Buck 500 Duke question

Agreed. When looking at a 'Block' stamped model, thats where the blade steel change, or handles, or sanded frames began. Some of these first even had the dot. DM
 
Thanks Haebbie.

In looking at the few 500's that I have, I also noticed an evolution of the blade profile. On a stag handled script stamped knife, the blade is a symmetrical shaped "spear" point.

On another script stamp 500 with the laminated wood scales, the profile is close to spear shaped but with a bit less drop than on the stag one.

Then on a 500 from the set (in 2011) with linen micarta and BCCI stamp and S30V steel, it is a drop point with the same profile as a "build out" with white bone scales from 2010. Those two blades are also a bit shorter?

Based on what has been stated, the bolsters on the 2010 and 2011 models must be N/S, but they all look like the same metal visually.

Interesting.

Peter
 
Yes, the blade shape/ profile changes a little thru the years. My English script stamped models don't have near the belly as these more recent models Peter names. I like the shape of those from the Heritage Series
and though the frame looks stainless a magnet doesn't respond to it but does to the blade. My blade on that model is 3.125". ? DM
 
peterinct said:
Thanks Haebbie.
Click to expand...

You're welcome :).


New and old together. It is not a good photo for comparison,
but I hope it helps.

Haebbie

Buck500sechs.jpg
 
I attempted to show the older to newer differences in the 500's. The stag and wood have the "script" stamp, the white bone is a buildout from 2010, and the micarta is from the "Heritage" set from 2011.

IMG_0469_zps1c1ad940.jpg


IMG_0471_zpsa3be39cb.jpg


Peter
 
FYI,
The side are made of 316 SS not nickel silver. This model did not transition to Nickel silver like the others did when we redesigned the line. The 501, 503 and 505 are nickel silver, the model 500 is 316. It looks like we are publishing the wrong specs. I have a call into the supplier to verify they are using stainless. Once I verify, I'll send a note to our marketing dept to correct future publications.


Jeff
 
J Hubbard said:
FYI,
The side are made of 316 SS not nickel silver. This model did not transition to Nickel silver like the others did when we redesigned the line. The 501, 503 and 505 are nickel silver, the model 500 is 316. It looks like we are publishing the wrong specs. I have a call into the supplier to verify they are using stainless. Once I verify, I'll send a note to our marketing dept to correct future publications.


Jeff
Click to expand...

Thanks for clearing this up Jeff. That also explains why you can't tell by using a magnet. 316 is one of the "austenitic" stainless steels which are non-magnetic.

"Type 316
Contains 16% to 18% chromium and 11% to 14% nickel. It also has molybdenum added
to the nickel and chrome of the 304. The molybdenum is used to control pit type attack.
Type 316 is used in chemical processing, the pulp and paper industry, for food and
beverage processing and dispensing and in the more corrosive environments. The molybdenum
must be a minimum of 2%."
 
Thanks for that info Jeff! If it is OK with you, I would like to open my thread back up and copy your post to it...
 
Jeff - Thanks for the information. It DOES evoke a question about the 532 which was not included in the discussion. Has the 532 also been made with stainless throughout?

Thanks,
Peter
 
peterinct said:
Jeff - Thanks for the information. It DOES evoke a question about the 532 which was not included in the discussion. Has the 532 also been made with stainless throughout?

Thanks,
Peter
Click to expand...

I don't know what the material is in the 532's but it's for sure not "stainless" even if it is one of the stainless steels.

Damaged532sa.jpg
 
J Hubbard said:
FYI,
The side are made of 316 SS not nickel silver. This model did not transition to Nickel silver like the others did when we redesigned the line. The 501, 503 and 505 are nickel silver, the model 500 is 316. It looks like we are publishing the wrong specs. I have a call into the supplier to verify they are using stainless. Once I verify, I'll send a note to our marketing dept to correct future publications.
Jeff
Click to expand...

You know it's pretty aggravating the lack of proof reading anymore, to see companies spending the kind of money necessary for marketing and to let this sort of thing happen in print. It's rediculous and it's not just Buck either.
 
Haebbie and Peter, The bottom model is each of your photo's is the cat's meow for me. The changes are slight and suttle but enough. DM
 
Mr. Hubbard, Thank you for chiming in on this discussion to offer such well informed and timely information. As it certainly contradicts the printed information we had. DM
 
st8, Thats a positive result of discussions like these which collectors have that causes true historical data to surface. Otherwise this would not have occured and we would have gone on believing something else.
So, a Good thing came out of it. DM
 
I really don't see that there's a big deal about the catalog saying it's NS.

No one seemed to be able to tell the difference so what's the big deal? If it takes a call to the supplier to find out for sure what the material is, then the end user sure wouldn't know the difference.
 
Plumberdv said:
I really don't see that there's a big deal about the catalog saying it's NS.

No one seemed to be able to tell the difference so what's the big deal? If it takes a call to the supplier to find out for sure what the material is, then the end user sure wouldn't know the difference.
Click to expand...

There is a big difference Dave! The stainless is better than the NK as it will not ding & scratch as easy;)
jb4570
 
Yes, John agreed. Not to mention us collector's are finally getting accurate information on this model, correcting a five year error. So, stuff like this matters. DM
 
All I'm sayin' and what I meant is that if Jeff hadn't come up with the new info, no one would have doubted that it was in fact NS. The catalog can be changed next time so there's really no harm done like someone made it out to be. In the end, still no big deal. It even seems that from Jeff's statement that he wasn't absolutely positive since he was going to check with the supplier to verify it.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top