What's the difference between 1060 and 5160?

O

Oerlikon

Joined
Jun 10, 2022
Messages
3
Both are pretty basic steels with similar compositions, except for the presence of silicon and chromium in 5160. Now as I understand, chromium makes a steel harder but more brittle while silicon does more or less the opposite, giving 5160 its spring-like qualities.
So why does 5160 perform so much better than 1060, if its additives are performing opposite functions? Is the whole greater than the sum of its parts, or does 5160 have some secret disadvantage I don't know about?
1060 is cheaper, but not by much; I doubt it's more corrosion resistant; maybe it "fails gracefully" as programmers say, tending to bend instead of chip? Not that I've heard about that being a problem with 5160, if anything the opposite.
The only property 1060 seems to beat 5160 at is in the Izod impact test, hence why I suppose it is more resistant to fracture. Is this a case of the more advanced material being absolutely better, or does 1060 still have a niche?

1060 properties: https://www.matweb.com/search/DataSheet.aspx?MatGUID=c7003a1d67184a83a301e5ba490db437
5160 properties: https://www.matweb.com/search/DataSheet.aspx?MatGUID=972ec49b746d47c2a31db406e9213247
 
I believe that level of Chromium content takes 5160 into the quasi-stainless territory like we see with D2.
Completely guessing on this one- I'm thinking 5160 benefits from the presence of carbides and I think 1060 doesn't have them.
I'm no metallurgist, however, and I don't have much patience for it.
 

Carbon Steel Question: 5160 vs. 1060

The composition of 5160 and 1060 is quite similar, but why is the performance so different? 5160 holds an edge longer and gets sharper in my experience, why is this? Could the slight amount of chromium make a difference? :confused: Anyone who's tried both steels, I'd like to have your...
www.bladeforums.com www.bladeforums.com
 
EngrSorenson said:
I believe that level of Chromium content takes 5160 into the quasi-stainless territory like we see with D2.
Completely guessing on this one- I'm thinking 5160 benefits from the presence of carbides and I think 1060 doesn't have them.
I'm no metallurgist, however, and I don't have much patience for it.
Click to expand...
Carbides are ceramics, hard but brittle, and form with about of dozen elements, none of which are in 1060. If it was that alone, you'd have a very simple trade-off. Would ceramic bits in your steel would make it harder to sharpen, I don't know the steels in my own knives well enough to test, maybe that's the downside of 5160? I've also heard stuff about chromium and carbon saturation, but I just thought it was another term for carbides when I read about it.

Alone said:

Carbon Steel Question: 5160 vs. 1060

The composition of 5160 and 1060 is quite similar, but why is the performance so different? 5160 holds an edge longer and gets sharper in my experience, why is this? Could the slight amount of chromium make a difference? :confused: Anyone who's tried both steels, I'd like to have your...
www.bladeforums.com www.bladeforums.com
Click to expand...
No helpful answer there.
 
It's hard to judge steel performance from the parameters of the data sheets provided. The primary differences will show in the areas of edge holding and resistance to abrasion, with 5160 having a noticeable advantage at typical knife hardness ratings, say 54RC to 61RC. Rolling versus chipping is more dependent on hardness and geometry than alloy content. I wouldn't call 5160 'quasi-stainless', though it doesn't rust quite as easily as a zero-chrome alloy. But, this also depends a great deal on surface finish. As you alluded to, 5160 does seem to be more than its alloying elements would suggest.

None of this is to say there's anything particularly 'wrong' with low-alloy steels like 1060. All a knife has to do is cut, and all it needs to do that is proper geometry and a decent heat treatment. Get those two right, and every thing else is gravy.
And, don't forget, steel is a relatively recent development in our tool kit. Bronze, and copper were in use for the exact same knife jobs thousands of years ago. Otzi, the Ice Man of the Alps, had a copper axe in his possession, 5000+ years ago.
Even such a simple modern steel alloy as 1060 would have been consider miraculous in ancient Rome.
 
Last edited:
Looking at the composition, 5160 has less than 1% chromium which I'm guessing would have almost no effect on corrosion resistance. It would probably allow it get to a higher hardness vs 1060 and also probably allow a small amount of chromium carbides to form which will have a positive effect on wear resistance as well.

I'm only speculating though.
 
5160 does not have significant corrosion resistance, it will rust easily. The chromium addition is primarily for better “hardenability” so the steel will harden in oil more easily. There is no difference in Si it just isn’t shown in the Zknives chart; most tool steels have at least 0.2%. I wouldn’t necessarily say that 5160 is “better” than 1060 that is just perception. The 0.6% carbon and low alloy means both have high toughness, decent capability for hardness, and relatively low wear resistance.
 
Larrin said:
5160 does not have significant corrosion resistance, it will rust easily. The chromium addition is primarily for better “hardenability” so the steel will harden in oil more easily. There is no difference in Si it just isn’t shown in the Zknives chart; most tool steels have at least 0.2%. I wouldn’t necessarily say that 5160 is “better” than 1060 that is just perception. The 0.6% carbon and low alloy means both have high toughness, decent capability for hardness, and relatively low wear resistance.
Click to expand...
Wait, did you say 1060 has silicon? Never heard that before.
But what I take is that 5160 is simply getting its hardness from a different source, making it more similar to 1070 or 1080 than 1060. Perhaps it is more flexible (elongation) than those, but most material properties I read are very similar, as expected. If that's true, then all is right in the world, thank you.

justjed said:
It's hard to judge steel performance from the parameters of the data sheets provided. The primary differences will show in the ares of edge holding and resistance to abrasion, with 5160 having a noticeable advantage at typical knife hardness ratings, say 54RC to 61RC. Rolling versus chipping is more dependent on hardness and geometry than alloy content. I wouldn't call 5160 'quasi-stainless', though it doesn't rust quite as easily as a zero-chrome alloy. But, this also depends a great deal on surface finish. As you alluded to, 5160 does seem to be more than its alloying elements would suggest.

None of this is to say there's anything particularly 'wrong' with low-alloy steels like 1060. All a knife has to do is cut, and all it needs to do that is proper geometry and a decent heat treatment. Get those two right, and every thing else is gravy.
And, don't forget, steel is a relatively recent development in our tool kit. Bronze, and copper were in use for the exact same knife jobs thousands of years ago. Otzi, the Ice Man of the Alps, had a copper axe in his possession, 5000+ years ago.
Even such a simple modern steel alloy as 1060 would have been consider miraculous in ancient Rome.
Click to expand...
I look at the data sheets and think "how would the performance give these results?" Induction, not a deduction. And 1060 is what those $40 cold steel and united cutlery gladii are made of.
 
I didnt want to start a new thread for this but from what I've found most people say 5160 is tougher. I did some research and 1060 has a much higher yield strength and somewhat lower UTS than 5160. Am I correct in assuming that the higher yield strength would make it tougher in use, IE less likely to deform?
 
effenoam said:
I didnt want to start a new thread for this but from what I've found most people say 5160 is tougher. I did some research and 1060 has a much higher yield strength and somewhat lower UTS than 5160. Am I correct in assuming that the higher yield strength would make it tougher in use, IE less likely to deform?
Click to expand...
Correct, though I believe material hardness will impact those figures- annealed steel behaves differently that quenched steel. Ultimate Tensile Strength is the point no one wants to see with their knives.
 
I am going to go a little off subject, but I am wondering why, with knife steel gurus, that corrosion resistance is so important? Knives, even 1095 knives, don't corrode with just a minimum of care. The only time I ever run into serious knife corrosion is when a knife has been left to molder, for months or years, in a tacklebox, or a tool box. In 70 years, I have not have a knife rendered useless because of corrosion. When I cut something wet, or acidic, I wipe the blade off on my pants and it is good to go....
 
Cattaraugus225 said:
I am going to go a little off subject, but I am wondering why, with knife steel gurus, that corrosion resistance is so important? Knives, even 1095 knives, don't corrode with just a minimum of care. The only time I ever run into serious knife corrosion is when a knife has been left to molder, for months or years, in a tacklebox, or a tool box. In 70 years, I have not have a knife rendered useless because of corrosion. When I cut something wet, or acidic, I wipe the blade off on my pants and it is good to go....
Click to expand...
I rusted an esee 3 pretty good in a blizzard during my time in the USMC, my griptillian was spotless. Its for times like that where your knife is a pretty low priority. Or kitchen knives, I hate stinky knives and streaky cheese. Or when your wife leaves the knives in the sink or puts them away wet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top