Why Does Everyone Think 1095 is Tough?

[DMG]

I think some of the 1095 people consider tough is at a low hardness.

I think you are right. The Esee I mentioned is run as a much lower hardness than really tough stuff like Benchmade M4 or Carothers 3V.

Also, 1095 has been around for a while. There was a time when it probably was one of the toughest steels.

 

[James Starr]

I believe you may have answered you own question within the first two parts - cheaper & easier.
A lot of manufacturers (both mass & custom) take pride in their ability & the use of "better" materials.
From a lot of what I've read over the years, 1095 has a reputation among the knife makers as being "difficult" to work with.

Where I'm going with this is - if you can make a great knife using 1095, then you've done something worth mentioning.
Plus - using 1095 leaves a lot of room for "lemons" or "one of a kinds" or "one in a million" - or - "one done to perfection" - since as I understand 1095, you have to judge each individual knife onn it's own merits.​

Sure. Who doesn't want to bone the supermodel, even if she is a clammy dead fish in bed? I think you're on to something here!

 

[James Starr]

After going through purchasing different brands w/ different steels here and there for almost the past year, I actually gravitated to Kabar for my outdoor fun knives. I love how their thicker spined knives can take abuse, their edges haven't chipped due to them not being too hard, and 1095 sharpens so easy and fast. Imo I think they are great for outdoor knives for the price.

I mean, yeah. You are wannaberamboguy, so yeah... I can see how you would like KABAR. I believe you. By outdoor fun, you mean murdering bad guys, right?

 

[James Starr]

Yeah, I guess I was half asleep still. I have seen the charts before so I don't know what I was thinking. But it seems that 1095 is too low on the chart. It is pretty tough steel. I know that Larrin is light years ahead of me on this stuff, but something seems wrong.
I buy my 3V knives from CPK. Nathan says that his Delta heat treat gives the 3V better edge retention, and better corrosion resistance if I remember correctly.

I mean yeah, the heat treat probably helps corrosion resistance if he quenched in melted fifties bumpers. Lol. Nah, I don't think heat treat affects corrosion resistance, but if he quenches hot and doesn't temper the hardness down much, he would sacrifice a little toughness for a little improvement in edge retention. I suppose that way he could effectively sell 4v and still call it 3v to appease the masses. A 4v knife would probably be my favorite 3v knife, so that works for me. I kid. Don't take offense. I can't help myself.

 

[James Starr]

I think you are right. The Esee I mentioned is run as a much lower hardness than really tough stuff like Benchmade M4 or Carothers 3V.

Also, 1095 has been around for a while. There was a time when it probably was one of the toughest steels.

Sure, if you're referring to that time when steel was made of glass, lol. Nah, I'm making fun of 1095, not you. You're probably exactly right. As for the Esse, yeah, tempering it down would definitely increase ductility and strength. And PM steels have everything in spades, so they can afford to sacrifice a little strength for edge retention or vice versa. Each steel has unique mechanical properties, and I think they often scale the final properties in the heat treat to make their steels fit their intended application, so I'm sure you're right about that. Good analysis I think. Maybe. It makes sense, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's right. I think it is in this case, correct, though, at least in a broad sense. I can't argue with that.

 

[000Robert]

I mean yeah, the heat treat probably helps corrosion resistance if he quenched in melted fifties bumpers. Lol. Nah, I don't think heat treat affects corrosion resistance, but if he quenches hot and doesn't temper the hardness down much, he would sacrifice a little toughness for a little improvement in edge retention. I suppose that way he could effectively sell 4v and still call it 3v to appease the masses. A 4v knife would probably be my favorite 3v knife, so that works for me. I kid. Don't take offense. I can't help myself.

None taken.

I believe him.

 

[Climb14er]

I've got an older Ontario Rat 3.5 inch coated fixed blade which I take along on deep back country trips. What I like about the knife is that I can very easily and quickly touch up and get a very sharp edge to it, even on a smooth rock in the woods. I use it as a knife, not as a hammer, are or baton. It's a knife that cuts and slices. Great knife!

 

[James Starr]

I've got an older Ontario Rat 3.5 inch coated fixed blade which I take along on deep back country trips. What I like about the knife is that I can very easily and quickly touch up and get a very sharp edge to it, even on a smooth rock in the woods. I use it as a knife, not as a hammer, are or baton. It's a knife that cuts and slices. Great knife!

Nice. I didn't even know they made the rat in 1095. I only hear about R2D2. But yeah, 1095 would be tough enough for edc. I just wonder why it's so ubiquitous in outdoor knives. I actually think D2 and 1095 are fairly comparable in a lot of ways. Only D2 is more corrosion resistant and 1095 is easier to sharpen in my experience. I prefer 1095 though, even though I live in New Orleans and my grandpa killed nazis with D2. Weird that I prefer 1095.

 

[Mannlicher]

ESEE 1095 knives have done everything I have asked of them, with no failures. That is good enough for me, regardless of 'the numbers'

 

[James Starr]

Personally, I’d like to see 5160 used a lot more. ESEEs or Beckers in that steel sound pretty good.

I don't have any experience with 5160, but it looks good on paper. It's just not very common. I think that's because people hear tool steel and think it can't be good for knives. It sounds too boring. People don't think of knives as tools most of the time.

 

[Larrin]

It seems people are confusing some of my data with one or more “steel ratings” charts like the one from BladeHQ. The BladeHQ chart is not based on data. Some of it is almost sorta accurate and some of it appears to be a random number generator.

3V has very good corrosion resistance for a non-stainless I don’t think I’ve ever disputed that.

1095 could have much better toughness with an austemper for bainite microstructure. None of the knives discussed so far have that heat treatment as far as I know since it’s pretty uncommon and more expensive to do.

another thing to keep in mind is geometry is very important. Put a 25 dps edge on a knife with enough thickness and anything is pretty much indestructible. Even 20 dps is pretty durable. And a lot of those 1095 knives are so soft that they always deform or roll, which is frequently equated with being tough.

 

[James Starr]

Sur

ESEE 1095 knives have done everything I have asked of them, with no failures. That is good enough for me, regardless of 'the numbers'

Sure, but I'm talking about relative toughness. There are a lot of great 1095 knives, but I don't find 1095 to be tough relative to other steels. Any knife can fail. I've had knives fail in lots of different ways. Probably says something about me. Get Esse to make a scandi grind and I'll buy it, even if it's made of butter.

 

[Londinium Armoury]

I know that chromium makes steel brittle, and so carbon steel does tend to have an advantage in toughness, but my experience with 1095 is that it is not a tough steel at all! TOPS does a fantastic job with 1095, but that's primarily due to their "differential" heat treat, which is tantamount to blue backing their blades, leaving the cutting edge hard for edge retention while leaving the spine softer and more elastic. I love TOPS and would not hesitate to buy any of their knives. In fact, I chose 1095 for my BOB over 154CM because I have absolute confidence in their heat treatment. I also have an El Chete in 1095 which I use hard without a bit of concern. I do not dislike 1095 at all. I actually really like it for a lot of applications, but it just isn't a tough steel! I actually bought a Condor when they switched to 1095 and snapped the blade in half batonning a smallish oak branch the day after it arrived. Before you ask, yes I do have an axe! And, no, I didn't seek warranty replacement because I realize I should not have batonning hardwood with a $60 knife, so my bad. My point is that I have never found 1095 to be particularly tough, yet every graph shows 1095 to have excellent toughness. I can baton with my N690 scandivex all day without a chip and minimal rolling, and all the charts say it has very marginal toughness at a similar 60ish hardness. Am I wrong or are the charts wrong? Am I just having bad experience with 1095? Is there something I'm missing, or have others had similar experience with 1095?

1095 is as tough as you make it really, I can make very brittle 1095 running at 64+ HRC or I can make very tough springy 1095 running at around 55-58 HRC. It all depends on how hard makers are running it. If you have had 1095 snap then it's a problem with the application compared to the hardness and intended use of the blade steel, or it was heat treated poorly. You can make 1095 very tough and shock resistant if you temper it to a spring level and quite soft. If I'm not mistaken old springs and suspension springs were made from 1095 and they served their purpose. If you go back in time and check old carraige springs their composition will be quite similar to 1095. Also Wilkinson and Pillin made their military grade sabres that were used by armies across the world out of steel almost exactly the same composition as 1095, Wilkinson sabres are basically 1095 (0.95 carbon content) swords. They held up very well for use in actual war. I own a pillin sabre than can still flex 90 degrees and chop through thick wood without deformation or damage even 150 years after it was made. It's a tough steel as far as i'm concerned.

 

[James Starr]

It seems people are confusing some of my data with one or more “steel ratings” charts like the one from BladeHQ. The BladeHQ chart is not based on data. Some of it is almost sorta accurate and some of it appears to be a random number generator.

3V has very good corrosion resistance for a non-stainless I don’t think I’ve ever disputed that.

1095 could have much better toughness with an austemper for bainite microstructure. None of the knives discussed so far have that heat treatment as far as I know since it’s pretty uncommon and more expensive to do.

another thing to keep in mind is geometry is very important. Put a 25 dps edge on a knife with enough thickness and anything is pretty much indestructible. Even 20 dps is pretty durable. And a lot of those 1095 knives are so soft that they always deform or roll, which is frequently equated with being tough.

Thanks for commenting. A couple people recommended steelnerds earlier, and I could tell immediately that your word is authoritative. I found that your evaluation of 1095 matched my experience. I suspected that the bladehq chart was not accurate, which is part of the reason I started this thread. Also the ubiquity of 1095 in hard use knives and the general consensus that 1095 is a tough steel just didn't make sense to me. I thought I might just have bad luck with 1095, but I suspected that that wasn't the case. Both my TOPS knives in 1095 are excellent and I have a lot of confidence in them, but I figured that was due to their "differential" heat treat more than any intrinsic toughness of 1095. Hard edge, soft spine, similar to blue backing. But after breaking a brand new Condor and two carbon moras, I don't find 1095 tough. Your site was the first site that confirmed my sus that 1095 isn't actually very tough. Other members' replies also reaffirmed that. I hope I didn't misrepresent or misunderstand your data. I am no metallurgist, obviously. I was just trying to wrap my head around the truth of 1095, and I only cited your date to argue against the information presented on bladehq. Also, I only argued that 3v shouldn't be as corrosion resistant as bladehq suggests based on my own limited knowledge of the role of chromium and nitrogen in fighting corrosion, and I didn't cite your data that I recall. I've never had 3v rust, but I take pretty good care of those blades. They are fairly expensive. Apparently, my suppositions aren't correct. I don't know why 3v has decent corrosion resistance. I don't think it should be on par with steels with twice the chromium, but if you say it is I won't argue. I stand corrected. Regardless, thanks for chiming in. I will never argue metallurgy with you. I trust your data and your conclusions more than my own. I would trust any matallurgist's analysis over my own. I think I have a decent layman's grasp on the mystique of 1095 now after this thread. Thanks for publishing your research and thanks for chiming in.

 

[James Starr]

1095 is as tough as you make it really, I can make very brittle 1095 running at 64+ HRC or I can make very tough springy 1095 running at around 55-58 HRC. It all depends on how hard makers are running it. If you have had 1095 snap then it's a problem with the application compared to the hardness and intended use of the blade steel, or it was heat treated poorly. You can make 1095 very tough and shock resistant if you temper it to a spring level and quite soft. If I'm not mistaken old springs and suspension springs were made from 1095 and they served their purpose. If you go back in time and check old carraige springs their composition will be quite similar to 1095. Also Wilkinson and Pillin made their military grade sabres that were used by armies across the world out of steel almost exactly the same composition as 1095, Wilkinson sabres are basically 1095 (0.95 carbon content) swords. They held up very well for use in actual war. I own a pillin sabre than can still flex 90 degrees and chop through thick wood without deformation or damage even 150 years after it was made. It's a tough steel as far as i'm concerned.

Well, I'm definitely not gonna argue with a blacksmith. I think you make the best argument I have seen for 1095 being a tough steel. I got hung up on "recommended hardness" ranges and didn't see the forest for the trees! What I understand you to be saying is that there is no "recommended hardness" range for 1095. It is, in essence as fundamental as steel gets, being essentially only iron and carbon at .95%, and as such it ultimately as versatile as you want. It's not it is what it is, It is what you make it. It really is that simple. I'm overcomplicating it trying to understand what it is. It's too simple. Thank you. Quality reply!

 

[Londinium Armoury]

Well, I'm definitely not gonna argue with a blacksmith. I think you make the best argument I have seen for 1095 being a tough steel. I got hung up on "recommended hardness" ranges and didn't see the forest for the trees! What I understand you to be saying is that there is no "recommended hardness" range for 1095. It is, in essence as fundamental as steel gets, being essentially only iron and carbon at .95%, and as such it ultimately as versatile as you want. It's not it is what it is, It is what you make it. It really is that simple. I'm overcomplicating it trying to understand what it is. It's too simple. Thank you. Quality reply!

I'm flattered by being considered a real blacksmith, I am probably one of the worst blacksmiths on this forum, but I do know the basics of making a knife and have made quite a few. I think you summe dit up pretty well though, it's basic carbon steel and has the bility to be as hard or soft as you dare make it. I've taken 1095 beyond the hardness of most makers on the production market by using Japanese heat treating methods using differential hardening and not tempering it back down very soft. So i've produced some hard 1095 that can cut through steel nails without chipping. Most people seem to aim for around 58+ HRC for 1095 but it can go way higher into the mid 60's. I had some 1095 still skating files after tempering, I wouldn't make it this hard witht hrough tempering though as it would probably shatter I opted for differential hardening so the spine was left soft and edge hard to prevent breaking and I used really thick stock to try and stop it bending while prying forces are applied. 1095 can basically be made into a spring or hard enough to use as an engraving tool, it really depends on the ehat treatment, I personally think it's pretty good stuff.

 

[Bigfattyt]

I'm probably looking at the wrong charts. I'm no metallurgist, but one chart that comes to mind is the blade steel guide at bladehq. That chart lists the toughness of 1095 as 7/10, N690 as 4/10, and D2 as 6/10. It feels like a lot of people think 1095 is tough to the point that the general consensus seems to be that 1095 is a tough steel. You are clearly much better informed than most, but I'm surprised that you haven't noticed that a lot of people regard 1095 as one of the tougher blade options. We must run in different circles. Anyway, here's the link: https://www.bladehq.com/cat--Best-Knife-Steel-Guide--3368 for you to check out. As for D2, I would love to love it. I'm pretty sure my grandpa killed nazis with it. But my experience with D2 is that it's only slightly tougher than glass and 1095. I am actually a big fan of N690, however the blades I own in N690 are fairly high end, so I wouldn't be surprised if the heat treatment is simply very good. Even 1095 impresses me if it's touched by TOPS.

There are actual charts with the amount or force it takes to break steels search Charpy impact test. There are notched and un-notched tests.

https://knifesteelnerds.com/2020/02/17/ranking-toughness-of-forging-knife-steels/

Good place to start. I've seen numbers that match his results from long ago.



I typed up this reply yesterday when the post had no responses. I see someone has already posted Larrin's charts.

And I see Larrin has already commented.

I have more than a few knives in 1095. Most of them are traditional slipjoint folders. I don't abuserhose knives. Ground thin, run at decent hardness.


I have used knives in too many steels to list.

I've made knives in 5160 and one in 1084. Both stock removal and forged.

CPM3v, INFI and 52100 from Busse have been remarkably tough.

 

[DMG]

Sure, if you're referring to that time when steel was made of glass, lol. Nah, I'm making fun of 1095, not you. You're probably exactly right. As for the Esse, yeah, tempering it down would definitely increase ductility and strength. And PM steels have everything in spades, so they can afford to sacrifice a little strength for edge retention or vice versa. Each steel has unique mechanical properties, and I think they often scale the final properties in the heat treat to make their steels fit their intended application, so I'm sure you're right about that. Good analysis I think. Maybe. It makes sense, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's right. I think it is in this case, correct, though, at least in a broad sense. I can't argue with that.

I just checked Esees site. 55-57 RC for their 1095 blades. So they left some hardness and edge holding on the table in exchange for toughness.

I know for a fact that an Esee 4 in 1095 will bend but not break from witnessing someone pound it into a stump and do terrible stuff to get it out. IIRC, Esee warrantied it for them.

Btw, they have said they made the newer S35v knives because people requested it but they won’t take the abuse their 1095 knives do.

 

[soc_monki]

All I know is, my Beckers (BK2, BK7, BK10) are awesome blades, that sharpen up easily and can hold their edge for an appreciable amount of time. I had a branch fall into the yard a few weeks ago and I had just got done sharpening my BK7 (grind was a little wavy, so I worked on fixing it...NBD I only paid $50!) and went to hacking at the branch to make it easier to carry to the road. Worked like a charm, even if it's not really a chopper (and I do have a hatchet I could have used but...freshly sharpened blade!) No problems, knife is still sharp, no chips or rolls, so I'm happy.

I don't need 3v or whatever other steel in my fixed blades. I don't know exactly how Kabar treats their 1095CV, I just know it works and I like the knives! And they are affordable...I ordered another BK7 for $75. Yep, excellent value!

 

[Spears]

Yup. Good point about marketing. TOPS obviously markets their knives as hard use outdoor products, and they back that up by using differential heat treatment, but I wouldn't be surprised if they temper it down to a lower than recommended hrc as well. I don't recall marketing claims that 1095 steel is tough, but it doesn't surprise me. It's a bit self fulfilling isn't it? I mean, if people want 1095, knife makers will give it to them, even if it means tempering it down to 1084 levels. At that point, why not just use 1084? Probably because people want 1095. I'm sure the data is out there on the steel. I'm not privy to it, but a couple users have already posted some chirpy data on this thread, so it's not really moot. Thanks for the reply.

Right... we have Larrin's numbers. We don't have ESEEs or TOPS numbers. At 58-62 HRC, per Larrin's graph, 1095 is in the single digits for toughness. The fact is, 1095 isn't really all that tough for a knife steel relative to other steels, even some of the higher alloyed steels. There's a reason why you don't see 1095 in high performance, thinly ground, Bladesport competition knives; 1095, as a simple carbon steel, doesn't have the necessary properties to perform at those levels, and good toughness is one of those attributes. Even at hardness that ESEE specify 55-57, we can extrapolate from Larrin's data that the toughness is still likely lower than 20 ft/lb at those hardness. I'm also not aware of what the numbers are for when 1095 is austempered but I do recall somewhere that the hardness is even lower at 54-56 if 1095 is austempered. My point regarding it being moot was mainly to highlight exactly why you asked your question. We don't have the data.

Instead, what we do have is an association fallacy (this really is the answer to your original and specific question). It's not just that TOPS or ESEE market their knives as outdoor, "hard" use, etc. Again, the beauty of marketing is that the advertised feature doesn't need to be explicitly stated. There's a logical fallacy that's made. Because these companies make "outdoor" knives, that implies the knives are "hard" use, and those knives also happen to be made out of 1095, the fallacy that's made then is that 1095 is tough steel. However, a steel being "tough enough" doesn't necessarily mean the steel is actually measurably tough. Toughness is a material property with a specific way of measuring it.