makes good knives), the general thought is that 440A stinks since it is made so poorly in a majority of knives.

That being said, there is a big difference in steel once you go to higher end blades and the top of the line steels are less likely to vary in quality (i.e. bad heat treat). There are a ton of junk 440A knives and some good ones. A bunch of junk 440C knives, but mostly good ones. But almost all 154CM/ATS-34, VG-10, S30V, M2, D2, etc... are good quality.

With higher end steels the manufacturer makes more of a difference when it comes to knife design, fit and finish, etc... and less of a difference with blade quality (of course there is still some differences out there). With lower end steels, the manufacturer makes a difference in not only the same areas mentioned above but the quality of the actual blade, even if two manufacturers use the same steel type.
 
I really like the 440A that my Gerber Mark I has. It does not stain easily, it sharpens well, and it is very tough. It's too bad that many cheesy knives are labeled "440 stainless steel" when they are not really 440A at all. Even big name companies like SOG used to call their AUS-6A steel 440A. I was told that "440" is used to describe other types of generic stainless steels for marketing reasons. I think that real 440A is a great inexpensive steel for the price. One thing that another forum member mentioned was that Buck uses 420HC over 440A because 420HC is easier to machine? I'd like to see more comparisons between the two steels.
 
Wunderbar said:
I really like the 440A that my Gerber Mark I has. It does not stain easily, it sharpens well, and it is very tough. It's too bad that many cheesy knives are labeled "440 stainless steel" when they are not really 440A at all. Even big name companies like SOG used to call their AUS-6A steel 440A. I was told that "440" is used to describe other types of generic stainless steels for marketing reasons. I think that real 440A is a great inexpensive steel for the price. One thing that another forum member mentioned was that Buck uses 420HC over 440A because 420HC is easier to machine? I'd like to see more comparisons between the two steels.
Click to expand...
Again.. aus-6 IS a european copy of 440-a,, aus-8 440-b, aus-10 is a 440-c equivelent. ats-34-154-cm virtual twins. only a few changes for machini ability. 440-a and 420are both too low in carbon content to effectively take a decent heat treat. Its done by cheating the steel. very similar to what was done in the olden days to make cheep cold rolled steel perform, In the old days it was case hardening. the modern method does the same thing. Hard outside soft interior. sharpen enough and you find the crap. Cheap is cheap Price wise and quality wise. You some times get what you pay for, sometimes not. Greed is running rampant in the knife manufacturing buisness, just like everywhere else. Crap sells. Just advertize well, and put a high price on. it. The kershaws, Gerbers are not the same knives they were before Peet's and Kershaws death. Period. M. Lovett :(
 
If one were to hack saw one of these cheap blades long ways in two would you be able to "see" the soft crummy innards? I might try that, but I might feel guilty as well.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top