The Woodsman now going 420 SS

[PocketKnifeJimmy]

It wasn’t announced (as far as I know) until recently. I don’t care enough about the difference between the steels to complain, but it seems like it was switched 2 years before anybody knew about it.

OKC is definitely quite slow on their product information release. Their website is still listing their SP series (non Gen2) as being 1095, when in fact they are almost all 1075 now, and been that way for quite a while. Same with their machetes, the 18" military version being the only one that is still 1095, all others now being 1075 (but the website still has them all as 1095). Yup, OKC does many things right, but their keeping the public up to date on their latest product specs, is not one of them

 

[buckfynn]

According to Toooj, the switch to 1075 for most of the SP series, (not the Gen 2 SP's), got phased in about 2-3 years ago. The edge retention may be a little less with the 1075 when compared to the 1095, but what they were aiming for was added tougness. So, the 1095 held a little bit better edge, but the little bit more toughness of the 1075, (less brittle), won out.
I can see their reasons behind that one, especially on their longer blades that get pretty beat up with battoning and such. 1055, 1065, and 1075 are steels often used for hard use, high impact, and longer blades. Yes, the lower it goes, the less it will compare with edge retention of the 1095, (the heat treatment being comparable and all), but I think the choosing of 1075 was a good compromise... In my opinion.

Yeah but, I noticed the RAT3 Cabela's version is now being sold with "1074/75" steel as they describe it. Not a good move in my opinion.

As far as the virtues of 1075 vs 1095 and various HRC and heat protocalls, I could debate such as well. My background is Chemical Engineering and Metallurgy. Again I don't think it is the wisest move to go from 1095 to 1075 on the rhetoric being discussed here. I did think it was a good idea when OKC switched from 1095 to 5160 on the RTAK II.

IMO what we are now seeing with OKC is a trend toward cheapness in the quality of materials they are using to manufacture their knives. And to me it is some what disturbing as I would rather not see them go down that road.

 

[Yonose]

OKC is definitely quite slow on their product information release. Their website is still listing their SP series (non Gen2) as being 1095, when in fact they are almost all 1075 now, and been that way for quite a while. Same with their machetes, the 18" military version being the only one that is still 1095, all others now being 1075 (but the website still has them all as 1095). Yup, OKC does many things right, but their keeping the public up to date on their latest product specs, is not one of them

Something about big ships changing course slowly, or scuttlebut replacing direct communication in marketing.

 

[PocketKnifeJimmy]

Is

Is 420j2 Chinese? I thought the 4- - annotation indicated American, and that Chinese would use 3cr16 or some such. But I guess they can stamp whatever they want on a blade.

I actually don't know if 420j2 is Chinese steel, but I do remember as a younger man seeing a lot of 420j2 in the real cheap imported stuff (like cheap in every sense of the word). And, I do know that when a USA company today claims 420 steel in an American produced knife, they are usually talking 420hc, which is a different animal than 420j2.
Buck regularly uses 420hc on their US made knives, but I have seen Buck knive's packaging stating 420j2 for some of their Chinese made knives.

 

[Yonose]

Yeah but, I noticed the RAT3 Cabela's version is now being sold with "1074/75" steel as they describe it. Not a good move in my opinion.

As far as the virtues of 1075 vs 1095 and various HRC and heat methods, I could debate such as well. My background is Chemical Engineering and Metallurgy. Again I don't think it is the wisest move to go from 1095 to 1075 on the rhetoric being discussed here. I did think it was a good idea when OKC switched from 1095 to 5160 on the RTAK II.

IMO what we are now seeing with OKC is a trend toward cheapness in the quality of materials they are using to manufacture their knives. And to me it is some what disturbing as I would rather not see them go down that road.

Same rat3 at wally’s. I hope Ontario is just making a readjustment, and not slowly sinking. I agree about the rtak2 being great in 5160.

 

[PocketKnifeJimmy]

One of the great things about this particular forum, is that questions pertaining to OKC products can be asked in the top section titled "Ask Toooj".
I did read his explaination on why the company went to 1075. And, my seeing some hard use tools being made and used all over the world with 1055, 1065, and yes... 1075 carbon steel, pretty much proves to me that someone must believe that these steels are perfectly serviceable.
I wish I could find the post where Toooj, (OKC's head Engineer, and the man that formally held a similar position at Ka-Bar), explained the reasons for their decision. But, it is a simple enough thing to just re-ask Toooj on his portion of the boards, and see how they may have come to their conclusion.
My guess still stands on the Woodsman steel change. I would guess it was made because of poor overall sales, and that the word stainless may be a better selling point for the masses that don't understand the benefits of 5160 carbon. Just a guess, but I am sure questions will be heading towards Toooj this week on this forum, and maybe answers will come soon after

 

[Yonose]

One of the great things about this particular forum, is that questions pertaining to OKC products can be asked in the top section titled "Ask Toooj".
I did read his explaination on why the company went to 1075. And, my seeing some hard use tools being made all over the world with 1055, 1065, and yes... 1075 carbon steel, pretty much proves to me that someone must believe that these steels are perfectly serviceable.
I wish I could find the post where Toooj, (OKC's head Engineer), explains the reasons for their decision. But, it is a simple enough thing to just re-ask Toooj on his portion of the boards, and see how they may have come to their conclusion.
My guess still stands on the Woodsman steel change. I would guess it was made because of poor overall sales, and that the word stainless may be a better selling point for the masses that don't understand the benefits of 5160 carbon. Just a guess, but I am sure questions will be heading towards Toooj this week on this forum, and maybe answers will come soon after

I just wish they would have gone 12c27 instead of 420. I’ve used the latter steel extensively, and just don’t trust it for constant use and abuse. My Woodsman user in 5160 has been abused extensively, prybar, wedge, batoning, chopping, digging etc and have never had to repair the edge, only resharpen.

 

[buckfynn]

Not a stainless steel, but it would have cool if they switched from 5160 to 80CRV2 on the Woodsman.

 

[Beastchopper]

Well I love the 5160 version. I ordered another before they are discontinued in this offering. It's tough!

I know this has been mentioned many times before, but I sure wish the scales were micarta. The wood takes damage pretty quickly.

Send it back to the vendor for a refund or replacement. If that's not a option, send it to OKC and let them look at it.

Do you know if this is still USA made, what are the markings on the blade ?

It still says USA on the side, it's still a little fishy why they're so vague about the steel and have no exact type of 420, the whole thing was made so shabbily though that I won't trust it. I emailed Dan Margani with half a dozen close up pics of the blade last week, but no response. He was good enough to answer a few questions about the knife he himself designed. This current version would be tough to draw much pride from however. My RAT 1 says taiwan, but I have no complaints at all about the AUS 8 so far. Not sure how to post the BW pics on here though.

 

[Beastchopper]

To clarify, Mr. Margani answered my questions in Nov, before my daughter's birth set back my knife purchase 6 months.

 

[Yonose]

To clarify, Mr. Margani answered my questions in Nov, before my daughter's birth set back my knife purchase 6 months.

Congratulations! I don’t know when they switched, but all mine have “5160” printed on one side. I replaced the scales on my user, having broken the laminated ones twice. I used scrap hardwood floor plank, will eventually replace those with micarta.

 

[Roguer]

I got my Woodsman because it was a 5160 non coated full tang version of the SP-50 for general purpose stuff that I can do even the heaviest and hardest use chore with it. Just athletic tape the handle and lanyard it. It moved my CS Marauder to more niche knife jobs in the marine tasks, mostly I find the CS Marauder makes a great fish processing knife...well the use it ended up doing by accident. But I never would put it through the hard things I'd put a 5160 blade would do. I keep an RD Tanto or TFI with it.

 

[Yonose]

I got my Woodsman because it was a 5160 non coated full tang version of the SP-50 for general purpose stuff that I can do even the heaviest and hardest use chore with it. Just athletic tape the handle and lanyard it. It moved my CS Marauder to more niche knife jobs in the marine tasks, mostly I find the CS Marauder makes a great fish processing knife...well the use it ended up doing by accident. But I never would put it through the hard things I'd put a 5160 blade would do. I keep an RD Tanto or TFI with it.

So the one they’re still selling are 5160?

 

[Roguer]

They seemed to have moved to a 420 SS, there are still some 5160s still out there to be snatched up.

 

[Yonose]

They seemed to have moved to a 420 SS, there are still some 5160s still out there to be snatched up.

Cool. I’d hate to think I recommended a blade for tough use that turned out to be 420hc. I guess the stainless ones will be labeled appropriately.

 

[Roguer]

Yes it seems so, I've seen a posting of a Woodsman review showing where it was posted with 420 on the knife.

If they are using a hard use 420 SS like I put my 420 HC Gerbers and buck through torture, it might be good enough for such use, probably just might need more sharpening. But I don't think it will be as tough as 5160 though.

 

[Yonose]

I would have rather seen the blade made from 4140, 6150, 440a, anything really but 420. I’m sure Dan Maragni can treat any steel to maximum performance, but I can’t help wondering if it’s another cost saving measure that won’t help Ontario’s reputation long term. I have enough of their 5160 blades to last several generations, but I really would’ve loved to see them double down on a longer chopper instead, like around 12.” But we’ll see. I don’t even know if they are using 420hc or 420j2. I stopped buying 420hc after I had breakage under circumstances even s30v would’ve passed muster. It could have been a hardness or thickness issue, but lowering carbon and adding chromium to a blade recipe goes against everything I’ve learned about steel since I started reading BF.

 

[Revolverrodger]

The 420series may be cheap but makes for a pretty tough stainless steel knife
It might not have been such a bad idea on their part

 

[Yonose]

It will be softer than the 5160 version, and .3 percent carbon according to tooj. Might be just as hard to break as the 5160 version, but I assume will hold an edge a lot less longer. A sharpener would have to be brought along for a day’s use, I guess.

 

[Toooj]

All,

I'll jump in and try to give everyone the reasoning behind the switch over.
First of all; we are always trying to improve efficiencies while still keeping the quality as high as we can. We also try to match the quality level to the appropriate price level.
A lot of things go into our decisions on material and costing and we always try to maximize both sides to give as great as performance as possible but with the best possible value.
Dan's Bushcraft designs are superb and the use of 5160 as the steel was , IMHO, a good move. However, 5160 is difficult to procure in our buying quantities and while it is not difficult to process, it is a departure from the way we process our other steels. Also it rusts like a viral epidemic. A lot of time is (was) spent to keep these parts rust free...with limited success. We spend(t) a lot of rework time in refinishing knife blades.
Our 420 HC steel is stainless (much less rusting) and US sourced. It has sufficient carbon in the formula to give good and proper hardness for the knife. It is not 5160...(I know; I commiserate along with you all)
The numbers that we sold (of the 5160 knives) required that we either discontinue the model or try to jump start it with a material and cost change. We are trying the later as opposed to dropping it.
Many times our choices and decisions are crap shoots based on the best knowledge we have at the time. We are trying to jump start the product to see if we can keep it going. Time will tell if we are successful.
Hope this helps.

Best Regards,

Paul Tsujimoto
V.P. of engineering
Ontario Knife Company