INFI & SR101 Weight Comparison

Status
Not open for further replies.
Regardless of who knows what there are actual machines (spectrometers) that can read the chemical composition of metal alloys. That means, if needed and a sample was around (meaning any old infi knife), we (as in us as people, or even not we, just Jerry and crew) would be able to find the composition of old infi and have it replicated (as long as there are foundries making steel). Then it would all come down to the heat treating process as far as hardness. I'm guessing the change to infi was either because an ingredient became to expensive (nickel swung $5-$25 a pound while I worked in a foundry, moly was consistently expensive) or the new comp is actually more durable, corrosion resistant, bend/chip resistant.

Good guess. Both nickel and cobalt are expensive. And making a formulation for limited production like Busse was/is expensive. The new formula being closer to mod A8 is certainly much more economical and probably offers the same level of toughness at the reduced cost. Nickel adds toughness and Cobalt adds resistance to heat and increases strength. Both add corrosion resistance. You can attain higher hardness with slight additions of Cobalt. Nickel gives you added toughness. Thus the old INFI liked to live at 60-62 instead of todays INFI living at 58-60. If you look at the performance of old INFI it never chipped, not even at a higher hardness than modern infi.
 
So will you say that 15 years later with so much development on metallurgy knowledge and equipment but INFI is getting worse in performance than the post 2001 made one..??

I highly doubt about that... the HT protocol might even changed many times... and speak of the tweaked composition, In fact, cobalt and nitrogen are not that anything special or excessively expensive alloy at all...

Looking forward Jerry to chime in about this.

I to have only had newer INFI bur I'm inclined to agree with you. It became clear to me that Jerry takes the steel performance very serious when plans to make trash1 with 1095 were canceled because Jerry said he couldn't get it to perform to his standard an they stuck with sr101. That's not infi but it shows his thinking. Unless there were some key ingredient that became to hard to aquire I can't see him changing it to lesser performance...especially being his bread an butter..I'm just speculating but it wouldnt make sense.
 
The modern INFI isn't a new formula. It was there close to the beginning. Hint.
 
Mod INFI?

Ding ding.

Here goes. I did test an ergo and I did test an old basic. And yes, Modern INFI is modified INFI from the original basics(at least according to my tests and in my opinion). The ergo BM I tested lacked cobalt and nickel as well, so you see, the modern INFI has been around since, oh lets say 1999 ish. It was a more economical alternative to the more expensive original INFI.

So all this talk about INFI changing in modern times is not the case. The current formula of INFI has been around since nearly the beginning. Nothing has changed since there was two formulas for INFI. Get it....

What gave me the hint was my FBMLE. I tested that one first. Then I knew something was up.

Edited to add, that since I have only tested a few knives nothing is truly conclusive, just like any other kind of testing, it is with many samples that you get a good idea of what is going on. Also, the testing method I used does not detect Nitrogen or Carbon. The presumption is that those have not changed.
 
Last edited:
Cobalt and nickel are relatively expensive compare to other metal like chromium or iron... but when it come to steel manufacturing, the price of alloy ingredient is just a small factor of overall price of steel itself.

You will see so many steel which considered "inexpensive" contained much higher amount of cobalt or nickel than your old INFI... to name few? VG10, N690, 15N20 etc. the latest steel that Spyderco used for their sprint run PM-HAP40 contain 8% of cobalt...

However, alloy composition is only one aspect of steel performance. The another aspect that even more importance is heat treat... There are quite a number steel which invented very long time ago but just became popular for knife making thanks to the continuously evolving of metallurgy knowledge...

I wouldn't not expected nowadays INFI to has any lesser performance than the old one because all of these.

Jerry even mention that he consistently improve on what he doing.



SR-101 started off in 2002 with a slightly modified 52100. We actually tweaked the Carbon and the Chromium content down a bit and increased the Manganese for added toughness.

This provided a much tougher steel than regular 52100 but with similar edge holding when treated the way we treat steel.

This set the benchmark for the performance we expected out of our steel labeled as SR-101.

Over the years we have consistently delivered performance that equals or exceeds those original benchmarks.

It cannot be stated strongly enough that the heat-treating protocol is, by far, the most determinant factor in steel performance.

The use of differential heat treating, martempering, super quenches, and deep, dry cryogenics, with alternating temper cycles can make certain steels perform far outside of the predetermined envelope and extremely unlike what you would normally expect.

Without going into the long involved history of our heat treating protocols, I can assure you that we continue to evolve and that minor changes in analysis combined with these protocols deliver the performance that has made these blades legendary.

I'm often entertained by the many drawn out debates over the analysis of knife steels. It's kinda like arguing over the ingredients of barbecue ribs or a cake and then deciding how that will make the cake or the barbecue taste when in fact the secret is in how it is prepared, and then baked or heated.

Ever had caveman grilled porkchops? You add nothing! You simply throw them directly onto the hot coals of the fire and then flip them once. Within a few minute, if you know what you're doing, tears will be flowing down your face because you are eating the greatest chunk of hog that you have ever had and you are convinced that the particular hog that these chops were cut from must have been weened on Johnnie Walker Blue and lived on a diet that was rich in bacon!!! Delicious!!!

My brother Dan and Beef are experts at this style of grilling. I am not. Whatever it is that they do is magical. Downright magical!

I'm a simple man who thinks that maybe the best way to find out how something is going to taste is to simply taste it! If it tastes better than any others that I have tried, then I really don't care what you put into it.

If I buy a rifle that consistently shoots sub-MOA at any distance, I guess I don't really care if it's made out of 416 SS or 4140 or some trade name steel that I have never heard of. I only care about the performance!

Wanna know why SR-101 and INFI kick ass? We know how to grill them!

The ingredients truly are the smallest part of the secret. . . . The heat-treating protocol is the majority.

Wanna know how our knives perform? Beat the living crap out of one! No worries. . . Our guarantee has you covered. The word “OUR” is very important here. Why? Because we actually make “OUR” own knives. We have for over 33 years. We don't farm our designs out and then discontinue our warranty when we change who manufactures our blades. We don't go overseas and try to get them made on the cheap. We put enormous amounts of unseen hours in “grilling” our blades to perfection.

To this day,we continue to stand as the ONLY manufacturer in over 16 years who has stood in front of a “LIVE” audience and proven our performance claims.

If you wanna have some fun, go ask any other knife manufacturer if they would like duplicate our tests and prove their steel's performance in front of a “LIVE” audience at a major gun and knife show. . . .Well, it's not actually fun unless you like the sounds of crickets chirping.

Let's Drink!

Jerry

 
Last edited:
Cobalt and nickel are relatively expensive compare to other metal like chromium or iron... but when it come to steel manufacturing, the price of alloy ingredient is just a small factor of overall price of steel itself.

You will see so many steel which considered "inexpensive" contained much higher amount of cobalt or nickel than your old INFI... to name few? VG10, N690, 15N20 etc. the latest steel that Spyderco used for their sprint run PM-HAP40 contain 8% of cobalt...

However, alloy composition is only one aspect of steel performance. The another aspect that even more importance is heat treat... There are quite a number steel which invented very long time ago but just became popular for knife making thanks to the continuously evolving of metallurgy knowledge...

I wouldn't not expected nowadays INFI to has any lesser performance than the old one because all of these.

Jerry even mention that he consistently improve on what he doing.

WOW^^^ that's awesome you located that.. ya for me to believe that Busse willingly settled for a lesser performance version of INFI when he has a better INFI in his possession.. Id have to hear Jerry himself state it. if it was a cost thing... he would just increase the price an explain why, an most Busse fans would pay it all the same!
 
I to have only had newer INFI bur I'm inclined to agree with you. It became clear to me that Jerry takes the steel performance very serious when plans to make trash1 with 1095 were canceled because Jerry said he couldn't get it to perform to his standard an they stuck with sr101. That's not infi but it shows his thinking. Unless there were some key ingredient that became to hard to aquire I can't see him changing it to lesser performance...especially being his bread an butter..I'm just speculating but it wouldnt make sense.

Naive to think that economics doesn't play into a businesses survival.
Steel manufacturing can be cheap when large quantities are involved. When INFI and Mod INFI were brought out they were not cheap as small quantities in batches were made. As I stated above, I believe modern INFI to be the same as modified INFI in the original Basics. Why Busse chose it over the original formula I don't know. But I can say this, some including Cliff thought that the Modified INFI might as tough as INFI at a slight loss in edge holding and corrosion resistance. If toughness was the primary concern, then modified INFI being cheaper and at least as tough would have made it a simple choice on which to move on with production with one steel. There is no doubt in my mind that modern infi is the same as the original mod infi in the basics. The original line of SHBM was $347 I think. Todays std ASHBM's went for near $400? So why so little change in price. If you account for inflation, today's ASHBM std should be closer to $700. Also by your logic SR101 is a better steel than todays INFI. Since Busse would never put out a knife of inferior steel at any cost.

It sure is easy to keep costs down when you have companies like spyderco, boker, benchmade, etc, buying hundreds of thousands of lbs of steel. It is a whole different story when a small company like busse does it.
 
You make several compelling points.. but Busse clearly has built the business to have an economy (scrap yard) standard (swamp rat) and their premium product (Busse) So I don't think my logic implies that their standard products would be better than their premium offerings. Jerry obviously wanted to have the cheaper options to fit the budget of more people.. in fact the fact that Busse has built two sub companies further convinces me that they would be less likely to sacrifice quality in their premium line. And product prices (as seen by the consumer) don't always follow inflation.. not knowing what their original markup on their knives was..Jerry may have given up profit margin over the years to keep his blades in a certain price range...its all speculation...but I see what your saying to.
 
Last edited:
You make several compelling points.. but Busse clearly has built the business to have an economy (scrap yard) standard (swamp rat) and their premium product (Busse) So I don't think my logic implies that their standard products would be better than their premium offerings. Jerry obviously wanted to have the cheaper options to fit the budget of more people.. in fact the fact that Busse has built two sub companies further convinces me that they would be less likely to sacrifice quality in their premium line. And product prices (as seen by the consumer) don't always follow inflation.. not knowing what their original markup on their knives was..Jerry may have given up profit margin over the years to keep his blades in a certain price range...its all speculation...but I see what your saying to.

I doubt Jerry gave up profit margin, in fact I bet his margin is better now. But I am sure part of it is better machinery, and less manual labor. Busse certainly would not have sacrificed quality. But if steel A and Steel B perform within a few percentiles of each other but steel B is 70% of the cost of steel A, then simple economics takes over. The cost gets transferred to us and all is good. But the other poster suggested that the INFI used today is better, and that is pure BS. The original line is what gave Busse's INFI the reputation.
 
I doubt Jerry gave up profit margin, in fact I bet his margin is better now. But I am sure part of it is better machinery, and less manual labor. Busse certainly would not have sacrificed quality. But if steel A and Steel B perform within a few percentiles of each other but steel B is 70% of the cost of steel A, then simple economics takes over. The cost gets transferred to us and all is good. But the other poster suggested that the INFI used today is better, and that is pure BS. The original line is what gave Busse's INFI the reputation.

So are you saying the current INFI falls below the performance level of the original? an is the scenario you pointed out something you know to have happened? Just curious what leads you to believe it lacks in performance in comparison to the early INFI..? You mentioned tests that showed a difference in its composition..but what leads you to believe its performance suffered due to the change? Just curious?
 
...I just read your post from earlier, so you are saying there is evidence that current infi is shown to be of lesser performance.
 
So are you saying the current INFI falls below the performance level of the original? an is the scenario you pointed out something you know to have happened? Just curious what leads you to believe it lacks in performance in comparison to the early INFI..? You mentioned tests that showed a difference in its composition..but what leads you to believe its performance suffered due to the change? Just curious?

Based on the toughness I have seen out of modern INFI and the original Basics(same thing) I would say that in the toughness department, no. Based on my own experience with corrosion resistance and edge holding was definitely on the side of the cobalt/nickel INFI formula and higher hardness. Anyone who has used the INFI in the old Steel hearts and BM's knows how that edge just seemed to go on forever.
 
Interesting stuff man, loved reading your take on it...but a lot of people have invested in Busse based on INFIs old tests..an being that we don't know the facts or anything for certain, I would not want to give anyone any false ideas about Busse,INFI, or anything else in that regard. Of all the blades I've owned..when I discovered infi I was an still am convinced that it is the best all round heavy use blade steel. Don't want anyone getting the wrong idea.
 
It is definitely and I have proven it to myself many times over.
 
We have never made a change in steel analysis because of cost. NEVER! That is nickel and dime crap and that is not the way we think or operate.

We do not have a single customer who wouldn't gladly pay an additional few dollars for a knife in order to have the highest performance obtainable. Cost of materials and manufacture have NEVER been a consideration at Busse. We are all about performance.

Here's the bottom line.

If the SHTF and I had a choice between an original Battle Mistress from the 1998 first run of 300 and one that we made last week, I would, without hesitation, walk barefoot over the entire first batch from 1998 in order to get to the one we made last week!

End of story.

Lets drink!:thumbup:

Jerry:D







.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top