Why 10xx is not better than D2 for a bushcraft kinfe!

[RX-79G]

So a tiny puukko blade if 80CrV2 still brings in a $50 price tag when put in a finished knife? A 1095 Schrade with a 7in blade can be got for less than $40 shipped. 1095 is noticeably cheaper than 80CrV2, you're only basing your opinion on the fact that you buy tiny blades. Blade of equal thickness and length, one of 1095 and one of 80CrV2, made by the same maker, will have a noticeable difference in price.

Cold Steel's 3V hunter is also only a 4in blade, while I could get an 18in Condor Discord for less than that which also has micarta handles instead of CS's kraton.

Small blades being compared to big blades is not a good comparison for pricing out steels, you're making broad statements about steels without actually doing direct comparisons between blades with similar specs.

I really don't think you're reading what I type, or looking for an argument. I said:

1095 is a good steel for the money - which makes me wonder why people keep buying $100+ knives made of it. Great steel for a $14 Old Hickory, though.

What part of "good steel for the money" is incompatible with a $40 Schrade?

 

[KingMC]

I really don't think you're reading what I type, or looking for an argument. I said:


What part of "good steel for the money" is incompatible with a $40 Schrade?

You are equating 80CrV2 as a direct competitor to 1095, and your personal choice because of the 'lowish costs'.

If you're asking about 1095 replacements, 80CrV2 or A2 would be the two I'd pick, offering high toughness with decent edge holding for lowish cost. O1 certainly works, and is affordable and better steel than 1095. 1095CV is great stuff, and 52100 is excellent, but doesn't appear to be the easiest stuff to get perfect in HT.

Cold Steel offers a 3V knife that would work well for $90.

As I just bought a ton of knives made of 80CrV2, I'll just say that you don't know what you're talking about. It is a common and relatively inexpensive steel.

Your 'lowish costs' are based on puukko blades, which are not very much steel overall, and the prices you quoted are quite a bit higher than what 1095 would be under the exact same situation.

You compare 80CrV2 to 1095 (going so far as to say it is your preferred steel over 1095), I respond to that comparison with a little price comparison to show you that of course you get more when you pay more, and you get upset that I am misunderstanding your position on 1095 when that wasn't even what I was responding to?

I'm sorry, I'm not responsible for your reading comprehension.

 

[RX-79G]

You are equating 80CrV2 as a direct competitor to 1095, and your personal choice because of the 'lowish costs'.





Your 'lowish costs' are based on puukko blades, which are not very much steel overall, and the prices you quoted are quite a bit higher than what 1095 would be under the exact same situation.

You compare 80CrV2 to 1095 (going so far as to say it is your preferred steel over 1095), I respond to that comparison with a little price comparison to show you that of course you get more when you pay more, and you get upset that I am misunderstanding your position on 1095 when that wasn't even what I was responding to?

I'm sorry, I'm not responsible for your reading comprehension.

No, I said that I don't understand using 1095 for more expensive knives, due to the widespread availability of nicer alloys. And I said that 1095 is a nice steel for less expensive knives. And you posted that it is great for an inexpensive Schrade, which is exactly the kind of knife I was referring to.

In terms of the steel costs, here you go:
http://newjerseysteelbaron.com/
Aldo the Steel Baron is where many knife makers buy their steel. As you compare the steels available, you'll note that 80CrV2 is more than 1095, 5160 and 1070, but less than 52100 and quite a bit less than O1 or A2.

It is not an expensive steel. It is one of the cheaper carbon steels you can buy for knives.

 

[KingMC]

I believe this is too far off-topic, so let's focus back on topic:

D2 costs more than 1095 and sacrifices certain qualities that many find useful in an outdoor knife. The qualities it brings to the table are not what many want in an outdoors knife, so that's why it's not more common in outdoors knives.

 

[RX-79G]

I believe this is too far off-topic, so let's focus back on topic:

D2 costs more than 1095 and sacrifices certain qualities that many find useful in an outdoor knife. The qualities it brings to the table are not what many want in an outdoors knife, so that's why it's not more common in outdoors knives.

Hilarious!

 

[CapitalizedLiving]

My BK9 is half the price of my brother's Viper Carnera, and does everything similarly. I can also buy another BK9 and still have saved money vs. his knife's starting price.

This may be true, but your knife is no Viper Carnera. Not knocking your knife or anything, but seriously, the Carnera is high class.

Comparisons of alloy compositions without consideration of edge geometry and heat-treatment protocols are pretty shallow. I had a knife in D2 steel that chipped very easily when used - it had a thick edge (thus more resistance at the apex of the edge bevel) and probably had pretty large carbides that tore out easily. I currently have a knife in D2 with a thin edge and what I suspect to be smaller and more evenly distributed carbides as the edge seems to dent and roll rather than chip.

Phil Wilson wrote a very interesting article on how he got S90V to behave in very different ways following different heat-treatment protocols, and I suspect the same could be said for knife steel in general. If you want to know if a D2 knife will hold up well and be reasonable to maintain, try something with a decent edge by a company that knows their stuff. EnZo and Viper are good examples of companies that seem to have good luck with this stuff.

 

[KingMC]

This may be true, but your knife is no Viper Carnera. Not knocking your knife or anything, but seriously, the Carnera is high class.

Comparisons of alloy compositions without consideration of edge geometry and heat-treatment protocols are pretty shallow. I had a knife in D2 steel that chipped very easily when used - it had a thick edge (thus more resistance at the apex of the edge bevel) and probably had pretty large carbides that tore out easily. I currently have a knife in D2 with a thin edge and what I suspect to be smaller and more evenly distributed carbides as the edge seems to dent and roll rather than chip.

Phil Wilson wrote a very interesting article on how he got S90V to behave in very different ways following different heat-treatment protocols, and I suspect the same could be said for knife steel in general. If you want to know if a D2 knife will hold up well and be reasonable to maintain, try something with a decent edge by a company that knows their stuff. EnZo and Viper are good examples of companies that seem to have good luck with this stuff.

Yeah, that comparison was the only one I could find of similar knives of similar size with the 2 steels in question. The Viper is a fancier knife for sure with micarta handles (not as comfortable as the Becker, but that's a design issue not a materials issue) and the FFG (making it a better slicer to the BK9's better chopping, again a design difference instead of a steel difference), but as of currently I have yet to run across any task for which one steel was better or worse in our outdoor excursions.

Neither of us have needed to sharpen the knife in the field (which shows both knives have good wear resistance), nor have we had any chipping/rolling issues with the edges (showing both have good toughness too). Neither of the knives have had rust issues, probably because both are coated steel rather than raw, but also because neither knife has been abused or unkempt enough to warrant that kind of result.

All this comparing, both steels have come out relatively equal, leaving just one other comparison: the price of the steels. D2 is acknowledged to be more expensive than 1095, which given the otherwise equal performance in the field of relatively similar knives would lead to an assumption that 1095 is a better cost-to-performance deal.

Pictures for those not familiar with the knives in question:

 

[RX-79G]

The Becker is not 1095.

 

[KingMC]

The Becker is not 1095.

I see you have progressed into picking one minutia and not allowing for any other debate.

1095cv is 1095 with small traces of other elements added to improve edge retention

 

[RX-79G]

I see you have progressed into picking one minutia and not allowing for any other debate.

1095cv is 1095 with small traces of other elements added to improve edge retention

Sure. So is W2, 52100, 80CrV2, O1, etc.

Actually, isn't D2 just 1095 with some chrome? What is an alloying element, anyway?

 

[Rhinoknives1]

It's not as tough, affordable, available and easy to sharpen as 1095 yet, is also completly overshadowed by S30v in every thing except cost and hardness.

So it's quite the niche steel.

Especially when the general masses prefer low cost, easy to sharpen, tougher knives over the added wear resistance that D2 can bring to the table.

There really isn't any corriosn resistance either. It's all soaked up with the high carbon to form the carbides that help the steel wear so well. So there is almost nothing left for the free chromium that aids in passivation.

Even then, since it not a PM steel, it really takes a horrible edge,
Because of the high carbide volume that tends to clump up in large globs

It can be sharpened to a high sharpness, yes but, it takes even more effort to form a great apex that comes more naturally on other steels, even s30v.

So in the end, even more experienced Bushcrafters wanting a higher performance carbon steel would rather have O1, A2, 52100


Also there's CPM 3v that seem to be taking the fixed blade world by storm with CPM 4v on the horizon as the next big deal.

Sad to say, but D2 is on the endangered knife steel list. Soon to be another ATS 34, S60v, BG42, etc

D2 Does come in a PM form CPM_D2 and All D2 has improved corrosion resistance over any 10XX steel.

There is a Cornucopia of Steels to chose from.
Just because another steel comes out, doesn't make other steels endangered or obsolete.

 

[KingMC]

Sure. So is W2, 52100, 80CrV2, O1, etc.

Actually, isn't D2 just 1095 with some chrome? What is an alloying element, anyway?

I just revisited the original post, turns out all steels in the 1095 family (including 1095cv) are included in this argument. Your minutia is actually irrelevant to this debate.

 

[grogimus]

I'm beyond happy with my Smith and Sons D2 knives. They take and keep a great edge. I don't think I'd like them any less or more if they were 1095 though. There are tradeoffs between the two, sure, but they equal out as far as I'm concerned.

 

[RX-79G]

I just revisited the original post, turns out all steels in the 1095 family (including 1095cv) are included in this argument. Your minutia is actually irrelevant to this debate.

No, it said that the 10xx steels, meaning the plain carbon steel family. "1095CV" is a trade name for 50100b (also known as Carbon V and CroVan), which is not in that series. It's what is called low alloy steel, like 52100. The ones with a letter followed by a number, like D2 and O1, are tool steels. There is some overlap between low-alloy and tool, like W2.

The OP is making the point that plain carbon steels, that lack alloying elements, aren't as good as his pick - D2. And I can see both sides, but I can't see how your experience with non-1095 50100b has a lot to do with it.

 

[AdamFuzzyballs]

I have had experience with D2 holding a better edge longer than 1095. that being said, in the real world I think any one of us would be hard pressed to tell the difference between identical knives made out of the two steels, or many steels for that matter. When you know D2 is "supposed" to hold an edge longer, then you're more likely to think that way. But given two unmarked blades, one in 1095 and one in D2, I don't think you could really tell unless you had alot of background studying their traits.

 

[AdamFuzzyballs]

And really that goes for most steels. Because generally people don't set out to destroy knives so it's not like toughness is an immediate giveaway. Rust, maybe. But otherwise I think it makes much less difference than it seems

 

[RX-79G]

And really that goes for most steels. Because generally people don't set out to destroy knives so it's not like toughness is an immediate giveaway. Rust, maybe. But otherwise I think it makes much less difference than it seems

I think that if you sat down with two similar blades (and several companies do D2 and something else in the same knife) and did a bunch of wood carving or butchering, you'd have an opinion.

But if you do it with a small and poorly done D2 blade and a big, correctly executed 1095 knife, your results might be upside down.

 

[KingMC]

No, it said that the 10xx steels, meaning the plain carbon steel family. "1095CV" is a trade name for 50100b (also known as Carbon V and CroVan), which is not in that series. It's what is called low alloy steel, like 52100. The ones with a letter followed by a number, like D2 and O1, are tool steels. There is some overlap between low-alloy and tool, like W2.

The OP is making the point that plain carbon steels, that lack alloying elements, aren't as good as his pick - D2. And I can see both sides, but I can't see how your experience with non-1095 50100b has a lot to do with it.

 

[RX-79G]

I just gave you some facts. You posted an infographic.

Just because the number "1095" is used in the name "1095CV", that doesn't make it 1095 any more than Waterford crystal is made of water.


And so we're clear - 10xx means the steels with the names 1045, 1050, 1065, 1070, 1075, 1080, 1085 and 1095, plus any extra carbon numbers you care to create. The OP is taking on the 1095s and the 1070s, like what Condor uses in their bushcraft knives.

 

[KingMC]

I just gave you some facts. You posted an infographic.

Just because the number "1095" is used in the name "1095CV", that doesn't make it 1095 any more than Waterford crystal is made of water.