Who knows 1085 steel

G

gpwknives

Joined
Jan 22, 2006
Messages
82
Some work with 1085 steel? Someone offer me that steel on knife but I dont know what is worth.
Thanks
 
Ask Aldo Bruno, he sells steel on this site. And if you want to sell through this site, make sure you buy the knifemaker membership ($10).
 
I sold some to a maker in trade for some Damascus awhile back at I believe $3.65 a pound. Not quite sure.
 
gpwknives said:
Some work with 1085 steel? Someone offer me that steel on knife but I dont know what is worth.
Thanks
Click to expand...

Depending on how skilled or well known the knifemaker is, the knife could be worth anywhere from $5 to $1000's. 1084 ;) can be an excellent blade steel and is used by some of the worlds best knifemakers :thumbup: :thumbup:
 
Last edited:
O.K. am I the stooge who is not in on the joke or did a run of 1084 get made that had .01% more carbon and is now available?:confused:

(P.S. I know there can be a range, but that only adds to my confusion, in fact with that allowable range how did it ever get called 1084 to begin with??:confused:)
 
Kevin R. Cashen said:
O.K. am I the stooge who is not in on the joke or did a run of 1084 get made that had .01% more carbon and is now available?:confused:

(P.S. I know there can be a range, but that only adds to my confusion, in fact with that allowable range how did it ever get called 1084 to begin with??:confused:)
Click to expand...

Kevin, you probably know this already, but for the sake of those who may not, the difference between two different 10XX steels is not usually the carbon content, but other alloys. Manganese especially. For instance, the 1084 from Aldo has .89% carbon, whereas some 1095 from Admiral had .88%.
Both are still within range. :rolleyes: The biggest difference is the manganese content. The 1084 has more than twice what the 1095 does.

Also, 1084 and 1086M may have the same carbon, but the 1086 also has vanadium added.

And so on and so forth. :)
 
Pick a number, any number.:) or any group of numbers.

Now lets give it some stats and create another legend.

:confused::) Fred
 
Looks like the spec for 1085 calls for more Mn than 1084. I've never worked with it, just what I read.
 
Phillip Patton said:
Kevin, you probably know this already, but for the sake of those who may not, the difference between two different 10XX steels is not usually the carbon content, but other alloys. Manganese especially. For instance, the 1084 from Aldo has .89% carbon, whereas some 1095 from Admiral had .88%.
Both are still within range. :rolleyes: The biggest difference is the manganese content. The 1084 has more than twice what the 1095 does.

Also, 1084 and 1086M may have the same carbon, but the 1086 also has vanadium added.

And so on and so forth. :)
Click to expand...

Which brings up a good question. Is 1084 with .89% carbon still 1084 ? I guess so. Like the 1095 with .88% carbon that Phillip referenced still being 1095. I'm confused :confused: :confused: ..........
Is that what the difference between 1084, 1085, & 1086 etc. is ? The alloying elements rather than the carbon content ?
 
Last edited:
I'm confused by your post Kevin. Are you saying that there shouldn't be a steel designation 1085 or that there isn't a steel designated 1085. This has been an ongoing problem with me, the understanding of the classification of some 10XX steels that is. Thanks.
 
Fred.Rowe said:
Pick a number, any number.:) or any group of numbers.

Now lets give it some stats and create another legend.

:confused::) Fred
Click to expand...

AMEN to that! If you have a ton of mystery steel given to you don't get too uptight about the chemistry, just give it an impressive new letter and number name like CV-X65285-M and then get Blade magazine to do a story so you can get the cover headline "CV-X65285-M, the new super steel?". You will sell out of the stuff in no time at almost any price you like:D. Then if you have your 3 year old think up some heat treating secrets for it and cut up any ludicrous thing you can think of (as long as it doesn't resemble anything you would actually do with a knife ;)), and make it clear to any pimple faced mall squatter that this is the steel they will want the very next time they are HALO dropped behind enemy lines on a double super secret mission... then... yes then, you could create another legend.:thumbup:

With that kind of P.R. I could almost guarantee that everybody would swear by the superior performance of that pile of rusty A36 or 1018 you sold out of:D
 
Last edited:
David Wesner said:
I'm confused by your post Kevin. Are you saying that there shouldn't be a steel designation 1085 or that there isn't a steel designated 1085. This has been an ongoing problem with me, the understanding of the classification of some 10XX steels that is. Thanks.
Click to expand...


in the AISI designation system the first two numbers tell you the alloying (10XX is a simple carbon steel with varying ammounts of Mn for desufurizing and slightly elevated hardenability) the second two numbers are the carbon content (XX90) is a steel with .9% carbon. So 1090 is a simple carbon steel with .90% carbon as the intended content.

However, in the making of the steel there can be huge ranges that the chemistry can fall within and still meet a specific designation, thus it is possible to have 1084 with as much if not a little more carbon than 1090 that falls on the low end of its range:confused:. I have never heard of 1085 so at first I was wondering if somebody just got it wrong, but then everybody else's posts continued using the name 1085, making me wonder if there was a special run of steel that I was not aware of that had its goal in creation to be .01% more carbon than the old standard 1084.

But then when one considers that you can have almost a 10 point range, you have to wonder why they ever came up with 1084 instead of 1085??:confused: If there is 1060, 1070, 1075, 1080, 1090 and 1095, where the heck did one of the most common carbon steels end up with the designation 1084?? Perhaps the eutectoid was a consideration? But then I noticed the other day in my Atlas of Isothermal Diagrams listings for 1062, 1054 and 1019. Perhaps they are slight carbon deviations within the 10XX listings but if there can be such a wide allowable range, why not just go in increments of 5 and call it good??

By the way jsut about every piece of 5160 I ever worked with was actually more like 5155;)

Anyhow is somebody actually selling a 1085 steel? If so it may actaully be a good thing. It is just too bad that if when they finally decide to go with increments of 5 it comes at time when all the steels concerned are being phased out:(
 
Kevin, you're way off base . You've got to use columbium instead of vanadium !
 
mete said:
Kevin, you're way off base . You've got to use columbium instead of vanadium !
Click to expand...

That would be cool but not as marketable:( Knifemakers have an affinity for vanadium that approaches mania, if you mixed enough ferro-vanadium powder into it you could sell knifemakers spoiled mayonnaise:D Besides, as you know, you could spark an international incident calling it Columbium;)
 
Security Spring Steel in Chicago has 1085, if anyone is interested.
I can't tell the diff between it and 1084.

There is a huge diff between 1084/85 and 1086 though.

The original question is a bit unclear??????

Tai, I am, are you? ;):D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top