Buck 110 with G10 and S30V

pinnah said:
(...)
Has Buck changed the grind on the 110? All of the Bucks I've owned have had the same basic grind (not counting the thickness near the edge) with pretty pronounced shoulders. I've thinned a few pretty dramatically, including a 112 with a 442 blade and found them better "slicers" through things like apples and potatoes after they were thinned but still nothing compared to a proper flat grind. I know you find flat grinds prone to suction problems though.

One place I find hollow grinds better is with flesh. Better for meat, imo.
(...)
Click to expand...

Sorry if my description was confusing; might be slanted by my own perception of it, if not technically accurate. Here's how I've viewed it:

Buck's grind on the 110/112 has varied somewhat through the years (since the '70s, anyway). But to my eye, it's always been essentially something like a 'high hollow grind' with a little bit of 'sabre grind' nearer to the spine (about 1/4" wide, above the hollow in the grind). The old 'hollow' in the '70s-vintage blades seemed to be of a smaller radius in the central portion of the blade, leaving a somewhat thicker portion of steel behind the cutting edge, and the flat portion near the spine. The newer blades, maybe mid-80s and later, seem to have a more gradual, thinning taper in the hollow below the 'flat', all the way to the cutting edge; more like most of us would expect to see in a true 'hollow grind' with a very thin slicing edge.

My inclusion of the 'sabre' description of the grind comes from differentiating it from a full-height hollow grind, as is often seen on many of Case's current line, for example. The hollow on their grind extends essentially all the way to the spine of the blade, with little/no 'flat' portion between the hollow and the spine.


David
 
I love the size and shape of the 110 blade. The handle is heavy, the blade is low spec'd, no thumb stud, and no pocket clip. These are all solvable problems. Take a Titanium frame, add a premium blade, add a thumb stud, and add a pocket clip. All problems solved.View attachment 390610
 
"All problems solved." Not really. It's still heavy. It's also still got that same grind, some like it, but not all. It's still too thick for easy pocket or waistband carry, that's why it comes with a sheath.
 
Au contraire, the Titanium, the Aluminum, and the Valox knives are lighter than the standard 110's. In the picture, #1 weighs 120gm. #2 weighs 106gm. #4 weighs 111gm. The standard 110 weighs 210gm. Knife #1 is only 3/8" thick. Knife #3 is 7/16" thick. #2 is 5/8" thick. The standard 110 is 39/64" thick ((1/64" shy of 5/8").
All the pictured knives are modified to accept assorted blades. Any of them will take any of the Selector blades (11 varieties). I can put any angle I want on my bevels, and I can recontour blades to suit my requirements (for me this usually means converting a drop point into a clip point). I don't do a lot of skinning.
 
Tiguy, I don't skin but still prefer the drop point.

While I don't care for the looks of the hollowed out scales, I think this and the selector idea we'd some what in the right direction for Buck. I think one of Bucks mistakes has been giving all these different variants different model numbers. A drop point 110 should be a 110dp and not some new number. And while I don't like the idea of the selector per se, having 110s and 112s with a wide range of frame and blade options makes a lot more sense than sticking with one frame and one blade with different scale options. A real failure to extend the icon and brand.
 
Skeleton handled, thumb studded, pocket clipped knives definitely do not belong in this TRADITIONAL sub forum. Please cease and desist. You can take the discussion to the Buck sub forum.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top