Buck 301 on the way

M

matt

Joined
Oct 24, 1998
Messages
413
I'm a fan of larger slipjoints and found a good deal on a 301. Is it similar to a case 6375 pattern in size and width? I haven't bought a buck knife in a while and thought I'd give it a try.
 
matt said:
I'm a fan of larger slipjoints and found a good deal on a 301. Is it similar to a case 6375 pattern in size and width? I haven't bought a buck knife in a while and thought I'd give it a try.
Click to expand...

I think you'll love the 301. I never fail to carry one or the other version of it on an everyday basis. The 301 is smaller than the 6375 however. The 6375 is the same size as the discontinued Buck model 307. Here's a quick and not so great picture of the three to show the sizes, 301 top, 6375 then the 307.

Case301307.jpg
 
Last edited:
Hi Matt,

I have not been much of a slipjoint fan for many years. However, as PBD said you will like the 301, someone by the name of Dave here on this site sent me a pair of Buck slipjoints awhile ago and they seem to have multiplied on their own;).

Here is a nice 301 that I just got in the mail.
IMG_3741.jpg

IMG_3743.jpg


jb4570
 
Thanks for the picture,it looks like a really good size for edc.does anyone know how long buck has used the black scales with the hammer sheld.
 
matt said:
Thanks for the picture,it looks like a really good size for edc.does anyone know how long buck has used the black scales with the hammer sheld.
Click to expand...

At least back to the 1970's Camillus made ones. Don't know about the original Schrade models. I know they were black scaled, but I do not know about the shield. I've never had one of those.
 
I've been vacillating between the Buck 301 Stockman and the Buck 303 Cadet. Can't make up my mind as of yet. Decisions decisions. . .
 
I know a lot of people feel that the larger slip joints are uncomfortable to carry,usually the 4 inch range, but I have carried trappers and large stockmen for years and never felt over burdened. I always carry a peanut in my watch pocket as well.I thought I remembered the black handled bucks from when I was a kid,(1970's). I like the new yellow handled ones and the wood as well but the basic black seems right for a user.
 
Matt.

Heres some some quick and limited info. First the early black sawcut scales were Delrin, the in the late 90s they became Valox. The new models have black scales moulded to the liners and bolsters. with stubs of the scale material inserted thru holes in the liners and then melted and flatened against the inside surface of the liner to form a thin plastic 'rivet' head. Black scales have been offered from the beginning of the series, the knife, bolt and hammer shield was dropped (brieflly) in 86 for the BUCK shield, but the K,B+H made its comeback in late 89 and is still found on the sawcut black version.

There is lots of info on this forum. Do a search for 301 info and you will have plenty of reading and info.

Here is a recent thread to show you the above description.
http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showthread.php/970048-silly-Buck-301-pin-question #2

Here is one to get your blood flowing.
http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showthread.php/851252-Favorite-300?highlight=301

300Bucks
 
Last edited:
The left side and the first on the bottom of this case are all Schrade contract knives. From there they are Camillus contracted on up until you get to the newer knives at the top. So in '66 when it all started they were Black with the knife, hammer, bolt shield.



Uploaded with ImageShack.us
 
Jack, Thanks for the nice photos. Notice the top knife utilizes 2 spacer/lock bar. Whereas, the Buck model has 3, one for each blade. Thus, the sheepsfoot blade is not canted to fit the well. DM
 
BFE,
I support your thoughts on handling a yellow Delrin Buck Stockman. Finish is usually top notch for this price range of knife.
300Bucks

Yellow301frnt.jpg
 
a question to stockman owners (any brand): is the middle blade, the one sandwiched between two spring ends, usually prone to hangups? i've had two. one has no noticeable problem with the middle blade but the other one does. i suppose the problem is absent for two-spring knives since both blades move against the brass/nickel liner, providing a smoother action.
 
Hank, I understand your question, but a moderator might say it goes in a different forum.

But, let me quickly answer you. As everyone can see, lots of 3 blade stockman designs, had or have brass liners, two back springs and three blades (clip, spey and sheepsfoot). The two smaller or secondary blades are 'crinked' or bent near the tang so they will fit in the blade well in the space provided by one spring and maybe a brass center liner. Usually the clip has its own spring. Sometimes this design works well and sometimes it gets a little out of whack and will rub someplace or another.

Buck changed their in house made stockman (and two blade) 300 series folders in the early 90's to a spring for every blade versions. Some Camillus contract versions continued with the old style till they were dropped.

So hopefully, with a post 90 Buck stockman the three springs and three blades are giving 'rub-free' service. If not, something is out of alignment. ......... 300Bucks

Both of these are Buck stockmen just different eras. You will sometimes see a stockman design with one spring larger than the other to get more room. But all of Bucks post 90 Stockmen will be found with a spring per blade and no crinking.
BB301e.jpg


For any seeking knowledge of what is 'crinking', here is a photo of a early Buck stockman with crinked secondary blades.
CrinkedA.jpg


On the left, is photo of the 'one spring wider' design, the larger clip blade gets this spring and the two secondary blades make due with leaning over into the slightly larger blade well. The brass center liner is cut out to the shape of the spring to make extra room. The one the right is the first version three spring which had brass liners. They did this a couple of years in the late 80's.
30323springs.jpg
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top