Old steel vs new steel why the attitude.

[Zidfeldts]

I have a lot of traditional knives. I have a Buck with BG-42. I would dearly love to have a stockman with M390. There is no comparison between 1095 and a super steel like M390 or S90V.

 

[willc]

I don't see much attitude versus old steel and new steel in the traditional forum.
It would be neat if Vic offered blades in carbon and GEC did more stainless but that is just not the reality of it.

I like most of the steels I have tried.
One of my Imperials from the 50's has a carbon clip and stainless pen blade on it and it is right scalpel, the thinness of stock is the main factor here.
Sure it needs to be touched up more than newer blades but it is easy to sharpen and an amazing cutting tool.

We are very lucky with all of our steel choices today.
I would love to see a Vic Soldier with a 3V main blade or a PM2 in carbon steel but that probably isn't gonna happen so I'll just enjoy what I have on me now.

 

[idahoguy]

Another odd thought about the past generations and their use of carbon steel blades. If an old farmer in the '50's had a carbon steel blade, and one of say D2, he might just look at the carbon steel knife, throw it in a drawer, and say, "Hell, that damn thing won't stay sharp!"

 

[knarfeng]

Another odd thought about the past generations and their use of carbon steel blades. If an old farmer in the '50's had a carbon steel blade, and one of say D2, he might just look at the carbon steel knife, throw it in a drawer, and say, "Hell, that damn thing won't stay sharp!"

Ummm.... probably not.
Proper heat treat for stainless (requires subzero quench) was not practiced in the US until the early 50's, and was not commonplace among all commercial knife manufacturers until the 60's. D2 requires that same subzero quench. So, in the 1950's that old farmer would have hung onto his carbon steel.

 

[Obsessed with Edges]

Another odd thought about the past generations and their use of carbon steel blades. If an old farmer in the '50's had a carbon steel blade, and one of say D2, he might just look at the carbon steel knife, throw it in a drawer, and say, "Hell, that damn thing won't stay sharp!"

If he was still relying on the most common 1950s-vintage sharpening tools to maintain it, like Arkansas stones, he might discover he made a too-hasty choice in the D2 blade and can't make it sharp to begin with or adequately repair the edge if it's damaged. That's a common complaint with D2 and similar 'super steels', even today, if one doesn't have access to the right tools for it. That underscores the beauty of well-executed 1095, as it can easily be made sharp and effortlessly maintained on the simplest and most 'Traditional' of tools. I really like D2, and even love it at times. But, that's only because our options for sharpening are so much better than they used to be; a diamond hone is a godsend for D2. That said, I feel much more at ease with a blade well-done in 1095 (best example: Schrade USA's 1095), of which I'm certain I can re-bevel it, repair it or touch it up no matter what, no matter where I happen to be.


David

 

[arizonaranchman]

I have only started my venture into traditional knives recently and though blade steel has been a big deal for me with modern folders this thread is the first time I have even considered it with the traditional knives. I have been having so much fun finding them in garage sales, pawn shops and such that it has never entered my old thick skull. Thanks to the OP for the wake up call. I have my first GEC coming this week (along with a Small Sebenza 21 old habits are hard to break) and never considered anything but the fact it was a Barlow and it seems most you folks feel they are great knives and I want to try one.. I don't even know what kind of blade steel it uses which is odd for me. As an example I only bought my Blur because it was made with ELMAX. Anyway here's what I've managed to accumulate so far and don't know what steel any of them uses.

You're off to a great start! Welcome to the world of the old classics :thumbup:

 

[Dean51]

Ummm.... probably not.
Proper heat treat for stainless (requires subzero quench) was not practiced in the US until the early 50's, and was not commonplace among all commercial knife manufacturers until the 60's. D2 requires that same subzero quench. So, in the 1950's that old farmer would have hung onto his carbon steel.

Since it is kind of a what if question and we leave out the reality of what was available.
The old farmer just might like a better blade, or at least have to think about it for a bit.

My grandfather farmed with a team of horses. If he had a tractor would he use it and keep the horses for pleasure.

 

[Student762]

I live in what is classed as a rural town where I'm currently studying at the community college there and two of my manual arts teachers I know carry two knives daily. One of them grew up in this area on a farm where his mother and father used to cut and split fence posts with a cross cut saw and the tree was then subsequently split with wedges and hammers, not a chainsaw in sight. His two knives are a Victorinox classic which handles most of his tasks if a student is around and then an cheapo lockback. All stainless steel. I asked him why stainless and he said because it doesn't rust. The other farm teacher is a habitual whittler (like myself) and carries again a lockback and then a super tinker. I was chatting to him about whittling and so forth and he again said stainless doesn't rust. These are guys who still utilise the imperial system and can count out pounds pennies and shillings if you ask.
They're not knife knuts but they're users. Hard users at that. Edge geometry, retention and so forth mean little to them, but rusting clearly does. For them a knife has little romance or such attached to it and thus the benefits of lower maintenance with stainless is all that matters and that's pretty much where I fall too. I adore my Charlow in 1095 but the knives I reach for when it gets dirty or tough are made of stainless. Like my farm teachers there's little case I can make for carbon over stainless when being worked hard during a day.
Forgive the ramble but that's where I fall with this, technological advancement is just that, an advancement.

 

[knarfeng]

Since it is kind of a what if question and we leave out the reality of what was available.
The old farmer just might like a better blade, or at least have to think about it for a bit.

My grandfather farmed with a team of horses. If he had a tractor would he use it and keep the horses for pleasure.

I think you missed my point, or perhaps I did not make it very well. The stainless cutlery steel commonly available in that time period was not very good. Those old timers used carbon steel because, at that time, it was the only option for a good knife. It would not surprise me in the least if they chose stainless or tool steel if either had been commonly available with a proper heat treat.

 

[LaughingBones]

One main reason I like 1095 is if you do decide to get a patina on the blades it changes the characteristics of the knife. So in a nutshell you have 2 options of how your knife can look without actually customizing. I hope that makes sense. I do find 1095 a little easier to sharpen. As far as 1095 holding an edge I don't mind if it dulls faster. I truly enjoy sharpening free hand and almost reach Zen while doing so.

 

[Dean51]

Like today most old farmers were users, so he may not have cared about m390 but i'm bettin they would have loved 420hc.

 

[Dean51]

I think you missed my point, or perhaps I did not make it very well. The stainless cutlery steel commonly available in that time period was not very good. Those old timers used carbon steel because, at that time, it was the only option for a good knife. It would not surprise me in the least if they chose stainless or tool steel if either had been commonly available with a proper heat treat.

Good point, I got it but my point was what if say 420hc was available. Forgetting about what was available.

 

[afishhunter]

I don't need a "super steel". I'm not sure if 440A is a "higher" grade steel than 425HC or that 4114(?) German Krupp steel that Cold Steel uses on the Eland and Kudu (among others) or if the stainless that Victorinox uses is a "better" steel.
All I know is all my knives cut what I need to cut, and don't need resharpened during or after use.
I personally think a proper heat treat is more important than what steel is used. I am old enough to remember when virtually every knife from dollar gas station specials and up had "440C" stamped on the blade, during the late 60's to mid 70's. Most were garbage. They would not take or hold an edge. I have a Gerber lock back, no idea what the blade steel is (I have not looked at that knife in going on 8 or 9 years). It dulls slicing warm butter. I am convinced Gerber forgotto heat treat the blade at all - or did a really bad job of it. A butter knife can be made sharper and will hold an edge better than that Gerber.

 

[davek14]

I don't need a "super steel". I'm not sure if 440A is a "higher" grade steel than 425HC or that 4114(?) German Krupp steel that Cold Steel uses on the Eland and Kudu (among others) or if the stainless that Victorinox uses is a "better" steel.
All I know is all my knives cut what I need to cut, and don't need resharpened during or after use.
I personally think a proper heat treat is more important than what steel is used. I am old enough to remember when virtually every knife from dollar gas station specials and up had "440C" stamped on the blade, during the late 60's to mid 70's. Most were garbage. They would not take or hold an edge. I have a Gerber lock back, no idea what the blade steel is (I have not looked at that knife in going on 8 or 9 years). It dulls slicing warm butter. I am convinced Gerber forgotto heat treat the blade at all - or did a really bad job of it. A butter knife can be made sharper and will hold an edge better than that Gerber.

So, you are a "steel snob", going for "middies" (mid range steel). Me too.

It's all relative.

Sometimes we forget that most folks that have a knife have something like that Gerber these days.

 

[pinnah]

• non-stainless holds a razor edge longer than 440C, D2 or other carbide-loaded alloys. (True statement, by the way.)

Frank, three questions come to mind.


First, could you say more about the different ways that large carbide (e.g. 440C) and fine carbide (e.g. 1095, 12C27) wear down and dull so as to expand on your statement above. I suspect it has to do with what happens with the large carbides at the apex and the basic difference between a "toothy" edge (440C) and a "keen" or "razor" edge (1095, 12C27).

Second, is it your opinion that different cutting tasks tend to favor large or fine carbides? My sense is that large carbide steels are better for jobs cutting fibrous materials (meat as in deer processing or rope as in on boats) or for cutting very abrasive materials (cardboard boxes) while small carbide steels do better where a keen edge able to withstand lateral stress well such as working with wood. I notice, for example, that most wood working knives are fine carbide steels.

Third, with the caveat that Sandvik makes most of their money selling fine carbide steels, I'd be curious on your (and others) thoughts on the comparison table they've posted here:
http://smt.sandvik.com/en/products/.../knife-steel-knowledge/different-steel-types/


My simple sense is that
+ 440C and D2 make sense for folks who like a toothy working edge for a longer time
+ carbon or fine carbide make sense for people who work with wood or who use blades abusively
+ medium carbide powder steel make sense for people who want long edge life and don't use their blades abusively

 

[The Mastiff]

In the 60's as a child I was given chores that required a knife without having any money to purchase a knife or knowledge about what I'd need or see for sale. My first knife was one I found on the ground walking through a construction site. A yellow imperial fish knife with one scale gone and the blade snapped in half and reground on a bench grinder. It was not the greatest but it worked. Later when I began sharpening my knives I noticed that some steels were easier to sharpen and took better edges with my oil stone. I then learned the difference between carbon and stainless steels.

I didn't much like stainless steels and still don't prefer them. If I am going to have stainless it's going to be a good one. I dislike 440C more than any other steel. I'd rather use 440A or Aus6, 420HC, etc.. IMO, it has the worst of the stainless habits without the redeeming qualities the new premium and super premium steels have. I can get the wear resistance of 440C with better grain structure and performance and without the poor edge qualities that make me not like it so much. Powder steels sharpen easier as well as usually have better performance. 440C is the least tough, edge stable of the stainless steels of note used for cutlery. S110V can give so much better performance in all respects at rc 62-63 it's like a flying saucer to a DC3 ( OK if you like DC3's. There are still plenty flying).

On the other hand I still prefer non stainless tool steels over even the super premium powder stainless steels. I really enjoy sharpening and using my O-1 ,W2 or 1095, or 52100 blades. I also like 3V, 4V, Cruwear up to M4 HC, M2, L6, and many others.

What I don't like are patinas. I keep my blades rust free and occasionally satin them to make scratches less noticeable. I had my share of rusted out, ground down snapped off blades and if I don't have to go that route I won't.

All knives need some order of maintenance. Even modern high performing stainless ones. That being said I'll carry the knives I like with the blade steels I prefer. The GEC models in O-1 were really some of the best performing blades I've had in over 40 years of cutlery use. It's a shame I can't get one in nice Ebony.

Joe

 

[Dean51]

I got a lot of good answers about why 1095 is a favorite with traditional knives, so thanks to every one.
I don't want this post to turn into a steel vs steel debate, that was not my intent.
I can spend all day drooling over a 1950 Ford F-1 pickup with a flat head V8 but I drive a 2000 stepside with a more modern V8. It just works better for me. I love looking at GEC's and old knives but I use Queen, Canal Street and Northwoods in 440C, D2 & CPM 154.


I guess i like a blend of old and new but each to their own, it's all good.
The way I look at steel is there is no bad steel, just the wrong steel for the job, or the wrong steel for a persons taste or experience.


Earlier there was a reference to what the old farmers would use if they had a choice. I'm thinking they'ed be sitting on the porch endlessly debating the merits if 1095 vs stainless.

 

[Peregrin]

I guess i like a blend of old and new but each to their own, it's all good.
The way I look at steel is there is no bad steel, just the wrong steel for the job, or the wrong steel for a persons taste or experience.

I don't mean my comment to become a discussion of them but it's like "boxers or briefs?". No right, no wrong, just varying opinions.

 

[idahoguy]

I'm new to screwing around with these knives and different steels, so there's no steel that's not interesting. I love sharpening blades, and have invested enough in sharpening tools to have no trouble getting D2 shaving sharp. What material a blade's made of gets right to the core of what a knife is.
One question has gone unanswered. I've seen many, many beautiful custom knives on this forum, none with simple carbon steels. Why is that?

 

[brownshoe]

I'm new to screwing around with these knives and different steels, so there's no steel that's not interesting. I love sharpening blades, and have invested enough in sharpening tools to have no trouble getting D2 shaving sharp. What material a blade's made of gets right to the core of what a knife is.
One question has gone unanswered. I've seen many, many beautiful custom knives on this forum, none with simple carbon steels. Why is that?

There are some custom makers who use simple carbon steels. I believe John Loyd is one. However, most buyers do not want to shell out $500 minimum for a custom knife that then rusts and pits because they forgot to rinse it off after using it at the bar. Even if it is a safe queen, improper wiping off of fingerprints before storage can leave a permanent mark. Most buyers want stainless to protect their investment and make it easier for resale. For me, I like pretty knives that are shiny, thus I would never get a custom that is not in stainless steel.

I think it's neat that GEC can charge premium prices for low cost steel I am no cutler, but I've read that 1095 is a lot easier to process to a finished knife than high carbon stainless 154CM, ATS34 and even Queen's D2 (which is heat treated out of house by Peters.)

Per the original question, I think that collectors of traditional knives have no real rational reason to prefer 1095, other than they like rust and patina. Which goes to the arena of "one man's meat is another man's poison." Those that put down knives that are stainless are just missing out. A knifeknut has room in their heart for any steel that holds an edge for the task it's designed for