Whats so great about 1095 Steel

^ Great post Carl :thumbup:

Any steel is only as good as it's HT.

I like 1095 for all the reasons stated above, and for traditionals, I like carbon steels in general. For me, they have a 'soul' that stainless doesn't really have (and there are some outstanding stainless steels), it shows wear, but ages well. 1095 cuts plenty well enough for anything I do these days, and in truth for anything I've ever done. It may have gone out of fashion with most non-traditional knife fans, as indeed have some of the 'super' stainless steels people were crowing about in the 1970's and 80's, but I think it's going to be around a while yet. As for taking care of it, my knives get a wipe after use, and now and again they get a drop of oil. They seem to do OK in the cold, damp country where I live.
 
1095 has been around for over a century, that should tell you something about its reliability and usefulness.
 
I started out only wanting traditionals in "better" steel. I focused on Queen's d2 and ats34. (You can see that in the Northwoods line). But I have thoroughly immersed myself in the 1095 on traditionals, and I like it. I like the patina. I find it to take and hold an edge. It doesn't hold one as long as the other steels, but I touch up the edge evey day anyway.

I still want to make a line of traditionals in a super steel, but I have found I really like the 1095.
 
jth250 said:
I have some knives in 154cm that will whittle hair. Take the time it takes you to clean and oil the 1095 and put that into sharpening the 154cm and you could have the same fine edge and it will hold it much longer.
Click to expand...

Good for you. But what makes you think I spend an undue amount of time cleaning and oiling my 1095 knives? I oil the joints, but I do that with all my knives including my 154cm Microtech LCC. Nor do I spend any more time cleaning them. That's patina on my slipjoints, not dirt. They are no dirtier than my stainless knives.

- Christian
 
jth250 said:
I hear a lot of talk on here about how great 1095 and CV steel are but I have have tried both and don't think they are that great. I would much rather have a blade made out of a good stainless link 154cm, Ats-34 or even 440c that don't rust and that will hold an edge much longer and they are not hard to sharpen for me. So what is so good about carbon steel?
Click to expand...

some people like the patina carbon steel develops and will even 'force' a patina by various methods.
some people like an old style steel on their old style knife as part of an overall aesthetic.
some, if not most, people do not need superlative edge retention on a knife that is only used for suburban jobs like opening blister packs from the super mega mart co. center or cutting fruit.
and anyone who reads this forum and everyone who might reply to this thread is a whackjob about pocketknives (lol) who wouldnt let their carbon blade rust for all the tea in china.
 
I'd Love to do a cutting test using high carbon steel vs all these so called super steels. A cheap opinel blade is about as sharp as I ever want a knife and it beats most blade steels for cutting ability. I recently purchased a Lauri skinner blade, heat treated to rockwell 63 ( I believe about 1% of blades are heat treated to 63) With a back hardness of 52RC. I'll tell you, the edge scared me. EASY to sharpen, holds an edge forever and cost 25 bucks. I believe the carbon content is .81,I'm a carbon guy through and through.

Best regards

Robin
 
Last edited:
IF the heat-treat is right (very important, and a deal-breaker if it isn't), this is why I like 1095:

  • Takes as fine an edge as any steel can (there's nothing in it to build bulky carbides --> very fine grain).
  • As compared to more modern steels, it can be made that fine quicker, easier and with very simple tools & materials (again, the lack of harder carbides makes it easy).
  • For it's ease of sharpening, it can hold a fine edge impressively long.
  • Maintenance is dead-simple, by stropping on simple leather, wood, fabric or paper with green compound and/or bare.

From a standpoint of honing, using and maintaining the sharpest edge with the simplest and most readily available of means, it's as close to a 'perfect steel' as any I've ever seen. I think CV could very closely match it in all aspects, if the RC hardness were at comparable levels.

I'll also agree, some stainless can take equally-fine edges as well (Sandvik 12C27Mod steel, as used in Opinels, is a good example). BUT, it does take more time to get it there, and somewhat more modern tools and materials, in many cases.


David
 
Last edited:
okbohn said:
I started out only wanting traditionals in "better" steel. I focused on Queen's d2 and ats34. (You can see that in the Northwoods line). But I have thoroughly immersed myself in the 1095 on traditionals, and I like it. I like the patina. I find it to take and hold an edge. It doesn't hold one as long as the other steels, but I touch up the edge evey day anyway.

I still want to make a line of traditionals in a super steel, but I have found I really like the 1095.
Click to expand...

I will be the first in line if you make them.
 
jc57 said:
I'm not really able to tell the difference in cutting or edge-retention between CV and Tru-Sharp once I have them equally sharp.
Click to expand...

I did side by side testing between CV and Tru Sharp. In that test the CV held an edge a bit better than the Tru Sharp. But I don't think you would notice the difference in every day use. I know Case says they harden CV to 58 or so, but the results of the various side by side edge retention tests I have performed do not support that.
--------------------------

Personally, I prefer D2, 440C, or similar for a pocket knife because of the way I use a pocket knife. As an urban homeowner, I cut a lot of hard, abrasive materials, so I like an alloy with high wear resistance. I don't use my pocket knives for skinning or such. And I'm seldom so far away from my sharpening equipment that I need to use a rock to resharpen. Patina does not make a knife better to me.

But that's MY usage, not that of someone else. If my usage were different, I might be more prone to prefer non-stainless. That being said, I have a lot of non-stainless knives. I just prefer a carbide containing stainless if I can get it.
 
There is a article about Frank J. Richtig (I know I have referenced this before and others too) talking about the performance of his blades. For those of you who dont know, he was a traveling bladesmith and his blades had some very interesting qualities despite their simple looks. Richtig demonstrated his blades by pounding them through railroad spikes, bolts, horseshoes etc etc with a hammer against an anvil. After doing this he would cleanly slice newspaper. The article " The Knives of Frank J. Richtig" is about some scientists who examined some examples of his blades and did all sorts of analysis. Richtig used simple AISI 1090 1095 in his blades and due to his heat treatment process they were able to complete these amazing tasks. In some of the last lines of the paper, the scientists admit that they too pounded one of his blades through a steel bar cutting it in two, without any damage. They also did a control test with another carbon steel blade in which it failed. Do a Google search for the article and one of the first searches brings up a summary. The article is really interesting albeit technical, but it confirms what simple high carbon steels are really capable of.
 
I have a large (11 1/2" blade) Moran style fighter bowie that I have chopped small trees with. It is differentially heat treated and convex edged. I have yet to dull the blade cutting wood or other materials appropriate for cutting with such a blade and its 1095. 1095 when forged and heat treated properly is amazing since its such a simple steel. It is easy to get shaving sharp and the steel is tough.
 
I like them all, promiscuous :D

Fixed blades more carbon.

Knives I use for food & snacks, French folding knives with Sandvik and stainless liners.

Gardening tasks, whittling, messing about outdoors, American folding carbon knives.

Gives me a nice excuse for varied carry anyway! Decent steel carbon or stainless, they both please me.:thumbup:
 
iwouldhurtafly said:
There is a article about Frank J. Richtig (I know I have referenced this before and others too) talking about the performance of his blades. For those of you who dont know, he was a traveling bladesmith and his blades had some very interesting qualities despite their simple looks. Richtig demonstrated his blades by pounding them through railroad spikes, bolts, horseshoes etc etc with a hammer against an anvil. After doing this he would cleanly slice newspaper. The article " The Knives of Frank J. Richtig" is about some scientists who examined some examples of his blades and did all sorts of analysis. Richtig used simple AISI 1090 1095 in his blades and due to his heat treatment process they were able to complete these amazing tasks. In some of the last lines of the paper, the scientists admit that they too pounded one of his blades through a steel bar cutting it in two, without any damage. They also did a control test with another carbon steel blade in which it failed. Do a Google search for the article and one of the first searches brings up a summary. The article is really interesting albeit technical, but it confirms what simple high carbon steels are really capable of.
Click to expand...

I find it hard to believe that any knife steel could do all that and still slice paper. I would have to see it done to believe it.
 
jth250 said:
I find it hard to believe that any knife steel could do all that and still slice paper. I would have to see it done to believe it.
Click to expand...

Yeah, Smithhammer has it right. Your mind is certainly made up and I'm kinda scratching my head about what the purpose of this thread might be. He is also right when he says:

Bottom line - use whatever you want, and whatever you prefer. You clearly prefer stainless steels, so use what you like. It's as simple as that.
Click to expand...

I have a nice sized collection of modern folders with everything from 440C to M4. Great steels, every one, although the "steel race" also includes quite a bit of propaganda, IMHO. While I wouldn't mind having a traditional made in a new super steel, for the most part I would prefer 1095 & O1 for all the reasons mentioned above. And those are real reasons, even if you disagree. If you don't like the steel, no problem. Just buy those knives that appeal to you.
 
Last edited:
One of the issues is that the consumer market is dominated almost entirely by marketing. And not to put too much blame on marketing, marketing just preys on built-in weaknesses of the human condition combined with cultural commitment to consumption both as a economic plan and as path to self definition/fulfillment. Point your browsers at the entertaining/horrifying "The Story of Stuff".

There is a 2 headed beast of a belief that comes out of this...
a) You get what you pay for with expensive goods
b) Inexpensive is bad

It is bad for GDP to buy cheap things and the culture will tell you that you are cheap person if you buy cheap things.

Enter the humble Opinel with 12C27 or 1086(ish) carbon steel.

There's just way too much cultural baggage to admit that a $15 knife can be excellent. And with that, we can unleash the steel wars.
 
jth250 said:
I find it hard to believe that any knife steel could do all that and still slice paper. I would have to see it done to believe it.
Click to expand...

Article came from the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, University of California. Jeffery Wadsworth, Donald R. Lesuer.
Richtig appeared in Ripleys Believe it or Not for his blades.

Citing the Article he received letters of endorsement from General Dwight D Eisenhower, General Douglas MacArthur, General George Patton, Admiral Chester Nimitz, and President Franklin D. Roosevelt.

I understand the whole having to see to believe, but do a little Google search on the guy, its very cool. With the correct HT and geometry, I think its possible. His knives sold for a few bucks a piece during the 30s-70s... Today, they go for thousands. Very neat.
 
Buck used to do the same thing, right? Didn't the first Bucks start out as heat treated files?
 
iwouldhurtafly said:
Article came from the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, University of California. Jeffery Wadsworth, Donald R. Lesuer.
Richtig appeared in Ripleys Believe it or Not for his blades.

Citing the Article he received letters of endorsement from General Dwight D Eisenhower, General Douglas MacArthur, General George Patton, Admiral Chester Nimitz, and President Franklin D. Roosevelt.

I understand the whole having to see to believe, but do a little Google search on the guy, its very cool. With the correct HT and geometry, I think its possible. His knives sold for a few bucks a piece during the 30s-70s... Today, they go for thousands. Very neat.
Click to expand...

I did not mean that I don't believe you it is just the whole concept of cutting through a railroad spike with a knife and it still be sharp is hard to believe but I guess anything is possible. Sorry if I offended you by my statement.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top