Why do people like 1095 for pricier knives?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Although I posted just once in this thread (a long, long, time ago), I have been watching the page count grow with casual interest.

I believe that "discussions" like this can generally be resolved, or avoided altogether, with the following statement- "If you don't like XYZ, then don't buy XYZ".

But this is Bladeforums, where people can, and will debate anything, endlessly.

I never did get the feeling that the OP was genuinely interested in learning why people choose knives made of 1095. It seems like this thread was started just to crap on 1095.

And this counts as my "smart-ass" post for the day. Quota filled. :D
 
Isn't versatility the mark of a good steel?

I want stuff that will take and hold a good edge for a reasonable amount of time... I don't necesarily want some space age steel that only the factory can sharpen.

More important than the steel itself is ofc that it has a suitable geometry for the task at hand.

On the other hand i do like a bit more rust resistance than 1095. :D
 
sideways said:
Isn't versatility the mark of a good steel?

I want stuff that will take and hold a good edge for a reasonable amount of time... I don't necesarily want some space age steel that only the factory can sharpen.
Click to expand...
How do these comments pertain to low alloy steels like W2, 52100, 80CrV2, etc?


We aren't talking about space age anything, folks. We're talking about the kind of alloys that scientists have been experimenting with since at least the 1820s. Nickel steels became industry standards in 1898, chrome-vanadium steels at the turn of the century and all sorts of alloy steels were commonplace before WWI used in the auto industry. 52100 was around for WWII.
 
alfred mcdougal said:
I have had a lot of stalkers going through my profile today.
Click to expand...

That's because all you've done so far in this thread is send personal attacks towards others who are trying to discuss something you're not even attempting to discuss. Most people get curious as to what a troll's profile looks like.
 
bluntcut said:
Let's narrow scope of this discussion to bang/buck choice of heat treated steel among $100+ sub 5" blade knives. Intended usage covers kitchen to light hardwood chopping duties. Good ht 60rc with edge geometry: 0.015" behind edge thick, 15dps, 750nm apex radius. All other aspects of the knife are the same.

A quick look at cost in simplistic view

Retail raw steel cost is cheap per knife. Buy in bulk/tonage would cost less than 1/2 retail.

Aldo .125 thick x 1.5" x 48" WxL

1095 - 17.59 ($4/blade)
52100 - 20.10
80CrV2 - 20.69
A2 - 29.31
W2 - 29.33
D2 - 43.89
O1 - 53.99
3V - 78.63 (so 3V blank is most expensive in this list - $16/blade)

Grind annealed steel is easy over all. Where 1095 & 80CrV2 are easiest => W2 => 52100 => 01 => A2 => 3V => D2.

Industry std ht is easy and not expensive, perhaps $10/blade to ht 10+ blades batch.

Post ht grind & finishing - A2 & D2 & 3V cost more because of higher wear resistant (note - nominally 3V has around 2.8 to 3% of carbide volume, which is slightly less than A2 5%, while D2 is 14+% CV). OK, then D2 could cost extra $20/blade.

Adding extra cost, generously the most costly steel is $40 premium over 1095.

Performance for intended tasks with given geometry
A WAG ;)

D2 probably DQ due to poor impact toughness.

3V & A2 are could be top performers (top wear & corrosion resistant as well) for a little extra $. <= bottom line answer to OP, I guess.

O1 material cost more than 52100 & W2 but w/o marginal perform gain, hence eliminated.

W2 is about $2 premium over 1095 and it has additional grain refinement elements. Look like a highest B/B gain. <= bottom line answer to OP, I guess.

52100 is $1-2 premium over 1095 (25cents material and grind). Not sure a slight corrosion resistant worth extra $.

80CrV2 has lower wear resistant; fine grain and tougher. However extra toughness is wasted in context of intended usage.

Metallurgy

Fine spheroidize cementite(Fe3C) is not brittle. 3V 400F tempered has quite a bit of sub 250nm precipitated cementite.

One can refine grain of hypereutectoid steels using non-dissolved fine cementites. applicable to low Cr steels such as 1095; 52100; Hitachi white&blue #1,#2; etc..

BCMW/my HT :D

HT low Cr steels to 64-67rc for indented tasks (above) at edge geometry (above). They are great B/B.

btw - keep in mind, edge retention in pushcuts & chops usage is mostly depend on steel matrix strength & toughness. Wear resistant (from high carbide volume) could speed up edge degradation in this type of usage, especially from chopping impacts.

I'll be busy...
Click to expand...
This is a great post. Thank you.
 
Some 20 posts removed. Focus on the question, not on the posters.
 
RX-79G said:
How do these comments pertain to low alloy steels like W2, 52100, 80CrV2, etc?


We aren't talking about space age anything, folks. We're talking about the kind of alloys that scientists have been experimenting with since at least the 1820s. Nickel steels became industry standards in 1898, chrome-vanadium steels at the turn of the century and all sorts of alloy steels were commonplace before WWI used in the auto industry. 52100 was around for WWII.
Click to expand...

Go get an answer from Ontario, ESEE and Condor as to why they don't use fancier alloys, until you get an answer from them all your hypothetical numbers don't mean anything. If it really is an equal cost to use W2 or O1 why aren't these reputable companies already upgrading? Cold Steel was using SK-5, customers pleaded for them to upgrade their steel, so they upgraded to 3V and the costs of their knives went up 50%, their customers complained because the price was too high.

Ontario has already said that they won't upgrade their RAT folders past AUS-8 because the added production costs would be too high and thus not worth it to them.

ESEE already has customers complaining that their knives are too expensive (not because of the cheap steel but because of the high total cost), what would they gain by making their knives even more expensive? They already have a reputation for making some of the toughest knives in the business, an increase in toughness wouldn't gain them anything because it'd be minuscule compared to what they already have, and it would make their prices so much higher they'd be sure to sell fewer knives.
 
KingMC said:
Go get an answer from Ontario, ESEE and Condor as to why they don't use fancier alloys, until you get an answer from them all your hypothetical numbers don't mean anything. If it really is an equal cost to use W2 or O1 why aren't these reputable companies already upgrading? Cold Steel was using SK-5, customers pleaded for them to upgrade their steel, so they upgraded to 3V and the costs of their knives went up 50%, their customers complained because the price was too high.

Ontario has already said that they won't upgrade their RAT folders past AUS-8 because the added production costs would be too high and thus not worth it to them.

ESEE already has customers complaining that their knives are too expensive (not because of the cheap steel but because of the high total cost), what would they gain by making their knives even more expensive? They already have a reputation for making some of the toughest knives in the business, an increase in toughness wouldn't gain them anything because it'd be minuscule compared to what they already have, and it would make their prices so much higher they'd be sure to sell fewer knives.
Click to expand...

I don't think it is in my power to "go get an answer". The answers are 1) 1095 is inexpensive, and 2) consumers think there is more to 1095 than there really is. The fact that KaBar decided to name the alloy that Cold Steel called CarbonV "1095CV" is illustrative of the public perception.

Cold Steel lost 50100B (Carbon V) when Camillus closed, and substituted other steels that were either downgrades, like SK5, or stainless AUS8. Some of those SK5 complaints are due to that downgrade.

It would be hard to describe Condor's line as "pricey".


If I wanted to make money in knives, I'd certainly consider a line of easy to machine blade shapes cut out of 1095, powdercoated and given machine cut handles. If I wanted to offer a superior value, I'd look around more because there are so many great options. Even cheap Morakniv uses low alloy steels instead of 10xx.

The intent of the thread is to discuss why the knife people of this forum, ever intent to discuss the nat's-ass difference between largely similar steels, give 1095 a pass. From this thread, I'd say it is partly because people believe stuff about 1095 that isn't really true - including people that make knives professionally!

And Bluntcut aptly illustrated the related economics in his post, if you want to read that. He appears to present pretty much the same story I did in terms of production cost increases by going to inexpensive low-alloy steels.
 
RX-79G said:
I

The intent of the thread is to discuss why the knife people of this forum, ever intent to discuss the nat's-ass difference between largely similar steels, give 1095 a pass. From this thread, I'd say it is partly because people believe stuff about 1095 that isn't really true -
Click to expand...

I.e., stuff you don't believe.
 
RX-79G said:
The intent of the thread is to discuss why the knife people of this forum, ever intent to discuss the nat's-ass difference between largely similar steels, give 1095 a pass. From this thread, I'd say it is partly because people believe stuff about 1095 that isn't really true - including people that make knives professionally!
Click to expand...

No, this thread is for you to ignore all opinions but your own and then wonder why everybody else keeps disagreeing with you. You obviously think it's stupid to pay over $100 for a 1095 blade, and you have made it your mission to school the rest of the forum that your opinion is the correct one. Discussions are 2-sided, but since you are ignoring the entire other side, I will now ignore you.

RX-79G said:
And Bluntcut aptly illustrated the related economics in his post, if you want to read that. He appears to present pretty much the same story I did in terms of production cost increases by going to inexpensive low-alloy steels.
Click to expand...

Cherry picking one post that fits your story does not an argument make. There are 4 pages of posts that say give valid reasons contrary to your own, but 1 post that shows how 3V costs nearly 5x as much as 1095 in just raw cost and you decide you can ignore all further commentary contrary to your own.

If everybody else is crazy, maybe it's not them it's you. ;)
 
KingMC said:
No, this thread is for you to ignore all opinions but your own and then wonder why everybody else keeps disagreeing with you. You obviously think it's stupid to pay over $100 for a 1095 blade, and you have made it your mission to school the rest of the forum that your opinion is the correct one. Discussions are 2-sided, but since you are ignoring the entire other side, I will now ignore you.



Cherry picking one post that fits your story does not an argument make. There are 4 pages of posts that say give valid reasons contrary to your own, but 1 post that shows how 3V costs nearly 5x as much as 1095 in just raw cost and you decide you can ignore all further commentary contrary to your own.

If everybody else is crazy, maybe it's not them it's you. ;)
Click to expand...

Cherry picking? A knifemaker goes to the trouble of doing all the math for us, and you think that's the equivalent of some guy's misunderstanding that 1095 is tougher than 52100?


You should actually read my posts. They are largely responding to posts about the factual nature of steel, not about the quality of anyone's opinions. You can have an opinion about qualitative things all you want. Steel is quantitative.

If you want to say 1095 is the prettiest steel, I'm all for it. If you want to say that 1095 can be ground with sandpaper and W2 needs a diamond grinder, we have left the realm of opinion.
 
Perhaps we need another "fact"...such as what the hell constitutes "pricey"?
Without that being agreed upon, the rest of it is silly bickering, really.

So what is it?
And for what size? (obviously, pricey for small might be cheap for big...)
And with what accessories (kydex sheath versus leather, etc.)?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top