What steel would you rather have...

K

KennyB

Joined
Jan 19, 2010
Messages
2,312
Would you rather have 440A produced in 2016 or whatever generic steel was used to produce knife blades in 1916?

Just curious, I would think even the lowest grade steeled today is superior to that available at those times. Always makes me think why people bash these steels so much when people were doing a lot with steel of lesser quality for centuries.

What do you guys think?
 
Would be the same sort of logic as to say would people want to turn back the clock and live back in 1916.

Or even farther like 3,000 years ago, or 30,000 years ago.

Personally when people start talking about something of that sort I apply that logic to everything across the board. ;)

Think about the current generation who doesn't know what it was like before cell phones.... ;)

And that's not that long ago...
 
Last edited:
Id take the well heat treated carbon steel from 1916 over 440a any day of the week and twice on tuesday.
 
This question is weird and complicate partly because, though I couldn't find an exact date, 440A was almost certainly formulated closer to 1916 than 2016. So what you're really asking about isn't new steels vs old steels, but the process of manufacture and heat treat. And that's complicated because most 440A cutlery in this day and age falls into the Jarbenza or cheap kitchen cutlery category, which requires a level of automation simply not available in 1916, but is also produced for the absolute bottom dollar.

You need to add some parameters.
 
Insipid Moniker said:
This question is weird and complicate partly because, though I couldn't find an exact date, 440A was almost certainly formulated closer to 1916 than 2016. So what you're really asking about isn't new steels vs old steels, but the process of manufacture and heat treat. And that's complicated because most 440A cutlery in this day and age falls into the Jarbenza or cheap kitchen cutlery category, which requires a level of automation simply not available in 1916, but is also produced for the absolute bottom dollar.

You need to add some parameters.
Click to expand...


http://www.ssina.com/overview/history.html
 
I don't think a decent quality carbon steel blade from 1916 is going to be significantly different than a modern 1084 carbon steel blade. Alloying and heat treatment had come a long way by then, and few companies working in basic carbon steels today are pulling off any miracles.

That said, 440A is not a terrible steel, so it would really depend on the knife size and use.
 
I haven't used a knife from that time period but I have used some axes from the early 1900s and if the knives made then were as good as the axes I would be perfectly happy with a knife from 1916.
 
Ankerson said:
http://www.ssina.com/overview/history.html
Click to expand...

Oh fun site.

Ankerson I don't agree with your analogy. If I asked would people rather drive a 2016 Prius than a 1916 Ford Whatever-They-Had (not good with their early history, but thinking it was still the Model T) I could see that response. Because there are obvious improvements made from such old vehicles, and I really mean obvious. A person doesn't have to do much research at all to know it would have greater top speed, better fuel economy, better safety, heck cars that old didn't even have starter ignition, AC, radio, etc.

With steel I can't see the differences being so extreme, I mean not in the sense that the situation could be pointed to as lving in a different time.

I'll put it like this then...

Say you have a cowboy Bowie from the middle 1800s or some time around then. Not primitive but not quite as technologically and/or industrially advanced as today. Then the knife got sealed in some kind of time chamber that made it impervious to any kind of corrosion so essentially it was the same strength today as it was when it was made.

Now say someone made the SAME bowie, an absolute clone, but used the cheapest steel they could find today. Still made it with as good a heat treat as the original blade, just new steel.

Basically what I am thinking is with all the time that's gone by, the technology and engineering that went into even a modest steel, it surely must be better than the metallurgy people were limited to a couple hundred years ago?

I guess another way to get at what I am saying is if you grabbed random iron as a blacksmith and then made your own steel, say two hundred years ago, what would that steel be the equivalent to in grade? Would it be like 1095 or even close?
 
I'd happily use either. 440A, when heat treated right, is actually pretty decent stuff. Kershaw used to do good work with it. Where knives back in the day usually excelled was in the geometry department--not the raw material, per se. Also, we tend to forget how many "garbage" knives there were back then. There's always been a demand for cheap goods, and knives are no exception to the rule no matter what time period you're in.
 
KennyB said:
Oh fun site.

Ankerson I don't agree with your analogy. If I asked would people rather drive a 2016 Prius than a 1916 Ford Whatever-They-Had (not good with their early history, but thinking it was still the Model T) I could see that response. Because there are obvious improvements made from such old vehicles, and I really mean obvious. A person doesn't have to do much research at all to know it would have greater top speed, better fuel economy, better safety, heck cars that old didn't even have starter ignition, AC, radio, etc.

With steel I can't see the differences being so extreme, I mean not in the sense that the situation could be pointed to as lving in a different time.

I'll put it like this then...

Say you have a cowboy Bowie from the middle 1800s or some time around then. Not primitive but not quite as technologically and/or industrially advanced as today. Then the knife got sealed in some kind of time chamber that made it impervious to any kind of corrosion so essentially it was the same strength today as it was when it was made.

Now say someone made the SAME bowie, an absolute clone, but used the cheapest steel they could find today. Still made it with as good a heat treat as the original blade, just new steel.

Basically what I am thinking is with all the time that's gone by, the technology and engineering that went into even a modest steel, it surely must be better than the metallurgy people were limited to a couple hundred years ago?

I guess another way to get at what I am saying is if you grabbed random iron as a blacksmith and then made your own steel, say two hundred years ago, what would that steel be the equivalent to in grade? Would it be like 1095 or even close?
Click to expand...

All I could say is that it would likely be better than bronze.... And that is a maybe..

Too many variables to even guess.

These days, well it can vary from complete garbage to excellent and that's using the same steel grade from the same batch.

With some it's more about cutting every corner they possibly can get away with knowing MOST people will never know the difference for various reasons. ;)
 
I think that if you dug up an original 1911 pistol from 1911 out of a collection and fired 50,000 rounds in a test against a moderately priced new production 1911, there is a very good chance the 104 year old one could outperform the new one.

A lot of what goes for modern production are ways to produce things less expensively than earlier. Blanked and cast steel replacing forged, etc. People are still firing high pressure ammunition through Mauser rifles from the 1890s.

I just don't see what impediments a decent quality knife company in 1916 would have faced in producing a proper blade with very good carbon steel performance. Skilled labor was cheaper then, so the level of craftsmanship could be very high.

Junk is always junk, in any age.
 
KennyB said:
Oh fun site.

Ankerson I don't agree with your analogy. If I asked would people rather drive a 2016 Prius than a 1916 Ford Whatever-They-Had (not good with their early history, but thinking it was still the Model T) I could see that response. Because there are obvious improvements made from such old vehicles, and I really mean obvious. A person doesn't have to do much research at all to know it would have greater top speed, better fuel economy, better safety, heck cars that old didn't even have starter ignition, AC, radio, etc.

With steel I can't see the differences being so extreme, I mean not in the sense that the situation could be pointed to as lving in a different time.

I'll put it like this then...

Say you have a cowboy Bowie from the middle 1800s or some time around then. Not primitive but not quite as technologically and/or industrially advanced as today. Then the knife got sealed in some kind of time chamber that made it impervious to any kind of corrosion so essentially it was the same strength today as it was when it was made.

Now say someone made the SAME bowie, an absolute clone, but used the cheapest steel they could find today. Still made it with as good a heat treat as the original blade, just new steel.

Basically what I am thinking is with all the time that's gone by, the technology and engineering that went into even a modest steel, it surely must be better than the metallurgy people were limited to a couple hundred years ago?

I guess another way to get at what I am saying is if you grabbed random iron as a blacksmith and then made your own steel, say two hundred years ago, what would that steel be the equivalent to in grade? Would it be like 1095 or even close?
Click to expand...

Your premise is wrong because the cheapest steel of today would be something along the lines of what goes into the cheapest SOGs: Whatever "440A" equivalent those are, it doesn't matter because the cheapest Chinese made junk today is often basically un-tempered: It is hardened, and it will hold an edge, but will shatter on you in multiple pieces if you rap it on a brick: This has been demonstrated by rapping the spine on a brick for cheap SOGs like the Jungle Warrior, and their cheapest half serrated Desert Dagger clone behaves the same...

I have seen 440B and C range from stuff than will bend the edge while chopping on Maple, literally bend on Maple so bad that the edge will curl and point upwards towards the spine (on an $800 Andrew Clifford Sly II) to Randall's 440B, which seems cut straight from Excalibur herself (and humiliates INFI in durability while chopping through concrete cinder blocks, as one guy in Italy demonstrated)...

If that is the range 440B/C can perform at, that designation number means absolutely nothing, short of how it rusts... (Just the molecular cleanness of the original billets can make a huge difference)

Good 440 steel should outperform excellent traditional Carbon, because old Carbons are generally lower on the performance scale, but the origin, cleanness and heat treat of 440 are such sensitive issues that saying "the cheapest available today" makes the comparison meaningless.

The best 440 of today is better than anything from past centuries.

Of course good stuff from the past will be better than absolute junk from today...

In my experience, if you don't know the maker, whatever designation is on that steel is pretty much meaningless. Use a power tool on the edge, and even the make will tell you nothing until you hand-sharpen past the burned area...

Gaston
 
Gaston444 said:
Your premise is wrong because the cheapest steel of today would be something along the lines of what goes into the cheapest SOGs: Whatever "440A" equivalent those are, it doesn't matter because the cheapest Chinese made junk today is often basically un-tempered: It is hardened, and it will hold an edge, but will shatter on you in multiple pieces if you rap it on a brick: This has been demonstrated by rapping the spine on a brick for cheap SOGs like the Jungle Warrior, and their cheapest half serrated Desert Dagger clone behaves the same...

I have seen 440B and C range from stuff than will bend the edge while chopping on Maple, literally bend on Maple so bad that the edge will curl and point upwards towards the spine (on an $800 Andrew Clifford Sly II) to Randall's 440B, which seems cut straight from Excalibur herself (and humiliates INFI in durability while chopping through concrete cinder blocks, as one guy in Italy demonstrated)...

If that is the range 440B/C can perform at, that designation number means absolutely nothing, short of how it rusts... (Just the molecular cleanness of the original billets can make a huge difference)

Good 440 steel should outperform excellent traditional Carbon, because old Carbons are generally lower on the performance scale, but the origin, cleanness and heat treat of 440 are such sensitive issues that saying "the cheapest available today" makes the comparison meaningless.

The best 440 of today is better than anything from past centuries.

Of course good stuff from the past will be better than absolute junk from today...

In my experience, if you don't know the maker, whatever designation is on that steel is pretty much meaningless. Use a power tool on the edge, and even the make will tell you nothing until you hand-sharpen past the burned area...

Gaston
Click to expand...

I think you're still reading too much Jay Fisher. More basic stainless steels don't offer any performance advantages over carbon steels, except corrosion resistance. Toughness in carbon will be better without all that extra chrome and wear resistance will vary by carbon content.

When you get to higher end stainless steels you'll see terrific wear resistance, but low toughness. The modern steels that combine wear resistance and toughness to the greatest extent are still carbon steels like M4.

But I don't see how 440A is going to do anything better than a basic high carbon steel from 100 years ago, except not rust. That's not a bust on 440A, because it works fine AND doesn't rust.
 
440 steel type are good but won't ever compete to good carbon steel at durability, edge retention, strength or toughness wise. Let alone high performance tool steel like 3V, M4 or V4E.

The thread you mentioned about 440B beat INFI is just a joke. There are no even a single evidence of the test... only some picture and you still believe?
 
I think you'd have to go further back to talk about generic steel. Stainless was a thing in 1916.

That said, I'd trust a good smith from hundreds of years ago to make me a blade better than some of the cheap junk we see today. Let's not forget, however, that cheap junk is not new.

I also don't care as much about particular steels than most others around here for reasons stated by Ankerson earlier in this thread.
 
Kwon Kwang said:
I think you'd have to go further back to talk about generic steel. Stainless was a thing in 1916.

That said, I'd trust a good smith from hundreds of years ago to make me a blade better than some of the cheap junk we see today. Let's not forget, however, that cheap junk is not new.

I also don't care as much about particular steels than most others around here for reasons stated by Ankerson earlier in this thread.
Click to expand...

Heck, stellite was a thing in 1916.
 
KennyB said:
Would you rather have 440A produced in 2016 or whatever generic steel was used to produce knife blades in 1916?

Just curious, I would think even the lowest grade steeled today is superior to that available at those times. Always makes me think why people bash these steels so much when people were doing a lot with steel of lesser quality for centuries.

What do you guys think?
Click to expand...

1916. If it's still around today for us to compare then it did damned good at surviving so it is better. So many new 440a knives are in trash for bein not good
 
No time to wade clear through this one, but I think it's relevant to say I still carry a few '60/70's classics in 420 and 440 and hold them as dear as many new ones. I don't mind sharpening and stropping though, and some of those are the most fun. I always thought I got "good ones" though as they can be made really sharp. As far as service I'd rate them superior.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top