# Why two variations of White Steel?



## Razor (Nov 12, 2017)

Since most agree that the difference in forging and HT has more impact on the knife than whether or not the knife is made in Shirogami #1 vs #2, why does Hitachi bother making two different steels. What is the measurable functional difference and reason?


----------



## K813zra (Nov 12, 2017)

Razor said:


> Since most agree that the difference in forging and HT has more impact on the knife than whether or not the knife is made in Shirogami #1 vs #2, why does Hitachi bother making two different steels. What is the measurable functional difference and reason?



There is a white # 3 too. Not that knowing that adds anything useful. I am not educated well enough to even fathom a guess to your question.


----------



## chinacats (Nov 12, 2017)

If my memory is correct, the only difference is the percentage of carbon while everything else remains the same...1 has the highest percent then 2, then 3.


----------



## pjotr (Nov 12, 2017)

Table on suggested applications from the manufacturer (Hitachi steels) can be found on this page https://www.hitachi-metals.co.jp/e/yss/search/shirogami1.html


----------



## shownomarci (Nov 12, 2017)




----------



## milkbaby (Nov 12, 2017)

When forging, one has to heat the steel repeatedly to forging temperatures. When you do that in an air atmosphere you'll lose carbon to carbon migration and oxidation. That's the black stuff on the outside of kurouchi knives. Increased carbon helps mitigate this loss of carbon.

For aogami, the addition of more tungsten and chromium should increase edge retention due to more carbide formers.

There may be other things I'm missing, hopefully one of the pros or more knowledgeable knife people will chime in.


----------



## LifeByA1000Cuts (Nov 12, 2017)

Piggyback question: Is it cooked as a batch of #1 or #2 or #3, or is it binned and labelled as one of the grades after testing?

And who says that a heat treat that works marvellous on #1 won't give you unmitigated disaster on #3 or vice versa?


----------



## Razor (Nov 12, 2017)

shownomarci said:


>



I've read all this stuff. But knowing that manufacturing, stocking and distributing two products costs more than just one, you would think substantial differences would exist. LB1000cuts offers a great question "Piggyback question: Is it cooked as a batch of #1 or #2 or #3, or is it binned and labelled as one of the grades after testing?" Or, during the batch are they able to separate 1, 2 and 3. I have not understood that #2 is considered superior or inferior to #1. #3 seems to be considered substandard for quality knives. But with modern manufacturing, I would think they could control the recipe to a high degree of quality control. Maybe not. The same can be asked of Aogami #1 and #2. Why do blade smiths often chose White or Blue #2 instead of #1.


----------



## HRC_64 (Nov 12, 2017)

LifeByA1000Cuts said:


> Piggyback question: Is it cooked as a batch of #1 or #2 or #3, or is it binned and labelled as one of the grades after testing?
> And who says that a heat treat that works marvellous on #1 won't give you unmitigated disaster on #3 or vice versa?



The higher grades are higher I believe because they are "more pure", so take more refinement. 
The lesser grades are lower because lower performance, and cheaper because its less work (refinement).

I have tools made out of lower grade steel and they are fine because the impurities don't adversely impact the use.
And the normal white #3 or yellow steel is still amazingly high quality (versus other crap that could be used).

For kitchen knives, I want to say even hitachi doesn't recommend white steel (which they think of as tool steel).
Which goes to show you everything is sort of up in the air at some level.


----------



## HRC_64 (Nov 12, 2017)

previous thread, has some more discussion on white #3

http://www.kitchenknifeforums.com/showthread.php/7794-please-tell-me-more-about-Shiro-ko-3(white-3)



JBroida said:


> not exactly... its not less pure at all... just lower carbon. Yellow steel is less pure, but within white steel, they are all the same. Just the carbon varies.


----------



## Razor (Nov 12, 2017)

HRC_64 said:


> The higher grades are higher I believe because they are "more pure", so take more refinement.
> The lesser grades are lower because lower performance, and cheaper because its less work (refinement).
> 
> I have tools made out of lower grade steel and they are fine because the impurities don't adversely impact the use.
> ...



White #1 and #2 have the same level of purity. Only a small difference in carbon content. Same with Aogami. Why bother varying the carbon when it can be reduced in the forging process anyway. Why not just make White #1. Again, making 2 versions costs a lot more money.


----------



## Yet-Another-Dave (Nov 12, 2017)

Razor said:


> Since most agree that the difference in forging and HT has more impact on the knife than whether or not the knife is made in Shirogami #1 vs #2, why does Hitachi bother making two different steels. What is the measurable functional difference and reason?



That the craftsmanship matters more to the knife consumer doesn't mean the differences in steel don't make a difference to the smith. Hitachi is a big company with accountants. I'm sure they sell enough to each to cover the extra overhead.


----------



## labor of love (Nov 12, 2017)

shownomarci said:


>



Blue 1 has added chromium and tungsten but white 1 doesnt? Is that really true?


----------



## milkbaby (Nov 12, 2017)

I bet it's down to the prevailing market. If you can sell a knife from shirogami 1 more than shiro 2, then it's worth it to Hitachi to make both when there is a market for both and charge more for #1 than #2. Like all consumer goods, a large component of the pricing is in perceived value.

As an aside, I have two pieces of prelaminated san mai Hitachi steel simply labeled as either "white paper" or "blue paper" so I have no idea which version they are. :scratchhead:


----------



## Paraffin (Nov 12, 2017)

Razor said:


> White #1 and #2 have the same level of purity. Only a small difference in carbon content. Same with Aogami. Why bother varying the carbon when it can be reduced in the forging process anyway. Why not just make White #1. Again, making 2 versions costs a lot more money.



I think we have to assume that Hitachi knows its market very well, and that the vast majority of its customers aren't handmade knife smiths. Most of this steel probably ends up in high-volume. automated tool production where consistency of the raw material is critical. Maybe it's better in that kind of production to begin with a choice of carbon content, instead of tweaking it through forging. 

Just guessing here, but if they offer a range of steel like this, then there has to be a customer-driven reason for wanting the different grades. And small-shop knife smiths aren't the big customers for this stuff.


----------



## LifeByA1000Cuts (Nov 12, 2017)

@HRC64 in manufacturing, surprisingly often things work like I suggested: The process is optimized so manufacturing tolerances have a chance to yield a given quality of results close to the market share of that quality, and the result is graded after the fact. Best example: computer CPUs. There aren't 100s of manufacturing lines or retoolings for the 100s of models available. No idea, though, if that is how these steel mills roll - excuse the pun. Well, Hitachi/YSS isn't even found among some lists of japanese steel makers, seems they are considered more of a ... well, specialty materials maker.


----------



## LifeByA1000Cuts (Nov 12, 2017)

@Paraffin there seems to be a special white steel grade optimized for ... saws. That might hint at a market....


----------



## HRC_64 (Nov 12, 2017)

LifeByA1000Cuts said:


> @HRC64 in manufacturing, surprisingly often things work like I suggested...



Its hard to generalize like that. 

many examples and counter-examples about. EG, we make cream from cow milk, but the cost of cream is not the cost of raw milk; and the cost of skim milk is also not the cost of raw milk. wether the skim is intentionally desired or considered the throw-away from making cream is sort of non-point, because eventually the market allocates value (to both skim and cream) somewhat independantly of their manufacturing method/cost...and more based on use-value (making butter, cereal milk etc). If you see what I mean.

whit the steels, the carbon content is like a form-factor that impacts the cost of purchase for industrial users, and the cost of the processes needed to make the steel work as "widgets". They could probably sell one class of white steel, but the users would have to add more expenses to the production to tweak the steel. This extra cost is a profit opportunity at the industrial/scale level for hitatchi (i am guessing here, but seem to make sense). 



the carbon content of steel tho is an intentional variance as far as I know.


----------



## Nemo (Nov 12, 2017)

In modern steel manufacturing, is:

1) A higher carbon steel obtained by adding carbon to a lower carbon steel? Or,

2) Is a lower carbon steel obtained by burning carbon off from a higer carbon steel or even a cast iron?

My layman's understanding is that option 2 is technically easier than option 1 but I am as always happy to be put straight if I'm wrong.


----------



## Pensacola Tiger (Nov 12, 2017)

Razor said:


> Since most agree that the difference in forging and HT has more impact on the knife than whether or not the knife is made in Shirogami #1 vs #2, why does Hitachi bother making two different steels. What is the measurable functional difference and reason?



With thanks to Jon Broida, I'm going to repost what he had to say about Hitachi's steels on 08-08-2012. I hope it helps the discussion.

Hitachi makes a number of carbon steels. Here are the common ones found in knives.

SK Steels (sk5, sk4, sk3)- the least expensive of the carbon steels and the lowest carbon content (#5 has the least carbon, #3 the most). This steel has higher amounts of phosphorus and sulfur than the other steels i'm about to mention. This steel tends to be tough (due to the lower carbon content and thus lower hardness). It also tends to be more reactive.

Yellow Steel (yellow 3, yellow 2)- This steel is more pure (less phosphorus and sulfur than the SK Steels). It also has higher carbon content (#3 has less carbon than #2 in this case as well). This steel is commonly found in saws and wood working tools. It is also sometimes found in knives.

White Steel (White 3, white 2, white #1)- This steel is even more pure than yellow steel (which is relatively pure). Once again, the lower the number, the higher the carbon content, so white #1 has the most carbon and white #3 has the least. The higher carbon (and hardness) leads to white #1 having the best edge retention of the white steels and also the best ability to hold an acute angle. White #3 has the best toughness.

Blue Steel (Blue #2 and Blue #1... i'll talk about blue super later)- Blue steel is white steel with chromium and tungsten added to it. Blue #2 has the same amount of carbon as white #2 but has the added elements. Same for blue #1 and white #1. The added elements lead to better corrosion resistance and edge retention (as well as deeper hardening). This also comes at the cost of being more difficult to sharpen and not taking quite as keen of an edge. Blue steel also tends to be more brittle (ever so slight).

Blue Super- Blue super is blue #1 with even more carbon, chromium, and tungsten added to it. Its the best of the hitachi carbon steels with regard to edge retention and ability to hold an acute angle (due to the higher carbon/hardness and added elements). This comes at the cost of being more difficult to sharpen, not getting quite as sharp, and being the most brittle of the bunch.

So, in conclusion, the white steels take the best edge (#1 holding the most acute angle and #3 being the toughest), while the blue steels hold the best edge (Blue super being the best at this while blue #2 and #1 have better toughness).


----------



## chinacats (Nov 12, 2017)

FWIW, I doubt Hitachi cares what steels the knifemakers use as it's likely a miniscule amount of their business.


----------



## LifeByA1000Cuts (Nov 12, 2017)

@Pensacola Tiger sure about AS > W#1 when it comes to holding acute angles?


----------



## Razor (Nov 12, 2017)

labor of love said:


> Blue 1 has added chromium and tungsten but white 1 doesnt? Is that really true?



You are comparing Shirogami to Aogami steel. And yes Aogami has additives.


----------



## Razor (Nov 12, 2017)

Paraffin said:


> I think we have to assume that Hitachi knows its market very well, and that the vast majority of its customers aren't handmade knife smiths. Most of this steel probably ends up in high-volume. automated tool production where consistency of the raw material is critical. Maybe it's better in that kind of production to begin with a choice of carbon content, instead of tweaking it through forging.
> 
> Just guessing here, but if they offer a range of steel like this, then there has to be a customer-driven reason for wanting the different grades. And small-shop knife smiths aren't the big customers for this stuff.



This is an insightful response. They are packaging small blanks for what I assume are knife makers. This could be an incorrect assumption but it seems a small package for high volume tooling. But I guess that once the steel is made, packaging is a minimal concern. I'm just glad they provide small shops such fantastic options that end up in my kitchen.


----------



## labor of love (Nov 12, 2017)

Razor said:


> You are comparing Shirogami to Aogami steel. And yes Aogami has additives.



No, what Im saying is that wh 1 is wh 2 with added carbon while blue 1 is blue 2 with added carbon, tungsten and chromium. I didnt realize additional tungsten and chromium was added to turn blue 2 into blue 1. I sorta thought blue 1 was closer to wh 1, but the diagram makes blue 1 seem like augami super lite.


----------



## Wens (Nov 12, 2017)

LifeByA1000Cuts said:


> @HRC64 in manufacturing, surprisingly often things work like I suggested: The process is optimized so manufacturing tolerances have a chance to yield a given quality of results close to the market share of that quality, and the result is graded after the fact. Best example: computer CPUs. There aren't 100s of manufacturing lines or retoolings for the 100s of models available. No idea, though, if that is how these steel mills roll - excuse the pun. Well, Hitachi/YSS isn't even found among some lists of japanese steel makers, seems they are considered more of a ... well, specialty materials maker.



I worked as an engineer for a place that did some consulting work about five years ago with a couple of American seamless tube producers making stuff for the petroleum industry. There are some process differences for flat rolled vs seamless tube but way more is the same than is different. Those guys definitely had good enough control of their process to hit the high end or low end of specifications when they wanted too, and I would assume Hitachi is the same.

I suspect there's more misses with impurities than with carbon content, and I'm sure in those cases they do "bin" it into a less stringent category, but I suspect those occasions trigger quality investigations to prevent recurrence, unlike semiconductor manufacture where it's a statistical process and you just live with it.


----------



## Pensacola Tiger (Nov 12, 2017)

LifeByA1000Cuts said:


> @Pensacola Tiger sure about AS > W#1 when it comes to holding acute angles?



When it comes to things about Japanese knives and steel, I think Jon Broida knows what he's talking about. I don't have his experience or knowledge, but my limited experience bears out what he said. So, yes, I'm sure.


----------



## Wens (Nov 12, 2017)

labor of love said:


> Blue 1 has added chromium and tungsten but white 1 doesnt? Is that really true?



Good catch, I was also someone who thought the only difference was the amount of carbon. Straight from the horse's mouth looks like the range is higher but overlaps. 

https://www.hitachi-metals.co.jp/e/yss/search/aogami1.html

https://www.hitachi-metals.co.jp/e/yss/search/aogami2.html


----------



## LifeByA1000Cuts (Nov 13, 2017)

@Pensacola Tiger my apologies, overread that you were quoting him verbatim.


----------



## Razor (Nov 13, 2017)

Pensacola Tiger said:


> When it comes to things about Japanese knives and steel, I think Jon Broida knows what he's talking about. I don't have his experience or knowledge, but my limited experience bears out what he said. So, yes, I'm sure.



I can't figure out what you are saying. When I posted my question I made the assumption responders would know the differences in Aogami and Shirogami steels. It is not complicated. Jon does not state that Aogami > White 1 at holding acute angles. He says that White #1 can take the most acute angle, but Blue steel does a better job retaining edges. But none of this helps answer my question which LB11000cuts and others have been doing.


----------



## StonedEdge (Nov 13, 2017)

Why does it even matter why this particular manufacturer has 3 different options of a very similar steel type? It's like asking why does DuPont make a certain type of bonding agent in 4 varying but very similar recipes? There's a demand and the manufacturer supplies it.


----------



## StonedEdge (Nov 13, 2017)

chinacats said:


> FWIW, I doubt Hitachi cares what steels the knifemakers use as it's likely a miniscule amount of their business.


Bingo


----------



## K813zra (Nov 13, 2017)

StonedEdge said:


> Why does it even matter why this particular manufacturer has 3 different options of a very similar steel type? It's like asking why does DuPont make a certain type of bonding agent in 4 varying but very similar recipes? There's a demand and the manufacturer supplies it.



I was wondering the same thing. The phrase "because they can" comes to mind. However, I guess some people are just more inquisitive than I.


----------



## StonedEdge (Nov 13, 2017)

K813zra said:


> I was wondering the same thing. The phrase "because they can" comes to mind. However, I guess some people are just more inquisitive than I.


Guess that makes two of us


----------



## Pensacola Tiger (Nov 13, 2017)

Razor said:


> I can't figure out what you are saying. When I posted my question I made the assumption responders would know the differences in Aogami and Shirogami steels. It is not complicated. Jon does not state that Aogami > White 1 at holding acute angles. He says that White #1 can take the most acute angle, but Blue steel does a better job retaining edges. But none of this helps answer my question which LB11000cuts and others have been doing.



No, my post was to clarify what other posts were alluding to and to illustrate the breadth of steels that Hitachi manufactures for blacksmiths to use to make knives. I'm sorry if you found it unhelpful to your question.


----------



## scott.livesey (Nov 13, 2017)

go here and compare http://zknives.com/knives/steels/Hitachi white#1=1.30% carbon white #2=1.10% carbon white #3=0.85% carbon. all 3 are the same except for carbon content, high purity, shallow hardening, water quench. for makers outside of Japan it is all a moot point as Hitachi does not export any white or blue steel to the US. steel making is business not art. the maker will control what goes into the melting pot to the ounce knowing what will come out.


----------



## HRC_64 (Nov 13, 2017)

scott.livesey said:


> ...steel making is business not art....
> ...the maker will control what goes into the melting pot to the ounce knowing what will come out.



ultimately mba/marketing problem. 
not a technical problem..

The consumers don't dope their own steel w/carbon 
The suppliers do this as its cheaper/easier for the end user, 
and the pricing &#8710; the consumer is willing to pay,
makes up for the extra cost.

A basic econ. 101 type puzzle.

The only quesion at a technical level 
would be along the lines of 
"how hard is it to dope your own steel"
[edit: meaning, for the end user]

And the answer to that is probably: 
1) not that easy...and
2) why bother when you don't have to.


----------



## scott.livesey (Nov 13, 2017)

explain "dope your steel". once the steel has left the maker, there is little you can do to the steel other than shape it and heat treat it.


----------



## HRC_64 (Nov 13, 2017)

scott.livesey said:


> ...once the steel has left the maker, there is little you can do to the steel other than shape it and heat treat it.



This then is maybe the answer... of why it leaves the factory with several choices for carbon level.


----------



## HRC_64 (Nov 13, 2017)

sorry, I forgot to anwer scott's Query



scott.livesey said:


> explain "dope your steel".



by adding 'dope' I just meant make a minor adjustment 
to the chemistry (eg, carbon content) during production.


----------



## KimBronnum (Nov 13, 2017)

To answer the initial question more shortly: after forging wh1 contains the most carbon and is purest wich provides a knife blade with the best ability to get the keenest possible edge. As you would like for a yanagiba and such. Maybe wh 2 is easier to work with or is cheaper. I don´t know. 
- Kim


----------



## scott.livesey (Nov 13, 2017)

HRC_64 said:


> sorry, I forgot to anwer scott's Query
> 
> 
> 
> ...



thought so, there are products that will let you raise surface hardness, but these are not really practical for knives. hitachi seems to be unique in that if offers the same chemistry with 6 or 7 carbon percentage choices in the Shirogami series and 6 carbon choices in the Aogami series. being in the US, there is very limited access to these steels. W1 would be an equal to Shirogami #2, 1085 or 1095 would be close to Shirogami #3, and 1.2519 is similar to Aogami #2.


----------



## Razor (Nov 13, 2017)

StonedEdge said:


> Guess that makes two of us



If nothing else this thread exposes an enormous amount of misinformation and misunderstanding of the products we espouse. To understand why can help decide which. I think this question needs the answer of a forger like Murray Carter or other forgers who participate here. Why does a knife maker chose W2 instead of W1 when the process is the same. Powdered steel is the opposite. Follow a simple recipe and you get a consistent result. But the Shirogami and Aogami require skill and many variables determine the outcome. What else do we have to talk about. Shun vs Miyabi? How long is your Gyuto?


----------



## HRC_64 (Nov 13, 2017)

Razor said:


> If nothing else this thread exposes an enormous amount of misinformation and misunderstanding of the products we espouse.



Since you started the thread...with the wrong # of white steels in the title...who is to blame for this misinformation


----------



## K813zra (Nov 13, 2017)

Razor said:


> If nothing else this thread exposes an enormous amount of misinformation and misunderstanding of the products we espouse. To understand why can help decide which. I think this question needs the answer of a forger like Murray Carter or other forgers who participate here. Why does a knife maker chose W2 instead of W1 when the process is the same. Powdered steel is the opposite. Follow a simple recipe and you get a consistent result. But the Shirogami and Aogami require skill and many variables determine the outcome. What else do we have to talk about. Shun vs Miyabi? How long is your Gyuto?



Thing is, for most I am not sure it even matters. There being misinformation that is. Nor would being more well educated stop us from making recommendations that are beyond the scope of the request. If anything I think it might give us more propensity to peddle things which were not asked for. Seeking knowledge for oneself is fine but I don't see it as some sort of quest for betterment of product suggestions. But then maybe I am wrong.

Like there is nothing wrong with this curiosity I see nothing wrong with the lack of curiosity, in this case, either. 

And the answer is Miyabi. The other answer is 189mm.


----------



## GLE1952 (Nov 14, 2017)

Steel is refined iron. On one hand removing undesirable impurities for a purer steel is more expensive so white # 1 cost more than white #2 etc. Remember, the composition charts of desirable elements when added up are far from 100%
The types of blue steel have various material added back to the basic steel after refining to get a desired quality such as durability, toughfness etc. which is why blue steel types are more expensive. More added ingredients equals more expense. 
However the pureness of white also has it's own advantages since carbon molecules are smaller than most added material hence better sharpness as opposed to durability.
All steels have material besides carbon. So where the iron is mined equals different basic steel composition since carbon is a small part of total steel composition.


----------



## milkbaby (Nov 14, 2017)

Going back to the original question, Hitachi makes these steels because there is a demand for them and they believe it is worth the cost to provide the different variations. Why does Nike make so many basketball shoes when functionally they are relatively similar and it would be cheaper for them if they only offered one model?

For all the knifemakers there may not be a huge difference in workability or functionality of the final product, but at any scale of production, one has to weigh the cost of the raw materials versus the expected income from sales. The difference in materials costs can add up over even just a few knives. Not sure of Japanese bladesmiths, but I've heard stories of established American knifemakers who need to have a good sales weekend at Blade Show to pay for their trip, essentially being a couple thousand dollars away from being bankrupt.


----------



## scott.livesey (Nov 14, 2017)

milkbaby said:


> For all the knifemakers there may not be a huge difference in workability or functionality of the final product, but at any scale of production, one has to weigh the cost of the raw materials versus the expected income from sales. The difference in materials costs can add up over even just a few knives. Not sure of Japanese bladesmiths, but I've heard stories of established American knifemakers who need to have a good sales weekend at Blade Show to pay for their trip, essentially being a couple thousand dollars away from being bankrupt.


When you start to look at the material costs of making a knife, the blade steel(assuming the steel isn't REX121 or HAP70) is usually 2nd or 3rd on the list. Number 1 is sanding belts followed by handle material. a piece of 1/8x12x2(enough for 8" chef's or nakiri) AEB-L costs $6, 440C $12, S35VN $24, "Blue steel"(hopefully from Hitachi) $70(half of that is shipment from Europe). 52100, 1095, O1, 80CrV2, and 1.2519 all fall in the $5 to $10 range. 2x72 ceramic belts cost $5 to $10 each, plan on using 3 or 4 per blade.
the Blade Show is $550 for a table, booths start at $1100. unless you are going to sleep in your car and eat McD's, hotel close to event and food will be another $750-$1000. add transportation and you really need a good day to break even


----------



## Razor (Nov 15, 2017)

HRC_64 said:


> Since you started the thread...with the wrong # of white steels in the title...who is to blame for this misinformation



My mistake. I just don't consider SK-series in the equation. Yes there are many more versions of White Steel. But then neither does Hitachi when they move to Blue Steel. In other words there is not White #3,4,5 version of Aogami that I have seen.


----------



## Razor (Nov 15, 2017)

scott.livesey said:


> When you start to look at the material costs of making a knife, the blade steel(assuming the steel isn't REX121 or HAP70) is usually 2nd or 3rd on the list. Number 1 is sanding belts followed by handle material. a piece of 1/8x12x2(enough for 8" chef's or nakiri) AEB-L costs $6, 440C $12, S35VN $24, "Blue steel"(hopefully from Hitachi) $70(half of that is shipment from Europe). 52100, 1095, O1, 80CrV2, and 1.2519 all fall in the $5 to $10 range. 2x72 ceramic belts cost $5 to $10 each, plan on using 3 or 4 per blade.
> the Blade Show is $550 for a table, booths start at $1100. unless you are going to sleep in your car and eat McD's, hotel close to event and food will be another $750-$1000. add transportation and you really need a good day to break even



This might get us closer to the answer to my original question. I spoke with someone today who has been in a Japanese forge and hammered various steels. He stated that SK5 was substantially easier to work than White 1 - Super Blue. He said each move from White #1 up to the harder powdered steels was much harder to hammer and work into shape. This would also be the case for grinding belts which get more wear on Super Blue than White #1. Also, (pure speculation) the extra carbon in White #1 might provide a margin of error that more experienced forgers don't need so they chose White #2. But I feel I have exhausted this thread and appreciate the insights I have received.


----------



## milkbaby (Nov 15, 2017)

scott.livesey said:


> When you start to look at the material costs of making a knife, the blade steel(assuming the steel isn't REX121 or HAP70) is usually 2nd or 3rd on the list. Number 1 is sanding belts followed by handle material. a piece of 1/8x12x2(enough for 8" chef's or nakiri) AEB-L costs $6, 440C $12, S35VN $24, "Blue steel"(hopefully from Hitachi) $70(half of that is shipment from Europe). 52100, 1095, O1, 80CrV2, and 1.2519 all fall in the $5 to $10 range. 2x72 ceramic belts cost $5 to $10 each, plan on using 3 or 4 per blade.



Scott, as a fellow maker I understand that unless you're using expensive steel, it's often relatively low cost in comparison to other materials. I think every knife I've made so far the handle wood cost more than the blade steel and sometimes by a huge amount like 4 or 5 times the amount.

But if you're doing this for a living and forging say 2 to 4 knives an hour, a fifty cent difference in steel cost per knife adds up over time. A doofus like me that finishes a knife once a month or every other month can afford to absorb that difference but a pro who depends on making for their living is well advised to pay close attention to all costs. Of course, sometimes it pays to use the costlier steel if it means you can sell a knife more quickly and at a higher price.


----------



## labor of love (Nov 15, 2017)

Razor said:


> This might get us closer to the answer to my original question. I spoke with someone today who has been in a Japanese forge and hammered various steels. He stated that SK5 was substantially easier to work than White 1 - Super Blue. He said each move from White #1 up to the harder powdered steels was much harder to hammer and work into shape. This would also be the case for grinding belts which get more wear on Super Blue than White #1. Also, (pure speculation) the extra carbon in White #1 might provide a margin of error that more experienced forgers don't need so they chose White #2. But I feel I have exhausted this thread and appreciate the insights I have received.



If this was the case lots of younger craftsman would have more knives made from wh1 on the market-which isnt the case. So whos spreading misinformation now?


----------



## Pensacola Tiger (Nov 15, 2017)

Razor said:


> My mistake. I just don't consider SK-series in the equation. Yes there are many more versions of White Steel. But then neither does Hitachi when they move to Blue Steel. In other words there is not White #3,4,5 version of Aogami that I have seen.



Hitachi markets three versions of white paper steel: #1, #2, and #3.


----------



## K813zra (Nov 15, 2017)

Razor said:


> My mistake. I just don't consider SK-series in the equation. Yes there are many more versions of White Steel. But then neither does Hitachi when they move to Blue Steel. In other words there is not White #3,4,5 version of Aogami that I have seen.



There absolutely IS a white # 3 and it is not an SK steel. It is even used to make Honyaki knives...It is still considered white paper steel regardless of whether or not it is manipulated to make yet another steel seems meaningless to me.


----------



## HRC_64 (Nov 15, 2017)

Razor said:


> My mistake. I just don't consider SK-series in the equation. Yes there are many more versions of White Steel. But then neither does Hitachi when they move to Blue Steel. In other words there is not White #3,4,5 version of Aogami that I have seen.



Just to correct the record it seems
three grades of white steel (#3,#2,#1), 
and three of blue (#2, #1 , super).

Whilst the SK steel is altogether different.


A QUICK SUMMARY OF HITACHI CARBON STEELS COMMON IN KNIVES
https://www.japaneseknifeimports.co...ary-of-hitachi-carbon-steels-common-in-knives



> White Steel (White 3, white 2, white #1)- This steel is even more pure than yellow steel (which is relatively pure). Once again, the lower the number, the higher the carbon content, so white #1 has the most carbon and white #3 has the least. The higher carbon (and hardness) leads to white #1 having the best edge retention of the white steels and also the best ability to hold an acute angle. White #3 has the best toughness.
> 
> Blue Steel (Blue #2 and Blue #1... i'll talk about blue super later)- Blue steel is white steel with chromium and tungsten added to it. Blue #2 has the same amount of carbon as white #2 but has the added elements. Same for blue #1 and white #1. The added elements lead to better corrosion resistance and edge retention (as well as deeper hardening). This also comes at the cost of being more difficult to sharpen and not taking quite as keen of an edge. Blue steel also tends to be more brittle (ever so slight).
> 
> Blue Super- Blue super is blue #1 with even more carbon, chromium, and tungsten added to it. Its the best of the hitachi carbon steels with regard to edge retention and ability to hold an acute angle (due to the higher carbon/hardness and added elements). This comes at the cost of being more difficult to sharpen, not getting quite as sharp, and being the most brittle of the bunch.


----------



## LifeByA1000Cuts (Nov 15, 2017)

@labor of love if you, for example, look at the tanebocho site... it is FULL of reasonably priced white #1 .. maybe we just overlook a lot of white 1 knives that are made?


----------



## Chef Doom (Nov 21, 2017)

Why two variations of olive oil?


----------



## Kippington (Nov 22, 2017)

In the context of this thread, the answer to your question is:
*Add more carbon, Get more carbides.*
White #3 was basically designed to be a _eutectoid_ steel. 'Speak English', do I hear some of you saying? Well, when you harden W#3 to its full potential you end up with a somewhat smooth and homogeneous steel with virtually no carbides. Using this as a baseline, if you add more carbon, it mixes with the iron to introduce harder iron-carbide granules into the steel. We call this a _hyper-eutectoid_ steel. The more carbon you add, the more carbides you'll end up with (up to the point where you reach cast iron). This also generally increases its difficulty in heat-treating.

Lets plot this on a graph:







Simple enough! If you would like a little more context, it belongs here:






This last graph is called the iron-carbon phase diagram, and there's a huge amount of really good information in it.
If you noticed the vertical axis has changed from 'carbide percentage' to 'temperature', it represents a similar thing. We need to add more heat if we want to dissolve the carbides that we've created when we added extra carbon. Just like adding sugar to water - we might need to heat the mixture up a little to help dissolve the granules, depending on how much you threw in (the size and the quantity of them).

And of course, what milkbaby said was spot on too:



milkbaby said:


> When forging, one has to heat the steel repeatedly to forging temperatures. When you do that in an air atmosphere you'll lose carbon to carbon migration and oxidation. That's the black stuff on the outside of kurouchi knives. Increased carbon helps mitigate this loss of carbon.



If a molecule of carbon dioxide in the air chances across a hot piece of carbon steel, it will happily snatch a carbon atom off the surface. This pesky brat takes that carbon atom and splits itself into two carbon monoxide molecules which both run away, never to be seen again.
:bliss:
Taking this into account, sometimes when forging a blade it's a good idea to pick a steel with a little more carbon than you need. This way, you can end up with the right amount of carbon at the end... even after some of it has vanished into thin air!


----------



## Nemo (Nov 22, 2017)

I love learning about this stuff. Thanks Kipp, it makes a lot of sense.

Just to clarify, when you say Fe carbides, you mean cementite? And the location in the grain (or its boundary) and the form (spheroid, pearlite, bainite, etc) of the cementite is dependent on the heat treatment?


----------



## ThEoRy (Nov 23, 2017)

Razor said:


> Jon does not state that Aogami > White 1 at holding acute angles. He says that White #1 can take the most acute angle, but Blue steel does a better job retaining edges.



I don't know what part you read or didn't read but Jon said exactly that. 

"Blue Super- Blue super is blue #1 with even more carbon, chromium, and tungsten added to it. Its the best of the hitachi carbon steels with regard to edge retention and ability to hold an acute angle (due to the higher carbon/hardness and added elements)."




LifeByA1000Cuts said:


> @Pensacola Tiger sure about AS > W#1 when it comes to holding acute angles?



See above. 


To answer the op, have you taken a trip to the Hitachi website?They pretty plainly summarize the different steels.


http://www.hitachi-metals.co.jp/e/yss/search/index.html



Have a look around at the different steels and properties of each. It's pretty easy to see why different makers would use different steels for many reasons. Ease of creation, edge retention, acute sharpness etc.




Specifically white 1 can get more acute more easily and has better edge retention at the expense of toughness. White 2 is less brittle than 1. White 3 has the worst edge retention of the 3 (read 3) white steels yet has the best resistance to chipping. So there is a functional difference. 



Another way to answer the question of "why two variations of white steel?" could be to say, Why so many different variations of beef? Why not just only use filet? The answer to the questions is because there is a sustainable market for the variety of products. Not to mention I know chefs who have a preference for cooking certain cuts. BBQ guys only do BBQ It's a preference and a reverence for the craft. The knife maker may also have a preference for working with a particular steel. Murray Carter stopped using Aogami all together for several years to hone in on his craft of Shirogami. He now works with both again. He explains it here.

[video=youtube;zl3uPlxuyjw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zl3uPlxuyjw[/video]


----------



## Drosophil (Nov 23, 2017)

Kippington said:


> Taking this into account, sometimes when forging a blade it's a good idea to pick a steel with a little more carbon than you need. This way, you can end up with the right amount of carbon at the end... even after some of it has vanished into thin air!



And that's how you get A and B within 1 and 2. Because it wasn't quite complicated enough. :dazed:


----------



## Kippington (Nov 23, 2017)

Nemo said:


> I love learning about this stuff. Thanks Kipp, it makes a lot of sense.
> 
> Just to clarify, when you say Fe carbides, you mean cementite? And the location in the grain (or its boundary) and the form (spheroid, pearlite, bainite, etc) of the cementite is dependent on the heat treatment?



No problem!

Yes, iron carbide in this case is cementite. And yes again, the location of the carbide is _highly_ dependent on how the steel has been heated and cooled.

Eutectoid steels such as White #3 are the easiest to heat-treat for the simple reason that if you quench it to full hardness, there's no left-over carbon - Nil, zilch. You don't have to worry about any carbides forming in spots that will negatively impact the steel... because there's no carbon left to allow the carbides to form in the first place. The more carbon you add, the more problems can arise.

In fact this applies to most of the alloying elements. ZDP-189 for example has over double the amount of carbon that White #1 has, and over three times more carbon than White #3! Twenty percent of the mass of ZDP is chromium alone! This stuff is so difficult to cool properly that to get it from a liquid into a solid fast enough, Hitachi need to spray it into a powder - hence the name PM steel.
It's kinda like spraying a drink into the top of a tall freezer so you can get a slurpee before it hits the bottom!







Cool it too slowly and you might get *cast iron* instead of steel... That, or maybe a ridiculous amount of chromium carbide...
Also, if you decide to make a knife out of ZDP and don't quench it to at least 75°C below zero, the steel never reaches its full hardness (roughly 70HRC).
What a pain in the ass! :stinker:
It _does_ make a mean knife though... :lol2:



Drosophil said:


> And that's how you get A and B within 1 and 2. Because it wasn't quite complicated enough. :dazed:


Hah! A lack of understanding sure doesn't stop any of us from enjoying our knives to their fullest! :knife:


----------



## Drosophil (Nov 23, 2017)

Kippington said:


> Hah! A lack of understanding sure doesn't stop any of us from enjoying our knives to their fullest! :knife:



Pfff, you kidding me? I wouldn't be able to tell the difference between white #3 and AS until it was time to sharpen. And maybe not even then.


----------



## Kippington (Nov 23, 2017)

You'd be surprised... If you enjoy using a well made knife until the time it needs resharpening, you're pushing the tiny amount of steel along the edge to its limits.
Telling the difference between the steels is a whole different ball-game!


----------



## Drosophil (Nov 23, 2017)

Oh, I wasn't implying using them until they're duller than Kristen Stewart, just talking about sensing the difference.


----------



## Kippington (Nov 23, 2017)

Just take a wild guess!
And if you get it wrong, do what we all do... _blame the heat-treatment!_ :wink:


----------



## Drosophil (Nov 23, 2017)

Getting back to carbon loss, are inert gas kilns feasible for knife HT? Or are they just too expensive and/or PITA to maintain? I think they're used for heat treating turbine blades, so that spells hyper-expensive to me.


----------



## Kippington (Nov 23, 2017)

This gets into a pretty deep field. I shouldn't derail this thread anymore than I have, so I'll PM you instead.


----------



## Drosophil (Nov 23, 2017)

Good point, sorry guys!


----------



## Nemo (Nov 23, 2017)

Kippington said:


> This gets into a pretty deep field. I shouldn't derail this thread anymore than I have, so I'll PM you instead.


I'd love to hear it too! Could it be the start of a new thread?


----------



## labor of love (Nov 23, 2017)

Nemo said:


> I'd love to hear it too! Could it be the start of a new thread?



I know, right? Someone get that guy his own subforum already &#128513;


----------



## Nemo (Nov 23, 2017)

Nemo said:


> I'd love to hear it too! Could it be the start of a new thread?


.... please?


----------



## Kippington (Nov 23, 2017)

Nemo, you're coming over to Melbourne this weekend? We can have a few drinks and chat about it then...
Heck, you can even come over to my place and make yourself a small knife, heat-treat and all! :wink:

Labor, your inbox is full!


----------



## Razor (Nov 23, 2017)

Kippington said:


> This gets into a pretty deep field. I shouldn't derail this thread anymore than I have, so I'll PM you instead.



Please - derail away. This is where I hoped the thread would go.


----------



## Nemo (Nov 23, 2017)

Kippington said:


> Nemo, you're coming over to Melbourne this weekend? We can have a few drinks and chat about it then...
> Heck, you can even come over to my place and make yourself a small knife, heat-treat and all! :wink:
> 
> Labor, your inbox is full!


Sounds like a great opportunity. And a very generous offer. Thanks. PM sent.


----------



## Dan P. (Nov 23, 2017)

To answer the OP- different steels for different knives, different smiths, different processes, different price-points.
Also- I used to work in a sheet metal workshop. We had two "jenny" machines, pretty much identical. The guy I worked with would only work on one, and refused to work on the other. I asked him why he wouldn't work on the other. He replied; "Because it smells of spiders".
When you work with a material every day, it's not unthinkable that a very similar, but not quite identical material can be disqualified or rejected simply because it's not quite right, or the the person working with it simpy doesn't like it. It's definitely a thing.


----------



## JayGee (Nov 24, 2017)

Kippington said:


> Nemo, you're coming over to Melbourne this weekend? We can have a few drinks and chat about it then...
> Heck, you can even come over to my place and make yourself a small knife, heat-treat and all! :wink:
> 
> Labor, your inbox is full!



Dang - I'm in Melbourne - I need this! I got one of the martell 300 suji blanks - I'm out of my depth!!!


----------



## Chef Doom (Nov 24, 2017)

ThEoRy said:


> I don't know what part you read or didn't read but Jon said exactly that.
> 
> "Blue Super- Blue super is blue #1 with even more carbon, chromium, and tungsten added to it. Its the best of the hitachi carbon steels with regard to edge retention and ability to hold an acute angle (due to the higher carbon/hardness and added elements)."



Like many religeous zealots that like to conveniently recite incomplete passages in the bible to win an argument, you negleted to complete that paragraph. If you BOTHERED TO KEEP READING Jon also states 

"This comes at the cost of being more difficult to sharpen, not getting quite as sharp, and being the most brittle of the bunch."

This keeps things in perspective because what seems to be the best steel on paper may not be the best steel in real world applications


----------



## Chef Doom (Nov 24, 2017)

And I agree with Razor, Jon 1. Never said that Aogami is better than white steel and 2. Somewhat considers Aogami Super in a different category from Aogami #1 or #2


----------



## ThEoRy (Nov 24, 2017)

Chef Doom said:


> Like many religeous zealots that like to conveniently recite incomplete passages in the bible to win an argument, you negleted to complete that paragraph. If you BOTHERED TO KEEP READING Jon also states
> 
> "This comes at the cost of being more difficult to sharpen, not getting quite as sharp, and being the most brittle of the bunch."
> 
> This keeps things in perspective because what seems to be the best steel on paper may not be the best steel in real world applications





Chef Doom said:


> And I agree with Razor, Jon 1. Never said that Aogami is better than white steel and 2. Somewhat considers Aogami Super in a different category from Aogami #1 or #2



Reading comprehension escapes you. Allow me to repeat the quote so you can better absorb the information.

"Its the best of the hitachi carbon steels with regard to edge retention and ability to hold an acute angle"

No one ever claimed Aogami was better than Shirogami period. 
We were talking about the ability to hold an acute angle. That's it. Go back and try again. Next time try it without presumptuous statements.


----------



## Chef Doom (Nov 24, 2017)

ThEoRy said:


> Reading comprehension escapes you. Allow me to repeat the quote so you can better absorb the information.
> 
> "Its the best of the hitachi carbon steels with regard to edge retention and ability to hold an acute angle"
> 
> ...


So you are going to ignore the fact that you used half a paragraph to argue against a statement that states your incorrect understanding of a passage on Jon's site? AND you are going to ignore the fact that that very same paragraph states that Aogami Super does not get quite as sharp?

You know, pornstars dont really sleep with a lot of men cause technically that is work. And Christians don't really have to read the bible cause Jesus rhode in and said most of the bible is garbage anyways.

You do realise that you are missinterpreting that paragraph or are you going to go all preacher on me?


----------



## malexthekid (Nov 24, 2017)

Yeah.... Ummm.... you're just wrong... Theory quoted the paragraph perfectly for the position he was arguing as Jon states exactly that the other information is irrelevant to the point that AS has the best edge holding and ability to hold an acute edge.


----------



## ThEoRy (Nov 24, 2017)

Chef Doom said:


> So you are going to ignore the fact that you used half a paragraph to argue against a statement that states your incorrect understanding of a passage on Jon's site? AND you are going to ignore the fact that that very same paragraph states that Aogami Super does not get quite as sharp?
> 
> You know, pornstars dont really sleep with a lot of men cause technically that is work. And Christians don't really have to read the bible cause Jesus rhode in and said most of the bible is garbage anyways.
> 
> You do realise that you are missinterpreting that paragraph or are you going to go all preacher on me?



What are you even arguing about here? I haven't misunderstood anything in this thread. You have. I was talking about the ability to hold an acute angle and nothing else. Repeat, nothing else. One more time just for you, nothing else. Why would I quote a statement about ease of sharpening or ability to get as sharp or lack of ability if that wasn't what I was talking about in the fist place? Jon said blue was better at holding an acute angle. I agreed. Because it's true. Wouldn't you agree? Now why you're arguing about something different that I never even said I don't know. For the sake of argument? Well you're arguing with yourself and the made up thoughts that you've imagined I was thinking. 

Just take the F for the day and sit in the corner.


----------



## Chef Doom (Nov 24, 2017)

No, he said it was better at holding an edge and corrosian resistance. He did not mention holding an acute angle. If you are talking about a specific angle, then there may be moments where shiogami is better than aogami.

And ease of sharpening is important because looking at only the positives and not the negatives does not present an accurate picture.


----------



## ThEoRy (Nov 25, 2017)

Let's recap shall we?

First PT quoted JB. The point of contention was:




Pensacola Tiger said:


> Blue Super- Blue super is blue #1 with even more carbon, chromium, and tungsten added to it. Its the best of the hitachi carbon steels with regard to edge retention and ability to hold an acute angle




Then Razor says:



Razor said:


> Jon does not state that Aogami > White 1 at holding acute angles.



Then I said:



ThEoRy said:


> I don't know what part you read or didn't read but Jon said exactly that.
> 
> "Blue Super- Blue super is blue #1 with even more carbon, chromium, and tungsten added to it. Its the best of the hitachi carbon steels with regard to edge retention and ability to hold an acute angle (due to the higher carbon/hardness and added elements)."



Then you said.



Chef Doom said:


> BLAH BLAH BLAH I'M USING CAPS LOCK



Now you've continued with:



Chef Doom said:


> He did not mention holding an acute angle.



But if you've been following along with my simple recap you will see that you and razor were wrong about what Jon said. Which was, " Its the best of the hitachi carbon steels with regard to edge retention and ability to hold an acute angle"


So are you not reading that part or just not comprehending it?

That was the only point I tried to clarify. I wasn't weighing and measuring the pros and cons of Aogami vs Shirogami or anything. I simply clarified the fact that Jon did in fact say what he said. That's it. Then I added to the discussion in what I felt was a meaningful way where I addressed the OP question by weighing the 3 white steels against each other amongst other contributions to the op like the Murray Carter video.

Your contribution to this thread has been nothing but Christian preachers, bibles and whores.

Take the L.


----------



## scott.livesey (Nov 25, 2017)

Drosophil said:


> Getting back to carbon loss, are inert gas kilns feasible for knife HT? Or are they just too expensive and/or PITA to maintain? I think they're used for heat treating turbine blades, so that spells hyper-expensive to me.



for at home use or small volume makers, an inert gas or vacuum furnace is both expensive and a PITA. most commercial heat treat companies use these and/or salt baths for heat treat. they also have liquid nitrogen baths for cooling after initial quench. if one is doing stock removal of high carbon steel(white, yellow, 1095, 52100, O1) the blade is at temperature(about 1500*F/800*C) during heat treat for only a few minutes and carbon loss in very low. when forging, the blade is heated to 1800*F/1000*C repeatedly until the smith is happy with the shape. that is why there appears to be sub-grades of Hitachi steels that have slightly higher levels of carbon. 
that said, if one made two knives, one of white and one of 52100, heat treated and tempered them to the same hardness, ground them to the same angle, sharpened them on the same stone, the average user would need thousands of cuts to even tell that two different steels were used. for futher reading http://www.cliffstamp.com/knives/reviews/blade_testing.html


----------



## Razor (Nov 25, 2017)

Jon's conclusion ends the debate on what he said. The confusion comes in his use of two words, "hold and take" . Yes, he says Blue Super can hold the most acute angle, but White #1 can "take" the most acute angle and of the White Steels #1 can hold this acute angle the best.

White Steel (White 3, white 2, white #1)- This steel is even more pure than yellow steel (which is relatively pure). Once again, the lower the number, the higher the carbon content, so white #1 has the most carbon and white #3 has the least. The higher carbon (and hardness) leads to white #1 having the best edge retention of the white steels and also the best ability to hold an acute angle. White #3 has the best toughness.

Blue Steel (Blue #2 and Blue #1... i'll talk about blue super later)- Blue steel is white steel with chromium and tungsten added to it. Blue #2 has the same amount of carbon as white #2 but has the added elements. Same for blue #1 and white #1. The added elements lead to better corrosion resistance and edge retention (as well as deeper hardening). This also comes at the cost of being more difficult to sharpen and not taking quite as keen of an edge. Blue steel also tends to be more brittle (ever so slight).

Blue Super- Blue super is blue #1 with even more carbon, chromium, and tungsten added to it. Its the best of the hitachi carbon steels with regard to edge retention and ability to hold an acute angle (due to the higher carbon/hardness and added elements). This comes at the cost of being more difficult to sharpen,* not getting quite as sharp*, and being the most brittle of the bunch.

So in conclusion, *the white steels take the best edge*, (#1 holding the most acute angle and #3 being the toughest), *while the blue steels hold the best edge (Blue super being the best at this* while Blue #2 and #1 have the better toughness.


----------



## JBroida (Nov 25, 2017)

yes... that


----------



## malexthekid (Nov 25, 2017)

Sorry... but umm I'm a tad confused... as far as I am aware basically any steel (making some room for giant carbides) can take any edge angle you put on it acute or obtuse... holding that angle is the key...

Perhaps you are referring to (and I'm a tad out of my depth here so let someone else correct my errors) but whit being quite a pure carbon steel has such small carbides that it takes a much more refined apex... getting that screaming sharp sensation we love.


----------



## Kippington (Nov 25, 2017)

That's the thing... as we try to get sharper and sharper, we're zooming into an ever smaller area. Carbides which might otherwise be beneficial to begin with start to look a hell of a lot larger, starting to get in the way as we strive ever closer to the 'perfect edge'.

In other words, if you decide to chase a _highly_ refined, smooth edge, you may have to compromise on your choice of steel and sacrifice some of the desirable properties that carbides might offer.
As with all things in knives, there's a balancing act we need to achieve if we want to reach a practical end product.



JayGee said:


> Dang - I'm in Melbourne - I need this! I got one of the martell 300 suji blanks - I'm out of my depth!!!


PM sent!


----------



## scott.livesey (Nov 25, 2017)

Razor said:


> So in conclusion, *the white steels take the best edge*, (#1 holding the most acute angle and #3 being the toughest), *while the blue steels hold the best edge (Blue super being the best at this* while Blue #2 and #1 have the better toughness.[/COLOR]



except you can't test your conclusion as you cannot buy Hitachi blade steel in the US to make test mules with. there is no way currently to make a blade of white and a blade of 52100 that are identical in every possible way and do a double blind performance test.


----------



## Kippington (Nov 25, 2017)

Haha! Scott, you took Razor's post way out of context!
He's comparing Hitachi whites and blues to each other, he's not comparing them to every other steel in existence! :biggrin:


----------



## milkbaby (Nov 26, 2017)

What Kip said, plus you CAN buy Hitachi steels in the USA. I know because I have from Maker Material Supply. You can also buy overseas from Dictum or Workshop Heaven if you don't like the billet sizes from MMS.


----------



## milkbaby (Nov 26, 2017)

Double post


----------



## K813zra (Nov 26, 2017)

milkbaby said:


> What Kip said, plus you CAN buy Hitachi steels in the USA. I know because I have from Maker Material Supply. You can also buy overseas from Dictum or Workshop Heaven if you don't like the billet sizes from MMS.



Um... you are going to start making us blades out of Hitachi steel for Christmas?


----------



## scott.livesey (Nov 26, 2017)

K813zra said:


> Um... you are going to start making us blades out of Hitachi steel for Christmas?



doubtful. maker material supply store on eBay shows zero items. a listing came up for some San Mai, 5/32" is a little thick for a kitchen knife, don't know anything about the maker. NJ Steel Baron had some Blue several years ago, but been unable to import any steel from Hitachi. Alpha Knife Supply tells the same story. small quantities of 1.2519 are still available, its chemical makeup is similar to Blue #2. it appears that Hitachi makes small quantities of Aogami and Shirogami steel and has most of it sold before it is even made.(seems to be standard Japanese business practice, Toyota and Honda don't start assembling a car until it is sold) since these steels seem to have almost mythical properties, Hitachi can sell them for whatever price it wants. since the steel is very difficult to obtain, the chance of a double blind test of Aogami vs. Shirogami is doubtful.


----------



## K813zra (Nov 26, 2017)

scott.livesey said:


> doubtful. maker material supply store on eBay shows zero items. a listing came up for some San Mai, 5/32" is a little thick for a kitchen knife, don't know anything about the maker. NJ Steel Baron had some Blue several years ago, but been unable to import any steel from Hitachi. Alpha Knife Supply tells the same story. small quantities of 1.2519 are still available, its chemical makeup is similar to Blue #2. it appears that Hitachi makes small quantities of Aogami and Shirogami steel and has most of it sold before it is even made.(seems to be standard Japanese business practice, Toyota and Honda don't start assembling a car until it is sold) since these steels seem to have almost mythical properties, Hitachi can sell them for whatever price it wants. since the steel is very difficult to obtain, the chance of a double blind test of Aogami vs. Shirogami is doubtful.



Was more of a tease because I like his work...

That aside, dictum seems to have both Aogami and Shirogami in stock at the moment as well as some SG-2 and others.


----------



## Chef Doom (Nov 26, 2017)

Kippington said:


> That's the thing... as we try to get sharper and sharper, we're zooming into an ever smaller area. Carbides which might otherwise be beneficial to begin with start to look a hell of a lot larger, starting to get in the way as we strive ever closer to the 'perfect edge'.
> 
> In other words, if you decide to chase a _highly_ refined, smooth edge, you may have to compromise on your choice of steel and sacrifice some of the desirable properties that carbides might offer.
> As with all things in knives, there's a balancing act we need to achieve if we want to reach a practical end product.



How dare you post the summarization of my argument! Are you spying on me? Do you have secret keylogging on my PC? Are you a secret Google agent?


----------



## Chef Doom (Nov 26, 2017)

This thread is now dead to me.


----------



## labor of love (Nov 26, 2017)

Its been dead for some time now. Honestly, the premise was pretty silly.


----------



## labor of love (Nov 26, 2017)

Its been dead for some time now. Honestly, the premise was pretty silly.


----------

