Which is better, AUS6 or 420HC?

Jedi Knife

Jedi Knife

Banned
Joined
May 6, 1999
Messages
728
Forgive the boring question, but with the proliferation of affordable knives with these steels, I will probably eventually have a knife with one or the other. Assuming both of these steels are optimally heat treated, which one of these steels would be better as far as edge retention? What about corrosion resistance? Thanks for your time and patience.

JK
 
No definitive answer for you, but something to ponder.

AUS-6A has a working hardness of Rc55-57.

420HC has a working hardness of Rc 58, give or take.
At least that's what Buck hardens it to in their line-up. You know, the Buck 110 and such.

I'm not sure of the elemental make-up of 420HC, but if it's working hardness is greater than 6A, I'm thinking it has more Carbon.
 
For blades, IMO, AUS-6 will perform better. AUS-6 has more carbon. AUS-6 has more chromium.

sal
 
Thanks Sal!:D
I'm glad you cleared that up.

Now, I hope you can clarify this for me because I'm a bit confused.
Does AUS-6A have a greater working hardness than 420HC?
It would seem that 6A, having more Carbon, would have the higher hardness.
But, I see AUS-6A at Rc55-57 in some factory's knives and others using 420HC at Rc58.
Are they using their respective steels at the optimal working hardness for those particular steels?:confused:
 
Hi Misque. I really can't answer that question. I've never used 420HC in a knife blade. We use various 420's for locks. We like higher carbon contents for blades. Locks don't have to hold thin edges. We can use lower Rockwells for our needs.

Roque_Spear. Gin-1 has in excess of .9 carbon. Much more going on in the carbon end than AUS-6 (about .6 carbon). Gin 1 is a very good steel. 20 years ago, it was one of the best. Shows you how technology progreses. OTOH, the "exotic" steels cost like the dickens and don't often end up as high volume pieces due to higher production costs.

sal
 
i think misque hit it ! the heat treating would make a real difference in performance, coupled, of course with edge geometry.(and you folks didnt think i was paying attention :) )
guy
 
Spyderco's AUS-6 is listed in the catalog as 57-58 Rc, while CRKT's AUS-6M is listed, I think, at 55-56 or 57.

I have some knives with blades of 420HC and find that depending on the manufacturer, it's a good working knife steel. I can't say whether it's better or worse than AUS-6, though I personally like the AUS-6 as done in Spyderco's knives quite a bit.

Jim
 
Originally posted by James Y
Spyderco's AUS-6 is listed in the catalog as 57-58 Rc, while CRKT's AUS-6M is listed, I think, at 55-56 or 57.
Click to expand...

CRKT also uses 420J2, what does the J2 signify? What does the M in AUS-6M mean?
Probably obvious, but someone please enlighten me.
Thanks,
Rob
 
AUS-6 carbon content is approx. .65%
420HC carbon content is approx. .44%

Just thought that this might be of interest.
 
420J2 is about the worst bladesteel around. Contains about 0.2% carbon - not wery hardenable. 'Age hardened cheese' term used by (I hope I remember correctly) Cougar Allen
 
Note that 420HC means a higher carbon content than AISI 420. Exactly how much higher I don't think is a rigorous standard. Phil Wilson uses a version with .5% carbon and tempers it so 55/56 RC for his kitchen knives. I don't doubt that he could get it harder if he wanted to.

-Cliff
 
I read somewhere that the j2 in 420j2 is merely a manufacturer's designation. The steel is widely used and imported worldwide, but is not a steel with a good reputation. Boker uses 420j2 on the Gemini series and the Top Lock models. Buck, Camillus, Kershaw and others use 420HC and it seems to be of better quality than 420j2.
 
aus6 is not a bad steel for edc. it takes a great edge and holds it reasonably well. I like my knives with aus6 better than the few i have with ats-34 because it is easier to sharpen, and that is what i do most with em anyway even if they don't need it.
420j2 just plain sucks. "age hardened cheese" is a fitting description
 
In knives I think that AUS6, 420HC, 425M, 440A
and Sandvik 12C27 are very close.
There does not exist a ideal heat treat.
It's allways a compromize, with any steel.
From a practical standpoint, I like Buck 420HC
better then CRKT AUS6M.
(Buck 501 vs CRKT Ace 6601, these are both rebeveled to my liking eg 14 deg)
All these steels are good in light use knifes,
that are carried more than used. Or when sharpening now and again is not inconvenient.
They are easy to sharpen and hold an edge for a while.
I live in Sweden, so I just KNOW that 12c27 is
superior. :) :D

john
 
The link is below. That being said, in my experience, I really like both Aus6 and 420 HC. I don't notice much difference. Most people seem to be "steel snobs" (the general :D ) My first real tactical knife was a first run BM AFCK. I loved the knife, but I could not get it sharp. I did not know about diamonds then. Needless to say, these days I like softer, tougher steels for my use. Although for pure cutting I love my William Henry in VG10. It is definately not a hard use knife, so being pretty hard is okay. My favorite hard use folder of all time is the CRKT M16. AUS6! Gotta like it. JMO. Peace.

STEEL FAQ
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top