carbon steel-trad v. modernists

[Dijos]

I find it funny that when traditionalists look at knives, you often see "too bad it's stainless". When the other 90% of folks on this board will argue forever about the valud of one steel over another, and carbon steel is hardly mentioned. I find 1095, for example, a highly functional and tough steel, despite the need for resharpening.

 

[Doug C]

I am in total agreement with you.I feel some of the people here seek the new "hot" steels and rightly so,they do certain things better than the other steels are capable of.As far as re-sharpening 1095 I love doing it.Have had an EdgePro for a couple months and enjoy sharpening 5160 and Damascus along with the1095.

 

[Ryan8]

Stainless in slipjoints tends to be inferior to 1095 for most uses. At least that's the trend I've noticed.

I would consider a slipjoint in a pretty decent stainless steel like 440C or 154CM or something along those lines. Still, if a company offered a knife both 1095 and good stainless, the stainless would probably be more expensive. That's assuming both knives aren't on the expensive side to begin with.

I think the reason carbon doesn't get mentioned much in modern folders is because there aren't nearly as many in carbon as stainless. For instance I don't think Spyderco makes any carbon steel folders and Benchmade is limited to some models in tool steels like D2 and M2.

 

[Larrin]

Without trying to get in to too much of an argument, I don't think a knife can be considered a "user" unless it can be used and neglected without worry for maintaining it, which in turn means I think no "user" should be anything other than stainless steel. Now, don't bother telling me I'm ignorant or that carbon steel takes little, if any, care, I'm fully aware.

Even with the "wonder" stainless steels, the best carbon steels always seem to be better than the best stainless steels. Just go look at the toughness differences between the Crucible carbon and stainless steels. That said, most of the popular stainless steels these days have a good balance between toughness, edge retention, ease of sharpening, and corrosion resistance, and are well suited to just about anything we will ever put them up to. Except for steels like S90V, which are about as hard to get dull as they are to re-sharpen, not a good, balanced steel, IMO.

 

[The Drifter]

I think that almost no steel will require little to no maintenance if one wants to keep the "new" look. I have had VG-10 develop rust in an air conditioned building simply from being in my pocket. I have had 1090 do likewise from being left in a glovebox for a rather lengthy period. I have lived inland and on the coast and it seems that cheap stainless, despite the problems, might be the best steel for the coastal or high humidity environment. For my purposes, I have never had 420HC, 440A, or SAK Inox rust on me whereas all better stainlesses and all carbon steels I have used have at least shown a little spotting. Some rust will not detract from the user value of the knife but a lot might be annoying. This is one big reason cheap stainless is so popular with so many makers right now. It will not rust in the showcase. It will not rust easily (if at all) in the pocket. Most general users will not notice the problems with edge retention and many will just be looking for a "pretty" knife. Just like the general trend in our society for everything to look new (new car every 2 years, facelifts on older actresses, companies moving out of older, perfectly functional facilities just to get newer ones) the same applies to knives. Most want their knife to look good and not rust, except knife nuts who are aware of the better edge retention in the steels more prone to rust.

 

[Carl64]

I find it funny that when traditionalists look at knives, you often see "too bad it's stainless". When the other 90% of folks on this board will argue forever about the valud of one steel over another, and carbon steel is hardly mentioned. I find 1095, for example, a highly functional and tough steel, despite the need for resharpening.

As someone else mentioned, Carbon steels are not used very much for production folders so there is less discussion.

We should note at this point all steels are at some level of stain resistance, not simply with or without. Some of the best tool steels are neither stainless nor non-stainless, but some kind of in-between. Even the best "stainless" steels currently used are far from being completely free of staining.

However, I find it "too bad" the industry/market focus on stainless properties has made us suffer for so long with so few options for blades that are better in other aspects. It is pretty clear how the common preference (for consumers and manufacturers) has always been for a fairly "stainless" steel over all other features so, even though the statement sounds vague in light of reality, I am still tempted to shout out "damn stainless steel."

 

[Carl64]

Without trying to get in to too much of an argument, I don't think a knife can be considered a "user" unless it can be used and neglected without worry for maintaining it, which in turn means I think no "user" should be anything other than stainless steel. Now, don't bother telling me I'm ignorant or that carbon steel takes little, if any, care, I'm fully aware.

Your statement is odd. You appear to know that you are wrong.

 

[Planterz]

I think he's mostly just stating his preference, rather than stating a fact, even though it's somewhat muddled in his tone. There's lots of people that will disagree, and that too is a matter of preference. Sometimes certain knives, like traditional slipjoints, look better used and with a layer of patina.

The problem with stainless steels in slipjoints is that it usually sucks. Low grade 420 and such. There's very little market for a high-quality stainless slipjoint, so we're left with traditional carbon steel (which performs great, but can rust), and junk stainless. Both are cheap, which is why they make them that way, and people buy them. The secondary benifit to the cheap carbon steel is that it usually works pretty damn well. Most of the people who buy a stainless one will never appreciate a better steel.

There simply isn't much market for a high-quality, stainless steel traditional knife. So you're left with paying rather high premiums for a limited edition production knife, or getting a custom.

Queen looks to be an excellent go-between with their D2 models. BTW, remind me to get a Queen MOP Small Trapper in a few weeks when I get a fresh paycheck that isn't already spoken for.

 

[Larrin]

Your statement is odd. You appear to know that you are wrong.

Well, I was trying to say it without getting in to an argument (which this isn't), but that I have obviously not completely avoided, because here we are, now having a discussion about what I said. I was saying it as kind of a mix between the maker's and buyer's perspective. People don't want to buy something that rusts, and with all the hype about how great the stainless powder steels are (and they are good, IMO), they're seeing little point in buying carbon steel knives anymore. There are people who have used carbon steels and never had any problems, and those that have had them and they rusted within weeks of purchase The market for stainless steel seems to be larger in most cases than for carbon steel. Of course, it matters a great deal which group of people you are going for, if you're an ABS Mastersmith and making bowies, you would probably sell them much easier using carbon steel, arguments against which is better aside. All of the cheap knife markets are going to keep on using the cheapest most corrosion resistant steels they've been using for quite some time now. The more expensive knives will keep on using the most popular of the "performance" stainless steels of the time, which is currently S30V.

 

[lambertiana]

I don't let myself be limited by anyone else's preconceived notions. I have and use knives in 1095, Cr-V, S30V, D2, etc. It all depends on the job at hand and which knife I think will do the best in that situation, and which ones I have on me at the time.

 

[knifeaholic]

Without trying to get in to too much of an argument, I don't think a knife can be considered a "user" unless it can be used and neglected without worry for maintaining it, which in turn means I think no "user" should be anything other than stainless steel. Now, don't bother telling me I'm ignorant or that carbon steel takes little, if any, care, I'm fully aware.

Well...I gues then that the knives that built this country...the early blacksmith knives, the original Bowie knives....the Russell Green River knives that went west....countless thousands of carbon steel pocketknives made and used from the 1860's to the 1970's.....no, I guess that none of these would be considered "user" knives. That news would probably be a shock to the men and women that tamed the frontiers, brought us into the industrial age, and won two World Wars......all with simple carbon steel blades.

 

[cattleking]

Well...I gues then that the knives that built this country...the early blacksmith knives, the original Bowie knives....the Russell Green River knives that went west....countless thousands of carbon steel pocketknives made and used from the 1860's to the 1970's.....no, I guess that none of these would be considered "user" knives. That news would probably be a shock to the men and women that tamed the frontiers, brought us into the industrial age, and won two World Wars......all with simple carbon steel blades.

Exactly. Knifemakers had it right the first time--1095. And they have spent about the last 50 years trying to develop a stain--less steel that is as good as 1095. Haven't done it yet.

 

[allenC]

I agree and disagree.

Yes, there has been a quest to find a "stainless" steel that is as good as 1095, and yes, it has been found.

I'll take VG-10 or S30V over 1095 for a small to medium folder everytime.

Allen.

 

[Bobwhite]

I find that all stainless steel developments are an attempt to reproduce carbon steel performance, while offering corrosion resistance. Corrosion has never been a serious problem for me, so I don't see why people insist on it. Execpt for some specialized applications, like in saltwater, carbon beats stainless every way that matters.

 

[brownshoe]

More steels...more fun for knife collectors. There are two applications for which stainless may be better.

First, I have a couple of mirror finished custom hand made pocket knives. Men I respect spent a lot of time and effort creating that finish. It looks real purty. I use my knives, and occasionally I don't get them clean as they should be for carbon steel. Thus the knives I buy with mirror finishes are in premium stainless to help maintain the integrity of that finish over time.

Second, most people use knives and don't clean them off. They leave them outside in the rain. They drop them in manure piles. They cut into chemical bags and just fold em up. These people need help. They need a reasonable stainless steel.

 

[pickupman]

I agree and disagree.

Yes, there has been a quest to find a "stainless" steel that is as good as 1095, and yes, it has been found.

I'll take VG-10 or S30V over 1095 for a small to medium folder everytime.

I'll take your word for it, I have never owned either. The problem is---as far as I know--nobody makes a slip joint in VG-10 or S30V.

 

[Sword and Shield]

VG-10 is all right, but I still prefer the old carbons. Easier to sharpen (even that old bear D2), and holds an edge as well, if not better. Staining does not bother me at all, and I have never had one rust, even when I was young and beat heck out of an 8OT working.

 

[Larrin]

Well...I gues then that the knives that built this country...the early blacksmith knives, the original Bowie knives....the Russell Green River knives that went west....countless thousands of carbon steel pocketknives made and used from the 1860's to the 1970's.....no, I guess that none of these would be considered "user" knives. That news would probably be a shock to the men and women that tamed the frontiers, brought us into the industrial age, and won two World Wars......all with simple carbon steel blades.

The history of steels in knifemaking has nothing to do with what I said, nor does it have anything to do with our modern-day definition of a "user", which is a term often thrown around on these forums.

 

[kamagong]

The history of steels in knifemaking has nothing to do with what I said, nor does it have anything to do with our modern-day definition of a "user", which is a term often thrown around on these forums.

The history of steels is very relevant to discussion of "users." If a knife was good enough to be considered a user in 1850, then why shouldn't it still be considered a user today? It is still a knife after all.

We don't even have to look to history. Even today a large part of the world's population uses carbon steel knives. The Nepalese for example use their famed khukuris. I've never seen a stainless khukuri, and I don't think that stainless steels lend themselves well to the khukuri design. But you'd be hard-pressed to argue that khukuris are not user knives. Nepal is a third world country, and a lot of the people there only own one knife, the khukuri. The Nepalese probably use their khukuris harder than most of us on this forum do with our knives.

 

[Ryan8]

Staining does not bother me at all, and I have never had one rust, even when I was young and beat heck out of an 8OT working.

Do you oil them? If not I'd be kind of surprised if you've never had carbon steel rust. I've seen a Buck 110 in 440C, a number of stainless tools, and blued guns rust. Oiling can easily prevent this though.