Why do people like 1095 for pricier knives?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Engineering and metallurgical science is always going to try and make the "perfect alloy" for a knife blade. I love 3V myself, as it is a favorite for a fixed blade chopper along with a giant slab of 1095 and INFI. Variety is not always a bad thing, especially when it comes to knife steel.
 
Halfneck said:
I don't buy a knife based solely on the steel used. How comfortable it feels in-hand is a bigger factor to me. Great steel, but uncomfortable to use makes less sense to me. Growing up using 1095/1095CV I'm familiar with it, and there is a degree of comfort in it's capabilities. Other than my GEC slipjoints, I have quite a few fixed blades (Mora to Dan Koster) in 1095 that I use on hikes an camping trips. I prefer simple steels for my woods use knives that can be easily field sharpened. While I'd prefer O1, A2, or L6, if I prefer all the other components of a knife and the steel is 1095 than so be it.

And that's my personal opinion on the question.
Click to expand...

1095 is not the same as 1095CV. 1095CV is a trade name of 50100b, also sold under the names "CroVan" and "Carbon V".
 
RX-79G said:
I'm not sure which of us is more confused. Tops and ESEE are examples of 1095 knives. Becker and Enzo are examples of nicer knives that come in superior steels to 1095.

What is it you're asking?
Click to expand...

Besides the difference in steel,

Why is Becker and Enzo nicer?
 
Most of the price of a pricey knife isn't the steel's cost, it's all the work that goes into it (including complicated heat treatments for some of those complex alloys). No reason a great steel like 1095 shouldn't be turned into a really nice knife with a price that reflects the work it takes to make it.
 
RX-79G said:
I'm not sure which of us is more confused. Tops and ESEE are examples of 1095 knives. Becker and Enzo are examples of nicer knives that come in superior steels to 1095.
Click to expand...

I think it would help to point out some specific knives to compare.
 
DeadboxHero said:
Besides the difference in steel,

Why is Becker and Enzo nicer?
Click to expand...

The Becker isn't as nice otherwise, but very similar, while being cheaper and of better steel.

The Enzos are about the same price, have very nicely made sheaths, beautifully fitted and nicely shaped micarta or wood handles, polished blades and better steel.


If Enzo and Becker can offer what they do at prices similar or less to Tops or ESEE, than there is room in the pricing of Tops or ESEE for something other than the world's least expensive hypereutectoid steel. IMO.


One of the best examples is the 1095 Ritter MK2, which is a Becker variation with similar sheath and plastic Becker handles + some brass weights for $125. Now that is easy to compare to the cheaper Beckers since you get pretty much the same for an additional $35 and lower steel.
 
Man, I haven't been part of a forum in years. I forgot how pissy and passive aggressive people get in forums. This place is like an eighth grade girls locker room with the girls wielding estrogen-filled Super Soakers.

RX-79G, I was starting to sympathize with you, until mid page 2, at which point your repeatedly vague posts started to change my mind. Then finally, with this last post you start giving them what they want: actual comparisons.

Anyway, I agree with your overall point. If I were shopping two knives, with similar features, similar sheaths, similar prices, but one was CPM 3V and the other 1095, the deal would be sealed. I would go CPM 3V all the way. That being said, that's me. I value steel over many other things. Someone else might value looks, or handle design, or warranty over the steel. I mean, if the 1095 gives you 80% of the performance of CPM 3V (pulled that figure out of my ___), then maybe it's worth going with a sheath design you like better for a slight reduction in edge retention.

Break's over. Refill those Super Soakers, ladies.
 
RX-79G said:
I have nothing against 1095. All steels excel at something, and 1095 excels at making a tough, sharp knife for relatively little expense. I 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.
Click to expand...

Because more money doesn't mean more knife, that's why. $100 gets you a beast of a knife in 1095, while supplying you with maybe a 5" D2 or O1 blade. By the time you get up to the same size knife in both steels, that 1095 knife will still be the same price but those fancier steels will have jumped significantly beyond your original price range of $100.

Find me a knife that can do what an ESEE Junglas can do, but in D2 or O1, for even close to the same price, and you might make a valid point.
 
Fanglekai said:
What materials testing data shows Becker steel is superior to Rowen's 1095?
Click to expand...

You could certainly ask the metallurgists why they add alloying elements to steel, or what chromium or vanadium do to form carbides and refine them. It would be up to you if you believe them, and I'm not a metallurgist, so there is little point in trying to get you to believe me.
 
RX-79G said:
You could certainly ask the metallurgists why they add alloying elements to steel, or what chromium or vanadium do to form carbides and refine them. It would be up to you if you believe them, and I'm not a metallurgist, so there is little point in trying to get you to believe me.
Click to expand...

EwzN7gh.jpg


for shame
 
KingMC said:
EwzN7gh.jpg


for shame
Click to expand...

Get real. I could post the results of some test, you could post some other test, someone could chime in with some knife their friend had, on and on.


If you don't believe steel alloys exist for any reason actually related to performance, there is no way I can possibly defeat that sort of believe system.

Here's a panda:
Panda_Cub_from_Wolong,_Sichuan,_China.JPG
 
RX-79G said:
Get real. I could post the results of some test, you could post some other test, someone could chime in with some knife their friend had, on and on.


If you don't believe steel alloys exist for any reason actually related to performance, there is no way I can possibly defeat that sort of believe system.
Click to expand...

Finally, you realize that other people have opinions that differ from your own. Hopefully you can use that information in the future

You had a chance to show that you knew how to research the subject and come up with solid hypotheses, instead you resorted to feigning ignorance and deferring to other sources. From all the google-fu I've pulled today ranging from this forum to the ESEE forum and everywhere in-between, the ESEE 1095 and the Ka-Bar 1095cv have no noticeable difference in performance. So, are you going to disqualify the ESEE Rowen HT as not 1095 too? is it too advanced to be considered normal 1095? Your arguments would lead me to believe so.
 
Last edited:
One of the most common comparisons here on BF is the Esee...or is it ESEE? Is it a word or an acronym? Sorry I digressed early. Been a long day.

Anyway Esee 4 vs Ka Bar Becker 16 seems like a valid comparison. The Esee is more expensive in 1095. The BK16 is cheaper in 1095 Cro Van.
The Esee is reputed to have a better heat treat. That makes me feel confident.
Esee have just about the best warranty in the business. That also makes me feel confident.
I think the Esee's handle is better; higher quality, grippier and more durable.
I like choking up on a blade so the Esee's finger choil is a lot of added value.
I really like the Esee sheath and the way the blade clicks into place. It just feels really secure.
I understand how 1095 behaves and I am confident that I can get a great edge on it quickly, in the rain, while hiding from rampaging drop bears.
I find the grind on the Esee to be better for general use up to and including dispatching and skinning that drop bear (not for prepping it for eating though; their flesh is toxic).
When I pick up that Esee I feel confident.

That's more than enough added value to justify the price for me.

(The above may or may not be my actual opinion but that is largely irrelevant )
 
Last edited:
RX-79G said:
The Becker isn't as nice otherwise, but very similar, while being cheaper and of better steel.

The Enzos are about the same price, have very nicely made sheaths, beautifully fitted and nicely shaped micarta or wood handles, polished blades and better steel.


If Enzo and Becker can offer what they do at prices similar or less to Tops or ESEE, than there is room in the pricing of Tops or ESEE for something other than the world's least expensive hypereutectoid steel. IMO.


One of the best examples is the 1095 Ritter MK2, which is a Becker variation with similar sheath and plastic Becker handles + some brass weights for $125. Now that is easy to compare to the cheaper Beckers since you get pretty much the same for an additional $35 and lower steel.
Click to expand...

Aww, now we can discuss.

I agree that steel ingredients on the Becker have the benift of trace amounts of chromium and vanadium for improved grain refinement

however in the real world any benefit that cro van has is marginal since neither steel is hardened to full potential.

EnZo offers D2, N690co and S30v good steels, and are quality knives.

This doesn't take away anything from Tops and ESEE at the high price.
They target a different style of user.

We also have to get that people are buying more then a bar of steel.

Look at Chris Reeve,

Is S35vn that expensive?

The fit and finish and excution, and handle materials are huge

This adds more cost.

EnZo still costs more and isnt a very good comparison since they only make small knives. They are also targeting a more "Traditional" user versus the "military survival" style of the Tops and ESEE

A more comparable company would be Survive! Knives.

Similar designs with super steels.

But then the cost almost doubles.


I'm not personally a fan of any of these knives.

Not EnZo,Becker, ESEE or Tops

But I can step outside myself and see things from a different point of view.
 
This is pre-Boris Boris, right?

Talking about the same steels (1095 and 80CrV2) in the same roundabout way but changing which steel is the better/nicer/cooler/superiorerest one.
 
I think the answer has to fall within that category of what do you want this knife to do. 1095 is cheap, which means big blanks are lower risk to work. 1095 has a wide heat-treat range, you can do it fast and simple like Old hickory, or really tune it up like Rowen/ESEE. Its apparently forgiving during that heat-treat as shown by Tops' weird designs, I suspect the heat-treat would be much harder on some of their knives in "higher end" steels considering cooling rates of the different areas in the more dramatic designs (but that is a guess)

So what sort of knives is 1095 in? either really cheap knives, or larger knives designed to take a large beating. Yes something little like an Izula or ESEE-3 could be (and are) made from a different steel, and are pretty good. But you will notice that high production number companies, and those with large catalogs, but small facilities tend to use the same steel for everything as a cost reducing measure. What steel has arguably the widest performance window? I'd say 1095, there might be others, but I don't think so. So while the ESEE-3 would be an amazing knife in CMP3V I don't know that the Junglas would, and neither would have hit their intended market. If you want that knife, BarkRiver already fits the bill, but you better bring the bills. As for why other steels like A-2 have not filled this niche? dunno, maybe they have a characteristic that is less desirable on the production end that drives up cost? I've seen quite a wide range of blades for near the same price in that steel, a similar case to 1095. Bark River did everything in A-2, and now are doing most things in CPM3V, again, taking advantage of a large number of units to amortize R&D cost, and get the best out of the steel. Neither steel is cheap, so maybe its a simple matter of cost? I don't know what the tonnage rate on these materials are.

The other side of that coin is the sheer number of blades Buck does with one steel. Different steel, fitting different needs, but same idea. They get more out of it than almost anyone else, but that heat treating cost is lessened due to the production numbers. If another maker wanted that steel that good, they would not likely be able to compete. So there are other cheap steels that are as popular, but they hit different markets.
 
well for around the same price some are cheaper esee 5 powder coated 1095 with sheath $168(you can get versions for less) cold steel ak47 fixed $163 in 3v. I get what your saying though if there are better steels that cost a little bit more why settle for 1095 in the same price range. To keep on point with out quoting one way to heat treat stuff and saying words like this is fact. People like to use what familiar to them and for a lot of people change in any manner can be hard. Another reason could be brand loyalty and not saying fanboy stuff.(talking like having good customer service and great warranty service). I lean toward Im more apt to buy in a better steel if I can. Why not have better edge retention or tougher steel if you can around the same price range.
 
RX-79G said:
You could certainly ask the metallurgists why they add alloying elements to steel, or what chromium or vanadium do to form carbides and refine them. It would be up to you if you believe them, and I'm not a metallurgist, so there is little point in trying to get you to believe me.
Click to expand...

You made the claim for several pages now. If you have no evidence why are you making claims about superiority?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top