The Woodsman now going 420 SS

At some point, despite my reluctance, I’m sure I will eventually end up buying one of the stainless models. I trust Mr Maragni’s HT more than I do than that of almost any other company!
 
Any interest in trading a 5160 woodsman for my 420 hc woodsman and a free lunch? Is your email the kwackster one? I work once / week in your area.
 
Any interest in trading a 5160 woodsman for my 420 hc woodsman and a free lunch? Is your email the kwackster one? I work once / week in your area.

No that’s on my profile page; check your own profile page;can’t discuss trades in this forum, Beastchopper Beastchopper .
 
Last edited:
Thanks TOOJ!

5160 Steel supply issues and not design or steel flaw for the design was the reason.

Well guess it was a hard call to make I bet.

Still a large hunk of full tanged 420 HC properly done treatment does sound interesting.

Thanks for the info TOOJ and Mr. Maragni's work and the others at OKC for all the blood, sweat, and tears (I bet that decision caused some) you all put in the products you make.

The handled one called
Roguer.

(May the Doughnuts be with you!)
 
Thanks TOOJ!

5160 Steel supply issues and not design or steel flaw for the design was the reason.

Well guess it was a hard call to make I bet.

Still a large hunk of full tanged 420 HC properly done treatment does sound interesting.

Thanks for the info TOOJ and Mr. Maragni's work and the others at OKC for all the blood, sweat, and tears (I bet that decision caused some) you all put in the products you make.

The handled one called
Roguer.

(May the Doughnuts be with you!)

According to Tooj it’s going to be run soft(48-52) which won’t hold an edge. It will bend long before 5160, and half the carbon and all that chromium won’t make a “better” knife, only a stainless one.
 
My copy of the 420hc arrived today. The 5160 version is on the left, 420hc version on the right.

Same sheath, shape, and handle scales.

420hc is a little shorter in length. Edge grind not symmetrical but sharp enough out of the box.

Some tooling marks visible but overall fit and finish is acceptable for the price point. Both versions have some variation in grinds and scales.

I much prefer the 5160 steel and was hoping this was old stock when I ordered the second one.

B83ADA2E-4D25-49EE-977F-7880E4902444.jpeg CD83A0BB-AACC-4443-B147-20E2E1FB4877.jpeg D14B2703-AA58-4CA8-8E0E-96062FCEA5CA.jpeg 94787DAC-7D46-4302-8A7A-E24BAED638FA.jpeg E1E1A504-F6F8-4950-A9F4-7301F91C2A47.jpeg
 
My copy of the 420hc arrived today. The 5160 version is on the left, 420hc version on the right.

Same sheath, shape, and handle scales.

420hc is a little shorter in length. Edge grind not symmetrical but sharp enough out of the box.

Some tooling marks visible but overall fit and finish is acceptable for the price point. Both versions have some variation in grinds and scales.

I much prefer the 5160 steel and was hoping this was old stock when I ordered the second one.

View attachment 935175 View attachment 935176 View attachment 935177 View attachment 935178 View attachment 935179


Does it chop? (Wood, not onions—lol)Mine came with the original sheath and fire starter, though I carry my user in a leather big brother sheath.
 
I haven’t swung the knife at wood yet, as I am waiting for baseball bat wrap to arrive to wrap around the handles. The wood scales don’t take hits very well.

Also, I am guessing this knife is basically built to baton and bash rather than cut for very long. The low hardness HT is indicative to that.

I am hoping I can find some time soon to go play with both versions and see how they compare. Not gonna lie though...I’m biased to 5160.
 
Although my speculation, (read as guess), was not the entire reason for the steel change, it does seem to have been a part of it.
I had stated the following in an earlier post on this thread...
"Makes me think they are not doing so well in it's sales, and are looking to possibly get some new interest from those that prefer the stain resistance of stainless steel. Just speculation on my part, but it does seem odd to change the steel if it was doing well selling as a 5160 carbon. I mean, sure, offer it in stainless AND carbon, but to drop it in carbon steel form, it makes me wonder if it was simply not doing well and they are trying to keep it alive in some way."

Toooj wrote:
"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."

Also, it seems that if they had been flying off their shelves, it could have helped them a little in dealing with the corrosion situation... Everything would have moved through faster, (the material arriving, it being processed and made into the final product, and then the product being shipped out). A quick turn around could have maybe helped a bit in their corrosion problems.

Toooj does a great job of setting things straight, and it's awesome that this forum exists on the subject of Ontario Knife products :)

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
 
Last edited:
Do you have a link to the post where Toooj said this ?
Toooj posted some info about the 420hc hardness capabilities, (in the mid to high 50's range), but then mentioned that the more ideal hardness range for such things as machetes in that steel, is lower, (giving the blede less edge retention, but more toughness against breakage).
This is what Toooj posted...

The Stainless in the Bushcraft machete is 420HC which has 0.31% carbon. That % can give is hardnesses up to HRc 55-57. The machete hardness, of course, is lower at 48-52HRc.
Hope this helps.

Best Regards,

Paul Tsujimoto
V.P. of Engineering
Ontario Knife Company
 
Last edited:
PocketKnifeJimmy PocketKnifeJimmy

I remember reading that but I'm starting to wonder is there's some confusion going on between the Bushcraft Woodsman and the Bushcraft Machete specs.

Hi Tooj,

Can you tell me what kind of 420SS is being used in the new bushcraft woodsman? Is it 420HC, 420J2, or something else? In other words, what is the carbon content?

Thanks, Dave

Yonose,

The Stainless in the Bushcraft machete is 420HC which has 0.31% carbon. That % can give is hardnesses up to HRc 55-57. The machete hardness, of course, is lower at 48-52HRc.
Hope this helps.
 
True. Toooj was basically saying that the Bushcraft Machete would be in the lower hardness scale, (giving it more toughness that a machete often needs). But, the Woodsman, (although shorter), is still a fairly long blade knife. It's also an item that could likely see some tough use, maybe even moreso, (it's not exactly the typical cutting/slicing type of a knife). So, does the Woodsman get a lower scale heat treat like the machete for toughness? Or, does it go to the higher ranges allowed for the 420hc, having a little better edge retention, but losing out on it's toughness?
In my opinion, the toughness should win out on a knife like this. Getting the 420hc to it's upper range of hardness, will likely see this type of usage knife with more breakages. One of OKC's biggest reasons for going mostly 1075 over 1095, was to lesson breakages, so it would likely make sense here too.
I too am curious to see where OKC heads with this one. The previous 5160 steel allowed the OKC firm to have a good compromise heat treatment range choice that gave them both a decent hardness for decent edge retention AND a decent tougness level. I don't believe that the 420hc gives them that kind of great compromise heat treatment range. It's more likely they'll have to decide which is more important to them, (and to their customers), that tougness thing, or that edge retention thing. Again, for this type of knife, it would seem that the toughness would win... But, ya never know.

In any case, it's definitely a fair question, sir!
 
Last edited:
PocketKnifeJimmy PocketKnifeJimmy

I remember reading that but I'm starting to wonder is there's some confusion going on between the Bushcraft Woodsman and the Bushcraft Machete specs.

I thought so too, but If I’m mistaken about the woodmans’ hardness being significantly different from the bushcraft machete I’ll have to rephrase the question on Monday morning. Sorry I didn’t see this until now.
 
Last edited:
Although my speculation, (read as guess), was not the entire reason for the steel change, it does seem to have been a part of it.
I had stated the following in an earlier post on this thread...
"Makes me think they are not doing so well in it's sales, and are looking to possibly get some new interest from those that prefer the stain resistance of stainless steel. Just speculation on my part, but it does seem odd to change the steel if it was doing well selling as a 5160 carbon. I mean, sure, offer it in stainless AND carbon, but to drop it in carbon steel form, it makes me wonder if it was simply not doing well and they are trying to keep it alive in some way."

Toooj wrote:
"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."

Also, it seems that if they had been flying off their shelves, it could have helped them a little in dealing with the corrosion situation... Everything would have moved through faster, (the material arriving, it being processed and made into the final product, and then the product being shipped out). A quick turn around could have maybe helped a bit in their corrosion problems.

Toooj does a great job of setting things straight, and it's awesome that this forum exists on the subject of Ontario Knife products :)


Earlier in the ask Tooj thread I seem to recall him saying they were selling well enough, though maybe not as well as they anticipated. They had a rust problem with their stockpile of 5160, though to me this suggests improper storage. I don’t know why, if they still produce 1095 blades under contract with US Govt, they don’t have marquenching ability onsite. Maybe it is prohibitively expensive. Ontario has always been my favorite, although I know see why their neighbors’ 1095 seems tougher. Not trying to use information freely and openly given against said company at all. I hope they survive as a money making enterprise into the 22nd century. I’m glad I got a chance to collect (and set aside a few)plenty of their 5160 blades such as the ranger series, the rtak2, spec plus gen2, and their Woodsman blade, which I don’t think I’ll need more than the first one I bought as a user.
 
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

@Toooj The RTAK II and RD6 have been recently made with 5160, is OKC planning switching over to 420 on them as well?
 
@Toooj The RTAK II and RD6 have been recently made with 5160, is OKC planning switching over to 420 on them as well?

He said only the Bushcraft line for now. The rtak2 and the rd6 are coated blades, so the rust problem wouldn’t pertain to these knives. Nobody can predict the future, though.
 
Back
Top