Steel types - newbie q

Warthog

Warthog

Joined
Oct 6, 2000
Messages
567
Kind of a newbie to the broad world of knives (despite my membership join date - that was when I had a knowledge gathering mission on khukuris:).

Basically, I want to know what is the best and worst type of steel for blade.....

Some I've seen:
440A - this is supposed to be the worst?
440B
440C - this is "acceptable" for a good knife?
AUS6 - better than 440C?
ATS-34
BG-42 - the best out of these?
....and any others...

Another question:
What does it mean when there are 2 listings in the type of steel category for a knife?
Examples -
Steel: BG-42, Rc 60
hmmmmmm is the "Rc" some kind of measurement (hardness)? SOrry for newbie questions.

Thanks all :)

Warthog
 
AUS-6 is the Japanese equivalent of 440A, AUS-8 = 440B and AUS-10 = 440C. These steels are very similar except for the small amount of vanadium found in the AUS steels.

I personally think that BG-42 is an excellent steel. In my opinion it is the best of the steels you have asked about.

Edited to add: Yes the RC value of a knife is a rating of how hard the steel is. A higher RC equals a harder blade.
 
Originally posted by Warthog
Kind of a newbie to the broad world of knives (despite my membership join date - that was when I had a knowledge gathering mission on khukuris:).

Basically, I want to know what is the best and worst type of steel for blade.....

Some I've seen:
440A - this is supposed to be the worst?
440B
440C - this is "acceptable" for a good knife?
AUS6 - better than 440C?
ATS-34
BG-42 - the best out of these?
....and any others...

Another question:
What does it mean when there are 2 listings in the type of steel category for a knife?
Examples -
Steel: BG-42, Rc 60
hmmmmmm is the "Rc" some kind of measurement (hardness)? SOrry for newbie questions.
Click to expand...
Well I wouldn't say 440A the worst, but it doesn't hold the edge terribly well. Same for AUS 6
440C is a pretty well rounded steel, edge holding is slightly below ATS-34
BG42 is probably one of the premium steel and you'll pay quite a bit comparing to the "lower grade" steel
Rc 60 stands for rockwell hardness of 60, higher the number, the "harder" the steel is going to be.
There's the search function that you'll probably bring up a hell a lot more information.
 
Yeah I tried it....figured this would be a common topic.....but I'm horrible @ forum searches (grr)...

Wow.....eye opener on the AUS markings....thanks for the info so far.
 
check out Terry Primos's page on steel info :

http://www.primosknives.com/articles/steelcmp.htm
and to understand that read this :
http://www.primosknives.com/articles/alloys.htm

From all steels you mentionned, KWM gave the right order of cutting ability. But.. poorly Heat-treathed BG-42 will cut worse then Well Heat-treathed 440A. HRC is a value, given to a steel to determine hardness by pressing a diamond cone ( the C Rating of Hardness ) into the steel and mesuring the penetration test.

OK, it gives a decent hardness value, but it isn't really a rating that tells how well a steel will hold an edge. For example CPM 440V will outcut BG-42, while BG-42 is HRC 61 and CPM 440V is 56 or something. Talonite will outcut but by a wide margin, and it's only in the 40's

greetz and take care, Bart.
 
If you ask me, 420 is the worst.
T425 Modified sucks quite a bit too.

I personally like 440A, it's not the greatest, but can certain get the job done.
420HC isn't bad either, particularly when heat treated well (such as done by Camillus or Buck)
 
There's been tons written on the subject of knife-steel and everyone has there own opinion about which is best, but here's my take on steels:
1) I'm lazy when it comes to rust-prevention, I like to fish and play in the water, and the Carolinas are extremely humid, so I don't like non-stainless knives much because they rust too easily.

2) Generally speaking, the longer the steel holds an edge, the harder it is to sharpen. This is the great dilema: sharpen more often (but with great ease), or sharpen occasionally (but with greater difficulty).

3) The type of steel used is'nt the most important factor in a knife. And there are very few really lousy steels on the market.
Even the low-grade steels (used by Victorinox, Buck, Case, Schrade, Gerber, ect) are better than the steel used by our forefathers who pioneered this world.

And if you really like a knife, don't be swayed by the steel-snobs.
After all, all steel eventually dulls if you use the knife, and I believe that it's most important that you can re-sharpen your knife without too much trouble (especially in the field).

Good luck,
Allen.
 
Allen's post is a clever ruse to throw you off base. He's got "the list", which has all steels ever made, in their exact correct order from best to worst, and he doesn't want to show it to you.

Joe "haven't seen 'the list' either" T
 
All of the steels you mentioned are stainless steels. If you don't really need stainless, you can save a good bit of money by purchasing carbon steel knives. In general the carbon steels are said to way outperform the lower priced stainless steels in all areas except resistance to rust.

Of all the lower priced stainless steels, the one that seems to get the most criticism is 420J2. This is the steel used for many cheap knives and "fantasy knives" made is Asia.
 
One other thing, Warthog. If you do need stainless knives and don't want to spend alot, buy the reputable American brands like Buck and Schrade. Stay away from knives made in Pakistan and China.
 
440 or AUS series steels are good enough. I wouldn't pay top dollar for a knife using one of these steels, but if you want an expensive knife they would be fine. I have a CRKT knife that uses AUS-6, and it will hold a decent edge, but is very easy to sharpen.

ATS-34 and BG-42 are much better steels in my opinion, but you will have to pay for the premium. I have not had any real problems sharpening with these steels unless they get way past when they should have been touched up. As long as you touch up the knife as soon as it begins feeling dull it shouldn't be hard to keep sharp.



Erik
 
Thanks for all the comments!

What about Smith & Wesson knives (just out of curiousity)? I have never seen any specs on their steel.:)

Warthog
 
Originally posted by Warthog
Thanks for all the comments!

What about Smith & Wesson knives (just out of curiousity)? I have never seen any specs on their steel.:)

Warthog
Click to expand...
I don't know, and I don't hear commentary in here terribly often. Personally I've seen some stuff that looks like morphed copies. They also have a boot knife, and one of my friends wanted to get it... I told him to get the camillus version instead, at least I know that they does a good job ;)
 
Originally posted by Warthog
Thanks for all the comments!

What about Smith & Wesson knives (just out of curiousity)? I have never seen any specs on their steel.:)

Warthog
Click to expand...

The nice thing about Smith & Wesson knives is that everyone seems to have a different reason to dislike them. Low quality on some of their line? Yep. Copy custom designs without paying the custom makers? Check. S&W gun control name baggage? Yes sir.

Joe
 
S&W gun control name baggage? Yes sir.
Click to expand...

LOL, damn right...I decided to never buy their firearms after that one....

For the price, what would be a decent substitute for the S&W SWAT? Someone I know wants one...

Thanks again:)

Warthog
 
Joe, don't talk about "the list"--you'll get us in trouble with "THEM"!

For all others reading this: "the list" does NOT exist and that's my story and I'm sticking to it.

Cheers,
Allen.
 
I have to admit to being a recent S&W knife purchaser. The knives themselves are alot better than the sheaths. One retailer claims some S&W knives have 440C blades, but the knives are just marked "440", which usually means 440A.

I can see one advantage of the hawkbill S&W Badge Knife over its competitors. The S&W knife has a bit longer blade. I would think that is an important difference in a knife of this type (small neck knives).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top