Why is 1095 so popular with fixed blades?

S

samgotit

Joined
May 11, 2005
Messages
27
Why is 1095 so popular with fixed blades?
Alternatively, why is 1095 not so popular on folders? (Besides not being stainless)

Thanks,
Sam
 
that's really about it.

folders don't expect too much heavy duty work, so stainless steels work fine.

fixed blades are made to expect heavy abuse and so use higher carbon steels for more strength
 
1095 is popular for fixed blades because it is tough, holds a good edge, is easy to sharpen, and because it can be differentially tempered.

I wouldn’t want a folder made out of 1095: the temperature and moisture associated with EDC carry would make it rust—which blunts the edge.
 
It's cheap, in material cost, machining, and heat treat. It's also very versatile, you can do alot with it, from relatively soft tough tools, to glass hard specialized cutting tools, though it's a bit fragile at those hardnesses. It's a standard steel so there's no worries about ordering expensive special mill runs, etc.
 
Tough, cheap, flexible, easy to forge/machine and easy to sharpen. That pretty much sums it up.
 
I have two Scagel reproduction knives by Northwoods (made by Queen) and they have 1095 blades. Great knives. Scagel used 1095 so I'm sure they were trying to be more authentic.

Regardless I have more folders than that though with 1095 or 52100 blades. Most that you find in this steel will probably be more utilitarian in design and use like found in wood carving knives and such.

Truthfully, after carrying high carbon blades for most of my life they don't rust on you if you take care of them. You can't stop the oxidizing from occurring to change the color of the blade. They can and will take on that patina that I like to call 'aging' from time. But there is something nostalgic about that I rather like. It is nice to watch an old friend age with you as you get to know it.

CaseandScagelsidebyside-copy.jpg


StevesScagel.jpg
 
Lazarus Long said:
Tough, cheap, flexible, easy to forge/machine and easy to sharpen. That pretty much sums it up.
Click to expand...

*And* they take an excellent edge. Better IME than any of the high-tech stainless steels.

Hans
 
1095 shows up in a lot of "traditional" knives and hard use knives. When you buy a USN Mk 2 style knife from Kabar, Camillus, or Ontario it is made from 1095 as much from historical association as it is from practical considerations. When Scrade provided pocket knives and hunting knives from 1095 it was in their traditional models. You can still buy traditional style pocket knives from Camillus with 1095 blades. You just don't find the latest whiz-bang one hand openers in that alloy (although it would be practical). One of the reasons you don't see more 1095 in folders these days is that high end folders are generally not derived from 50 year old architypes. They are products of the stainless steel era and have always been made from stainless.

Ontario uses 1095 for their big choppers out of economy as much as anything. Generic 1095 is cheap and available from multiple sources. Yes it is tough and a good choice for those knives, but it is also cheap to buy and fabricate. I think that most of those knives would be better if made from 1084 (or 1085), but those alloys just aren't as easily available. The price differential between 1095 or 440A is not significant for small blades, but is for big blades. If you can brag about toughness with a cheaper alloy it makes sense to push 1095 for a bowie knife. If the public worries about pocket knives rusting in their pockets it make sense to give them AUS-4 for their economy one hand openers.
 
Jeff Clark said:
I think that most of those knives would be better if made from 1084 (or 1085), but those alloys just aren't as easily available.
Click to expand...
Cosidering how soft many of these knives run, ~ 55 HRC, I would drop down to 1050 or similar. Problem is then you lose the name recogonition and and you noted may have stock issues.

-Cliff
 
My 2cents worth.

I have a love affair with 1095 (or 1084 etc.) Great for fixed blades for all the reasons mentioned above - simple, predictable, forge-able, tough, great edge holding, and gets a fantastic hamon in it if the maker wishes to work that way. And it isn't expensive.

As mentioned, carbon steels are more commonly used in folders than most people realise. Many knife users and collectors in the know will appreciate the role of a carbon steel folder blade... However, the abundance of moving, hidden, difficult-to-clean parts translates into a business decision to make most folding knives with various stainless steels. Most knife users are NOT knife enthusiasts, knife nerds of knife addicts !

An observation I have made (right or wrong) is that because many custom makers who use carbon steel will forge their blades, there is limited time and economical sense in forging small carbon steel blades for folders and many bladesmiths will prefer to spend the time forging some fancy carbon steel damascus instead. Many of the collector-grade folders out there with carbon steel blades are damascus.

Jason.
 
If you count damascus, there are a fair number of high end custom folders with 1095.
 
STR said:
He drew a circle that shut me out
Heretic, rebel, a thing to flout
But love and I had the wit to win;
We drew a circle that took him in.

Edwin Markham

Teach Tolerance.
Click to expand...

Well said!
 
Sword and Shield said:
1095 just works. :) Plain and simple.
Click to expand...


Darn straight. The average user today just wants a knife that looks pretty and doesn't rust. And stain-- less is ok for them. If you are going to use a knife, make it 1095. I read all the time on this forum arguments about the dozens of stainless steels out today. Knifemakers had it right in the past--1095. Go with it and forget the rest.
 
cattleking said:
Darn straight. The average user today just wants a knife that looks pretty and doesn't rust. And stain-- less is ok for them. If you are going to use a knife, make it 1095. I read all the time on this forum arguments about the dozens of stainless steels out today. Knifemakers had it right in the past--1095. Go with it and forget the rest.
Click to expand...

Uh, yeah. Screw A2, D2, M2, 52100... They suck compared to 1095!! :rolleyes:
 
cattleking said:
Knifemakers had it right in the past--1095. Go with it and forget the rest.
Click to expand...
While 1095 works very well for a lot of knives, this is a kind of extreme viewpoint. There are better steels, and the primary reason it is so common is simply because it is cheap and available.

-Cliff
 
" While 1095 works very well for a lot of knives... There are better steels"

Hmmm, I think that statement is better if qualified - there are steels that perform better at certain specific tasks. For examle, H1 is what I'd want in a dive knife, 5160 is much-loved as a Bowie knife steel, etc. 1095 is actually a really good steel for general-purpose knife usage. IMO, a "better steel" refers more to specific need than general purpose usage.
 
Regardless of the type of knife, there are better steels, even Alvin Johnson who uses 1095 as one of his primary knife steels, will readily note there are far better knife steels, some of them are just more difficult to obtain, grind and heat treat.

1095 is very versatile in that you can make just about any type of knife from it, from a large bowie to a small skinner, and it will work well with a suitable heat treatment, but for each knife you could get better performance from other steels.

If you have a small skinner, it isn't like the fact that the same steel could make a large bowie (with a different hardening) is of value to you, and the fact that M2 would make a better knife would be.

As with all steel performance issues, there is more to the issue than steel, there are lots of makers I would rather have 1095 blades from than M2 blades from other makers. I would rather have a 1095 utility knife from Alvin than a M2 from benchmade.

-Cliff
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top