Why do people knock 440C so readily???

Sep said:
I don't have a problem with 440C, my issue is mostly price point. A $20 production folder in 440C is wonderful, but at $80 it's not great.
Click to expand...

But I think a quality design overrides all of that. I'd rather have a design I like in 440C than a design I don't care for in any steel. I carry my BM 527 more than any other knife even though the steel is "inferior" to S30V etc.
 
A knife I designed for a manufacturer called for 440C. Why? Because even though it's considered older than dirt, and there are better steels available nowadays, there's still nothing wrong with a good 440C. From a production standpoint on a mid range knife, it's really not a bad choice at all. If you're designing a knife to be a Toyota or Honda, rather than a Ferrari, then 440C is a good bet.

The manufacturer may choose a different steel, of course, but 440C was what I had in mind.
 
Proper HT is a must. Why would you want any steel, 440C, 420 or whatever improperly HTed?

Unfortunately, the way some posters portray things, there is some magic HT that can make 440C or any other "good old" steel perform better or equal(for unspecified tasks) with the modern alloys for the same tasks.
Amateur knife enthusiasts aside, this is simply discounting all the science that goes into metallurgy, steel research and development.
Disregarding all the new alloys as marketing gimmicks and false promises is wrong, and has no basis at all. Knife makers, tool makers, factories use those alloys and it does make difference for them. They last longer, are lighter, or allow for shallower angles, consuming less energy during cutting, etc.

I understand where some of it is coming from. Put the same 40 deg. inclusive edge on all of your knives and then it will be quite difficult for some of the cutting jobs to see the advantage of the new alloys.
However, a knife is a tool, which has one function, to cut, and easier it cuts, and longer it stays sharper, higher its performance and value as a tool. It is very obvious from physics and every day experience, thin edges cut better than thick ones. Theoretically the goal is to have the edge as thin as possible that can stay sharp and not break for a given work, not to have an edge so thick that it barely cuts. That's common sense and very simple logic.

The main obstacle having thinner edges is the steel properties, there are no alloys today allowing for let's say 3deg. per side edges for hard use knives, or even medium cutters. But I do have bunch of high performance light or even medium cutters between 5-10 per side. And they outcut thick edged knives many to one. 440C even with best HT, at that angle will not last 15 minutes. Yes, it will last longer with 20 per side edge, but that means loss of cutting ability, plain and simple, there is no other way around. In other words, the user has to exert that much more force and energy.

It does make a difference, whenever I have to cut an hour or longer I really feel the difference in fatigue and overall speed or work process, plus sharpening and maintenance. Older, softer steels do need more time to keep them sharp and contrary to the popular belief they're not very easy to sharpen, while I could restore sharp edge on high hardness, thin edge with few strokes on the smooth steel, softer edge required major sharpening.
If you view a knife as a workout tool, may be that works, but otherwise, thin edges cut better. The only reason we are forced to have thick edges is the inability of the alloy to perform adequately with a thin one.

So, in the end, today, other than a budget(even if that), there is absolutely no performance related reason to buy 440C knife. Well, if you like the knife design, or have other reasons, fine. There is no shame in that :) But touting 440C steel as high performance alloy today... It's rather disservice to knife community.
If I want a knife optimized for cutting and long edge holding, there's bunch of stainless steels that will perform a lot better than 440C.
Higher corrosion resistance comes from other, modern alloys including Ti and Co alloys.
If I want hard use knife then there's another class of new alloys optimized for that.
 
Gator97 said:
Proper HT is a must. Why would you want any steel, 440C, 420 or whatever improperly HTed?

Unfortunately, the way some posters portray things, there is some magic HT that can make 440C or any other "good old" steel perform better or equal(for unspecified tasks) with the modern alloys for the same tasks.
Amateur knife enthusiasts aside, this is simply discounting all the science that goes into metallurgy, steel research and development.
Disregarding all the new alloys as marketing gimmicks and false promises is wrong, and has no basis at all. Knife makers, tool makers, factories use those alloys and it does make difference for them. They last longer, are lighter, or allow for shallower angles, consuming less energy during cutting, etc.

I understand where some of it is coming from. Put the same 40 deg. inclusive edge on all of your knives and then it will be quite difficult for some of the cutting jobs to see the advantage of the new alloys.
However, a knife is a tool, which has one function, to cut, and easier it cuts, and longer it stays sharper, higher its performance and value as a tool. It is very obvious from physics and every day experience, thin edges cut better than thick ones. Theoretically the goal is to have the edge as thin as possible that can stay sharp and not break for a given work, not to have an edge so thick that it barely cuts. That's common sense and very simple logic.

The main obstacle having thinner edges is the steel properties, there are no alloys today allowing for let's say 3deg. per side edges for hard use knives, or even medium cutters. But I do have bunch of high performance light or even medium cutters between 5-10 per side. And they outcut thick edged knives many to one. 440C even with best HT, at that angle will not last 15 minutes. Yes, it will last longer with 20 per side edge, but that means loss of cutting ability, plain and simple, there is no other way around. In other words, the user has to exert that much more force and energy.

It does make a difference, whenever I have to cut an hour or longer I really feel the difference in fatigue and overall speed or work process, plus sharpening and maintenance. Older, softer steels do need more time to keep them sharp and contrary to the popular belief they're not very easy to sharpen, while I could restore sharp edge on high hardness, thin edge with few strokes on the smooth steel, softer edge required major sharpening.
If you view a knife as a workout tool, may be that works, but otherwise, thin edges cut better. The only reason we are forced to have thick edges is the inability of the alloy to perform adequately with a thin one.

So, in the end, today, other than a budget(even if that), there is absolutely no performance related reason to buy 440C knife. Well, if you like the knife design, or have other reasons, fine. There is no shame in that :) But touting 440C steel as high performance alloy today... It's rather disservice to knife community.
If I want a knife optimized for cutting and long edge holding, there's bunch of stainless steels that will perform a lot better than 440C.
Higher corrosion resistance comes from other, modern alloys including Ti and Co alloys.
If I want hard use knife then there's another class of new alloys optimized for that.
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone is saying that there aren't better steels today than 440C: we all know that there are. But that doesn't mean that 440C doesn't still have applications. There are, as you've pointed out, levels of steels for different applications, and while one may work well for one thing, it may not work as well as another steel for another application.

I think everyone would cede the point that 440C is not the best steel on the market, and probably wouldn't be the best choice for some of the higher end cutters that you seem to be arguing for, although it probably still works well for, say, an inexpensive folding camp knife. Much of that has to do with the target market, the target price point, and what the manufacturer is comfortable working with. In other words, 440C is still a viable choice for some applications.

You seem to dismiss it as wholly inferior in every aspect, simply because there are better steels available. I simply submit that those better steels are not always the better choice in all situations. Sometimes the better choice is to go with what works well at a certain price point.
 
I agree with everyone that said their were a lot of less than honest people who put other 440's in instead of 440c. The sharpest knives I ever had was when I first started using 440c and sent them to Jim Barbee in Ft. Stockton, Tex. to treat . His oven was designed by NASA scientists he guided on deer hunts and he cryoed them all. They with a buffing would have the hair on your arm jumping off .
 
hardheart said:
I would take 19C27, better chemistry and still 'cheap'.
Click to expand...

I'd say that's an excellent choice in lieu of 440C for a number of things. I haven't had the opportunity to try it myself, but I understand that it has some very good properties, and is more wear resistant than 440C.

Still, if a manufacturer hasn't worked with it before, but they have used 440C, they may be reluctant to make a switch.
 
I have used several blades made of 12c27, AUS8-A, Gin1 and VG-1 and they perform quite good. So a 440C blade wich is supposed to be a better steel than those, must be excellent... yes indeed, It is!
 
Why is it criticized? Because the hobby and industry tell the user that it's "Inferior."

The whole steel mess started in the mid 90's when Benchmade began advertising that it uses ATS-34, and began using steel type as a selling point.

The hobby types, who will never approach any steel's performance threshold, jumped on the bandwagon, which fueled the hysteria.

S30V, S110V, S35V, CPM-154, S90V, 440ABCD, ATS-34, ATS-55, O-1, O-2, A-2, D-2, 12C27, 13C28, H2, GIN-1, GIN-2, M-2, M-4, etc etc etc....They all cut, they all perform, and 99% of the users will never push any of them to their limits in day-to-day usage, nor could a vast majority of users tell them apart if these blades weren't marked (not to mention the few cases where blades were mis-marked, and users could not tell the difference).

Steel choice should be secondary; if you like the knife, buy it, and use it and quit worrying about what all those little atoms and elements are doing.
 
I am weary of those steels that claim to be 'like' 440C, such as AUS8, 19C27, 15C34KorMo. My not just use tried and tested 440C?
 
dawsonbob said:
You seem to dismiss it as wholly inferior in every aspect, simply because there are better steels available. I simply submit that those better steels are not always the better choice in all situations. Sometimes the better choice is to go with what works well at a certain price point.
Click to expand...
Well, nobody specified in what aspect 440C is superior to what, when or how. In every aspect of knife steel performance there are better choices. That's my point, plus my opinion that there is no need to cling to 50 yr. old alloys. Besides, users can be educated.

dano said:
and 99% of the users will never push any of them to their limits in day-to-day usage,
Click to expand...
I doubt the number is 99%, at least amongst the ones who care about the steel. Second, ignorant users are no reason to dismiss science and progress.

dano said:
Steel choice should be secondary; if you like the knife, buy it, and use it and quit worrying about what all those little atoms and elements are doing.
Click to expand...
When one needs a knife that looks cool but also has high performance (I do care), then there's the choice, mediocre steel, or the one that performs few times better.
 
Last edited:
Gator97 said:
Besides, users can be educated.

Second, ignorant users are no reason to dismiss science and progress.
Click to expand...

Ya' know, since square one, all you've done is ramble on and on about how much you know, and science, and BLAH, BLAH, BLAH. I'll take the opinions of someone with calloused hands who has worked IN REALITY with steel for a few decades long before I would from a 'scientist'...or ultra-smug steel snob.:rolleyes:

(This is the first time ever on these forums someone has annoyed me to the point that I actually said something. Congratulations.)
 
oguruma said:
But I think a quality design overrides all of that. I'd rather have a design I like in 440C than a design I don't care for in any steel. I carry my BM 527 more than any other knife even though the steel is "inferior" to S30V etc.
Click to expand...

It goes without saying that a 440A bowie blade will work much better to skin a deer than a ZDP-189 hawkbill. If somebody makes 2 identical knives except for the blade steel, all I care about is whether the price makes sense.
 
I would reserve my judgment on 440C until I get a folder or fixed blade made from it by a maker I like.

Using it for EDC tasks for a few months should be a reasonably good test of its overall qualities, which is dependent on individual needs and wants from a fixed blade or folder.
 
folks everytime we get to alloys we start fighting.i think most everyone has made some valid points. i admit gator really knows his alloys & i refer to his steel charts often.[for which we owe him dearly]. i only take issue with one of his catagoreical imperatives. not all the oldies have been surpassed.52100 & 1095 have been heattreated to cut up there with all the new supers. ed fowler is proof in 52100 & jody mullers 1095 [sniper blade works] these knives will cut as good or better than zdp189 or cpm154 anytime . the tests have been mentioned many times on the forum.gator lets not fight ,these are authenicated.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top