Stainless vs Non-stainless?

Status
Not open for further replies.
G

gga357

Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2007
Messages
497
Location
Albuquerque, New Mexico
I have seen comparison charts and write ups giving the relative toughness of stainless steels to other stainless and also non-stainless to other non-stainless. What about comparing stainless to non-stainless? Are the premium stainless knife steels as tough as the better non-stainless steels? or are they just two different categories and not really comparable?

All comments, links to more info or opinions are welcome. Thanks, Greg.
 
Yes, premium stainless steels are as good as carbon. The thing is that there are a lot of variables to a steel used for knives: molecular dimensions (not sure if that's the right term - this can result in different levels of sharpness/toothiness), toughness (how well it survives shock), hardness (better stated as optimal hardness for edge retention without being brittle, the harder it is as long as it isn't brittle the better it holds an edge; this is somewhat opposed to toughness), ease of sharpening, corrosion resistance. Usually the harder a knife is, the longer it holds an edge, but the harder it is to sharpen.

This isn't a complete picture of course. It has been my experience, and I think this is generally true, that carbon steels are usually easier to sharpen at a given level of edge retention, and tend to balance toughness and hardness well. They are also easier to work with, so you are more likely to get a properly heat treated knife if you buy carbon. I have had several improperly heat treated stainless knives, one of them premium, but all my carbon steel knives have been great. And carbon is pretty much always a better deal for the money.
 
You need to do some digging, Myth Busters did a show on the stainless "ornamental" swords and the real high end carbon steel swords. The stainless swords broke and shattered when matched against the carbon, the carbon swords (in slow motion) bent and then resumed form.
Just to give you an idea.
 
All blade materials, stainless steels, carbon steels, non-steels can, of course, be compared. There are dozens of materials in each class, however, and there is more to a good blade than good steel: There's geometry, edge profile, heat treatment and a host more..... In the end there aren't simple answers, only a set of compromises for a given purpose.


This site (thanks Bikerdoc) has a wealth of information along the lines of what you're looking for, I think.

http://www.cutleryscience.com/reviews/blade_materials.html

Notice how many steels (or non-steels) in each class there are, and these are but the most popular!

Once, it was possible to say that carbon steel blades were superior to stainless ones in all ways but corrosion resistance. Newer stainless alloys have removed alot of the truth from that statement. There are now absolutely excellent stainless steel options out there if that's your taste. Carbon steel has largely been relegated to knife affictionados and a few with a taste for nostalgia, the general public would rather have a rust proof knife it seems.

That's not to say that non-stainless steels are undesireable.... I mostly carry knives in 1095 or 5160, both non-stainless steels.... They do have a beautiful ability to hold an edge, and sharpen easily.... Rust isn't an issue unless I forget them at the bottom of the sink......

I also carry a D2 folder. D2 is a nearly stainless tool steel. It holds an edge almost as fine as 1095, but keeps it longer (3x maybe?). It is much more corrosion resistant. It is rather slower to sharpen (2x maybe?)...

J
 
TheBookGuy,

Great episode, but the comparison was between POS wall-hanger crap sword-like-objects that kids get suckered into buying and entry level carbon steel blades. It isn't even close to a comparison of stainless steel, whatever that means these days with the huge range of corrosion resistant alloys, and carbon steel, another nearly meaningless over-generalization what with new exotic CPM D2 and other 21stC carbon steels.

We have so many types of corrosion resistant steels and are starting to see new steels made just for cutlery that it becomes difficult to make a distinction.:scrutiny:

CPM's new "super" carbon steel, CPM D2, out performs most exotic steels for blade use.:D

Then we get into the whole world of "friction forged" D2! Wonder what friction forged CPM D2 would be like?:eek:
 
Last edited:
Well I have read or heard most of what you all are saying, the thing that brought about my question is I have been watching the knife abuse on knifetests.com and the expensive stainless knives tend to fail sooner. Well I should say of the videos I have watched. I have not seen them all.

It seems to be the shock of hammering/battoning/chopping that causes the stainless to fail.

I guess I was hoping to see a super stainless out last the non-stainless on all accounts.
Maybe something like stainless meteor rock with kryptonite. :)
 
I have seen comparison charts and write ups giving the relative toughness of stainless steels to other stainless and also non-stainless to other none-stainless. What about comparing stainless to non-stainless? Are the premium stainless knife steels as tough as the better non-stainless steels? or are they just two different categories and not really comparable?
Click to expand...


Toughness is a technical term for materials. I don't know if you are using the term generically or technically.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toughness

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fracture_toughness

Today's stainless steels are the best that have ever been. Good quality stainless steels, properly heat treated, will take an edge and hold it. The butter soft stainless of the 50's and 60's is only duplicated in cheap junk.

Quality stainless blades are just as good in the same applications as carbon steel knives, and stainless is hard to rust.

Just don't take a high quality knife and expect to chop trees, bust bricks, or punch sheet metal with it. Get the proper tools for that sort of abuse, like an axe, sledge hammer, or snips.
 
Once, it was possible to say that carbon steel blades were superior to stainless ones in all ways but corrosion resistance. Newer stainless alloys have removed alot of the truth from that statement. There are now absolutely excellent stainless steel options out there if that's your taste. Carbon steel has largely been relegated to knife affictionados and a few with a taste for nostalgia, the general public would rather have a rust proof knife it seems.
Click to expand...

The one thing that's usually left out of this discussion is price point and quality guarantee. It's pretty hard to screw up 1095, and hard to justify selling it for the exorbitant rates that semi-comparable stainless would go for. Those two - more guarantee of quality since it's easier to work, and price point - are the bigges selling points for me.
 
Yes, Cutleryscience has an excellent scientific approach to testing examples of most steels. Way beyond practicality in the name of science.
 
Slamfire, based on the given definitions I would have to say I am talking about both definitions.

I agree that what is shown is abuse and not proper use, but I also like to now which options have more margin for error. I always like to build/design for a little extra margin. I also want to know if that margin is not there. Or is smaller than I would otherwise think.

It is like having a tool that should work as you expect and then it fails on you. No fun. Whether that tool is a knife, wrench, drill, or bit.
 
Wootz is nice, but no better than the well established modern steels used for quality knife blades.

I've seen wootz made and handled both ancient and modern "wootz" blades. Neat stuff, but no better than L6, or many other steels, for performance.
 
Red shortness is a weakness some steel alloys exhibit when they're red hot. It's something for a knife maker to be aware of. Different steels must be forged at different temperatures. Forging a red short steel at red heats could result in otherwise unanticipated cracking or crumbling of the work, when the smith would have otherwise expected plastic deformation (ie. expected his hammer to dent, rather than shatter the work).

It's a relatively old blacksmithing term. Not of great consequence to the end user.

J
 
hso,

Lucky you!

I have heard that performance of wootz is different and not necessarily comparable to carbon/stainless. I find its ability to slice and retain that ability after severe abuse intriguing.

I have heard of a guy who has been making wootz for years - I am hoping to obtain material for testing some day.
 
JVoutilainen,

I've never actually seen/held/used any wootz steel, but I've gotten the impression from my reading that its ability to hold edges thru horrid abuse is more reputation gained relative to poorer common steels available at the time, and that even then its ability is grossly over stated.

I doubt it really performs much better than 1095 made by modern methods and heat treated to its full potential. Maybe some extra toughness, but I can't imagine that it's a night'n'day sort of difference....

Descriptions of it, and the original metallic impurities in the ancient ores it was made from (vanadium and tungsten being promenant, along with very high carbon) make it sound sort of like an accidental modern tool steel. Seems many of its superior properties came from the percipitation of hard carbides in the structure, much like many tool steels, like D2 and others, do today.

That's not to say I wouldn't love to play with some myself, too..... But I suspect in the end I wouldn't be blown away, as I've been spoiled by having the fruits of 100 years of advanced steel making to fall back on....

J
 
JVoutilainen,

7x57chilmau described the relationship of wootz to other steels well. Relative to the other steels at the time it was at it's best it was far superior because it had modern steel properties due to accidental inclusion of modern steel alloying elements. As demand for it grew and as the number of producers grew it became a "brand" more than a "composition" and as that growth continued the alloy began to change. That ultimately lead to the end of wootz. Too successful for it's own good and not enough knowledge of what went into it to make it so wonderful.

You might get "wootz" from Al Pendray or Rick Furrier. I'm sure there's a button around Larry Harley's shop somewhere (where I saw Rick make it).
 
7X57chilmau,

A friend of mine, who is a professional blade smith, has tested wootz and said that even though the blade he examined was dull by his standards it had a peculiar ability to "slice". He speculated that it had something to do with the amount of carbides present in the edge - as you suggested. He has experience with many modern materials and is also fairly knowledgeable about metallurgy...and still he thought there was something special about it.

I am most definitely not saying that wootz is magic material that will blow anything else out to the water, but it is interesting, nonetheless. If I ever get a sample I will probably make a kitchen knife out of it.
 
hso,

I agree, "impurities" might have been included by accident, but then again, maybe not. I have seen so many examples of archaeotechnological "anomalies" that it makes me wonder... I doubt we are the first "advanced" civilization in our history.

If I had a sample to experiment with I would probably try making a relatively thin blade... I have used old knives that have thin carbon steel blades and they have a tendency to keep relatively sharp without ever being sharpened. Combined with the "special" properties of wootz...well, remains to be seen.
 
HSO, my bad, thanks for the info.

I have always wanted a stainless bowie knife for camping, but always a-feared of it conking out on me... who'dathunk i might yet get a decent one!
 
TheBookGuy,

No bad at all.

The simple truth is that you're right that you'll spend less and get more out of a properly heat treated carbon steel blade than a corrosion resistant blade IF you're going to treat it rough and expect it to hack and chop and cut and slice and all the things you see the guys in knife cutting competitions do. BUT if what you want is what 90% of outdoorsmen use a knife for you can get pretty comparative performance from corrosion resistant steel blades. If you want extreme abuse potential pay the money for the more exotic steels or stick with the wide range of carbon steel.
 
It's pretty hard to screw up 1095
Click to expand...

Actually it's not that hard to screw it up, 1095 needs a fast quench to get the most out of the steel , and the majority of the stuff many are using as a quench medium isn't nearly as fast as it should be.

1095 is generally more inconsistent from batch to batch , than say S30v , 154CM , 1080+ and other blade steels.
knifetests.com
Click to expand...
I find their tests comical , once in awhile entertaining , but should be called knife destruction. Right tool , right job......everything else is abuse.
 
JTW, I agree knifetests.com is pure abuse, but often testing limits means the potential of taking a given item to it's point of failure.

bikerdoc and hso, I have been reading through cutleryscience.com and it has great info, I see that there is a torsional impact and charpy impact graph for 1095. What would be great to have is an interactive graph so I could superimpose plots of different steels for comparison.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

JohnKSa
  • Locked
"Stainless" vs "Carbon" steel
2 3 4
Replies
75
Views
6K
ugaarguy
ugaarguy
M
  • Locked
Magnetic stainless steel?
Replies
10
Views
1K
Zero_DgZ
Z
D
  • Locked
Blade steel: Sandvik 13C26 vs. AUS-8 vs. Moly 8A vs. 440C vs. others
Replies
4
Views
10K
Gordon
Gordon
M
  • Locked
ARMY Knife
Replies
9
Views
917
mustang_steve
M
arcticap
  • Locked
Stainless USFA 1860 or not?
Replies
23
Views
2K
jmaubin
J
Back
Top