Steel inquires. 440C vs D2, 5160 vs 10xx, strength vs ease of sharpen

[arty]

440C is more abrasion resistant when cryo treated, but it is not going to be anywhere like the abrasion resistance of D2.
I got a Queen teardrop that came with a tiny nick in the blade - barely saw a shiny spot. I went through 3 sanding belts getting that nick out. It took forever in D2. It would have been a breeze in a 440C blade. I wouldn't even use a belt sander for a 440C blade, but just a medium India stone, or the equivalent.
If I look very carefully and the lighting is just right, I can still see a tiny shiny spot on the D2 blade edge of the Queen. I wouldn't want to try to sharpen that sucker without access to diamond stones or a belt sander (320 or 400 grit belt).

I wouldn't want either 440C or D2 in a Khukri - The Hi Khukris are made from rail steel - I'd want lower carbon content, like 5160 or perhaps 1070.

 

[Tilaran]

Answers in no particular order:

5160 will be potentially tougher than 1095 for a couple of reasons. It has less carbon, and it is a low alloy steel.

Carbon content and toughness potential are inversely related. As carbon content goes down, toughness generally goes up. 1030 and 1040 carbon steels are very tough, even when compared to 5160, but they don't reach hardnesses that are generally acceptable for knives.

The low alloy steels are a direct upgrade from the 10xx series. The small additions of a few alloy elements allows the steel to have greater potential for toughness and ductility at the same hardness. I say potential because it is dependent on heat treatment. Annealed 1095 (as soft as you can get it) will likely be tougher than fully hardned 5160.

About the best you can do is to compare individual knives of the 2 different steels for your needs, especially if you don't know what the relative hardnesses are or how the maker got there. Of course, the same applies to edge holding, but this favors 1095 instead of 5160.

The comments about sharpenability, edge holding, and stainless vs. carbon are so vague as to be nonsense. At one time, maybe 20 years ago, it could have been a generalization that was true, but not anymore. You need to know the particular alloys in question and have some information about them to make any statements on these properties.

Just as important, if not more so, is the geometry of the knife blade. A thick carbon steel blade will take much longer to sharpen than a thinly ground stainless one.

Also, you need to know the definition of carbon and stainless steel the person you're talking to is using. Some people group steels like CPM 10V, CPM M4, and 1095 all in the same "carbon steel" group, simply because none of them are stainless. However, if you ever try to sharpen the first 2 steels by hand after being used to 1095, you will learn quickly that you are in for some work.

This is getting rather complicated I realize, so here are some short answers. 5160 is tougher than 1095, but doesn't hold its edge as long. 440C won't hold it's edge as long as D2, but D2 will be more time consuming to sharpen, if the blades are ground the same. If you live near salt water, 440C may be a better choice. In the steel comparisons you listed, the thicker blade will take the longest to sharpen, regardless of steel used. Stainless vs. carbon is so vague a comparison, the question can't really be answered.

The salt water issue can be fixed by calling Mike Snody and getting a titanium rig. There may well be a long time frame but Mike will do you one.

 

[james terrio]

There may well be a long time frame but Mike will do you one.

Speaking of timeframes... the post you quoted is three years old.

Anyhoo, since this is at the top again... if someone can't decide between D2 and 440C, they should consider Elmax. It basically has all the best attributes of both, and better toughness.

 

[archieblue]

For me the steel needs to match the knife. For a folder I'd prefer more stainless. 440c would be fine and D2 acceptable. They're also great for smaller fixed blades. D2 &1095 for pretty much any sized FB and 5160 for a G10 scaled pry bar sword.

Steel shmeel though IMO. It's more important to select knives based on:
The task(s) you have in mind
Blade length
Blade Profile
Blade grind/stock thickness
Carry options
Handle comfort
Attractiveness

I find that if the grind is right and the knife is otherwise a "good design" that the steel is adequate to excellent for my uses. But you'll find there are trade offs. Sometimes you like everything about the knife but wish the grind was thicker or thinner. Sometimes you wish it was a different steel.

I have examples of all the steels listed except 5160 at the moment. They're all fine but none of them are on my favorite knives! Could change though I should be receiving a Boye Basic 3 Dendritic 440C in the mail today... Though who knows.. I may not like the handle! Haha.