Carbon steel or stainless steel...?

Which do you prefer in a hard use fixed blade?

  • Stainless steel (a common example would be S30V)

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Carbon Steel (a common example would be 1095)

    Votes: 1 100.0%
  • Total voters
    1
GregS

GregS

Gold Member
Joined
May 6, 2008
Messages
6,023
If you were looking for a hard use knife in the form of a fixed blade which would you choose? And by hard use I envision basic stuff such as batoning, chopping, prying etc... And since there are many different kinds of stainless steels and carbon steels I figured I'd narrow it down to two very common ones... S30V or 1095. If you can think of two better ones to compare, have at it.

Please vote... although I am also very interested in reading people's reasons for favoring one over the other.
 
I favor stainless on smaller knives that will be used mostly for cutting chores and food preparation. Stainless is really easy to wash and I also prefer an uncoated blade when working with food.

For larger knives that see chopping, prying, digging and other rough use I prefer a carbon steel mainly because it is more likely to be able to come away from those of tasks undamaged.
 
I use both.

Among others that I use, the Fallkniven A2 with Laminated VG10 stainless steel and Bark River Bravo 2 with A2 carbon steel most closely duplicate the use you have identified.

The Bravo 2 is hardened to 58RC, has a 7 inch blade that is .21 inches thick at the spine. The Fallkniven A2 is hardened to 59RC, has an 8 inch blade that is .23 inches thick. Both are sharpened to convex edge.

I find the performance of both blades very similar for general camp tasks like batoning, chipping, light / medium chopping.

The VG10 is perhaps marginally more robust than the A2 carbon steel. When used for heavy tasks like batoning and having occasional contact with the ground the VG10 will micro chip a bit along the edge, the A2 steel tends to roll the edge, but will suffer very minor chipping as well.

My observation is that the edge of the A2 steel takes a bit more of a beating than the VG10 when subjected to comparable tasks. But the difference is relatively negligible.

Both blades are hardened to a high degree, but I do find the A2 steel to be perhaps a bit easier to sharpen. It seems to take a little less time to freshen up the edge after a good beating. I have no difficulty sharpening either knife so no real preference for one over the other for sharpening.

Performance and capability wise I find little difference between the two. I would say I have a slight preference for the VG10 simply because of ease of care, but I'm hard pressed to say one is better than the other based on performance.

NOTE: I didn't vote because you didn't give a choice of "A good blade is a good blade, doesn't make a cats meow of difference"

Batoning with Fallkniven A2
FKA2-Batoning.jpg


Batoning with Bark River Bravo 2
BRKTB2-Batoning-4.jpg


Comparison
A2-B2SpineThickness.jpg


After a good beating
B2-A2-RC4-2.jpg


Kevin
 
Last edited:
I do like carbon still, granted it can get more rusty than stainless but my kivimäki puukko's have carbon steel, my Ka-Bar is 1095... My best blades have been carbon steel. So my choice is Carbon steel.
 
All of my folders are S30V. The fixed-blades are a real mish-mash of S30V, 1095, 440C, and O-1, so I don't know what to say. I'd probably pick one in O-1 for heavy-duty chopping, though. I should probably also note that, with an average humidity of 13%, rust pretty much doesn't live here, so that's not a factor.
 
Last edited:
Ahh the always tough stainless or no stainless. Fortunately steel has progressed a lot within the past few years. Places like Crucible that are able to make some damn good stainless steels like cpm s30v that are much tougher than most people could have believed a stainless steel to be just a few years ago. They can now have very high carbon stainless steels it's insane where steels have evolved now.

I have a good mix of carbon steels and stainless steel knives, so it's a very hard decision, but if the stainless steel knife you're talking about is made from a steel that came from Crucible I will chose stainless. I say this because I am taking your question as this is going to be the one and only knife I'm going to have forever. In this situation I would worry a lot about rust and corrosion with a possible lack of ability to fight these problems.
 
There was an excellent quote from a Blade mag article by maker Dan Farr that I posted long ago but am unable to find just now.

He said, in essence, that with a folder or small fixed blade, you are not going to generate enough energy to gain any benefit from the increased toughness of carbon steel (e.g. when chopping). However you will see benefits from both the corrosion resistance and wear resistance (edge-holding) of a stainless steel like S30V.

The larger the knife, the more energy you can generate and the more you will benefit from the increased toughness of carbon steel. He said that his personal EDC was a folder by RJ Martin with S30V blade, and his knives used in cutting competitions (10" blades, I believe) were all carbon steel.
 
Samael said:
All of my folders are S30V. The fixed-blades are a real mish-mash of S30V, 1095, 440C, and O-1, so I don't know what to say. I'd probably pick one in O-1 for heavy-duty chopping, though. I should probably also note that, with an average humidity of 13%, rust pretty much doesn't live here, so that's not a factor.
Click to expand...


I have a hunch, that of the small amount of people that picked the stainless option, one or two live in damp climates.

As for O1, it's a great steel. However, I made the mistake of giving a Butch Harner paring knife in O1 to my brother as a wedding present, you should see what O1 looks like when owned by someone not willing to care for it... big mistake on my part.:rolleyes::D

Thanks for your comments, and thanks for voting gentlemen.
 
To be honest I prefer tool steels developed for cutting tools, like O1 or M2, sadly which is not
among the choice.
Plain carbon steels are not a bad choice of course as they get excellent edge very easily.
 
carbon steel for me love them for how tough they are and the edges they obtain. also nothing looks better on a knife like a patina be it natural or it forced.
 
I quite like stainless for folders as they are carried in my (often sweaty) pockets and are obviously less easy to clean than a fixed blade.
For a larger blade thats going to be seeing some "proper" use I would take carbon steel every time. I do have to deal with rust living in
Taiwan but if the knife is being used it's not a big deal, you just need to be carfull when it comes to storage.
 
A lot depends on if the knife will also be used for food prep. If it will then I would lean toward stainless because carbon steel tends to transfer a metallic taste to some foods. Do you plan to cook a meal after you've batoned all that firewood?

Why S30V? Why not VG-10? Or, more specifically why not VG-10 sandwiched between layers of 420 for a nice combination of edge holding and toughness. There's a reason people love the Fallkniven F1, S1 and their brethren.
 
Stainless for folders and "art"/ collectible knives. Carbon or semi-stainless (eg. D2) for work knives.

I like 'em all. :thumbup:

By the way, HRC 59 for A2 is way too soft, A2 works best at HRC 60. Shame to use such a good steel without an optimal heat treat. A2 is tougher and has better edge retention at HRC 60.
 
flatgrinder said:
Stainless for folders and "art"/ collectible knives. Carbon or semi-stainless (eg. D2) for work knives.

I like 'em all. :thumbup:

By the way, HRC 59 for A2 is way too soft, A2 works best at HRC 60. Shame to use such a good steel without an optimal heat treat. A2 is tougher and has better edge retention at HRC 60.
Click to expand...

Is HRC a logrhythmic scale? If it's linear then is there really much difference between 59 and 60?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top