Which is better AUS-8-A vs 420 HC steel

They're very close. In identical blades it would be difficult to tell the difference. I would speculate that any detectable variation in performance is due to the heat treat and blade geometry.
 
I agree.

It´s hard to say, which steel is better. Better in what? Edge holding, toughness, achievable sharpness?

Those two are from the same family (.5 to .8 % carbon and 14 to 16 % chromium). The differences are minor. As Alberta Ed has written: In that comparition the quality of heat treatment and the blade geometrie are playing the main roles.

Take the one from the manufacturer you trust more or the one you better like.
 
I'm with Blop.

Better for what? Metals have a long list of characteristics that are used to compare them.

Which characteristic are you asking about?
 
I prefer 420HC, but that's probably due to Buck's heat treat of it. Never really liked
AUS-8. Sharpened fine, but did not hold an edge.
 
Handwrecker said:
I prefer 420HC, but that's probably due to Buck's heat treat of it. Never really liked
AUS-8. Sharpened fine, but did not hold an edge.
Click to expand...

That's what I always thought about it, until I got ahold of some of AUS8 that was HT buy Benchmade. I was fairly impressed.
 
Your AUS8 issue was due to heat treat. The last Gerber I bought to test had AUS8 and I am impressed so far.

I do like 420 HC from Buck. That is one impressive combination, 420 HC and their heat treat. Between 440C and AUS8 I really don't know that I can tell, but I guess I'll pick 440C simply because it has history. It was perfect then as now for 99% of the applications people need knives for.

I would bet the minor changes from 440C to AUS8 are there for a reason, because we learned more about metallurgy. I'm still sticking with my choice of 440C. I just figured you should have all the information. :)
 
If they are both heat-treated correctly, I'd put my money on AUS-8A.
 
Considering both properly heat treated, the AUS8 would be better. It contains more Carbon and also Vanadium, which is missing from 420HC.
 
If you are talking about bucks 420HC, definitely the bucks. I have read that bucks 420HC contains a small amount of vanadium, its latrobes version of it from what I understand. Anyways, bucks 420HC is one of my favorites steels period, even compared to the super steels.

If it is not buck, then I would move on....
 
IMO if properly heat treated, AUS-8 is better and holds a finer edge longer than 420HC. The addition of vanadium in AUS-8 would make for stronger carbides in the steel matrix.
 
ohenkowski said:
Which is better AUS-8-A vs 420 HC steel?:confused:
Click to expand...

If both are hardened to the same hardness and sharpened exactly the same, AUS8 will hold an edge longer than 420HC by a fair margin. I have tested them side by side cutting manila rope.

-I tested a Buck 420HC blade and a KaBar Large Dozier in AUS8. I measured the hardness of each blade. Both measured 59.
-I gave each a 15° per side edge angle and sharpened them to the same level of sharpness.
-After making 20 slicing cuts through 3/8 inch manila rope I examined the edges under a hand lens. The 420HC showed more wear.
 
Preacher Man said:
IMO if properly heat treated, AUS-8 is better and holds a finer edge longer than 420HC. The addition of vanadium in AUS-8 would make for stronger carbides in the steel matrix.
Click to expand...

Some steel makers add a tad of Vanadium to their 420HC. Latrobe is one such.

The amount of Vanadium in either 420HC or AUS8 is insufficient to affect the abrasion resistance. It is there to refine the grain structure.
 
Considering you asked such a general question with no regard for usage, the answer is... it doesn't matter. Not for what you would use it for anyway.
 
I don't have any experience with 420hc but I'm a fan of aus8 and feel it is highly under rated as an edc blade steel . I have several older spydercos in aus8 and actually prefer it to similar models in vg10 .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top