119 or 124 which one do you like better and why?

I think the 119 is more of a classic. That may be due to the fact that they are a reasonably sized hunting knife and sold in Walmarts and sporting goods stores across the country. I have had a 119 for decades. I bought it at Walmart for about $30 back in '99. Road around in my jeep until a buddy tried to use it and snapped the tip off. I just kinda left it sitting and forgot about it. After my grandfather died, I found that he had somehow gotten a hold of it and reground the tip down. Its now about 1/2 shorter with a fatter tip, but I still keep it in my home toolbox. Something to remember my grandpa by.
 
I like the 124 better but have (2) 119s. I bought myself a 119 many years ago and it has been used, abused and poorly sharpened as only I could have. It's been on hunting and camping trips with so many memories that even though i now have much better knives the 119, especially my old scratched up one is the most "Special" to me.

If I had it to do all over again I would go with the 124; but I don't and love my 119 and it's newly acquired back-up 119.
 
124 hands down. It’s my favorite Buck sheath knife. It’s a big knife that carries like a smaller knife. It also comes with a much nicer sheath.
 
124 is the better looking of the two but...
I've owned both but the 119 remains being easier to carry and more comfortable to handle and operate.
The 124 gets a little clumsy doing fine work where I find the 119 shines.
And I've never found a job that "really" needs the extra real estate and expense of the 124.
 
Henry Beige said:
124. I don’t like the turned up tip of the 119. But the 119 is inexpensive, ubiquitous and iconic. Thats why I have a 119 and not a 124.
Click to expand...

^^^^This. 124's are much more expensive, and much harder to find.
 
They are both classics cannot fault either,theyve been around a long time; I saw a post on a bushcraft forum that some dork said the 119 was completely useless for every kind of outdoor task and it was only good for stabbing someone; that's the kind of misinformation that I hate seeing on the internet.
 
goldie said:
They are both classics cannot fault either,theyve been around a long time; I saw a post on a bushcraft forum that some dork said the 119 was completely useless for every kind of outdoor task and it was only good for stabbing someone; that's the kind of misinformation that I hate seeing on the internet.
Click to expand...
Isn’t that crazy? I’d say what in the world did Vietnam’s veterans use? Many either the buck 119 or a Ka-Bar
 
That Les Stroud used a 119 in an episode of survivorman here is the idiot and what he posted;

Ajax13
Scout
Joined
Dec 29, 2013
Not a fan of Bowie-style knives like that. The blade is too long and cumbersome for field-dressing, skinning and butchering and too thick for slicing. The guard gets in the way for carving and makes a proper deep sheath impossible. The ricasso moves the edge too far away from your hand for fine work. The finger grooves guide you to hold it like a hammer, which is how a knife should hardly ever actually be held.

So, unwieldy for game processing, carving, food prep, spreading peanut butter, etc. They were designed for stabbing people, and that’s about all they’re really good for.
 
I own neither but have handled both. I prefer the 124. I have a big hand and find the 124 handle much more comfortable.
 
Jared Leland said:
Isn’t that crazy? I’d say what in the world did Vietnam’s veterans use? Many either the buck 119 or a Ka-Bar
Click to expand...
I had a Randall but most of my friends who carried Bucks in Vietnam carried the 120. YMMV since most were USAF remfs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top