Steel used in Russian Army knives pre-1950

d2eux

d2eux

Joined
Oct 10, 2010
Messages
289
I'm not sure where was a good place to put this, but this got me thinking. I think the consensus is that carbon steel blades do very poorly in extreme cold and wet environments. So, given that, what kind of steel do you think the russian army would have used to produce knives for their soldiers, specifically before 1950? (Russia is just an off the top example given their military history and dealing with extreme cold climate.)

This would probably require some knife historians, but I am very interested to know. From what I understand stainless steel is relatively new

thank you!
 
I have a lot of Soviet bayonets (and rifles/pistols/etc) from the 1920's - 1950's and they are all plain old carbon steel. The Red Army wasn't known for doing anything fancy. They just picked a design/material that got the job done at the lowest possible production cost and cranked out TONS of it.
 
d2eux said:
I'm not sure where was a good place to put this, but this got me thinking. I think the consensus is that carbon steel blades do very poorly in extreme cold and wet environments. So, given that, what kind of steel do you think the russian army would have used to produce knives for their soldiers, specifically before 1950? (Russia is just an off the top example given their military history and dealing with extreme cold climate.)

This would probably require some knife historians, but I am very interested to know. From what I understand stainless steel is relatively new

thank you!
Click to expand...

i think the russians would be happy with any knife pre 1950's. Let alone care what steel was put into it
 
tabeeb762 said:
Haven't you been listening to nutnfancy?

Folks in Lapland and Boreal areas are practically throwing their carbon knives in the trash since they found out about this.
Click to expand...
I am sorry, but this is not my experience. The traditional scandinavian knives are most often made of simple carbon steels. I am thinking of finnish puukkos, traditional swedish moras and sami knives in general.

I am not saying that the stainless is totally refused, however you will find it in smaller knives, folding knives and fishing knives. As the size of the knife increases, so does the shift to carbon steel.

http://www.cloudberrymarket.com/servlet/the-PUUKKO-KNIVES-FINLAND/Categories

http://www.ragweedforge.com/StromengCatalog.html

http://www.ragweedforge.com/LapinPuukkoCatalog.html

~Paul~
 
dePaul said:
I am sorry, but this is not my experience. The traditional scandinavian knives are most often made of simple carbon steels. I am thinking of finnish puukkos, traditional swedish moras and sami knives in general.
Click to expand...

His sarcasm must have been lost in the translation.:)
 
Pretty much EVERYBODY used nothing but carbon steel blades prior to the 1950s. It worked just fine, in that everybody back then pretty well knew how to properly maintain them (clean & oil).

Stainless steel has been around since the early 1900s (around 1910 or so). It's very telling, that for at least 40 years beyond it's invention, most people still preferred to use carbon (non-stainless) steel for knives. It performs just fine, so long as it's properly maintained.

No idea where this 'consensus' (?) comes from, that carbon steel performs poorly in cold & wet. Many, many people, to this very day, actually prefer it.
 
Stainless steel and blades really evolved with people that know nothing about knives and care very little for them. Pre 1950, people tended to care more for their tools and prefered the high functioning capability of carbon steel blades. Stainless is high functioning today, but it is extremely expensive (for quality stainless)
 
Obsessed with Edges said:
Pretty much EVERYBODY used nothing but carbon steel blades prior to the 1950s. It worked just fine, in that everybody back then pretty well knew how to properly maintain them (clean & oil).

Stainless steel has been around since the early 1900s (around 1910 or so). It's very telling, that for at least 40 years beyond it's invention, most people still preferred to use carbon (non-stainless) steel for knives. It performs just fine, so long as it's properly maintained.

No idea where this 'consensus' (?) comes from, that carbon steel performs poorly in cold & wet. Many, many people, to this very day, actually prefer it.
Click to expand...

Stainless came in two forms prior to WWII: 1) soft and tougher; 2) hard and brittle. The discovery of cryo treatment changed things.

I cannot imagine a worse set of conditions for "plain carbon steel" than the bore of a firearm. On top of that, the primers were corrosive. Yet I own several well used military riffles, most from Sweden, with nice, crisp bores.
Plain carbon steel." That is the result of care. A knife would be much easier to care for. As you say, "Properly maintained."
 
Obsessed with Edges said:
Pretty much EVERYBODY used nothing but carbon steel blades prior to the 1950s. It worked just fine, in that everybody back then pretty well knew how to properly maintain them (clean & oil).

Stainless steel has been around since the early 1900s (around 1910 or so). It's very telling, that for at least 40 years beyond it's invention, most people still preferred to use carbon (non-stainless) steel for knives. It performs just fine, so long as it's properly maintained.

No idea where this 'consensus' (?) comes from, that carbon steel performs poorly in cold & wet. Many, many people, to this very day, actually prefer it.
Click to expand...

sorry, that was a poor choice of words. I've just read a lot of folks' comments about high carbon rusting and actually being more brittle in severe cold weather
http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=705792

Also the high praise Fallkniven gets for its VG10 laminate and how its a preferred blade type in the cold scandinavian region
 
Last edited:
While Fallkniven's use of vg10 is really nice, I feel most people's concern for high carbon steels to be rather overblown. A well made carbon steel blade should be fine with just the minimum of maintenance, no special products necessary
 
d2eux said:
sorry, that was a poor choice of words. I've just read a lot of folks' comments about high carbon rusting and actually being more brittle in severe cold weather
http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=705792

Also the high praise Fallkniven gets for its VG10 laminate and how its a preferred blade type in the cold scandinavian region
Click to expand...

For what it's worth, brittleness (under any conditions, cold or not) can affect any steel, stainless or carbon. Personally, I think it's got more to do with the quality of the heat treat & tempering. And there are many different types & grades of 'plain' carbon steel, just as with stainless. Some, I'm sure, are better than others. As would be the case with any knife, it has more to do with the quality of execution than anything.

The reason laminated blades get such high praise, is due to the outer layer of steel being at a lower hardness (therefore less brittle) than the 'core' steel in the middle, which forms the cutting edge. The edge itself is harder, which gives it better edge retention. The outer layer, being softer, gives the blade a somewhat flexible backbone, which allows it to be more resistant to impact & shock. All of these qualities could apply just as equally to carbon or stainless. It has much more to due with the heat treat & tempering of the two different steels in the blade.

Personally, I think we may hear more about carbon blades breaking under severe conditions just because carbon steel makes up a very large (& popular) portion of the the big, chopper-type, camping fixed blades on the market. There are a lot of 'em out there, so it stands to reason we'll here more 'anecdotal' accounts of failures under extreme use.

As previously mentioned, the plain carbon blades do rust (obviously). But, a lot of people are willing to accept the higher maintenance expectation of a carbon blade, in trade for what many believe will be a superior cutter. Not to mention, many people prefer carbon blades over the 'super' steels simply because they're so much easier to sharpen to a great edge, using conventional tools.
 
Thomas Linton said:
Stainless came in two forms prior to WWII: 1) soft and tougher; 2) hard and brittle. The discovery of cryo treatment changed things.

I cannot imagine a worse set of conditions for "plain carbon steel" than the bore of a firearm. On top of that, the primers were corrosive. Yet I own several well used military riffles, most from Sweden, with nice, crisp bores.
Plain carbon steel." That is the result of care. A knife would be much easier to care for. As you say, "Properly maintained."
Click to expand...

:thumbup:
Gun barrels are probably the best testament to just how strong & durable carbon steel can be (with proper care). Some very expensive knives, these days, have actually been made from the recycled barrels of old artillery.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top