To the Xperts...Stainless or carbon steel

B

Big Ugly Tall Texan

Joined
Jan 27, 2006
Messages
107
I've always had the impression that carbon steel blades were better than stainless, but my recent search for a Bowie knife showed me stainless is MUCH more common. Am I mistaken about carbon steel being better because it is easier to sharpen, or is stainless steel actually better.

And if carbon steel is better, why are so many knives made in stainless and not barbon?

I'm still having second and third thoughts about my Bowie knife choice sinde that American 49 isn't available in carbon, but only in stainless. My true choice is the Damascus blade with a bone grip.

damascusbowie.jpg


And it may be what I wind up buying, although I realize Damascus steel is softer.

Anyway, which is better Carbon or Stainless. Asking the experts and if you guys have a gun question, then it will be MY turn.
 
im no expert but ill give it a shot.....

I think it may depend on the user. Many here prefer carbon but i think stainless is easier to take care of. I think thats why many more companies are using stainless. Anyways thats my $0.02. dont worry, the experts should be here soon
 
You can do a search.
Stainless is popular because it doesn't rust as easily (Think tools and kitchen knives, salt water conditions etc). Depends what you use it for.

Carbon steels are good but you need to take care of it, frankly the average joe isn't going to - hence the popularity of SS. Survival knives might use carbon steel with a powered coating, like you mentioned it sharpens easily.

There are good stainless steels that also have high carbon content so do some research and use the search func.
 
I am no expert either, but I know some things.

Carbon steel is usually easier to sharpen, and tougher, and offers equal or better edge retention.

But stainless steel offers much better stain resistance, and that can be a huge issue.

A sports car offers far better performance than a family car, yet family cars are far more common.

For a folder, I prefer stainless steel. For a large fixed blade, I prefer carbon or tool steel as the harder stainless steels are not tough enough for chopping.

Whether carbon or stainless steel is right for you depends on what you are going to do with the knife. One is not better than the other.
 
Our ancestors chopped, skinned, killed, defended, etc., with carbon steel blades. Carbon metallurgy has improved as much as stainless has. Stainless is prettier.

However, when the chips are down, the more chromium present, the more compromised the steel than is steel without it.

What if you stain your carbon blade? What if it gets some surface rust? Horrors!!!! You'd have to be a total waste of breathable air to let your knife corrode away completely.

In my estimation, stainless is for the lazy, and for those who can't bear to have their knives look like used tools.;)

I love 1095 for its field sharpenability. I love A2 for its overall qualities. D2 is as close as I come to liking stainless in a fixed blade.
 
Good stainless steels with good heat treating will hold an edge longer. The greater number of carbides, and the hardness of those carbides insure it, particularly with the steels which have a lot of vanadium in them. Carbon steels are usually much tougher, and because of their simpler chemistry (fewer carbides) will generally get much sharper. The sharpest knives I have ever owned were carbon steel Opinels, and it don't get much simpler than that. Again, though, it really depends on how the steel was manipulated, and the heat treating. I like both. I make stainless knives, but I carry both, as well. Theoretically, carbon steels are tougher, but if you use a knife as a knife, rather than for something it's not designed to do, I feel stainless is just as good, if not better. Both types have their place. I wouldn't own a stainless axe or straight razor, for instance, but I wouldn't own a carbon steel sailor's knife, either.

I agree with you in principle, Boats, because I take great pride in being able to maintain my tools, but I still feel that for the average user, stainless steel is a better option, and perfectly tough, if you use it for what it's for. Most of the time, it's not "laziness", so much as a lack of knowledge. It's easy on the forums to make a statement such as yours, because most of us here are rabid knife knuts, and are generally knowledgeable about knives, but we also represent a very very very small minority of the knife-buying public.
 
I've used some really high-grade stainlesses (VG-10, 154CM, ATS-55 and on), and I still can't beat a good carbon blade for daily use.
 
they have an extensive article on Carbon vs Stainless. Bottom line, as already mentioned is that Carbon is more durable but stains (read rust), and Stainless, while being resistant to most forms of corrosion, is not quite as durable, especially for chopping. That is also the reason that many fixed blades made from Carbon steel are usually coated to some degree. Also, Carbon steels are cheaper than Stainless steels.
 
I'm no metalurgest, but i was a machinist for almost thirty years. Some of the jobs we did required a coolent spray on the work being done so as not to burn the tool up. Like milling stainless steel. At the end of the day the whole setup had to be taken down and dried and wiped down with a silicon to keep things from rusting. Yet I never saw an end mill, key cutter, lathe tool, or drill bit or counter bore that was made out of anything but good carbon tool steel. It's what we used to cut other metals with.

Stainless is pretty, and it appeals to the knife buying public because they can neglect it. But a good strait carbon steel like 1095, W2, 5160, if heat treated right, will outcut stainless steel by a great degree. You just have to take care of it. Wipe it off when your done at the end of the day. Put a good protective patina on it.

Nothing was more valueble to its owner than a sword. No matter if it was a rapier carried by a conquistidor or a samurai serving his lord. They were carried in all kinds of weather, used hard in war, never rusted away but were well cared for.

Go with carbon and take care of it and you'll have the better knife.
 
I agree to what was said before, even though stainless itself is not an indicator for edge holding. Wear resistance aswell is not a synonym for edge holding. A low carbide containing carbon edge dulls more uniform than one wich contains more. But they both dull for the carbide rich leaves a coarser edge which will cut badly but cuts.

Another part may be, that besides some higher temperatures needed to harden stainless you have more time to quench it than a middle or low carbon carbon blade (nice composition).

But the main reason is, that ppl. have no imagination about how late a steel blade will rust. Guess most fear it will happen as soon as they look at it. Advertising stainless surely is a major part of this.

If you choose a kitchen knife, stainless may be the better choice for the foods will take the steels taste or get black if the blade is a carbon.

BTW, why should damaskus be softer? I have a damaskus blade with a hardness ranging between HRC 59 and HRC 62. Which stainless is offered that hard?
 
Your mills and things weren't made out of what you'd call regular carbon steel. Those items have more tungsten, and again don't really fall under the "carbon steel" category, but rather under the hot/cold work tool steels. That's not even remotely the same as 1095, W2, or 5160. Nor would anyone have ever made a sword out of D2, M2, M50, etc. I like carbon steels, but check out the cutting comparison charts posted all over the internet, or even in Wayne Goddard's books, and you'll find stainless steels like S30V, 154CM, ATS-34, VG-10, etc., all hold an edge longer than almost any of the carbon steels. Carbon steels have the edge in toughness, but for general use, good modern stainlesses with good heat treat are a better choice. Most of the posts on here are arguing for carbon steel from the standpoint of tradition and nostalgia, rather than practical reality. Facts, rather than feelings, bear this out. Carbon steels have their place, and I love them, and wouldn't feel 'undergunned' carrying a carbon steel knife, but to throw out a blanket statement that they are always better than stainless is fallacious. 52100 is probably the best carbon steel used for knives, and is used in ball bearings, but in high-temp, high stress, close-tolerance aerospace work, they use something like BG42. Why, if carbon steel is soooo much better? Different applications have different needs...much like knives. For most work, stainless is just better. There are applications where only carbon steel will do, but for most of the things a pocket or sheath-sized knife is good for, stainless is simply a better choice. You can argue that what was good enough for our ancestors is good enough today, and that's true, to a point. My grandfather also took a dump in a hole in the ground in a wooden shed. It was good enough for him, but I'm not about to give up my flushable toilet if I have a choice. It's called progress. Embrace it, rather than disdain it.

Oh, and BG42 is offered that hard :D.
 
When it all comes down to it, its the skill of the heat treat that decides performance, not the steel. If you let your carbon blades rust, you shouldnt be owning nice knives and shouldnt care anyways. It amazes me when i hear people paying a couple hundred bucks on a nice knife, then let it rust. I only have carbon and only work in carbon and Ive pretty much never had a blade rust because I care for my knives.

I think steels all will make a good working knife. Some steels outperform others in niche activities. You hear a whole lot of talk about this steel or that steel being soooo superior, but I doubt there are many people who can give any proof to any of that given the amount of use, comparison methods, and total lack of knowledge as to the heat treating processes between the blades they are comparing. Its all personal preference. If you like getting your nice knives all wet and then just throwing them in a drawer, stick to stainless. If you take care of your knives, the ability for a steel to resist rust becomes a minor advantage, and you are able to choose more wisely. Its hard to hear that the ability to neglect a knife is the main deciding factor in choosing a blade steel over that steel's other determining factors.

Just because our ancestors all used carbon doesnt mean we have to, but it does prove that people, can, believe it or not, take care of their posessions without letting them rust. people have been doing it for thousands of years. They didnt have renwax, or any of the modern amenities that can be used to protect a blade, and they didnt have too much trouble. Personally, I think its just a fact of life that the average user isnt looking for a knife they can keep and be proud of, but rather a knife they can abuse and forget. Nothing wrong with that, either!
 
If your interested in buying a Bowie style knife, I'll guess that traditional etc is important to you, then don't buy stainless.

If you want only performance, you'd probably be considering other styles of knives including stainless steels.
 
warden41272 said:
Nor would anyone have ever made a sword out of D2, M2, M50, etc. I like carbon steels, but check out the cutting comparison charts posted all over the internet, or even in Wayne Goddard's books, and you'll find stainless steels like S30V, 154CM, ATS-34, VG-10, etc., all hold an edge longer than almost any of the carbon steels. Carbon steels have the edge in toughness, but for general use, good modern stainlesses with good heat treat are a better choice.
Click to expand...

"Good" modern stainless may have better edge holding than older, simple carbon steels - but the modern non-stainless tool steels are even better, as those same charts will show you. Whether you want extreme edge holding, extreme toughness, or any balance of the two, modern non-stainless tool steels like 9V, 3V, 10V, A9, T15 or M4 will out-perform any stainless steel in the world.

Yes, modern stainless steels are much better than forty year old stainless steels. But modern tool steels are much better old tool steels, and better than any stainless steels, old or new.

Unless corrosion resistance is important to you.

Oh - and modern steels like 3V, 1V, A9 and H13 make incredible swords, just very expensive ones.
 
Just a question--what keeps titanium from trumping steels overall? Is it a cost concern or is there some sort of design compromise you have to make with it?

Because my limited experience with titanium (custom chopsticks, if you must know) has been very positive.
 
warden41272 said:
Good stainless steels with good heat treating will hold an edge longer.
Click to expand...

This depends on what you are cutting and how, and the edge profile. Large bowies are often used for chopping and high impact work, this is little helped by wear resistance.

The greater number of carbides, and the hardness of those carbides insure it, particularly with the steels which have a lot of vanadium in them.
Click to expand...

Wear resistance isn't the only factor in edge retention in general, there is also resistance to deformation and cracking. 1095 at 66 HRC in a thin profile easily out cuts many stainless steels because they are much softer and crack/bend at low edge profiles.

-Cliff
 
Very good points, Nick, and I agree. It's just that very few makers or users (me included) have any experience with the steels you mentioned. Jerry Hossom's the only guy I know who uses 3V regularly, and I'm not even sure he does anymore. My comments were addressing the most common usages for the most common steels. There are niches for everything. And again, you're not really talking about "carbon steel" as most people think of it. You're talking about high-performance, extremely high alloy, specialty tool steels that just happen to rust. If that's the direction this thread is going, fine. I will certainly agree with you that the alloys you mentioned are superior in most performance aspects to any stainless in the world, but again, for most purposes the average knife user can get by just fine with a good stainless. And how many makers actually use the stuff you mentioned? Where could a person buy a knife to try using, say, A9? Nowhere, outside the custom realm, and rarely there. I'm only arguing one aspect of it (that being mainly the assumption that non-stainless is always superior to stainless). Some here seem to be arguing that its ability to rust makes it better, without taking into account any other factors. I go for performance first, as I define it, and so far I've had no reason to regret my decision to switch to stainless. I like it, my customers like it, and I've gotten good service from my steel. I love carbon steel. I just think over the broad range of the average user's activities, stainless is a more practical choice. Just my opinion though.

To Cliff...while I admit readily to your superior knowledge of this subject, and greater experience, I must pose this question to you: Who in the hell would leave a 1095 knife at 66Rc? That's pretty much as-quenched hardness, and would have to be brittle as all getout. That brittleness would have to negate your argument of "resistance to deformation (lots, probably) and cracking (very little, probably), particularly in a thin profile, as you talk about. There might be something there I'm missing, and I'm not trying to start a flame war, particularly with you (much respeck:D), but a thin 1095 at 66Rc would break like glass without a soft-back draw, and even then, the edge would be brittle. I started off making knives out of 1095, 1084, L-6 (when I could get it), and O1, and doing my own ht, and that was my experience.
-Joe
 
1095 at 66 RC would be pretty much asking to own a multi-piece knife. It might out-cut other steels on some materials that would not stress the blade in any way, but for any actual real-life usage, I would say thats way too hard. A razor blade will out cut lots of things, but I wouldnt want to chop anything with it or push cut plywood....there are so many factors at play here......

Personally, a properly heat treated piece of O-1 is one of my favorites. A few of mine I could actually shave the edge off production knives with the O-1. But thats just my personal taste. I guess people just need to develop the same on their own. I think its a simple matter of prioritizing what you want most out of a blade and then finding a steel that most closely matches that.
 
TikTock said:
1095 at 66 RC would be pretty much asking to own a multi-piece knife. It might out-cut other steels on some materials that would not stress the blade in any way, but for any actual real-life usage, I would say thats way too hard.
Click to expand...

There is more to toughness than hardness, and softer=tougher isn't univerally true, check the materials data on 1095. No I would not chop with that blade, but it is less than 1/16" thick and fully hollow ground, not much of an axe even if it was bainite-L6. I have done lots of cutting with that blade including cutting limbs, used carpet, plastics, sneakers and even things that people selling heavy tacticals call abusive such as digging, cutting metals, etc. . Details are in the review.

[1095 at 65/66 HRC]

warden41272 said:
There might be something there I'm missing ...
Click to expand...
1095 has a torsional strength/toughness maximum at a draw of 325F which raises the strength above as quenched signifiantly and increases the ductility and impact toughness massively. These all decrease as the hardness is lowered, it actually gets less ductile and then rebounds past the embrittlement range of 500F, but it takes quite a drop to recover the initial toughness and by then the yieilding point is quite low.

The relevant materials data can be seen in a review of a 1095 blade which such a hardening I wrote awhile ago, I was not overly gentle with it, including digging holes in the ground and the usual. Same point in general holds for other steels, I compared O1 at 63.5 to S30V by Reeves with both at thin profiles and the O1 edge was much more resistant to damage. Similar work was done recently with a series of blades on plywood, all stainless this time, H1, 8C13CrMoV and S30V (Sebenza again).

Again the S30V blade did the worst due to the inability of the steel to stay in place as it just fractured away, wear resistance wasn't a factor as the edge didn't blunt by wear, it just cracked off. With thicker profiles and the necessary strength achieved, running the same blades on carboard the S30V now had many to one edge retention over the other two stainless in slicing aggression due to the wear resistance.

So it depends on what you cut and how. Of course there are different ways to harden steels, maybe with a custom heat treatment S30V can be as tough and strong as the other stainless and still be more resistant. However doing all of that compared to the carbon and low alloy steels is probably not possible.

Note the work I did on the hard 1095 and O1 blades is mainly a repeat of work already done by Johnson, verified by Swaim, on rec.knives. Multiple comparisons of ATS-34 (Bos) and D2 vs 1095 were discussed there years ago (before Knifeforms let alone Bladeforums).

-Cliff
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top