Case using 1095?

Would you agree that 1095 has a very specific AISI standard for what constitutes 1095 and that Case has no such standard?
No. I can't agree because I don't know what their standard 1095 contains in alloys and I don't think you have a "Spec" sheet with that information either. So we can agree to disagree that neither of us are "Privy" to their Steel...The AISI standard only calls for 0.95-1.00% Carbon and 0.30 percent Iron with some sulphur and other impurities that are insignificant BUT that is what the AISI allows....Look at all the 1095's and tell me they are PURE to only the AISI standard??!!
 
Compare the 1095 to CV though, and definitely get back to me with your opinion.
I've done this already in the past and they are so close in cutting tests that there is no noticeable difference....1095 takes a better Patina.

I don't believe Case promotes their 1095 as "AISI", which kinda leaves the door open to a proprietary recipe?
 
No. I can't agree because I don't know what their standard 1095 contains in alloys and I don't think you have a "Spec" sheet with that information either. So we can agree to disagree that neither of us are "Privy" to their Steel...The AISI standard only calls for 0.95-1.00% Carbon and 0.30 percent Iron with some sulphur and other impurities that are insignificant BUT that is what the AISI allows....Look at all the 1095's and tell me they are PURE to only the AISI standard??!!
So this is a stunning revelation to me.
They call it 1095 but it could just be any ol' whatever?
No one's out there watching?

Is this true of 420HC, too? I always assumed that when you called a steel by it's name it meant a specific thing. My world is falling apart. Down is up, Up is down. Nothing makes sense anymore.

I checked Jantz just to see what they have for their 1095 and they just said "typical composition" and gave Mn figures that were 1-4 tenths of a percent higher than the spec, almost double the AISI spec. I have no idea to what degree they were being precise, but it doesn't bode well.

If this is all true, I'm eating crow and I now have no reason to buy the afore mentioned case.
 
So this is a stunning revelation to me.
They call it 1095 but it could just be any ol' whatever?
No one's out there watching?

Is this true of 420HC, too? I always assumed that when you called a steel by it's name it meant a specific thing. My world is falling apart. Down is up, Up is down. Nothing makes sense anymore.

I checked Jantz just to see what they have for their 1095 and they just said "typical composition" and gave Mn figures that were 1-4 tenths of a percent higher than the spec, almost double the AISI spec. I have no idea to what degree they were being precise, but it doesn't bode well.

If this is all true, I'm eating crow and I now have no reason to buy the afore mentioned case.
Find me a DATA sheet on "Busse" INFI steel that is in current production....There is a listing on the "OLD" INFI from the early '90's but nothing newer. And the only ones watching are the Metalurgest that does the test to give a thumb up or down that it meets basic criteria. We're not there and Yes I believe they get the best steel within the parameters....I take that on Good Faith just like I take it on good faith my steel supplier is providing me the Correct Steel with the Data Sheet for that steel. Check out zknives and search Case 1095 or all of the 1095's they have listed...It's a Knife Steel Data Base lots of good info!!

 
I checked Jantz just to see what they have for their 1095 and they just said "typical composition" and gave Mn figures that were 1-4 tenths of a percent higher than the spec, almost double the AISI spec. I have no idea to what degree they were being precise, but it doesn't bode well.
Check out what Chuck at AKS....Alpha Knife Supply says about 1095....I get my steel from these people so I trust his judgements....Which Begs the question what is GEC's 1095 and is it Modified??? Read Chuck's comments at the bottom of the 1095 products page. I don't use much if any 1095 so I was even a bit surprised at his comments.

 
Busto Busto this is particularly alarming language: I have no feel for what +/- 0.4% is worth but my bulletproof old standby doesn’t seem nearly as reliable anymore.
One of the best ways to make excellent knives is to use repeatable and reliable processes and materials. 1095 does not meet this criteria. The problem is the specifications are too loose. The composition shown above is for this specific batch of steel.

This is the standard specification for 1095:

Carbon:0.950 - 1.050
Chromium:0.000 - 0.400
Manganese:0.300 - 0.600
Molybdenum:0.000 - 0.100
Nickel:0.000 - 0.400
Phosphorus:0.000 - 0.025
Silicon:0.150 - 0.350
Sulfur:0.000 - 0.025
There are five elements where the acceptable percentage ranges from 0.000% to a maximum of .400%. This is a ridiculous amount of variation. Loose tolerances is the primary reason why we previously chose not to stock 1095 for years.
 
my bulletproof old standby doesn’t seem nearly as reliable anymore.
There are "steel people" that analyze things to death.
There are even people out there that won't carry S30V because it's not "good enough"
Then there are those that just don't care as long as it cuts things and stays sharp for a while.
 
There are "steel people" that analyze things to death.
There are even people out there that won't carry S30V because it's not "good enough"
Then there are those that just don't care as long as it cuts things and stays sharp for a while.
That's a fair point- I'm just a little disenchanted at the moment because in my mind 1095 wasn't as mysterious and pretty standard. I'll continue to use my 1095 and I like it just fine.
 
Busto Busto this is particularly alarming language: I have no feel for what +/- 0.4% is worth but my bulletproof old standby doesn’t seem nearly as reliable anymore.
There may be some truth to "Ignorance is Bliss"....Don't overthink it and trust that it cuts and enjoy ownership no matter the make or steel type.
 
Back
Top