Why do people like 1095 for pricier knives?

Status
Not open for further replies.
KingMC said:
Anecdotal evidence is invalid to him, he only cares about the numbers behind the steels. If you tell him you have had good experiences with a steel he thinks is inferior he'll just tell you your knife sucks and you just don't know it yet.
Click to expand...
I think you are a very emotional and petty person that has frequently attacked my person throughout this thread and needs to go away.
KingMC said:
You make me laugh

Your argument [sic] is hilarious

I believe you only care about numbers and don't actually have any real life experience dictating your thoughts, until you get some you're just some number-crunching know-it-all
Click to expand...
 
RX-79G said:
I don't think anecdotal reports of one breakage mean anything, including breakages of knives made of 1095. The OP was not about how fragile or awful 1095 is, but how it doesn't perform as well as some other fairly inexpensive steels.

If you were shopping for a car and someone told you their Toyota lost a CV joint, would you immediately buy a Honda instead? None of the knives we're talking about break often, if they do break it would be stretch to immediately go to just one factor in the knifemaking process and assign it to that, and this is all assuming that there wasn't a good reason the one knife broke and that any knife wouldn't have broken in the same circumstance.

It isn't that personal experience isn't worth anything, but there's nothing in this topic that really has much to do with broken knives. Metallurgical difference in toughness might buy you a few extra degrees of bend or other abuse, but if a knife is taken well past that the alloy had no role.


Did YOU think this one broken knife is meaningful?
Click to expand...

Not necessarily, but I put more credence in real world experience than charts and graphs. After all, the numbers only tell us how a steel is supposed to perform. They do not always do so.

There are so many variables at work that trying to discuss one steel being used in knives over the particular steel's "perceived value limit" is an exercise in futility.

i.e. - what is "value"? What is "pricey"? What is "substandard"? It's just a ridiculous argument that will go nowhere but in circles.
 
Last edited:
All I was pointing out was "better" is more important on paper than in reality sometimes. The same log that snapped the tip off of a BK16 had its hole finished with an Izula 2. I do not get into arguments about steel choice very often because I know what works for me. I just find more often than not people who debate steel choices are rarely those who use them often. I will be perfectly happy with my choice of O1, 1095, and what ever steel Kelly used on their old vintage axes for the rest of my life. That doesn't mean if someone else chooses M390 their choices is any "better" than mine because on paper M390 might look neater than 1095. It simply means M390 might be better suited for their needs.
 
AntDog said:
Not necessarily, but I put more credence in real world experience than charts and graphs. After all, the numbers only tell us how a steel is supposed to perform. They do not always do so.

There are so many variables at work that trying to discuss one steel being used in knives over the particular steel's "perceived value limit" is an exercise in futility.

i.e. - what is "value"? What is "pricey"? What is "substandard"? It's just a ridiculous argument that will go nowhere but in circles.
Click to expand...

That may be. I just don't see what broken knives have to do with the value question or explanation of how alloys do or don't work.
 
RX-79G said:
I think you are a very emotional and petty person that has frequently attacked my person throughout this thread and needs to go away.
Click to expand...

So I say you know too much and you get pissy, and I get amused at your posts and you're annoyed?
 
RX-79G said:
That may be. I just don't see what broken knives have to do with the value question or explanation of how alloys do or don't work.
Click to expand...

It has everything to do with what you're talking about. Patrick said he had an alloyed knife break before a simple 1095 blade. It's a real-world example of charts and graphs not adding up to reality.

Sometimes heat treats are botched. Sometimes the steel is not being utilized to its full potential. Sometimes the only way to see if knife A is better than knife B, is to go out and use them.
 
Well, I'm sorry I responded.

The points I was making was about relatively small differences in edge holding and stability. I was not suggesting that 52100 knife would never break and 1095 one would. Or vice versa.
 
PatrickKnight said:
Maybe i am just a hill jack from Texas but if a knife breaks it seems the alloy didn't work.
Click to expand...
Please don't feel insulted that I didn't think it had anything to do with the alloy. Maybe someone else does think it was the alloy, and not some other factor.
 
KingMC said:
So I say you know too much and you get pissy, and I get amused at your posts and you're annoyed?
Click to expand...

You are now acting pissy and annoyed. Or, you are just arguing for no reason.

I do not like you, every point you've made in this thread has been pretty much disproved by other posters, and I don't understand why you persist in making yourself look worse.

I may have a reputation, but it isn't for posting misinformation than acting petty when I'm proved wrong. Quit while you're behind.
 
RX-79G said:
You are now acting pissy and annoyed. Or, you are just arguing for no reason.

I do not like you, every point you've made in this thread has been pretty much disproved by other posters, and I don't understand why you persist in making yourself look worse.

I may have a reputation, but it isn't for posting misinformation than acting petty when I'm proved wrong. Quit while you're behind.
Click to expand...

You've built a reputation of ignoring real world experiences in favor of your all-powerful composition numbers, which people have already come in and shown are not foolproof. No ones trying to disprove your numbers because numbers don't make a knife good or bad, but when they bring the real world into the discussion you have to tell them it's irrelevant because your numbers don't lie.

If you don't want a discussion that explores all parts of a topic, don't start one that allows for it. Numbers behind a steel don't mean anything once you're actually using The steel to make a knife.
 
KingMC said:
You've built a reputation of ignoring real world experiences in favor of your all-powerful composition numbers, which people have already come in and shown are not foolproof. No ones trying to disprove your numbers because numbers don't make a knife good or bad, but when they bring the real world into the discussion you have to tell them it's irrelevant because your numbers don't lie.

If you don't want a discussion that explores all parts of a topic, don't start one that allows for it. Numbers behind a steel don't mean anything once you're actually using The steel to make a knife.
Click to expand...

No one believes that alloyed steel is prone to breaking. No knowledgeable person about this topic thinks that 1095 is the toughest. It isn't some theory, it's a well tested reality that you are rejecting because of one machete and a propensity to believe that your narrow world view is meaningful.
 
I read the first page and stopped there.

When you put forward the "nicer steel, better steel" argument it all falls off the rails....

It's now a "preference, I use it for ?" Argument and any "facts" go out the window.

"Nicer Steel for less money" ???

The OP needs to have these conversations alone.....
 
RX-79G said:
No one believes that alloyed steel is prone to breaking. No knowledgeable person about this topic thinks that 1095 is the toughest. It isn't some theory, it's a well tested reality that you are rejecting because of one machete and a propensity to believe that your narrow world view is meaningful.
Click to expand...

If you actually read my posts, i never said that 1095 is the toughest, just that it's tough enough for what people use it for. You hear real-world accounts of 1095 performing better than you think it should and you dismiss them as hearsay and not worthy of basing any opinions on.

But that is how the knife world works, some material performs well and people use it. You seem unfamiliar with anything more than steel composition.
 
" just don't personally understand why anyone would choose a knife made of 1095 if they are spending into the tool steel price range unless there simply is no other choice to get the features they desire."
Post 1 OP


"Steel improvements can be had for nothing more than the raw materials costs. Even if you pass those on to the distributor, retailer and consumer the net change in price on $100 isn't going to be the 20% material cost, but more like 5% because the blade material costs are only a fraction of the total cost of producing a blade, handle, sheath, box and warranty."

Post 80



Your stating even with the increased cost in features (micarta, coatings ) that company's could still offer better steel without an increase in cost?
Correct me if I'm wrong,
I have bad comprehension ;)

That would be awesome, but why would the do that?
These knives aren't marketed that way.

I'm not here to argue 1095 as superior, it's not

These knives are for the average mo' they wouldn't be able to tell the difference between W2, Crovan, 01, A2, 52100

The performance gains are marginal to the regular guy

Also most people aren't pushing the limits on edge performance

Not every knife user is as knowledgeable as you are.

In fact I'd argue your in the top percentage.

The problem is your not able to "step out side of yourself" to see that in reality the steel is not that important when accounting for the "user" population as a whole

This painful for me to say but in the grand scheme it's the "sum of all parts" over what kind of "icing is on the cake."

In the end, these knives simply aren't marketed for you.
 
JR88FAN said:
I read the first page and stopped there.

When you put forward the "nicer steel, better steel" argument it all falls off the rails....

It's now a "preference, I use it for ?" Argument and any "facts" go out the window.

"Nicer Steel for less money" ???

The OP needs to have these conversations alone.....
Click to expand...

I said in the OP that 1095 has a price advantage over other HC steels. Why is it so ridiculous to say that a more expensive steel does a better job?
 
KingMC said:
If you actually read my posts, i never said that 1095 is the toughest, just that it's tough enough for what people use it for. You hear real-world accounts of 1095 performing better than you think it should and you dismiss them as hearsay and not worthy of basing any opinions on.

But that is how the knife world works, some material performs well and people use it. You seem unfamiliar with anything more than steel composition.
Click to expand...

What you said was that it was "incredibly tough".
 
RX-79G said:
I said in the OP that 1095 has a price advantage over other HC steels. Why is it so ridiculous to say that a more expensive steel does a better job?
Click to expand...

Price does not = Better.

Gold would be the best blade steel then????

Many of the reasons why people like to use a certain knife steel has nothing to do with charts and graphs....

Personal experience, comfort, intended use, perceived sharpen-ability, lots of intangible tangibles that are far more valid than what a chart may say.

These things are real and important, and they also effect the overall value of that steel and not just it's raw cost.

I would pay more for a folder that was made using 52100 then one using S30V.......
 
RX-79G said:
What you said was that it was "incredibly tough".
Click to expand...

Yes. I see no mention of 'toughest' there. For what I did with it, it was incredibly tough. Is that relative to a machete made out of O1? No. Is that relative to my prior blade experiences? Yes.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top