Which is "better" -- 1095 or O-1?

[tallwingedgoat]

Okay these are two steels I've always thought were quite similar. They're two carbon steels with about 1% carbon, and are consequently used for the same type of knives. 1095 seems to be quite familiar with smiths and stock grinders alike, but O-1 is not as popular with blade smiths as the other carbon steels.

One smith that is making a bowie for me would prefer 1095 over O-1 because the latter is harder to forge and tends to warp in heat-treat. In his opinon, O-1 offers no advantage that warrants the added cost.

So the question for everyone is, how does a maker choose one over the other? Would you expect O-1 to have a significant edgeholding advantage, would 1095 make a noticably tougher blade?

 

[tejas7]

I don't know the answere but would like to hear it. I use O-1 on the majority of my smaller knives. Holds an edge well and is plenty tough. Especially when I differentially heat treat (soften the spine).

I have been planning on trying out some 1095. Mainly because I would like to get some more dramatic "temper lines".

Where is a good source for 1095?

 

[knifemaker3]

Tallwingedgoat,

I use 1095 in several knives I make. I think it is a great steel for knives. After all, think of the millions of GI's who had depended on it for their very lives in the KaBar USMC fighting knives.

tejas, try Admiral steel. www.admiralsteel.com I think is their web address. I buy all my 1095 there.

Hope this helps.

------------------
Craig Blankenship
Blankenship Knives
http://www.blankenship-knives.com

 

[samwereb]

The only important difference between the two is that 1095 has a higher carbon content. It makes all the difference in the world, however. Both steels make excellent knife blades, but 1095 is certainly superior. It apparently can be hardened and tempered to a higher rating than 0-1 and tends to corrode somewhat less, though both rust if not cared for. 1095 is more forgiving in the heat treating process and this can be very important. It is widely regarded as being "tougher" than 0-1, but how do you actually tell? The differences are minimal at equal hardness ratings. Moreover, I think "toughnes" is often meant to stand for "abrasion resistance" and that is mainly a benefit of the hardness. Too "tough" and it can't be sharpened very easily.

For the cost, the performance of 1095 is outstanding. Certain new, and newly popular stainless steels can approximate the performance of 1095, but are exponentially more expensive.

I hope you get more input than this, but it may be difficult. It is mostly "stainless"
in these threads.

Please don't rely on amateur advice like mine, and try to keep in mind that most of what you get from the "heat-and-beat" crowd is anecdotal. Ask a metallurgist. They are almost always very helpful.

[This message has been edited by samwereb (edited 05-09-2000).]

[This message has been edited by samwereb (edited 05-09-2000).]

[This message has been edited by samwereb (edited 05-09-2000).]

 

[dhannon]

I don't know the metallurgical differences. These must be small in nature and should not make a dramatic impact on the end result. However, I have had limited past experience with both materials. The 0-1 seems to carry a better staining characteristic (turns grey with use and proper care). However, the 1095 seemed to bloom (rust blooms) rather than stain. Could be a small difference in handling, but...

I made the knives with the stock removal method, so I do not see the draw backs that may ocurr during forging. The Smiths will have a good 'handle' on this.

As noted, Admiral Steel is a great source for 1095 and stainless.

Probably added more confusion??

Dan
Hannon Bearpaw Knives http://www.freeweb.pdq.net/dhannon/hannon.htm

 

[raker]

tallwingedgoat, the 1095 has about .9% to 1.1 % carbon and .3% manganese. According to the isothermal transformation diagram for 1095, you have .8 seconds to cool it from 1450 deg. F. to about 800 degrees F. This will cause the steel to start forming martensite at about 420 deg. and continue till it cools to around 200 deg. or for an hour or so.
The O1 has about the same amount of carbon and some chrome, vanadium, and tungsten. In the diagram for O1, the time is 10 seconds to about 800 deg. and the rest is appox. the same. Both require the same amount of time to temper but the temps. may be different due to the use of the blade.
That is why it is easy to get a temper line with the 1095. 1095 will rust or discolor faster than O1 under the same conditions due to the alloying elements in the O1.
The last I bought of O1 was a bargain at $6.00 a lb. (normally $10.00 lb). I use it and L6 in my damascus along with the 52100.

To me, best would be what I liked to use and knew how to make it perform at its best. I have never tried to use the O1 with a differential heat treatment so I don't know if it is difficult or not.
I guess you could say I am one of the "heat and beat" crowd but I have spent my life working steel and pursueing knowledge of the medium that I enjoy working with.
The I-T Diagrams were given to me by Dr. James Batson of Alabama for the 52100 that I use. This has helped me to maybe get just a smidgen more performance out of the blades made from it.

------------------
Ray Kirk
http://www.tah-usa.net/raker