1996 Buck Factory Expermint

There is no conspiracy here. The knives are exactly what the cert says they are. Your cert is real. The knives are real. They have been for sale on ebay for a decade already. Sorry you havent seen them. :D
I had three of them about 8 years ago, I would guess. 2 of mine cracked and I contacted Joe about it. IF I would have sent them in, Buck would have warrantied it, but it was only replacement with a current 119. They would not and could not repair the "experimental" as the tooling was gone, and it would possibly crack again anyway.

They were sold to BCCI members if I recall correctly, but no they were not sold off to stores and then etched etc for resale.

FYI, if you meet Chuck or CJ, they will sign any knife you want and they date it when signed. Chuck doesn't only sign current year knives with that date.
Someone had your 1996 factory experimental signed by Chuck in 2003 Mitch. ;)

Here is the earliest thread I can find about these knives. Using the search feature.

http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/s...y-Experimental-1-of-625?p=1547479#post1547479

They were and still are a great collectors item (especially if uncracked) :D , and a huge part of Buck history. Enjoy it Mitch, shes a beauty!


Another FYI, just because they made 625 of them doesnt mean Buck sold them all in 1996. When Buck sells off old stock or buildouts, they come in new boxes with newer sheaths. They don't have a warehouse full of old boxes too. ;)
 
Last edited:
Mine came in a 2002 100th anniversary sheath and the box is of the same vintage so I would have to say 2002. As for taking a picture of the COA, I'm Ohio and headed back to Florida and can take a picture then. I will say that it seems that everytime the process part is listed on Ebay, these knives show up.
 
So, again Who signed my COA because I have Chuck Bucks autograph and have seen it on others knives and the signature on my COA AIN'T Chuck Bucks. Did he have his secretary sign these or what...
 
mbjannusch said:
So, again Who signed my COA because I have Chuck Bucks autograph and have seen it on others knives and the signature on my COA AIN'T Chuck Bucks. Did he have his secretary sign these or what...
Click to expand...


mbjannusch said:
Click to expand...


DSCN0712.jpg



I honestly don't understand why you think your cert is not signed by Chuck? I have had and have seen quite a few over the years, and I am no handwriting expert but it looks like mine do. The paper is correct also for the time period.
Your pic is on top. The pic of my cert is from the Chuck Buck signature series 405. Looks pretty close for being signed a few thousand certs and 6 years later. ;)

(Look at how the "C" starts. The peak on the "h", and look at the "a" they are almost identical....)

For the record, signing a cert (flat piece of paper) with a pen, and signing a sharp knife blade with a pneumatic rotary file (engraver) are 2 different things.
 
Last edited:
I have an actual ink signature (from 2-27-00) on my "Story of Buck Knives" book and it doesn't look anything like the sig on that COA.

Not even close.

It looks like the COA is signed "Charles" and I never see that from Chuck.......he always signed "Chuck."
 
Just my .02 and I am not a handwriting expert myself, but I do not see the word, "BUCK" in the signature. Sometimes people do drag the surname if you will- I even do, but it does not say BUCK-and people usually enlarge the first intitials "C" and "B" in this case for Mr. C. Buck. It is this way on the blade itself re: sig, but the letter is 100% different and no defining "B". I also thought the sig was always "Chuck" also-as is the case of the knife itself. I kinda agree with MB. A stupid question albeit, but most COA's also have some sort of raised seal no?? Think notary public type raised seal and most COA's whether its a blade or a signed Peyton Manning football. Wouldn't Buck use some sort of "STAMP" within their COA's? Basic photo shop skills and a quality scanner could reproduce those COA's in 15 mins. What you cannot duplicate easily is a raised stamp. It can be done also, but you would need to find an old school stamp maker to reproduce- and that would cost you 75-150 bucks alone, and ol school stamp makers are a dieing breed ( I am not talking staples address stamps either). The signature just does not look right IMHO on the letters. Sorry to mettle gents-just my .02 from an unbiased person. I could be wrong though. And the knife is obviously the real thing. GL guys and thx for posting this interesting thread.
 
I may as well throw this into the mix.

001-5.jpg


Maybe the simple explanation is that Chuck never had time to sign all those COAs and stuff they wanted him to and somebody else signed most of it with his approval.
 
I didn't see this book signed, BTW......I'm not the "Great Man" mentioned.

But I am sure it's an authentic signature.

Faking the sigs on the Buck books doesn't make them more valuable.

Chuck has signed anything not moving for forty years, so his signature is not rare.
 
BG42EDGE said:
I didn't see this book signed, BTW......I'm not the "Great Man" mentioned.

But I am sure it's an authentic signature.

Faking the sigs on the Buck books doesn't make them more valuable.

Chuck has signed anything not moving for forty years, so his signature is not rare.
Click to expand...

With that said, look at the "C" and the h in your signature of the book. Really close. Another thing, how does your signature look after you sign 1,000 certs. :D

Faking the sig. on cert doesnt make them more valuable either. ;)

I sign my name 2 different ways also, just because I normally use Jim, doesn't mean I don't sign James occassionally.


Cr33, they don't use raised stamps or anything on their certs. Alot of the knives now just come with a card. The integrity of the certs has never been challenged until now. ;)

There are a ton of Autograph Authentication Experts in CA. I think we need to look one of them up. :D
 
Last edited:
I honestly don't believe Chuck or any busy executive signs thousands of documents like COAs.

They have helpers to do that.

You'll see their real signatures on essential legal documents and personal notes in books, etc.

The fact that people make fake COAs and knives really has nothing to do with Chuck Buck, so don't start making accusations that people are questioning his integrity.

Chuck will probably get a laugh out of all the discussion of his signatures.

:)
 
I aggree that exec. don't have time to sign 1000s of COA but. isn't that the purpose of a COA. that it be authentic. I dont know why someone would sign there name two different ways either. I sign my name 100s of times a day and although it may get sloppy at the end of the day, I still sign it the same way, MB Jannusch. I never write Matthew B. Jannusch, just because my hand doesn't hurt yet.
 
I see it as authentic as long as Chuck stands behind the COA and signing is done with his approval and authority.

People who RUN organizations don't have time to do busywork like signing thousands of COAs and such stuff.

And I wonder about this:

...what it seems like is , that Buck stamped Factory Experiment on a hand full of left overs and sold them as collector pieces at an inflated price tag, maybe to recoup some of the money lost on an idea that went SOUTH. I hope that isn't the case, because that would piss me off.
Click to expand...

You sure? When I consider it carefully, that doesn't bother me.

The knives belong to Buck.

They are legitimately collectible and have intrinsic value that will probably rise.

So I don't see a problem. Selling them is just a smart business decision.

Also, if some WERE sold to the public (contradicting the COA) well, stuff like that happens all the time at Buck--we find out about leftover 118 blades that Joe supposedly said were scrapped or this or that conflicting information all the time--much, it seems, happens that people don't hear about.

And some things that supposedly happened didn't happen at all......it was rumor that evolved into legend and then evolved into common knowledge and then evolved into fact (ersatz fact).

That's why I keep harping on history......you need to keep tabs on it or floats to the four winds and vanishes forever and all you're left with is.........old rumors and legends.....and maybe myth.

Interesting thread, though.

:)
 
mbjannusch said:
So, this "experiment " was happening several years before the so call "claimed" 1996 experiment, stated on the COA. In addition it seems that from what Mitch is saying is that several of these went out to the public, got returned because they split and were replaced with regular 119s. The COA says these never hit the public. So, which is it. I have talked to others who are in the know, about this knife and they said that they have seen them for auction and the sellers didn't even know that was what they had... I don't know, but what it seems like is , that Buck stamped Factory Experiment on a hand full of left overs and sold them as collector pieces at an inflated price tag, maybe to recoupe some of the money lost on an idea that went SOUTH. I hope that isnt the case, because that would piss me off.
Click to expand...

While I certainly do not know any of the "history" behind these knives, no where on the COA do I see any "claim" that they were a "1996 experment". True enough, the letterhead of the COA is dated 1996, BUT that does not mean that the knives in question were made in 1996. As Joe has stated, they were worked on for several years so that would make a 1995 date stamp on the knife itself perfectly legitimate for a 1996 COA. When Buck realized these knives were not going to cut it (pun intended) in the real world, they mostly likely did take their inventory, stamp them as factory experimental so buyers were aware of what they were, and sold them. I, for one, am pleased that they did as it allowed collectors the opportunity to obtain a fairly rare knife at a reasonable price.
 
Mitch W. said:
Let me rephrase what I said. I was told they were sold to BCCI members. In that regard, yes they did go to the public. Now could you go down to Bubbas Booze and Blade Emporium and buy one? No, in that regard they were not sold to the public. They were made while in San Diego and when it came time to pack everything up for the move to Idaho, someone found them sitting on a shelf and Chuck decided to make them available to club members. Yours and mine are the only 2 I've seen available. Unless I see a butt load of them show up suddenly, I still think I got a hard to find BUCK 119.
Click to expand...

Well, here's mine. No COA, no blade etch, or number. Just a regular 119 with clearly visible evidence of why they didn't go into production. And mine's dated 1994 as well.
 
Sure it was a smart business decision, on the backs of the customers that revier there product. Most "collectors want items that are collectable, such as a knife that didnt quite work out so the idea was scrapped. But it wasn't thought out very well if you ask me. This hole thread is for arguement sake so dont think I give it a second thought. I just think they could have executed this better. These knives are all over the board with date stamps and I know that some of these got out to the public. To stamp 1996 Factory Experiment on the knife and have a COA written up is misleading. The "experiment" wasnt in '96, there were more than 625 of these made and the whole purpose of a COA is to substantiate the claims made by the company, and that cant even be proved because the signature is bogus, and until someone from the Buck family says "yes that is Chucks signature" it will remain bogus in my mind. I wouldn't even try to sell it at this point because I wouldn't jip someone out of $100 and tell them the signature is real. I have a signature where Chuck signs his name Charles T. Buck and it doesn't look like the signature on my COA. You make the call, I no hand writing expert but you have to blind to not see the differences.

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Uploaded with ImageShack.us
 
Well looking at them side by side( over and under) I can see some similarities. The Ch looks right but the rest is a miss and unreadable.
 
I don't think you have to be concerned about selling the knife at all.

It couldn't be a fake. It's so unique (and limited in appeal) that nobody would bother to fake it (it would just be too much work for the limited reward).

The signature is either Chuck's or done by staff with his approval and authority, so the company will call it Chuck's signature, obviously. Nothing wrong or embarrassing about it (well, if they admit that a key guy like Chuck wastes hours at his desk signing his name over and over again--yeah, that's a little embarassing).

And yes, as usual, a few oddball knives were unaccounted for, got out and are turning up here and there. That's going to happen in a big operation like Buck. Situation Normal.

I'd say relax, but I guess that's all up to you.

:)
 
Last edited:
I'm not gonna fret because there are some that aren't etched. When I was researching the knife I asked Leroy about it and he said the one he has is not etched and cracked. It is distinctly possible that some were given to employees and MAY be the ones that aren't etched. I would not be surprised if some of the employees sold their knives.
 
Last edited:
Mitch W. said:
I'm not gonna fret because there are some that aren't etched. When I was researching the knife I asked Leroy about it and he seals the one he has is not etched and cracked. It is distinctly possible that some were given to employees and MAY be the ones that aren't etched. I would not be surprised if some of the employees sold their knives.
Click to expand...
Mine came from San Diego and based on the other knives the guy had, I'd be very surprised if he wasn't an employee. I'd also be surprised if there 600 of these floating around out there, as I've seen a total of about five. I bought mine for what it is: an interesting piece of Buck history and a rare knife. I didn't need a certificate or blade etch to tell me what I had bought. One look at the knife tells you what it is and anyone can look up the history.
 
Yeah.....this is one knife that is self-explanatory on its face.

No COA needed.....it really couldn't be anything except what it is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top