Buck 301 Replacement Saga Continues

D

Doug S

Joined
Feb 1, 2006
Messages
605
Months ago I wrote about sending my new Buck 301 in for repair/replacement because of blade wobble. Buck replaced my 301 with a new one, but also contained in the package I received back from Buck was an older vintage (1970's model I think) 301. When I posted about it here, a number of people indicated that Buck probably made a mistake and returned someone's keepsake knife to me. Even CJ Buck commented in that thread. It was suggested that I return the knife to Buck with an explanation so that the original owner could get his knife back. Well, I did so, and it's been long enough that I had forgotten about the whole thing...that was until yesterday. When I checked the mail after work I was surprised to find a box from Buck. In the box was another brand new Buck 301, along with the same older model Buck 301 that I had sent back.:confused: Well, I finally got a Buck 301 without side to side blade wobble, but I'm not sure what to do about the old 301. I'm starting to think Buck really wants me to have this knife.;)
 
Last edited:
So you sent in one, and got a total of three back???

I wish Nissan had done that when I took my Xterra in for warranty work...
 
I'll try to get some pictures up a little later today.

So you sent in one, and got a total of three back???
Click to expand...

Yeah, a pretty good return, isn't it.

Maybe I'll send it in again, and see what happens.:o
 
Last edited:
Bear,

Yeah I wear the badge proudly,,,,,but I was going to see if he had a knife of value and should actually feel ahead.........300
 
Here are some photos of the old 301. Sorry about the background. I didn't feel like looking for a background, so I just took the pictures of the knife on a book I'm reading. You can see the "well used" condition of the knife in the photos. The scales have been worn mostly smooth. The blades have been heavily sharpened. In the last photo you can see where the backspring of the knife is broken, and coming apart.

OldBuck3010031.jpg


OldBuck3010041.jpg


OldBuck3010021.jpg


OldBuck3010011.jpg
 
Last edited:
OK, Glance at my Avatar.....

Your old beat up 301 is a 2nd Version 301, Schrade made, one of two versions (the most commonly seen one). Other version does not have Buck on secondary blades. Knife is used a bit, spey is sharpened a time or two. It is likely 440C blades. If blades are tight and spring is good it would be a good user. If blades wobble or break, knife is not reasonably repairable(Anything is repairable if you got enough cash)due to hidden pivot pins. Does it make it more desireable to know it is a 1967-71 era 301, probably 39 + years young...........................could be someones long time companion, or not. You've tried to give it back the court would rule in your favor.

Here's my best guess, because these older knives are unrepairable, a new knife and the one you send in are automatically returned to you. Someone keeps thinking you are sending in the old Schrade for repair and just sends you a new one and the old back to maintain the Buck warranty.....I see the posibility of a scheme. Anyone with old Schrade versions could send them in and get a new knife and the old one returned. I think I have half a dozen old 300's laying around here somewhere.....ha

300Bucks
 
Last edited:
Thanks 300 Bucks, I appreciate the 301 history lesson. Neat to think that the knife has been around, and obviously well liked, and well used. I wouldn't mind sending it back again, but I'm not sure that it would accomplish anything (except maybe a repeat of what happened last time). The blades still have a lot of snap to them, but the knife is coming apart in the area of the backspring (left side of last photo). I may keep it and just add it to my "Man Cave" slipjoint display.

I do wonder if the person who returned this old 301 got a new replacement. I figure they did, but someone at Buck accidently slipped the old one into my return package.
 
Last edited:
This is the end view of a Schrade contract 300 ground off to the "blind" pivot pin level. It would look like your knife either has has had the pin break and shift or pin hole wear out and shift pin to a 'jamed' angle; or part of the blade where it contacts the spring is broken. If blade were broken then I would expect in might fall out. Notice how high the clip blade sticks up in the half open position. Normally tang printing is just barely above the liners. Center brass liner appears shifted also. In the highest of tech descriptions - 'It's broke'

This is a good representation of why Buck switched to Camillus contract and exposed pivot pins.....It is not reasonably repairable as you state and your solution as a item of historic nature seems reasonable to the court. Photos below for more than you really wanted to know about this..........300


DSCF11212.jpg


Exploded view, clip blade end ground off.
Explodedview.jpg


Some of same version, notice how high clip sets in normal position when half open. then compare to your first photo.
DSCF0401_edited-1.jpg
 
Last edited:
Doug S said:
I do wonder if the person who returned this old 301 got a new replacement. I figure they did, but someone at Buck accidently slipped the old one into my return package.
Click to expand...

However, as I recall the original post, the knife was sent to you in error and was identified as a "keepsake", meaning that the original owner requested it be returned if it could not be repaired. And CJ also chimed in, requesting that it be returned as well. The problem is that there seems to be a bit (or maybe more than a bit) of confusion at Buck at the moment and a lot appears to be falling through the cracks; hope that gets straightened out in the near future. I know that this is taking money out of your pocket to return it once again, but the bottom line here is that the original knife may have a great deal of sentimental attachment to the owner. I would return it with "attention" to either C.J. Buck or Joe Houser on the package, and I would bet it will have a reasonable chance of getting processed correctly this time.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top