2 questions about Bucks

Richard Matheny said:
I would put the date on that knife from 1982 thru 1985. The sides of the frame are coined not engraved. This is the same process used on coins, thus the name. Not many were made with polished blades. Some knives were made with a polished banner in the early years but they may have scratched too easily so they apear to have gone to the satin banner to get away from that problem.
Click to expand...

Richard, Are you speaking of just Plumber's 4 dot model or something else about the 111 ? DM
 
Plumber's 4 dot.

Coining is a stamping process. The 111 Classic frame was stamped. In the context I used the term I was not refering to a finish.
 
Richard, Thanks on the coining . I was able to find Vern Taylor's article "A Classic Story"
in the May 1996 newsletter so now I'm up to specks on it . A good read .
What caught my attention was your sentence about the 4 dots being mfg. from 82-85 .
Does this apply to the 4 dot 110's ? I had suspected 1982 on their first appearance . But was reluctant to state the rest . Yet, it sure fits . DM
 
It is my understanding that 4 dot tang stamps were used on the 110, 111 & 112 in that time period (1982 - 1985). However, as we all know, the only thing for certain on Buck knives is that everything is subject to revision. Hope that helps.
 
By the way, coining (the stamping process) works on materials that are not as ductile as soft aluminum. For example, samples of most or all the Classics were made in brass which is a lot harder (less ductile) than aluminum. I have a brass 111 that looks just like the aluminum version but gold in color.
 
Buck_110 said:
Weren't four dot stamps employed from 1981 through 1985(425M).
1980 was the only year for the three dot(440C).
Click to expand...

Yeah, I was puzzled by what David and Richard said, too.

So, Dave and Rich......if 81 was not a stamped with four dots......what stamp WAS used on the 1981 110?

(?)
 
BG42EDGE said:
Yeah, I was puzzled by what David and Richard said, too.

So, Dave and Rich......if 81 was not a stamped with four dots......what stamp WAS used on the 1981 110?

(?)
Click to expand...

The current data sheet on BF stops at 1980? It used to go to 1986 and the year date stamps.

My old data sheet shows it exactly as Buck_110 said it.

I will not quote the version/variation numbers from my data sheet as each data sheet has changes on the ver/vari information and will only confuse the new folks.

1980, 440C, left hand stamped BUCK, *110**, U.S.A.

1981, 425 modified, (1), left hand stamp BUCK, **110**, U.S.A.
1982-1983, 425 modified, (2), left hand stamp BUCK, **110**, U.S.A.. same as (1) above except handles have been radiused edges but no radius in the thumb depression area. (finger grooved model introduced)
1983-1985, 425 modified, (3), left hand stamp BUCK, **110**, U.S.A.. same as (2) above except handles have full radius edges.
jb4570
 
Last edited:
Thanks, JB......that's what I thought (except I only have that in my head).

Be nice if Joe made a few quick additions to the sticky.......and also put back the 112 information that used to be available. At least I think I remember separate 112 info available.

:)
 
BG42EDGE said:
Thanks, JB......that's what I thought (except I only have that in my head).

Be nice if Joe made a few quick additions to the sticky.......and also put back the 112 information that used to be available. At least I think I remember separate 112 info available.

:)
Click to expand...

The Data sheet is still on the BCCI web site under 112.
jb4570
 
I have mostly thought 1981 was a transition year with both the 3 and 4 dots occupying some of that year . George Stenzel in his presentation on the 110/112 at the 20yr. reunion matches somethings Richard says . So, this causes me to wonder . I don't think those dates are carved in stone . Excuse the detour on this thread . DM
 
David Martin said:
I have mostly thought 1981 was a transition year with both the 3 and 4 dots occupying some of that year . George Stenzel in his presentation on the 110/112 at the 20yr. reunion matches somethings Richard says . So, this causes me to wonder . I don't think those dates are carved in stone . Excuse the detour on this thread . DM
Click to expand...

Dave,

Those of us who have been around for a while Know that Buck has always been very poor at record keeping. It also stands to reason that their inventory and storage of stock would follow suit (these guys has months worth of in-process knives sitting around in various stages of completion).

I have no doubt that on any given year knives were made with what ever components were on hand. No first in first out inventory control, no need as these parts would not expire. It was their knife making process at that time and they had huge amounts of inventory waiting to be completed.

That said these dates are for reference. I'm sure when 1981 hit and the switch to 425 was in-process, Buck did not toss out the 440C blades or any other components that were in various stages of manufacture.
jb4570
 
Can you tell the difference between the 80-81 440C and 425M blades by the shape of the blade?

Are there 440C blades stamped with four dots?

Pardon if these are dumb questions, but if it's ever been discussed before, I can't find it.

:)
 
I qualified my statement because the exact date of transition is not known but the transition is generally considered to be complete in 1982. The engineering change may well have gone through in 1981 per Joe's data but as indicated above the inventory of three dots were probably not clear until 1982.

Dave, I know stamping can be performed on hard materials but coining as a stamping process is reserved for more ductile materials although not dead soft as you originally indicated. Thus the brass example. Stamping as a process includes blanking, lancing, drawing, coining, etc.
 
Buck_110 said:
The 425M blades are .120" thick, as are all blades from 1981 forward.
The 440C blades are .115" thick; except for the 1st Version, which are .085" thick.
Click to expand...

Thanks, I never knew that.....or if I did, it passed quickly through my brain and vanished into the sunset.

:)

I'm going to try to pose this issue somehow for a new thread.

:thumbup:
 
Richard wrote:

I qualified my statement because the exact date of transition is not known but the transition is generally considered to be complete in 1982. The engineering change may well have gone through in 1981 per Joe's data but as indicated above the inventory of three dots were probably not clear until 1982.
Click to expand...

By that do you mean they were clear at the beginning of 82 or the end?

At what part of the process are the dots stamped?

Question being, would all 440C blades have (at most) three dots?

OR......would some 440C blades have been stamped later and have four dots?

Is it possible that any 425M blades could have been stamped with three dots?

I suppose all of this depends on whether or not it is known at exactly what part of the process those dots are stamped?

As in, for example, if there would be 440C blades sitting around unstamped in 1981 or 82?

Are there any workers left around who would know this? Or even make a guess?
 
BG42EDGE said:
Can you tell the difference between the 80-81 440C and 425M blades by the shape of the blade?
I don't think one can tell by the blade shape . Other means yield better accuracy .

Are there 440C blades stamped with four dots?
If there was ever a definate stamping change occur at Buck and why, it was this one and most everbody knew it . (Going from 3 dots to 4) But there is a remote chance of this happening . It would be an isolated incident . Even then its doubtful any one would know or very few . To verify the metal requires a good piece of the blade causing destruction . Ouch !

Pardon if these are dumb questions, but if it's ever been discussed before, I can't find it.

:)
Click to expand...
BG, There is never a dumb question on here . DM
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top