Vanguard, dang you. After getting my (used but new to me) Buck 500 for Christmas this year, I had pretty much talked myself into believing that I don't need a 112 in my pile.
Then you post yours. Dang you. It will only be a matter of time before I get one...
112's are great. I know this will anger the 110 Gods, but I could never understand, how they haven't become more popular than the 110's... YMMV
The first time I held a 112, I knew it was probably the most comfortable knife I've ever had in hand.
I think it's an accident of history. I don't think the 110 was ever designed to be an EDC knife, but my sense is that it's pretty much impossible to underestimate the impact of it was in terms of what we now consider to be acceptable for EDCs.
My sense is that prior the 110, hunting knifes meant fixed blades and pocket knifes (in the US) meant slip joints. The 110 legitimized the locking folder for the hunting crowd but I believe it was always meant to be either belt carried or, if pocketed, pocketed in a jacket. That design then became the huge hit that it did first in the hunting crowd and then in the trades (and biker gangs) and was widely copied - all before shorter bladed locking folders became common.
I think it's instructive to see the impact of the 110 when viewed from the reflection off of the Schrade line of knives. In 1970, Schrade had no locking folders. The closest was the 25OT folding bowie that had 2 blades, was about the size of the 110 but didn't lock. By 1975, Schrade had the 125OT Mustang locking hunter, which like the 25OT, was about the same size as the 110. There were no other locking knives in the line yet. (I believe the 112 debuted in 1972?) By 1980, Schrade had several locking folders with blades starting to get shorter. There was the 7OT (3 1/2" blade), 51OT (3 1/2" blade), 194OT (3 1/8" blade) and 18OT (2 1/2" blade).
Of these, I think the 194OT and 18OT are the most important. These were really traditional slip joint pocket knives that had gotten the liner lock treatment. The reason I think they're important to understanding the place of the Buck 112 is that I think they demonstrate that by 1980, the pendulum of locking folders was in the process of swinging from large belt carried designs (the Buck 110 and Schrade 125OT Mustang) to light pocket knives. And, imo, it was this pendulum swing that created the back drop for the introduction of the pocket clipped Spyderco in 1981.
In this light, I think the Buck 112 (and other smaller folding "hunters" like the Schrade LB7) were sort of transitional knives. They were smaller than traditional hunting knives but bigger and heavier than traditional pocket knives. Sort of an in-between design.
This isn't a criticism, btw. I like the basic size and don't care for pocket clipped knives like modern tacticals. But, a 3" blade is too short for heavy hunting/woods use so I can see how a 110 is more popular there. And the thick heavy bolsters of the 112 are, well, thick and heavy for EDC pocket carry for most folks. Sitflyer has been making some slimline 112s and I think he's really onto something with them. I know that there's no comparing carrying a 110/112 and my slimmer 500. My ideal would be the drop point of the 500 blade combined with the frame profile of the 112FG but thinned like Sitflyer's 112s.
