-
The BladeForums.com 2024 Traditional Knife is ready to order! See this thread for details: https://www.bladeforums.com/threads/bladeforums-2024-traditional-knife.2003187/
Price is$300$250 ea (shipped within CONUS). If you live outside the US, I will contact you after your order for extra shipping charges.
Order here: https://www.bladeforums.com/help/2024-traditional/ - Order as many as you like, we have plenty.
110 transition from forged to sintered
- Thread starter junom
- Start date
Does this help? I found it on the forum, Joe gives 1972-1974 for Variation 3; 2) George Stinzel gives 1974; and Bill Keys says that the sintered brass frame started in early 1975. The first sintered brass knives had a "Buck/110/USA" stamp and a lockbar the same length as for the 5th Version Variation 3; the early knives of this type used adhesive on the scales, but after mid-1975 Buck quit using adhesive to hold the scales.
5th Version 3rd Variation was first produced in 1974, perhaps in late 1973, and that it was replaced by the sintered frame knives in early 1975. Maybe we should think of the first sintered frames as Transition knives between the 5th Version and the Two-Dots. I can't see the Two-Dots occurring before late 1975 or early 1976.
5th Version 3rd Variation was first produced in 1974, perhaps in late 1973, and that it was replaced by the sintered frame knives in early 1975. Maybe we should think of the first sintered frames as Transition knives between the 5th Version and the Two-Dots. I can't see the Two-Dots occurring before late 1975 or early 1976.
David Martin
Moderator
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2008
- Messages
- 19,520
George Stinzel is well read on the subject of 110's. I've sat in on his lectures. The other two are Buck employees. With over 25yrs. each. These are no light weights of Buck knowledge like me. DM
I also looked in Tom Ables book but found nothing about sintered frames VS forged an the change over. Though I did get a big laugh! out of how the 700 series was suppose to be the main stay an they were going discontinue the 300'S. LOL it reminded me of the movie 300.
I found the links George an some of the thread/discussion. It may lead you to more links. Sorry about the CUT & PASTE job...LOL
http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showthread.php/904918-1st-Older-Buck-110-need-help
I don't see many of these ver 5 var 3. sintered with epoxy gap filler, this must be soon after Buck went to sintering, I read that the sintered frame didn't need epoxy, also Joe Houser told me that the epoxy was a gap filler, until then I was under the understanding that epoxy was needed on the forged frame to help keep the inlays on.The forged frame var3 is for comparison.The light inlat 110 is the forged knife.
there's more epoxy on the sintered knife I put a forged one up for compairison, I was told the epoxy wasn't needed after late 1974 when Buck stopped forging their frames, I guess a few were done with epoxy.
Thanks
Joe's data sheet is what I always go by. I usually try to hit the middle grounds on the older knives because there is lap-over on years, but I always refer to this model as a 1973 5th/3rd." - Stumps
I'm not trying to start an argument, especially since dates for the early 110s are in a murky area. My guess of dates is based on a couple of things: 1) Joe gives 1972-1974 for Variation 3; 2) George Stinzel gives 1974; and Bill Keys says that the sintered brass frame started in early 1975. The first sintered brass knives had a "Buck/110/USA" stamp and a lockbar the same length as for the 5th Version Variation 3; the early knives of this type used adhesive on the scales, but after mid-1975 Buck quit using adhesive to hold the scales. (I have one of each.)
Considering all of the above, I'm inclined to believe that the 5th Version 3rd Variation was first produced in 1974, perhaps in late 1973, and that it was replaced by the sintered frame knives in early 1975. Maybe we should think of the first sintered frames as Transition knives between the 5th Version and the Two-Dots. I can't see the Two-Dots occurring before late 1975 or early 1976.
I'm willing to change my mind if someone has some good information to the contrary. This is what makes collecting the early 110s fun. The main point might be that we shouldn't be too categorical in assigning dates.
Bert
I'm in favor of Bert's last sentence. 1)Bill Keys has stated the 2dots began in 75 w/ the first having 4 handle pins. I've seen one of these. 2) George Stinzel stated in his presenation at the 20yr. Reunion, the 2 dots ran from 76-80 (well into 80). 3) Larry O. says the use of the blade bushing came w/ the two dots in 1974. So, the author you read will determine your stance. We should lighten up on this era. The 3 dots we're more sure about. This information does affect dating Van's model some. DM
We know that his knife falls into the '72-'74 period for sure. If what you quote is true, it may have been into '75 but we know for sure it could have been from '72-'74. If the published data can't be used, it should be revised or deleted. JMO
book on page 152, with another respectable reference, Paul Bos, one familiar to Buck officionados:
http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/s...C-does-hold-an-edge?highlight=Sintered+Frames
http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showthread.php/127414-420HC-does-hold-an-edge
"THE EFFECT OF HARDNESS ON EDGE-HOLDING ABILITY -- One of the tests that I did early on, with the help of Paul Bos, was to determine the effect on edgeholding as the hardness changed. Paul is a professional heat-treater and was interested in helping in these tests. We ran test batches of D-5, 154CM, and 440C, giving half the blades their normal working hardness, the other half were drawn back two points on the Rockwell C scale. The blades drawn back two points would cut 15% to 20% less, which surprised both of us. Later when comparing a blade with a hardness of 54 HRC to a blade of 60 HRC, I found the percentage loss held up. The steel that did 40 rope cuts at 60 HRC would do 30 cuts at 58 HRC, 20 cuts at 56 HRC, 10 cuts at 54 HRC, and at a hardness of 52 HRC, would hardly cut the rope one time."
"All test blades are prepared having a width of 1", a thickness of 1/8" and a length of 3-3/4". All blades are flat-ground to 0.20" at edge. Sharpening is done on Norton Fine India Stone, the wire edge (burr) being worked off with the stone. This gives a hair-shaving, long-lasting edge that has what I refer to as micro teeth. Slicing custs are made on a single strand of a 1" rope (a 3-strand 1" rope has 3 fat strands of say 3/8" each). Care is taken to use an equal section of blade from one knife to the other. The edge will bite into the rope strand when freshly sharpened, but as slicing continues there comes a point when the edge no longer is biting into the fibers, and this is when clicing is stopped and the number of cuts is recorded. The edge loses its ability to shave hair at about the same time as it loses its bite into the rope. Each blade is tested at least 3 times and the results are averaged."
I have no interest in debating hardness vs. edge holding here. The only SS type blade materials that come close to even minorly deviating from the above general test results are Stellite/Talonite (Cobalt/Chromium matrix of Rc 42-48, but loaded with Tungsten & Molybdenum carbides, both of which are in Rc 72-77 range) and some of the supersaturated CPM stuff (CPM440V and 420V)... the CPM's slicing longer than they should at softer hardness, and Talonite/Stellite testing soft because of the Rockwell tester's technique of pushing into the soft matrix and not registering the carbides, all the while Talonite/Stellite having tremendous abrasion resistance (related to slicing ability in fibrous/abrasive materials).
~~~~~~~~~~~~
On the subject of corrosion resistance, what typically improves it is free chrome. If the chrome is bound up with carbon as carbides, it does not seem to contribute to corrosion resistance. This is not a very clear relationship to me yet. E.g. CPM420V has 14% chrome but 9% vanadium and beats CPM440V in corrosion tests with 17% chrome and 5.5% vanadium. In this case, it's assumed that the extra vanadium in 420V binds with carbon leaving more chrome free.
However, I will say that after consulting another reference, the Crucible Tool Steel & Specialty Alloy Selector, I will graciously recant my early statement that 440C should beat 420HC in terms of corrosion resistance. According to Crucible, they even give 154CM/ATS-34 somewhat better corrosion resistance marks than 440C. This doesn't align with my own experiences (I have found light rust on my ATS-34 blades occasionally, whereas 440C I have not, but this isn't a controlled test either). I think most people in industry will say 440C has higher corrosion resistance than 154CM, but not Crucible. They also indicate that a "420Prem" that is fairly close to 420HC beats both 440C and 154CM in corrosion resistance. Sorry for the mis-information on this point. 420HC may well very more corrosion resistant than 440C.
I think what you can say is that most of the stainless steels that have more than 13% chrome (D2 runs 11-12% and will rust) are nearly always plenty corrosion resistant for anything most of us normally use blades for. Exceptions would be uncared-for salt-water fish fillet knives or dive knives.
I believe that this Buck forum has probably had an overdose of my input, so I will move on now, hoping I didn't ruffle too many feathers. Ciao.
[This message has been edited by rdangerer (edited 02-19-2001).]
http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showthread.php/904918-1st-Older-Buck-110-need-help
I don't see many of these ver 5 var 3. sintered with epoxy gap filler, this must be soon after Buck went to sintering, I read that the sintered frame didn't need epoxy, also Joe Houser told me that the epoxy was a gap filler, until then I was under the understanding that epoxy was needed on the forged frame to help keep the inlays on.The forged frame var3 is for comparison.The light inlat 110 is the forged knife.
there's more epoxy on the sintered knife I put a forged one up for compairison, I was told the epoxy wasn't needed after late 1974 when Buck stopped forging their frames, I guess a few were done with epoxy.
Thanks
Joe's data sheet is what I always go by. I usually try to hit the middle grounds on the older knives because there is lap-over on years, but I always refer to this model as a 1973 5th/3rd." - Stumps
I'm not trying to start an argument, especially since dates for the early 110s are in a murky area. My guess of dates is based on a couple of things: 1) Joe gives 1972-1974 for Variation 3; 2) George Stinzel gives 1974; and Bill Keys says that the sintered brass frame started in early 1975. The first sintered brass knives had a "Buck/110/USA" stamp and a lockbar the same length as for the 5th Version Variation 3; the early knives of this type used adhesive on the scales, but after mid-1975 Buck quit using adhesive to hold the scales. (I have one of each.)
Considering all of the above, I'm inclined to believe that the 5th Version 3rd Variation was first produced in 1974, perhaps in late 1973, and that it was replaced by the sintered frame knives in early 1975. Maybe we should think of the first sintered frames as Transition knives between the 5th Version and the Two-Dots. I can't see the Two-Dots occurring before late 1975 or early 1976.
I'm willing to change my mind if someone has some good information to the contrary. This is what makes collecting the early 110s fun. The main point might be that we shouldn't be too categorical in assigning dates.
Bert
I'm in favor of Bert's last sentence. 1)Bill Keys has stated the 2dots began in 75 w/ the first having 4 handle pins. I've seen one of these. 2) George Stinzel stated in his presenation at the 20yr. Reunion, the 2 dots ran from 76-80 (well into 80). 3) Larry O. says the use of the blade bushing came w/ the two dots in 1974. So, the author you read will determine your stance. We should lighten up on this era. The 3 dots we're more sure about. This information does affect dating Van's model some. DM
We know that his knife falls into the '72-'74 period for sure. If what you quote is true, it may have been into '75 but we know for sure it could have been from '72-'74. If the published data can't be used, it should be revised or deleted. JMO
book on page 152, with another respectable reference, Paul Bos, one familiar to Buck officionados:
http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/s...C-does-hold-an-edge?highlight=Sintered+Frames
http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showthread.php/127414-420HC-does-hold-an-edge
"THE EFFECT OF HARDNESS ON EDGE-HOLDING ABILITY -- One of the tests that I did early on, with the help of Paul Bos, was to determine the effect on edgeholding as the hardness changed. Paul is a professional heat-treater and was interested in helping in these tests. We ran test batches of D-5, 154CM, and 440C, giving half the blades their normal working hardness, the other half were drawn back two points on the Rockwell C scale. The blades drawn back two points would cut 15% to 20% less, which surprised both of us. Later when comparing a blade with a hardness of 54 HRC to a blade of 60 HRC, I found the percentage loss held up. The steel that did 40 rope cuts at 60 HRC would do 30 cuts at 58 HRC, 20 cuts at 56 HRC, 10 cuts at 54 HRC, and at a hardness of 52 HRC, would hardly cut the rope one time."
"All test blades are prepared having a width of 1", a thickness of 1/8" and a length of 3-3/4". All blades are flat-ground to 0.20" at edge. Sharpening is done on Norton Fine India Stone, the wire edge (burr) being worked off with the stone. This gives a hair-shaving, long-lasting edge that has what I refer to as micro teeth. Slicing custs are made on a single strand of a 1" rope (a 3-strand 1" rope has 3 fat strands of say 3/8" each). Care is taken to use an equal section of blade from one knife to the other. The edge will bite into the rope strand when freshly sharpened, but as slicing continues there comes a point when the edge no longer is biting into the fibers, and this is when clicing is stopped and the number of cuts is recorded. The edge loses its ability to shave hair at about the same time as it loses its bite into the rope. Each blade is tested at least 3 times and the results are averaged."
I have no interest in debating hardness vs. edge holding here. The only SS type blade materials that come close to even minorly deviating from the above general test results are Stellite/Talonite (Cobalt/Chromium matrix of Rc 42-48, but loaded with Tungsten & Molybdenum carbides, both of which are in Rc 72-77 range) and some of the supersaturated CPM stuff (CPM440V and 420V)... the CPM's slicing longer than they should at softer hardness, and Talonite/Stellite testing soft because of the Rockwell tester's technique of pushing into the soft matrix and not registering the carbides, all the while Talonite/Stellite having tremendous abrasion resistance (related to slicing ability in fibrous/abrasive materials).
~~~~~~~~~~~~
On the subject of corrosion resistance, what typically improves it is free chrome. If the chrome is bound up with carbon as carbides, it does not seem to contribute to corrosion resistance. This is not a very clear relationship to me yet. E.g. CPM420V has 14% chrome but 9% vanadium and beats CPM440V in corrosion tests with 17% chrome and 5.5% vanadium. In this case, it's assumed that the extra vanadium in 420V binds with carbon leaving more chrome free.
However, I will say that after consulting another reference, the Crucible Tool Steel & Specialty Alloy Selector, I will graciously recant my early statement that 440C should beat 420HC in terms of corrosion resistance. According to Crucible, they even give 154CM/ATS-34 somewhat better corrosion resistance marks than 440C. This doesn't align with my own experiences (I have found light rust on my ATS-34 blades occasionally, whereas 440C I have not, but this isn't a controlled test either). I think most people in industry will say 440C has higher corrosion resistance than 154CM, but not Crucible. They also indicate that a "420Prem" that is fairly close to 420HC beats both 440C and 154CM in corrosion resistance. Sorry for the mis-information on this point. 420HC may well very more corrosion resistant than 440C.
I think what you can say is that most of the stainless steels that have more than 13% chrome (D2 runs 11-12% and will rust) are nearly always plenty corrosion resistant for anything most of us normally use blades for. Exceptions would be uncared-for salt-water fish fillet knives or dive knives.
I believe that this Buck forum has probably had an overdose of my input, so I will move on now, hoping I didn't ruffle too many feathers. Ciao.
[This message has been edited by rdangerer (edited 02-19-2001).]
