If I were to order steel from Jantz, I could choose between:
1095: "Typical chemistry C .90/1.04, Mn .60/.90"
O1: "Typical chemistry C .95, Mn 1.20, Si .30, CR .50, Va.20, Mo .50."
Kabar's 1095 Cro-Van is AISI 1095 (see above) plus chromium (CR), Vanadium (Va), and a little Molybdenum (Mo), and Nickle (Ni - not seen above)
Hmmmm.....
It has always seemed to me that Kabar's steel is more or less a non-AISI variant of O1. Perhaps the Sharon steel formula was developed before the AISI designations were standardized? Perhaps they can simply order it in quantity with this formula without an expensive formula certification?
In either case, O1 typically has better wear resistance (and a touch more stain resistance) than straight 1095. It requires a somewhat more rigorous heat-treat than 1095 due to the additional elements in the alloy, and we know kabar does this quite well. I would expect Kabar's steel to perform on par with O1 as a blade steel, and would generally perfer both of those steels over bare 1095.
Another interesting point of comparison is Aldo's 1084, well known on the maker's side of the house.
It's nominal carbon content is lower than 1095 (barely), but it too has some extra alloying elements not found in straight 1095. It is *superb* blade steel and a cinch to heat-treat:
http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/s...4-extra-spicy-or-sumpin?p=8681212#post8681212
So the numerical designations are really just the opening paragraph to the real story.
Ok, back to your regularly scheduled dain bramage.
-Daizee