Buck Comprade Hatchet

You still have not address your statement that 5160 is or may be brittle which flies in the face of custom knife makers all over the USA. If you are living somewhere, you are surviving, and if you have no experience with the Buck Hatchett, how do you know it is too thin to be anywhere effective? I mentioned the parang, or golok or bolo as they are also great for splitting wood without having to baton, as is a billhook. A machete as used in Central and South America, is not as stout, thick as the before mentioned items, so if you had handled and used them you would know that. In any case we are starting to beat a dead horse. I hope to see a Buck Hatchett in Eugene over the weekend, and see how thick or thin it is. John
 
The Buck hatchets from 1960's era I've handled and they are 3/16". The same on through 1980's. I have come across some from the late
1990's and in 2000, which are thicker, closer to 1/4". DM
 
Kevin Houtzager said:
Uhm, Are looking for answers that aren't there: Living somewhere is something totally different then surviving there? I did adres so, read it yourself: Yesterday 7:32 PM. I don't see what a machette has to do with it, or a Parang for that matter (which in itself is a machette I might ad)? I never metioned it, so why do you? A Parang or a machette is less of a knife, and more of an axe, since its used mainly for chopping, and because of the length of it works like a lever.

But Lets stick to the subject:

Camping, so no need for survival. So you can just carry an axe with you. Same rules still apply:

Would you use a axe that is suited for the job, or would you use a axe that is more like a knife, but without the benefits of one (and yes, I am talking about the Buck Compadre)? In other words: Would you use a hatchet that is as thin as a blade, which gets stuck in Wood as soon as you try to chop it? Or would you use an hatchet that is nicely shaped and splits wood. And yes, both could do it, but its all about efficienty. There is no way that that the hatchet could do that as efficient as as regular hatchet. Sure, you make do with what you have or whats availlabe. But thats a non issue, as there a better hatchets available. Thats what my whole point was about.

Could you also use a machette? Yes you could. But thats besides the points. You could also knaw it in two. But that would be even more inefficient as use an hatchet like the Buck Compadre. That has nothing to do with build quality: As I mentioned earlier: I for one couldn't say if it is decent or not. But it has everything to do with shape: Its just to thin to be anywhere near effective. And Yes a machette is just as thin, but still longer and there applies more force, so would be more efficient.

Its all just physics....
Click to expand...
IMO, If you haven't handled it then you shouldn't knock it or praise it. With all of the years it's been around, all of the wood this axe design has processed during those years i would think it performs just fine. I own three and have used the first one bought a couple years ago on every camping trip. It processes kindling just fine. No I'm not going to log with it but that's not the intended use.
 
Use it first. You can't give a review otherwise.
 
Council tool uses 5160 steel as well in their axes. They have been around since 1886.

I'm not sure where your getting your info but people who are actually in business making axes use 5160 steel.

Another popular type of carbon steel is 5150 and 5160. The 50xx group of steel is classified as alloy steels in the SAE, and the last two digits determine the percentage of carbon, just like the above. At 0.5% and 0.6%, this is a medium-level carbon with enough chromium to significantly increase its overall performance, though not enough to consider it a stainless steel
 
5160 essentially universally regarded as a wonderful steel for axes. It has more than enough shock resistance and toughness. When it's used in knives it's usually used in large knives. I've never, ever, not even once heard it referred to as brittle before. This is, of course, in general terms - not the possibility that one *could* make a brittle 5160 axe. I can make 1018 brittle.

That said, I'm not a fan of these style hatchets/hawks. I prefer the steel all in the head for a variety of reasons in line with what some others have mentioned.

I also want to hope out loud that the ad hominem attacks disappear and keep disappeared. It's not becoming to assert inabilities, slights on age, etc., when in discourse with others who refrain from that kind of base behavior. I'd wager I'm not alone in that hope.
 
Edit

That said, I'm not a fan of these style hatchets/hawks. I prefer the steel all in the head for a variety of reasons in line with what some others have mentioned.

I also want to hope out loud that the ad hominem attacks disappear and keep disappeared. It's not becoming to assert inabilities, slights on age, etc., when in discourse with others who refrain from that kind of base behavior. I'd wager I'm not alone in that hope.[/QUOTE]
You are most certainly not alone. You put it much more tactfully than i was going to. I've been biting my tongue but I'm not going to for much longer. Some people just want to argue. Actually it seems one person wants to argue... Constantly. I'm sick of it too.[/Q
 
Why go out with just one tool ?
It's not large knife or hatchet it's smaller knife plus hatchet.

Those who prefer a larger knife can do whatever they need to despite the downsides, and the same goes for those who prefer a hatchet or small axe.

I say this Buck and others of this same construction / build are just axe shaped knives and I'd rather have the large knife or a regular hatchet.
 
Kevin Houtzager said:
So you judge people how long they are in business? Ok, here goes: Vikings have been in business for 1400 years. They didn't use 5160 steel? Does that make them superior? Of course not. It just makes it have different attributes. But whether you like to admit it or not: Those attributes aren't all in favor over 5150-5160 compaired to 1045-1095. But let me ask you the following question: if everything else is equall: Which steel will chip more easily? 1045 or 5160. Temper, weight, shape, force, cutting edge, etc being equall?

1045 of course

Which material will be more wear resistant, al else being equal:

5160 of course

Its always a compromise.

But for its intented duty, an axe, where shock is a more of issue then being the sharpest possible, which of the 2 has to best composition? Again all else being equal? That would be 1045. And thats not because I think so: Composition of the steel dictates that.

It isn't so much about whats good, but whats available these days. Its like saying: We don't eat cornflakes because we only have bread available? Its like saying: We do this in America, so it has to be the best. You know there is a whole world out there....

I know what the numbers stand for. But what does Chromium actually do? It makes it more wear resistant, but also more brittle. There is no such thing as perfect steel, there is always a trade-off. Do people want a shinier axe/blade/etc, that is more corrosion resistant? Or lets say a tactical looking blade/axe/etc? Does that make it better? No of course not, but according to you it does???? But strip all opinions away, and what's left: Physics (it being a axe and all, and not a knife), and steel composition. You cant claim anything different about that, facts are simple facts.

Does that make it bad steel? No of course not. Its good enough for its intended purpose. Does that make it superior steel for axe making: No.

But since this is running on deaf mans ears: I'm done with this discussion. I only care for the facts, not about opinions....
Click to expand...

As I understand it, the chromium in 5160 improves depth of hardening, overall hardenability, and actually improves ductility at a given hardness compared to simple 10xx alloy. In an axe that would allow for a higher hardness to be used for improved edge stability at low angles without causing the edge to become brittle. 5160 is one of the very most commonly used spring steels, and S7, which is legendary for its toughness, has about 3.25% chromium.
 
FortyTwoBlades said:
As I understand it, the chromium in 5160 improves depth of hardening, overall hardenability, and actually improves ductility at a given hardness compared to simple 10xx alloy. In an axe that would allow for a higher hardness to be used for improved edge stability at low angles without causing the edge to become brittle. 5160 is one of the very most commonly used spring steels, and S7, which is legendary for its toughness, has about 3.25% chromium.
Click to expand...

Forty Two is correct. 5160 is commonly used for axe heads.
He is also correct about the chromium content issue.
5160 has less than 1% chromium. At that level, the chromium serves to improve the uniformity of heat treating. The greater uniformity of heat treat means that the steel is tougher, not more brittle. The presence of chromium in the alloy at that level does not make 5160 brittle and has no effect on wear resistance.

The carbon level of 5160 is the same as 1060, not 1045.

knock yourself out and argue about the shape of the head. But to claim that 5160 is brittle is blatantly wrong and sets your other arguments in a poor light.
 
Hickory n steel said:
Why go out with just one tool ?
It's not large knife or hatchet it's smaller knife plus hatchet.

Those who prefer a larger knife can do whatever they need to despite the downsides, and the same goes for those who prefer a hatchet or small axe.

I say this Buck and others of this same construction / build are just axe shaped knives and I'd rather have the large knife or a regular hatchet.
Click to expand...

Yeah, agree. I have a Hudson Bay knife that fits the modus operandi. It's a lightly modified Condor. 1075 so you can beat on it as much a you want :)
 
Kevin Houtzager said:
Again,

I'm not saying that 5160 is a bad steel. I'm just saying it is more brittle then 1045. And nobody has proven otherwise. Let me clarify:

5160 =
0,55-0,65 % Carbon
0,75-1% Manganese
0,7 - 0,9 % Chromium
The rest is Fe or just Iron

1045 =
0,43-0,5 % Carbon
0,6 - 0,9 % Manganese
0 - 0,04 % Phosphorus
0- 0,05 % Sulfur
The rest is Fe or just Iron

As Sulfur and Phosphorus can be in 1045 but do not have to be, I'm going to disregard them for this instance. That leaves Carbon (used to actually harden the blade) and Manganese (do desolve oxigen). The main difference is the chromium content. If you realy want to knit pick, just look up 1060. They're practically the same in content except Chromium.

Now lets look up the elemental properties of the materials used and especially the Mohl scale to keep it fairly simple.
Iron:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron
Mohls hardness: 4 .
See it as the base hardness of the material. The only difference being Chromium between the 2.

Chromium:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chromium
Mohls hardness : 8,5 .
Thats the added hardness and brittleness found with adding Chromium. The higher the chromium content, the harder and more brittle it becomes.

A more simple way to look at Chrome is looked at a chromed bumper. It the stuff on top of the shiny nickel plated bit with the blueish tint. It chips of when you whack it with a hammer. The rest of the metal just bends. The same properties I am talking about the whole time.

I work with a lot of metals as an engineer, so I need to know mechanical properties. And trust me on this one: The enviroment I'm talking about is lot harder on the metals compaired to any axe or a knife will ever experience: Engines, cars and planes. There is a shit ton more stress involved and far higher operating temps.

And I'm not saying that it will shatter upon impact. As I said from the beginning: It depends on the temper of the steel itself applied by the smith. But as a base its a step in the wrong direction for anything that has an impact sensitive job. It may not even crack during the lifetime you use a tool. But it will crack sooner then 1045 steel if all else is kept equal. Thats all I'm saying.... It's highly likely that won't notice the difference though: because everything else isn't kept equal in real life. Temper differs from axe to axe, steel differs from batch to batch (remember each category has a minimum and maximum content), force differs from user to user and from job to job.

And lets not forget one thing: Allmost all steel is recycled steel. So getting the purest grades becomes harder and harder (and therefore more expensive). But each and every steel has it minimum en maximum content for it to be called said steel. 1045 is more expensive over here compaired to 5160 in Europe. How about in the US or Canada? And thats not saying anything about quality, but everything about it being harder to produce.

Lets not forget that marketing is the name of the game these days. Its not about getting the best product. That died during the early 20th century. Its about creating a need that you want....
Click to expand...


That's not how metallurgy works. At all. To repeat myself, the addition of chromium in 5160 preserves ductility at a given hardness. If you were to harden and temper 1060 and 5160 to 58 RC, the 5160 would be the less brittle of the two.
 
Last edited:
The interactions of elements in an alloy are NOT the same as the way the individual elements behave...I did make a misstatement prior, though--the chromium doesn't increase ductility, exactly, but rather preserves it at higher hardness, meaning that achieving higher hardness does not cause a significant reduction in ductility at that level.

From a metallurgist:
Influence of chromium

Cr increases the hardenability of steel while there is a minimal effect on the ductility. Cr by forming carbides increases the edge holding quality of steel. The tensile strength of steel increases by 8 to 100 N/sq mm for every 1 % of Cr added. The yield strength also increases but the notch impact value reduces.

Cr is normally added to steel for increasing oxidation resistance, and for improving high temperature strength. Corrosion resistance of Cr steels increases sharply at a Cr level of greater than 12 %. Cr forms a very coherent oxide layer on the steel surface that prevents further oxidation and thus provides resistance to corrosion in the steels.

As a hardening element, Cr is frequently added with a toughening element such as Ni to produce superior mechanical properties. At higher temperatures, Cr contributes increased strength. Cr is strong carbide former. Complex chromium-iron carbides go into solution in austenite slowly and hence sufficient heating time is required to be provided before quenching of these steels.

The strong carbide forming property of Cr is an essential factor for its behaviour as a strong second phase particle. It, therefore, obstructs the dislocation motion particularly at elevated temperatures. Also Cr is a nitride former and is used in nitriding steels.

As with Mn, Cr has a tendency to increase hardness penetration. In fact Cr has many interesting effects on steel. When 5 % Cr or more is used in conjunction with Mn, the critical quenching speed is reduced to the point that the steel becomes air hardening. Cr can also increase the toughness of steel, as well as the wear resistance. Probably one of the most well known effects of Cr on steel is the tendency to resist staining and corrosion. Steels with 14 % or more Cr are referred to as stainless steels. A more accurate term would be stain resistant steels. Stainless tool steels will in fact darken and rust, just not as readily as the non stainless varieties.

Presence of Cr in some steels can cause excessive hardness and cracking in and adjacent to welds.
Click to expand...

The issue with welding is due to heat-induced brittleness. Not due to the alloy itself being inherently brittle.
 
From the renowned John D. Verhoeven:

57070921_10218242566764038_4877280551129579520_n.jpg


56775687_10218242572724187_773819975637925888_n.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top