Stainless...what's the deal?

[hollowdweller]

I like some.

The stuff Bark River uses and also the stuff Fallkniven uses is great.

 

[jackknife]

I have to agree with most of what baldtaco said.

There is so much BS hype in the knife market, and it's an artificially created market at that. The knife makers and companies try to make each knife buyer think they have the modern Excaliber in their hot little hands, and people try to make more of it than there is. It's a hunk of steel thats tool, get over it. Most of the modern stainless is darn good stuff. Even the stuff of 30 years ago was good.

In 1967 I went over on my tour in Vietnam. The issue knife was the Camillus MK2, or what people called a Ka-bar no matter who made it. At the same time on every army base, Buck was the big item at the PX. If you wanted something better than the issue knife, guys bought a Buck. Everyone, I mean everyone, had a 110 on thier belt. Going out in the field, one saw a heck of a lot of Buck 119 specials on belts. Young GI's being young GI's, all the knives saw heavy use bordering on abuse. I don't recall seeing a Buck special breaking, But I saw a couple of the Camillus MK2's break. So much for 1960's carbon vs stainless. They were used a lot for busting the metal bands off ammo and other boxes.

And speaking of the Buck 110, they have to be one of the most abused knives on earth. Every construction worker, oil field roughneck, farmer and others making a living outdoors in the 60's and 70's used the 110, and it developed a repuation for an entire knife company to become an icon for a quality knife. This was not because they didn't work well. One could make a good arguement that Buck, raised the bar for all the factory makes of knives. If you go over to scandinavia, the huge bulk of Mora's produced are stainless steel, and I don't see many brokeen mora's. I have seen them pounded into trees, pushed on, levered on, and pounded on while battoning. The mora's seem to have their cult following as well. I'm sure this is not because they are not good knives.

Plain and simple, with modern steels, there is not a lot of differnce anymore. BUT... the stainless steels are harder and more expensive to make. Stainless steel is a PITA to work with. I spent 30 years as a machinist, and I turned enough stainless parts on a Harding lathe, and did enough parts on a Bridgeport mill to tell you that stainless can eat end mills and other tools. It's gummy, hard, and you need to run a ton of coolent on it. It will eat up three times the sanding belts.

In the early 1960's when Smith and Wesson came out with the first stainless steel revolver, the model 60, I recall seeing an article about it. The S&W personel said that gang drilling a normal cyclinder, the bits would last 50 to 60 cylinders. Making a model 60 cyclinder they only got 10 to 12 cylinders out a gang of bits. Stainless steel can work harden on you, and gall the tooling.

Carbon steel is way easier for a maker to produce. Pure and simple. If I were a knifemaker today, I'd try to hype the hell out of my 1095 blades, because I don't want to screw around with that stainless. Stainless also has a far narrower window for heat treat. With carbon you can do it with a torch and get it halfway right and still end up with a good knife. Pump that anti stainless hype out there. Add in the old BS from the 1950's that stainless is no good, spouted by all the old timers, and there you have it.

It all comes down to a artificially created steel snobbery.

The knife makers get to make their stuff out of a material thats cheaper and easier to deal with, and charge you more for it. It's a win/win for them.

The truth is only about 1 in 100 people will ever be able to really tell the difference, if that many. Even then it's goiing to be a close thing.

 

[BlackHills]

I guess I'm a retro-grouch but I don't really like stainless. In my experience with the ones I have used (ATS34, 440C and 12C27 from well respected makers) I've found no benefits and many minuses, i.e. harder to sharpen, don't hold an edge as well, etc. I can understand that in a wet/humid environment they are a better choice but that doesn't apply to me. I will say I haven't tried any of the newer 'miracle' steels so they may better than the types I've used.

CPM 154 is suppose to be really good stuff, not like those cheap stainless stuff. Plus with Crucible out the picture, CPM 154 is going to be hard to come by.

I've read that CPM154 will be back on the market soon, likely in January. It's going to be made under license by Niagra Specialty Metals.

 

[SouthernCross]

I know I'm a "different breed" to most here because I use stainless knives

Not all stainless steels are created equally.

With a polished edge, I can't ever say that I have noticed a tendency of either VG10 or SGPS to chip.

Both sides of the ribcage of this goat was cut through with a stainless 3G knife with no chipping..

I have battoned through knotty seasoned hardwood for a weeks worth of campfires with a stainless 3G knife with an edging steel at 62 RC with no chipping. Also note that because of the size of the wood, it is the very tip of the knife is being struck with zero damage to the edge or the tip :thumbup:

[youtube]Jkpn1_SaKvc[/youtube]



With regards to stainless "not holding an edge as long", take a look at the edge holding of 3G. What you are about to see is it shaving seasoned hardwood, including through knots, after a weeks worth of bushcraft use without touching up the edge at all . And guess what...no chipping either.
[youtube]je8CgtP1-jU[/youtube]

Personally I don't have a problem sharpening stainless knives when needed. The 3G takes a couple of minutes longer than properly heat treated A2. Personally I happily exchange a couple of extra minutes of sharpening in exchange for the need to sharpen less often (ie a nett reduction in sharpening time). But then again, I do know how to sharpen a knife


Add to this the fact that I also use these same knives around saltwater..

and I can't see a reason to change to any other :thumbup::thumbup:



Kind regards
Mick

 

[MRpink]

I've read that CPM154 will be back on the market soon, likely in January. It's going to be made under license by Niagra Specialty Metals.

I haven't been keeping up on it, but that sounds about right. Crucible probably auctioned off all their different steel formulas.

 

[GRIM 62]

I like both carbon and stainless.It all depends upon the application that you intend the knife to be used for also.I prefer carbon for my woods knives,but like stainless for my boat knives,especially around salt water.A good heat treat makes all the difference in the world,period.I'll keep using both and not worry about it one way or the other.

 

[m. wohlwend]

I have always built what the outdoors crowd wants. I started making knives out of some great saw blade steel, but had to stop that because nobody wanted a "mystery" steel". Because my equipment was limited at the time, I had to work with simple carbons, or alloys that responded well to oil quench. Now that I have better equipment, I have no problem building something out of stainless if someone wants that. Air quenched steels should be no problem. I have never had anyone to order a stainless knife. Maybe someone should build indentical knives out of the best stainless and say O-1 and then test them head to head. That would be interesting! I will add this, betting against carbon steel, is like betting against the 1911 series pistol. A 100 year old design that is still knocking bad guys on their can.. LOL
My point is I will build whatever the customer wants, and not really try to sell him my "art".

 

[Gossman Knives]

Maybe someone should build indentical knives out of the best stainless and say O-1 and then test them head to head. That would be interesting!

That's exactly what I planned on doing. I have an 8" Tusker, 5/32" thick by 1 1/2" wide made with 154CM laying on my bench ready to finish. I haven't had a chance to finish it. I hope to get it done sometime this month.
Scott

 

[BoxANT]

It's all about the heat treat

I'm a fan of Rat Cutlery and their 1095 for my outdoor blades, excellent stuff. However, there are also very well done SS blades from many companies. A quality company will generally make a quality product, and of course, you get what you pay for!

 

[m. wohlwend]

It's all about the heat treat

I'm a fan of Rat Cutlery and their 1095 for my outdoor blades, excellent stuff. However, there are also very well done SS blades from many companies. A quality company will generally make a quality product, and of course, you get what you pay for!

YES ! It is the heat treat! In fact you can get different results with the same steel with different heat treats and tempering. 1095 tempered at 62 RC is going to perform different than 1095 58 RC. The same with "brittle" stainless. You would loose some edge holding ability, by dropping the RC 2-4 points but the knife would loose some of the "brittle" characterists.

It is fun to argue over steels, but NOBODY address the fact that the argument ASSUMES that the steel has been properly heat treated and tempered. If a steel has been over-heated and quenched it will not perform well no matter what kind of steel it is. It boils down to how much control that the knife maker has over the process.

Can you really judge a steel if it has been heat treated wrong? or if one maker treats it different than another ? May be he tempers different than another maker! I really think arguments over steels is equivelant of arguing over Chevy of Ford....

 

[Skimo]

I'm in line with bald taco... with the exception that the guys in the "shacks" are paid for a design I can't get cheaper from a mass production company.

I'd say the difference is that of a custom made house where you work with an engineer and a crew versus the clone houses and mass produced mobile homes (steadily improving in quality)

Pick the kind of steel, the finish, pick folder or fixed, handle material etc. Custom is great for something you think you will enjoy now and years down the road.

 

[matthewdanger]

For me, it is not so much that I do not like stainless steels. It is just that I am not willing to pay extra for them and I am not really to work any harder at sharpening them. I don't even like carbon steels like D2 for these reasons.

Many of the more modern stainless cost more and are more difficult to sharpen. I can get knives that perform as well (or nearly as well) for less money if I stick to simple carbon steels. Being able to easily sharpen a knife in the field is important to me.

I really like VG-10 and AUS-8. Both have performed well for me and there are times when stainless steel makes all the sense in the world (like working around water). Both are relatively easy to sharpen and don't cost too much of a premium over similar carbon steel knives.

There will always be a place for stainless steels.

 

[fujita yuji]

Steel makers provide new super stainless steels every year almost in a way like fashion(they seem to me).
I'm by no means an expert of metallurgy that have no idea wheather the new steel
has it's own good reason to be developed from a technical point of view.
There is a fashion in some sort or another including outdoor life and it's equipment
but I believe knives to be just tools like many people living in this WSS forum.
It will not exclude the possibility of tool to be a fashion but I hope not as I'm not a
very fashionable man

This fashion may pose no technical trouble in theory but does cause some trouble
in the process of production. Good heat treatment for new steel is not always known to
everyone from the beginning. That can pose a real trouble which is sometimes annoying
to me when I just want a good tool and don't want to do metallurgical experiment.

 

[The Government]

I have to agree with most of what baldtaco said.

There is so much BS hype in the knife market, and it's an artificially created market at that. The knife makers and companies try to make each knife buyer think they have the modern Excaliber in their hot little hands, and people try to make more of it than there is. It's a hunk of steel thats tool, get over it. Most of the modern stainless is darn good stuff. Even the stuff of 30 years ago was good.

In 1967 I went over on my tour in Vietnam. The issue knife was the Camillus MK2, or what people called a Ka-bar no matter who made it. At the same time on every army base, Buck was the big item at the PX. If you wanted something better than the issue knife, guys bought a Buck. Everyone, I mean everyone, had a 110 on thier belt. Going out in the field, one saw a heck of a lot of Buck 119 specials on belts. Young GI's being young GI's, all the knives saw heavy use bordering on abuse. I don't recall seeing a Buck special breaking, But I saw a couple of the Camillus MK2's break. So much for 1960's carbon vs stainless. They were used a lot for busting the metal bands off ammo and other boxes.

And speaking of the Buck 110, they have to be one of the most abused knives on earth. Every construction worker, oil field roughneck, farmer and others making a living outdoors in the 60's and 70's used the 110, and it developed a repuation for an entire knife company to become an icon for a quality knife. This was not because they didn't work well. One could make a good arguement that Buck, raised the bar for all the factory makes of knives. If you go over to scandinavia, the huge bulk of Mora's produced are stainless steel, and I don't see many brokeen mora's. I have seen them pounded into trees, pushed on, levered on, and pounded on while battoning. The mora's seem to have their cult following as well. I'm sure this is not because they are not good knives.

Plain and simple, with modern steels, there is not a lot of differnce anymore. BUT... the stainless steels are harder and more expensive to make. Stainless steel is a PITA to work with. I spent 30 years as a machinist, and I turned enough stainless parts on a Harding lathe, and did enough parts on a Bridgeport mill to tell you that stainless can eat end mills and other tools. It's gummy, hard, and you need to run a ton of coolent on it. It will eat up three times the sanding belts.

In the early 1960's when Smith and Wesson came out with the first stainless steel revolver, the model 60, I recall seeing an article about it. The S&W personel said that gang drilling a normal cyclinder, the bits would last 50 to 60 cylinders. Making a model 60 cyclinder they only got 10 to 12 cylinders out a gang of bits. Stainless steel can work harden on you, and gall the tooling.

Carbon steel is way easier for a maker to produce. Pure and simple. If I were a knifemaker today, I'd try to hype the hell out of my 1095 blades, because I don't want to screw around with that stainless. Stainless also has a far narrower window for heat treat. With carbon you can do it with a torch and get it halfway right and still end up with a good knife. Pump that anti stainless hype out there. Add in the old BS from the 1950's that stainless is no good, spouted by all the old timers, and there you have it.

It all comes down to a artificially created steel snobbery.

The knife makers get to make their stuff out of a material thats cheaper and easier to deal with, and charge you more for it. It's a win/win for them.

The truth is only about 1 in 100 people will ever be able to really tell the difference, if that many. Even then it's goiing to be a close thing.

Thanks for the post Jackknife. What I get from it is that both stainless and carbon steels are great -the only thing to equal out... is the price difference! - that carbon is relatively over priced.

 

[m. wohlwend]

A bar of S30V 3/16th thick by 1 1/2 inch tall by 72 inches long is pennies away from 160 dollars, the same bar of 1095 is just over 19.00. The 1095 can be forged to shape, and heat treated in a simple smithy, while S30V is going to require more grinding (expense)and probably a trip out somewhere for heat treat. So a lot of money invested up front, and then after you go to Crucible steels and compare the data charts on S30V with other high carbon tool steels, you end up wondering why? There are other non-stainless steels that are not just 10-20 percent tougher but are 200 - 400 percent tougher than S30V and still have a high edge retention. If I am going to invest in a "super steel" it will be something like S3V that is 300 percent tougher than S30V.

 

[baldtaco-II]

That introduces a good point. Roughly speaking, going from your figures we could get 7 knives with 5” blades and 5” handles from one length. So that's about $23 USD of steel material each. And that's just for us plebs buying it not the big buying power of a major vendor. Add in some cheap micarta and a couple of fixings and it's still not much more. Even if you went the whole hog and made it arty by going at the blade with a wipe of cold blu and some bog bleach you're still only adding pence. Perhaps the money is all bound up in really expensive vulcanized rubber scale liners or something, 'cos as we've established it aint in the heat treat. Yet I can think of a company that is outing these at more than the price of a similar sized tool expertly heat treated in laminated VG-10. No wonder they can offer a no quibble money back guarantee. They can bloody well afford to, there's enough of a mark up on all those they sell. And that's just looking at hobbyist prices. I've got to wonder what that particular brand buys them in at per unit.

 

[1066vik]

most of the $$ is tied up in equipment, labor, and the 20% markup at every stage of the distribution chain so they can cover their overhead costs as well.

 

[Ravaillac]

Yet I can think of a company that is outing these at more than the price of a similar sized tool expertly heat treated in laminated VG-10.

And yet the edge is more likely to chip than on many carbon steels.
There are also many (japanese) craftmen that can deliver handmade water quenched laminated blades for the price of some factory made ones.

 

[baldtaco-II]

And yet the edge is more likely to chip than on many carbon steels.
There are also many (japanese) craftmen that can deliver handmade water quenched laminated blades for the price of some factory made ones.

I don't see how that has any bearing on what I wrote.

--

While I'm at it I don't see what a company explaining away overheads, equipment and so on has to do with it either. Companies have those problems not just the one I had in mind when I was speaking of the markup of 1095.

--

And just for fun it is worth noting that although the heat treatment is vital we were speaking of stainless and carbons. It is in our interests to focus on that because both can be hardened up for toughness or edge retention. Talk of "yeah but heat treatment" comes across to me as a variable we need to assume control of or we end up in a right muddle at least or at worst obfuscation.

 

[greater]

M. Wohlwend makes a good point. You can get fantastic performance out of a cheaper and easier to deal with Carbon Steel.

There are so many custom designs out there that I love to get but can't because they are too expensive. Why is this ? It is because the materials are costly and the labor very intensive to make them properly (ie stainless super steels.)

With a good simple quality carbon steel I am able to get an affordable usable blade at a price I can live with because the maker doesn't have to spend a small fortune on materials that are hell to work with. Why insist on giving both the buyer and the maker a hard time.

As for mass produced knives people can rant all they want but I don't believe that any economically mass produced super steel knife is going to get the same attention to properly heat treating and other things as well as give the same performance of say for example a Strider S30V knife.

I don't see it happening. Quality mass produced stainless blades are excellent cutters, they hold great edges, they are generally good tools but I always hear about them snapping from being dropped on the floor etc.. They are said to be poor performers in extreme cold, people are reluctant to make swords or impact tools out of them. I am not saying these can't be done with quality stainless, but as Mr Wohlwend said, bringing out these qualities in stainless is no walk through the park.

Baldtaco-II I think you are over rating the capabilities of manufacturers to mass produce quality stainless blades that are on par with cheaper carbon counterparts in terms of toughness and edge retention at an affordable price to consumers.

Another thing that is not mentioned here is what is it to be used for. For some applications it may not matter at all if the blade has a tendency to be more brittle or if edge retention is a little less.

Again customizing a carbon steel for it's intended purpose is a more easy task, correct me if I am wrong, because carbon steel tends to be more forgiving in terms of heat treating etc..

The question is do you need a stainless, if it is a must (such as working in salt water and salt air environments) then depending on what you are using it for prepare to spend a modest amount or money (mass produced quality stainless knife) or a large chunk of change (expertly crafted super tough stainless like a Strider)

I for one like having the option of purchasing a super performer made out of an economical carbon steel. Since bringing out the best qualities of these steels is much more easier and economical you are less likely to get a lemon.