What makes a better knife? 1080 or 1084?

J

jimbowie7

Joined
Mar 13, 2005
Messages
90
Is there a discernible difference between these steels?

Will one outcut the other? Or take a sharper edge?

Thanks! :thumbup:
 
Admiral Steel sells 1075 but might call it 1075/1080. It is 1075. The 1084 will have a bit more carbon content. The difference between 1080 and 1084 for our purposes is splitting hairs (not a pun). The 1075 I buy from Admiral has a carbon content, according to the traceable sheet they provide with it, of about 0.72 percent. Figure 1080 a bit more than that and 1084 a bit more than 1080.

All these will, of course, make a wicked edge.

rlinger
------
 
What Roger said. .04% carbon is not enough to even bother considering them as different steels. It is enough for the mills to be able to work in a different range and give it another designation. Some runs are cleaner so that may help in your decision. If given the chance to use any other 1080 or the 1084 that Mace and Aldo offer I would go with the 1084.
 
The 1084 that I got from Aldo Bruno has .89 carbon. Some of Admirals 1080 has been tested to contain .72 or less carbon. Pretty big difference.
 
Thanks for all the replies and useful info. Looks like 1084 is better. :)

Is there any difference in terms of deep hardening? I remember reading somewhere that 1084 is deeper hardening due to the presence of manganese? Is this true? Does it make any difference in terms of performance? :confused:
 
Kevin can flog me if I'm wrong, but 1084 is still a shallow hardening steel, afik. I don't think you'll see a performance difference based on this, I think the difference is in the quality of the old 1084 stock, which seemed to have better tolerances than what we see in 1080 or even 1095 today. I've seen a lot of complaints about new 1095 stock being less consistent.
 
1080 and 1084 are both high in manganese, which makes them much deeper hardening than 1095, W1 and W2. But not as deep hardening as 01.
 
I agree with Don. I am able to do a 45 degree angle partial quench (edge quench where the "edge" is REALLY wide...lol) with Admiral 1075/80 in Tough Quench which I would not dare try on W2.
 
Don Hanson III said:
The 1084 that I got from Aldo Bruno has .89 carbon. Some of Admirals 1080 has been tested to contain .72 or less carbon. Pretty big difference.
Click to expand...

I had a couple pieces of Admiral 1075 tested independently. Highest carbon was .67. Subtract some for carbon loss due to forge work (welding and drawing, over and over) and what do you have?

Seems to me .67 is better described as 1065.
 
JCaswell said:
I had a couple pieces of Admiral 1075 tested independently. Highest carbon was .67. Subtract some for carbon loss due to forge work (welding and drawing, over and over) and what do you have?

Seems to me .67 is better described as 1065.
Click to expand...
Thanks for posting that. I was planning to use my leftover Admiral 1075 for my first damascus attempts but now I may have to rethink that. With that said, I guess Admiral "1065" still makes a fairly decent blade unless you burn it up because my first real customer over in the UK said he stropped out the 1075 hunter I sold him to a "hair popping" edge:D
 
Thanks for the plug Kevin!:D

We still have lots of 1084 left if anyone needs some. Just drop me an e-mail.:thumbup:
Mace
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top