305 differences

Scott Hartman

Scott Hartman

Joined
Oct 28, 2005
Messages
2,606
I'm sure there's not too much discussion in the world of 305s, but 300Bucks had asked me a question about a 305 I pictured in the SPS thread. I may have unkowingly stated my knife is 1st contract Camillus, but after Craigs question, about where the handles meet the bolsters, I got my lope out for a closer look. The inlays are a tight fit against the bolster. There was a discussion that a gap may denote a Schrade made knife.
Then I got out what I thought was an identical 305 from 1 of my displays. It turns out the 305 in the SPS thread is very similiar to a Schrade contract knife....there are no visible pins in the bolsters(and I tried to make them visible w/ the breath test). The secondary blade has a much bigger cut-out in the frame & handle, as well as a bigger deeper nail nic. You guys that have older 305s, get them out and have a look...and feel free to post pics. We may be able to help Craig gather some more of his 300 info.

The lower knife may be a Schrade made
305s001.jpg


305s002.jpg


Top knife visible bolster pins
001bolsterpin-1.jpg


Lower knife, no pins vsible w/ lope(or breath test)
002nobolsterpin-1.jpg
 
I have several that the pivit pin is not visible but they all fits into the existing 300 list. I have looked over several of them and the nail nik varies in width and depth. I dont believe Schrade ever made a 305, or anything similar in their own line of knives. So, if Schrade never made a knife in their own line of knives than they most likely didnt make one for Buck. The tooling would have to be there and it wasn't.
 
Pull out your Schrade contracted knives 303/301, and look at them again. In my opinion they look way different than the Camillus contracted knives.
 
Howdy,

Scotts NIB 305 and my recent reading of Vern Taylor in the old Aug. 99 BCCI newsletter prompted this discussion. Vern was speculating without any written documents that Schrade made a 305 that had undercut edges on the bolster scale meeting joint. Well, all my 305 have the reverse, the bolster slopes out at the bottom where it meets the liner. Remember - Schrade 300s are made with hidden bolster pins. (Not visible on surface of bolster)

I have always said that Schrade never made the 305 only Camillus. Matt makes a good point on no similar version ever made by Schrade. Camillus has a near lookalike on most Buck 300s. Anyhow for you 300 interested people a discussion point that may have been settled in the past but doesn't hurt to check once in a while.

Here are my 6 oldest 305s. Knife four and six are not narrower in width, they are slightly turned on their axis and the light makes them seem smaller. If I had a almost Schrade it would be 4th from left. In all of mine the bolster pins are visible. I would end this particular post with this...as far as the Schrade 305 deal goes, at present I have never seen one, but always looking for the unexplainable. Scott will check his out somemore.. ...I bet. Sometimes the pins on the old knives are really well polished and really hard to see.

Scott, take a hair dryer to the bolster to heat it up then breath breath on it......????

300Bucks

305.jpg
 
Last edited:
300, I see varying nail nics on your secondary blades, and that was a hand operation process back then. What about the size and depths of the frame notch to access the blade in the closed position on your 6 305s?

305s002deepnotch.jpg
 
The nail notches were only on the first and second Camillus made models with the larger notch first and smaller notch on the second.
 
Let me catch anyone confused up to speed.
Schrade contracted the first Buck folders. They were made in the 301 and 303 stockman mode. Some discussion on the two blade 305 model has occurred in the past. The general consensus (99%) feel that Schrade never made the 305. No paperwork to that either way has ever surfaced. Schrade did not make a 309, only Camillus.

With Scott Hartman showing us a really nice NIB 305 in the Sunday Picture Show, I asked him to carefully check it out, and he feels he has used all avaliable methods in his knowledge to look for bolster pins and he can't see any. Schrade used a hidden bolster pin method to construct some knives at that time and the 301 and 303 were made that way. They also suffered that way with the weakness of that system to make repairs difficult to impossible. That is why Buck changed contractors.

Current topic. As Scott and Matt have stated there are factors you look for in checking this question out. Number one is - Are the blade pins in the bolster visible. All other factors wane in this one factor. Scott feels he has made a good attempt at seeing them and cannot. If anyone knows a non-destructive method to see them please let Scott know about it. Matt also brought up a good point that Schrade had other designs equal to the 301 and 303 but at that time not the 305. This business all occurred back in the late 60's, you remember everything from back then ?

We slipped into discussing other factors and differences in the early 305s and that brings us to the current point.

This statement by Vern Taylor (Buck rep and one of the founders of BCCI) in the Nov. 1999 BCCI Newsletter, is one of the things that prompts me to continue this investigation at a low level. (Go to BCCI Website to read all the old newsletters)

AUG991-6.jpg


Scott had asked me about the secondary blade nail nic cutout being any indicator of Schrade manufacture and here is a photo showing the differences of the early 305s I have. In all of these the BOLSTER HINGE PINS ARE VISIBLE.

The one on the left has no secondary nic cutout, the next two have very tiny nic cutouts and the three on the right larger nic cuts. I feel confident that the large nic cut came first and then the small nic. The no nic is still in question. All in photo are called Camillus contract because the bolster pins show. The reduction of the nic and eventually dropping it may have been a cost saving move.
A305.jpg


At this point and in conclusion, until we can prove the hidden pin bolster in a 305, the Schrade 305 may well be a ghost.

To some of you big knife, non collectors folks this seems a trival discussion, but tit for tat as sometimes I get frustrated with all your 110 dot talk also......HA

300Bucks
 
Last edited:
Just another destinctive characteristic of Schrade made knives was the swedge grind on the top of the blade. All 305s have a short grind which is a distinct characteristic of a Camillus made knife.
 
Ok, In going through the 305s I have I found another strange model. I think I may have spoken to Craig about this in the past. I have a 305 with one back spring, brass spacer, no handle pins, long nail nik, SS rocker/ spring pin, blade stamp BUCK MADE IN USA, and no visible bolster pins( I used a jewelers loupe). This doesnt fit in any of the current information. If anybody has any in-put, please speak up.
 
Last edited:
That sounds like the first Camillus model without scale pins.

BUT, I think we are at a point where we should be asking everyone , do you have a technique to make highly polished bolsters show their scale pins. If there was a never fail method it would sure be nice for everyone to know.....

If I had two with all the characteristics described by Mr. Taylor, I would gladly 'disect' one for photos and history. But I don't even have one with undercut bolsters, much less swedge's on top over the clip blade nic.

300
 
Last edited:
Normally I would say "Oh Yah" but this one doesnt have the model # on the pile side. All others have inlay pins or model #s, this has neither. I found louping to be the best way to see the bolster pins.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top