- Joined
- Jan 17, 2004
- Messages
- 5,014
Since thy were interviewed for history and not metallurgy I’m not sure why it matters.
Did the “Definitions” section not spell that out clearly enough?
-
The BladeForums.com 2024 Traditional Knife is ready to order! See this thread for details: https://www.bladeforums.com/threads/bladeforums-2024-traditional-knife.2003187/
Price is$300$250 ea (shipped within CONUS). If you live outside the US, I will contact you after your order for extra shipping charges.
Order here: https://www.bladeforums.com/help/2024-traditional/ - Order as many as you like, we have plenty.
Carbon vs Stainless Steel
- Thread starter Larrin
- Start date
It matters if your article is "science" per discussion of science vs. BS.
Yeah your definitions were clear, that's why I wondered why you wrote the piece.
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2004
- Messages
- 5,014
I guess I naively assumed my own qualifications were enough.
The reasons why I write the articles are in the about me section of the website.
+1. My thoughts exactly. I have a lot to learn and this was a great read.
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2005
- Messages
- 5,295
Geez! Sounds like Slick Willie trying to define the word, "if."
Sounds like SS has carbon in it. OK.
Let's get back to the debate. Which do you like best and why.
I think you know where I stand. I have a Mora knife. Guess which steel is in it?
Hint..it has a SWEET apple cider patina.
Sounds like SS has carbon in it. OK.
Let's get back to the debate. Which do you like best and why.
I think you know where I stand. I have a Mora knife. Guess which steel is in it?
Hint..it has a SWEET apple cider patina.
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2009
- Messages
- 11,809
True. I work with many different steels and once they are machined or ground, there is absolutely no discernible difference.
Since we're discussing BS vs. science, per the article's source material, of the one's I've met or read, there's a lot of BSers in that list and not one metallurgist. The references:
[1] Russell, A.G. (2018, July 20). Phone interview.
[2] Bagwell, Bill. (2018, July 20). Phone interview.
[3] https://knifemakersguild.com/history.php
[4] Hibben, Gil and Wes. (2018, July 21). Phone interview.
[5] http://www.hibbenknives.com/Gil-Hibben
[6] http://www.americanbladesmith.com/index.php?section=pages&id=117
[7] http://www.americanbladesmith.com/uploads/file/Testing/JS Test FINAL 4-24-2010.pdf
[8] Fikes, Jimmy. (2018, July 23). Phone interview.
[9] Warner, Ken. Knives,’84. DBI Books, 1983.
[10] Henry, D.E. Collins Machetes and Bowies, 1845-1965. Krause Publications, 1995.
The simple fact is that stainless steel contains carbon and is carbon steel. Some stainless is even high carbon steel. I learned this years ago when I first started learning about knives and talking to knife makers at shows.
Me: "Do you use carbon or stainless steel?"
Old Maker: "Well son, stainless steel contains carbon or else it wouldn't be steel."
Per taste, the human tongue is very sensitive, we all know that, unless you smoke
The article only mentioned "carbon-free steel" in the context of not discussing carbon free steel.
You know how there are people out there that want to cut everything down to size? If he didn't make a note of excluding carbon free steel from the discussion, then someone would make it about "carbon free steel".
Seems like this is turning into an excersise in semantics about carbon free steel.
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2018
- Messages
- 99
Far from a pro on steel. I honestly do not know what stainless to suggest. Z-Finit, N360, and Nitrogen based steels are 3 I can think of that are pretty tough for stainless. I doubt S7 at 3.3% chromium gives much to stain resistance as my D2 folder is 12% Chromium and considered semi stainless. I have to keep all my blades oiled even Stainless. But Stainless is way less maintenance and even with oiling I have had rust and pits form on 1095 carbon on a humid day. But rest assured Stainless Steel is going to surpass Carbon in toughness in the future and comes close right now. Technology in steels will favor stainless over carbon as time passes.
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2009
- Messages
- 11,809
Maybe so, but carbon steels will always have a place in our hearts!
....And on our belts!
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2018
- Messages
- 99
Mine also. I prefer Carbon in my machete and axe. I also have a D2 folder I am fond of. But with that said I am all for the new age of steel.Maybe so, but carbon steels will always have a place in our hearts!
....And on our belts!
DocJD
Basic Member
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2016
- Messages
- 11,697
This "initial condition" is very artificial and is not what is experienced in actually using the knives as tools over time . Not without a lot of maintenance that masks the true nature of the metal .
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2009
- Messages
- 11,809
Even so, can you tell if its 1084, 1095, 5160? From the patina?
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2008
- Messages
- 25,970
Patina is NOT the "true nature of the metal". The bare finish is. That's what it looks like when not covered with an oxide layer. Just like how aluminum will develop a dingy grey appearance or copper will develop a dull brown under verdigris, or silver will develop a purple-black blotchy surface. That layer of oxide does not represent the nature of the metal. Try making a knife out of pure black iron oxide (magnetite) and see how it holds up -- I believe you'll find its performance qualities are quite different than those of blade steel of any sort. And many people historically kept knives, swords, and other items bright and shining through rigorous maintenance. But keep moving those goal posts.
DocJD
Basic Member
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2016
- Messages
- 11,697
No , I'd have to smell it !
After some lengthy fondling , prayer and meditation and a little help from my spirit guide (and a modest service charge) I would have an ecstatic vision telling me the exact chemical formula and HT .
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2008
- Messages
- 25,970
Nope. Re-read those quotes. I said you wouldn't be able to tell which one was stainless vs. carbon steel. That is not the same as there being zero visual difference. There is often a very slight difference in the luster or tone of one steel vs. another, which is largely why you can see the lamination line in laminated blades. BUT that doesn't tell you which family that steel belongs to (stainless vs. carbon). So you can say "oh, that one is blade A and that one is blade B" after examining them and having them swapped around on you, but you wouldn't be able to reliably say "oh, that one is obviously the stainless one and this one is obviously the carbon one", presuming equal finish (bare, bright steel.) For instance, the two blades I posted fairly clearly have a slightly different tone to them. The top one is a bit warmer in tone while the bottom one is cooler. That's not just the lighting. I took a number of photos from different angles to try to capture them with with as equal lighting as I could, and that difference can be seen in person when handling them and turning them in the light. Furthermore, if I were to blindfold you and hand you just the (blunted, for safety) blade of each knife, you would not be able to tell me reliably which was which.
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2015
- Messages
- 965
Sorry maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but you are contradicting yourself.
Here's what an actual steel manufacturer has to say about the visual difference in Carbon and Stainless steel.
"How to Distinguish Carbon and Stainless Steel ?
Stainless steel is lustrous and comes in various grades that can increase the chromium in the alloy until the steel finish is as reflective as a mirror. To the casual observer, carbon steel and stainless steel are easy to distinguish. Carbon steel is dull, with a matte finish that is comparable to a cast iron pot or wrought iron fencing." http://pearlitesteel.com/carbon-steel-vs-stainless-steel/
The interesting thing for me is this page continues to say...
"There is an in built chromium oxide layer in stainless steel, which is not present in carbon steel."
So to say how Aluminum has a oxide layer and Carbon steels patina is not a part of the nature of the steel is false. Stainless wouldn't be stainless without it's chromium oxide layer.
I'm worried if I actually ordered something from you if I would get the right stuff or not.
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2008
- Messages
- 25,970
The chromium oxide layer is what makes stainless stainless, certainly. To the point where after a lot of manufacturing steps when making a stainless product they'll actually perform a step known as "passivating" the steel to force the oxide layer to develop. In the case of stainless steel's chromium oxide layer, however, it's transparent.
If it's so easy to tell the difference, go ahead and take a guess at which blade is which. You've got a 50/50 chance just flipping a coin, so you stand a good chance of getting it right on that basis alone.
And you said:
The patina in that context is actually what is masking the metal. Not the absence of one. The oxide itself is not the steel, regardless of the surface layer it can and will form on its surface under the right conditions. The property of the steel is that it will form the coating. The coating itself is not a property of the steel, but rather, came from it. The coating will not exhibit the qualities of the base metal. Those are two different things.
If it's so easy to tell the difference, go ahead and take a guess at which blade is which. You've got a 50/50 chance just flipping a coin, so you stand a good chance of getting it right on that basis alone.
And you said:
The patina in that context is actually what is masking the metal. Not the absence of one. The oxide itself is not the steel, regardless of the surface layer it can and will form on its surface under the right conditions. The property of the steel is that it will form the coating. The coating itself is not a property of the steel, but rather, came from it. The coating will not exhibit the qualities of the base metal. Those are two different things.
DocJD
Basic Member
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2016
- Messages
- 11,697
Actually you CAN sometimes tell stainless from carbon steel by sight even when they're both bright polished. But only if the stainless wasn't passivated. If there's any free iron left on the surface it can give a little bit of a barely-there yellowish tint to the stainless if it oxidizes. It's not even really noticeable in most cases unless they're side by side. Passivating removes the free iron from the surface of the stainless and helps facilitate the chromium oxide layer.
And I'm fine with "ultra-low-carbon" for maraging steels. Much more accurate IMO. a non-zero number should not be stated as zero.
And I'm fine with "ultra-low-carbon" for maraging steels. Much more accurate IMO. a non-zero number should not be stated as zero.
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2006
- Messages
- 42,979
You've taken the manufacturer's comments out of context. Then you make that crack about a well respected vendor's expertise. Poor form. And noted.
That's a steel manufacturer who talking about stacks of steel stored in a warehouse. That's a far different scenario from a polished blade which has been properly stored.
Unpolished and exposed, non-stainless steel is dull.
Polished and protected, it's every bit as shiny as stainless.
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2013
- Messages
- 10,017
The chromium oxide layer is what makes stainless stainless, certainly. To the point where after a lot of manufacturing steps when making a stainless product they'll actually perform a step known as "passivating" the steel to force the oxide layer to develop. In the case of stainless steel's chromium oxide layer, however, it's transparent.
If it's so easy to tell the difference, go ahead and take a guess at which blade is which. You've got a 50/50 chance just flipping a coin, so you stand a good chance of getting it right on that basis alone.
And you said:
The patina in that context is actually what is masking the metal. Not the absence of one. The oxide itself is not the steel, regardless of the surface layer it can and will form on its surface under the right conditions. The property of the steel is that it will form the coating. The coating itself is not a property of the steel, but rather, came from it. The coating will not exhibit the qualities of the base metal. Those are two different things.
FortyTwo, you're getting at what I was going to elaborate on next, in this and your previous posts. Firstly, an oxide layer does change the visual appearance of an alloy. So-called "heat anodizing" even makes metals change the spectrum of the rainbow due to altering the thickness of the oxide layer on the surface. Even the thin chromium oxide layer that forms on the surface of stainless steel, and probably the tiny chromium carbides themselves being a different composition than iron carbide, will scatter light ever so slightly differently than the same steel sans the high level of chromium.
If someone made a stainless steel-clad san mai laminated knife, where the whole knife was was polished evenly, I'm sure that there are many people out there who could say, confidently, that it was a stainless clad san mai, because the high chrome steel on the flats would look that much different than the high carbon core.
There is a whole art form to visually appreciating the minute details of grain structures, crystalline phases and varying carbon levels just within just carbon steel alone, in a Japanese sword. Within a polished sword, one can see which parts of the sword are martensite, pearlite, etc., and also which parts are high, medium, and lower carbon steel, or iron. The blade is observed very closely in good light, and various angles to observe the scattering of light from the steel's surface.
The tatara smelters and sword smiths themselves, visually and through feel, accurately evaluate the purity, quality, and general carbon content of the various pieces of steel before forging begins. If one were to slip a disguised piece of stainless steel into the sample box, the sword smith would immediately tell that the piece of stainless steel had a huge amount of some alien alloying element in it upon feel and observation. Why would he not be able to say that is was steel highly doped with chromium (stainless steel) after some practice picking out stainless? A HUGE amount of chromium should make reliably observable changes just as a tiny amount of carbon does.
With all this talk about science, I don't see the "science" behind the supposed impossibility of seeing the difference between normal carbon and stainless steels. All I see are some people stating it's impossible, and others stating that it is possible, with no "proof." I don't understand the strong motivation to believe the difference can't be seen and sensed.