Buck 110 Pro lock update?

D

DocT

Joined
Mar 25, 2012
Messages
5,437
In my other thread I mentioned I had read a review that said the lock on the Pro had been slightly updated. I found that review. If was from Chuck Hawkes and he said:

"The back lock has also been subtly improved. It works the same way from a user perspective, but the shape/angle of the engagement surfaces has been modified. The locking mechanism is extremely strong and virtually impossible to force."
https://www.chuckhawks.com/buck_110_pro.html

Is this true? Would someone from Buck comment or someone who has certain knowledge of this?

Thanks
 
Strange. I've never managed to get the 110's lock to fail.
Reading his review, lock failure must be what he means by "forcing the lock".
Come to that, I've never heard of the lock failing when using a 110 for its designed purposes. I think I might have heard of one guy complaining the lock failed on his 110 when he was batoning it. But since that is severe knife abuse, I consider that incident "operator stupidity", not the result of a defective knife or design.

Unless the lawyers worried about liability are involved, that ancient prehistoric adage
"If It Ain't Broke, Don't Fix It!"
comes to mind.
 
Maybe Jeff knows. I can't any reference to any changes. I can't imagine this particular model would be different. But maybe so
 
interesting sure woud like to hear Mr. Hubbards comments on it.
 
afishhunter said:
Strange. I've never managed to get the 110's lock to fail.
Reading his review, lock failure must be what he means by "forcing the lock".
Come to that, I've never heard of the lock failing when using a 110 for its designed purposes. I think I might have heard of one guy complaining the lock failed on his 110 when he was batoning it. But since that is severe knife abuse, I consider that incident "operator stupidity", not the result of a defective knife or design.

Unless the lawyers worried about liability are involved, that ancient prehistoric adage
"If It Ain't Broke, Don't Fix It!"
comes to mind.
Click to expand...

I had one fail, once. My fault. I was using it to cut the skull cap on a Buck, deer, trying to get the rack. Of course, I was using extreme pressure trying to achieve this, got a glove to protect my fingers and finished the job. Then went and bought another 110...
 
That doesn't sound right, and I don't trust reviews / information from those who feel the need to test lock strength in a folder.
 
No idea what Chuck Hawks is referring to.

Just to add that lock failure is about more than accidental closure.

The other issue is wear and tear from hard cutting forces. The basic lock back design typically has a bit of angle on the interface between the blade and the front of the lock bar. Hard cutting forces can cause the lock bar to lift. This can be felt by holding your thumb on the top of the joint under very heavy cutting. Most lock backs from pretty much every maker will do this. It's just a matter of the design.

Still, some are much worse than others. Glassner at Syoderco claims that kickbacks shouldn't be made from stamped steel like 420HC because a) the stamping causes small deformity at the edge of the part and b) fine grained steel is too maleable even after hardening. Combined, this leads to what we call "lock rock".

Cold Steel eliminates this problem by addiing a stop pin to stop the opening movement of the blade. It's s good design.

All of this assumes that the pivot sssembly has no slop. Every Bucklite Max and Spitfire/Slimline that I've tried get sloppy very fast.

i should also note that lock rock can produce an accidental closure in a sling shot type event like cutting through a branch. The hard cutting force can lift the lock bar and when the blade cuts thorough the branch, the inertia can cause the blade to snap closed before the lifted lock bar can return to location. Many people have reported this kind of closure.

I stick to Bucks traditional designs like the 110 and 500 but I don't push them as hard as other folders I have.
 
Sorry Pinnah, but I respectfully disagree...

It's simple geometry, really. The pivot pin is ahead of the lock bar. Any forced pressure on the cutting edge wouldn't raise the lock bar if the pivot was sloppy, it would do exactly the opposite and the lock bar would fall below the bolster, not rise above it.
Additionally; the blade stops rotating when it meets the lock-bar. At the same time, the lock bar engages the notch in the blade.
Really, there's not a whole lot that can go wrong with this design. If you have a 110 that is experiencing this, it should be repaired or replaced.
I've used and abused dozens of different 110s and have had dozens of them apart. From some of the oldest to some of the newest, I've not witnessed enough erosion of the parts on any of them to cause a serious failure.
I'm going out on a limb and guessing that 100% of the blades are harder than 100% of the lock bars. When that's the case, the blade could (and should) wear the face and locking tab on the lock-bar. Is this erosion enough to measure and effect the locking mechanism? Perhaps on a knife that is opened and closed a lot, but for these parts to deform from hard use; I ain't buyin' it.

2376C267-FA60-450B-9FCB-15C5EA061AB5.JPG
 
The spitfire has been fixed. Saw and held it. Tight now
 
MT_Pokt said:
Sorry Pinnah, but I respectfully disagree...

It's simple geometry, really. The pivot pin is ahead of the lock bar. Any forced pressure on the cutting edge wouldn't raise the lock bar if the pivot was sloppy, it would do exactly the opposite and the lock bar would fall below the bolster, not rise above it.
Additionally; the blade stops rotating when it meets the lock-bar. At the same time, the lock bar engages the notch in the blade.
Really, there's not a whole lot that can go wrong with this design. If you have a 110 that is experiencing this, it should be repaired or replaced.
I've used and abused dozens of different 110s and have had dozens of them apart. From some of the oldest to some of the newest, I've not witnessed enough erosion of the parts on any of them to cause a serious failure.
I'm going out on a limb and guessing that 100% of the blades are harder than 100% of the lock bars. When that's the case, the blade could (and should) wear the face and locking tab on the lock-bar. Is this erosion enough to measure and effect the locking mechanism? Perhaps on a knife that is opened and closed a lot, but for these parts to deform from hard use; I ain't buyin' it.

View attachment 908082
Click to expand...
Agreed
 
Before the Cold Steel marketing blitz on lock safety/integrity, I never even really considered lock safety because I've simply never experienced it before (for any knife). People can come up with interesting "what-if" scenarios ("what if you are in a knife fight and the guy hits the back of the blade", "what if you are [cutting in this precise and improbably scenario]"), and I'm sure people have had lock failures before, but I see this as a non-issue the people at Cold Steel are making into an issue purely from a marketing perspective. But hey, who wouldn't want a safer locking mechanism? And I can't blame those guys for making a big deal about a superior function on their products... but it's still not going to get me to buy their stuff.
 
Darkera said:
Before the Cold Steel marketing blitz on lock safety/integrity, I never even really considered lock safety because I've simply never experienced it before (for any knife). People can come up with interesting "what-if" scenarios ("what if you are in a knife fight and the guy hits the back of the blade", "what if you are [cutting in this precise and improbably scenario]"), and I'm sure people have had lock failures before, but I see this as a non-issue the people at Cold Steel are making into an issue purely from a marketing perspective. But hey, who wouldn't want a safer locking mechanism? And I can't blame those guys for making a big deal about a superior function on their products... but it's still not going to get me to buy their stuff.
Click to expand...

Maybe they're making a big deal out of is because they have nothing else to brag about...

Pinnah, if the 110 locking devise is so defective why is it the Highest selling knife in the country? I don't think it would have been in production for 53 years with a major locking defect? When I made one fail I was going way above and beyond what it was meant for, if I remember right I was even using a rock as a hammer to pound the knife thru the skull...

Darkera, If you ever go to stab something and you hit directly on a bone and your knife has a bad lock on it you'll understand. You'll have plenty of time to reflect while they're stitching your fingers up or even sewing them back on.
 
I carried my 482 Bucklite max every single day for 2 years straight and it's not sloppy or unsafe now.
I don't do stupid things with my knife and have no need to worry about it closing on me.
 
MT_Pokt said:
I'm going out on a limb and guessing that 100% of the blades are harder than 100% of the lock bars. When that's the case, the blade could (and should) wear the face and locking tab on the lock-bar. Is this erosion enough to measure and effect the locking mechanism? Perhaps on a knife that is opened and closed a lot, but for these parts to deform from hard use; I ain't buyin' it.
Click to expand...

And I would assume that is the reason that you sometimes see the blade of very early 110's, usually first and second versions, canted slightly upwards when opened?
 
Hawks never said that he abused a knife or had a knife lock failure. He said the new lock is even better and there is no way to force it to fail (if someone should try).

Locks do fail. Some locks are less prone to this and the back lock is at the top of reliable locks, though some people have lost fingers when a lock did fail. On some brands, the blade will slip past the lock bar as they are not engaged properly. I have known of a guy who had a Buck fail, and many with lesser brands. With Buck this is uncommon. With liner and frame locks it is far more common. If they have tweaked the lock somewhat, that is a good thing. Spyderco, long known for making strong back locks improved their geometry and the result is phenomenal.

Lock rock can cause failure if someone is doing something stupid with a folding knife. I have cut saplings down by slicing (not batoning!) with my 110's and never had an issue with the lock, nor the pivot (which is taking a lot of strain doing this).
 
Blade HQ did some lock strength tests and even measured the force. The back lock is king. However, I note that they are not going with the cutting direction, but against the lock.

In their tests, the only back locks to fail were as a result of the lock bar breaking or the pivot area of the blade. The lock itself did not fail and this was long after other locks had given up the ghost.
 
^tri-ad is the king so far from what ive seen. scorpion and axis/ball bearing does well and spydercos power lock all beat the lockback. the lockback done right is no slouch though.....

same can be said for a proper made liner lock. the real issue is many arent done right.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top