# Ginsan vs. Aus-10



## Crobert (Dec 30, 2020)

I recently noticed that on paper, these steels seem very similar from a composition standpoint, but I can't think of an instance of them being discussed comparatively. Also, descriptions of their characteristics often seem quite different. Does anyone have any insight why this is? Disregarding variations from heat treatment/forging processes, is there some significant difference from these minor chemical changes, or does it come down to marketing? Or something else entirely? My curiosity is piqued, any insights appreciated.


----------



## Nemo (Dec 30, 2020)

There is a bit of V, Mo and Ni in the Aus steels that is not present in G3. You would expect the V in particular to affect the steel's properties in terms of increasing wear resistance and possibly changing sharpening characteristics.

Disclaimer: I have never actually used an Aus10 knife. The Aus8s that I have sharpened are probably a tiny bit gummier than the single G3 knife that I have sharpened (a Tanaka) and not as easy to deburr. It's entirely possible that this is a heat treatment or hardness/ brittleness effect though.


----------



## Crobert (Dec 30, 2020)

Thanks, metallurgy isn't my strong suit. Sounds like a little alloying may go a long way.


----------



## Nemo (Dec 31, 2020)

Crobert said:


> Metallurgy isn't my strong suit.



Easy to fix


----------



## Nemo (Dec 31, 2020)

Crobert said:


> Sounds like a little alloying may go a long way.



Yeah. Great, isn't it?


----------



## Crobert (Dec 31, 2020)

Nemo said:


> Yeah. Great, isn't it?



It is, increasingly clearly!


----------



## Jovidah (Dec 31, 2020)

My sample size is just 1 on both, so anything I say could be _entirely_ due to differences in heat treat, especially since the ginsan knife was in a slightly higher price class. But the main thing I noticed is that Gin-3 sharpened easier... pretty much carbon like. Not that aus-10 was bad, but it was more like any other average stainless. Edge retention on the Gin-3 was surprisingly good - so good that I wouldn't expect the aus-10 to surpass it in that regard. 
But again, could be just because the heat-treat on my gin3 was better.


----------



## Matt Jacobs (Dec 31, 2020)

I have never looked but I am surprised to see them so similar. What I have heard is that AUS10 is cheep and should be avoided (Dalstrong) but G3 is a fantastic steel that sharpens very nicely almost like carbon steels. I wonder if the only reason that is the case is because G3 knives tend to be used by artisans rather than factories and they know how to get more out of the steel?


----------



## Crobert (Dec 31, 2020)

Jovidah said:


> My sample size is just 1 on both, so anything I say could be _entirely_ due to differences in heat treat, especially since the ginsan knife was in a slightly higher price class. But the main thing I noticed is that Gin-3 sharpened easier... pretty much carbon like. Not that aus-10 was bad, but it was more like any other average stainless. Edge retention on the Gin-3 was surprisingly good - so good that I wouldn't expect the aus-10 to surpass it in that regard.
> But again, could be just because the heat-treat on my gin3 was better.



Thanks, this pretty much backs up what I've heard, with ginsan being compared to carbon steel and aus-10 to cheaper stainless. I was interested to see how it played out in reality. I've also learned that alloying elements can make significant changes in very small quantity, so that definitely factors in to the difference between the two


----------



## ModRQC (Dec 31, 2020)

AUS-8 has less carbon than Ginsan. It also has Moly and Vana added, which are carbide formers, absent from Ginsan steel, but Ginsan steel tend to have more Manganese, a grain refiner.

Results of which Ginsan is finer grained. Aus10 (boosted Carbon compared to AUS-8) will mean a bit more carbide for same amount of Moly and Vana.

Then you have 440C with boosted chromium, more Moly, no Vana, should produce a grain structure similar to AUS-10 with augmented stainless-ness.


----------



## Crobert (Dec 31, 2020)

Matt Jacobs said:


> I have never looked but I am surprised to see them so similar. What I have heard is that AUS10 is cheep and should be avoided (Dalstrong) but G3 is a fantastic steel that sharpens very nicely almost like carbon steels. I wonder if the only reason that is the case is because G3 knives tend to be used by artisans rather than factories and they know how to get more out of the steel?


I wondered about this too, it does seem to be the case that there is more artisan ginsan and mass-produced aus-10. Of course, it could be that this is because ginsan is simply a better steel.


----------



## ModRQC (Dec 31, 2020)

AEB-L or 13C26 or Ginsan





440C

I'd imagine AUS-8 looking somewhat in between, AUS-10 looking almost like 440C, still finer I would believe.


----------



## ModRQC (Dec 31, 2020)

AUS-8 and AUS-10 are not cheap steels. They are pretty neat stainless. 440C also.

Dalstrong are retarded. Not the same thing.


----------



## Crobert (Dec 31, 2020)

ModRQC said:


> AUS-8 has less carbon than Ginsan. It also has Moly and Vana added, which are carbide formers, absent from Ginsan steel, but Ginsan steel tend to have more Manganese, a grain refiner.
> 
> Results of which Ginsan is finer grained. Aus10 (boosted Carbon compared to AUS-8) will mean a bit more carbide for same amount of Moly and Vana.
> 
> Then you have 440C with boosted chromium, more Moly, no Vana, should produce a grain structure similar to AUS-10 with augmented stainless-ness.


Thank you, seems like this pretty objectively answers my question, and the images visually support it. I've heard ginsan described as "pure", which seems to refer to the lack of carbide formers you mentioned. I didn't fully understand the effects of some alloying elements when making my initial comparison, so the two steels may not be as similar as I thought.


----------



## ModRQC (Dec 31, 2020)

AEB-L is razor steel. Pure indeed applies to grain refinement there. Fine grained can support very fine edges. AUS and 440 wouldn’t but their edge would be retained longer in kitchen use, more toothy finished at the same grits.

It’s a great comparison to make when looking to understand the role of alloying elements.. and how little dose they need to have an effect.

In my experience steels like 440 compared to Ginsan sharpen very easy too, just longer to deburr.


----------



## Jovidah (Dec 31, 2020)

Matt Jacobs said:


> I have never looked but I am surprised to see them so similar. What I have heard is that AUS10 is cheep and should be avoided (Dalstrong) but G3 is a fantastic steel that sharpens very nicely almost like carbon steels. I wonder if the only reason that is the case is because G3 knives tend to be used by artisans rather than factories and they know how to get more out of the steel?


My cheaper AUS-10 was at least Japanese, not Chinese made junk. But yeah I can imagine that stuff like Dalstrong might give certain steels a bad name... I wouldn't be surprised if the heattreatment was all over the place on them. Had a similar experience with Chinese made VG-10 knives that, even within the same series from the same manufacturer, were noticably all over the place. The story about Misen knives turning out to be lower 50's HRC also comes to mind.

I think it's very hard to make general statements about these steels without having a large enough sample size, but from a theoretical perspective ModRQC has some valid points. At least it seems to lineup with my limited experience in practise. But again, could all just be down to differences in heat treatment. I guess this is why you have to be a bit cautious about overfocusing just too much on a steel label.


----------



## ModRQC (Dec 31, 2020)

Dalstrong like to pretend all such SS they sell are cryod. They very probably mess it up about there. Would also explain why they see so much of them break in half. What they call good and send out the door, a Japanese maker would probably toss.


----------



## Barmoley (Dec 31, 2020)

My experience with AUS-10 vs Ginsan is that they are very similar in quality knives. These are in the same class of steels and should provide very similar performance when done right. AUS-10 has a little Vanadium, but probably not enough to form vanadium carbides, maybe enough for grain refinement or to improve chromium carbides, but not likely. AUS-10 also has more silicone that can make the steel tougher, but I don't know if there is enough more to make a difference. We need a real metallurgist @Larrin to figure that out. AEB-L is more different from these steels than they are different from each other. I think they are in the same class and the biggest difference is perceived due to marketing and use. If you had to pick between 2 knives in these steels pick on other attributes than the steel as both can be used to make excellent blades.


----------



## ModRQC (Dec 31, 2020)

There's some more Carbon and Chromium in Ginsan at the higher end of the range they provide for those compared with AEB-L. Almost twice as much Manganese too at the higher end of the range they provide. I would have expected Ginsan to come out pretty close with AEB-L, but possibly Manganese doesn't have that much effect I think it has. 

I know so little in the end. I'd like to see a micrograph of either AUS-8 or 10.


----------



## inferno (Dec 31, 2020)

i have a feeling that many of the lo-buck japanese stainless would be almost impossible to tell apart in a test.
vg-1, vg-5, ginsan, aus8, aus10, acuto440 etc etc.


----------



## ModRQC (Dec 31, 2020)

14C28N seems to prove you right @Barmoley. The effect of a slight chromium addition for similar specs than AEB-L shows. Would come out worse with the higher carbon content of Ginsan, even.


----------



## Barmoley (Dec 31, 2020)

It's probably not the difference in chromium, but a pretty large difference in carbon between ginsan and AEB-L. Ginsan is very similar to AEB-H or 19C27 which are quiet different from AEB-L.

19C27 from New Micrographs of 42 Knife Steels - Knife Steel Nerds


----------



## daveb (Dec 31, 2020)

I like Ginsan

I don't like AUS

Next question?


----------



## Barmoley (Dec 31, 2020)

daveb said:


> I like Ginsan
> 
> I don't like AUS
> 
> Next question?


I bet you like the knives you tried that were ginsan and didn't like the ones that were aus. I doubt you'd be able to tell the difference in the same knife. Your point stands thought lock this thing up.


----------



## HumbleHomeCook (Dec 31, 2020)




----------



## M1k3 (Dec 31, 2020)

From what little I know, AEB-L has fine carbides because it's carbon:chromium ratio is is carbon light. Forcing more of the chromium into solution versus forming carbides with carbon.

I believe Ginsan is forgeable. Unsure of AUS-10.


----------



## Larrin (Dec 31, 2020)

Barmoley said:


> My experience with AUS-10 vs Ginsan is that they are very similar in quality knives. These are in the same class of steels and should provide very similar performance when done right. AUS-10 has a little Vanadium, but probably not enough to form vanadium carbides, maybe enough for grain refinement or to improve chromium carbides, but not likely. AUS-10 also has more silicone that can make the steel tougher, but I don't know if there is enough more to make a difference. We need a real metallurgist @Larrin to figure that out. AEB-L is more different from these steels than they are different from each other. I think they are in the same class and the biggest difference is perceived due to marketing and use. If you had to pick between 2 knives in these steels pick on other attributes than the steel as both can be used to make excellent blades.


The Si in both steels are maximums so it’s impossible to know if one has more than the other. The Mo and V are quite small in AUS-10. I wouldn’t expect either one to be substantially different than the other when it comes to composition.


----------



## ModRQC (Dec 31, 2020)

Larrin said:


> The Si in both steels are maximums so it’s impossible to know if one has more than the other. The Mo and V are quite small in AUS-10. I wouldn’t expect either one to be substantially different than the other when it comes to composition.



Can I ask what would be the effect if indeed Ginsan gets the upper limit of Manganese? I mean, if there is at such proportions?


----------



## Larrin (Jan 1, 2021)

ModRQC said:


> Can I ask what would be the effect if indeed Ginsan gets the upper limit of Manganese? I mean, if there is at such proportions?


Higher manganese would mean a bit more hardenability, which means it can be quenched more slowly and still achieve more hardness, somewhat important for industrial heat treating. Mo also improves hardenability. High Mn can also increase retained austenite, which can limit hardness to some extent. However, we are talking about such a small Mn difference I wouldn't expect it to lead to much real change in RA. Both steels have the same Mn maximum according to the manufacturer websites so I don't think there is any difference between the two there.


----------



## inferno (Jan 1, 2021)

M1k3 said:


> From what little I know, AEB-L has fine carbides because it's carbon:chromium ratio is is carbon light. Forcing more of the chromium into solution versus forming carbides with carbon.
> 
> I believe Ginsan is forgeable. Unsure of AUS-10.



i think all the japanese stainless are possible to forge. the big question is: is it worth doing? what would be the gain of that instead of just cutting it from sheet? they probably wont improve anything vs how it came from the mill. 

maybe the different steels comes in different shapes/formats with different price tags? it might also be down to some "tradition", maybe they only know for sure how to forge ginsan, but not vg5 or aus10 or whatever because no one ever tried it. that could be a reason. i dont know. 

from what i've heard, no stainless is nice/fast to forge though.


----------

