camillus marine combat vs. Buck General fixed blade

I would choose the Camillus knife. The Camillus is made of carbon steel (1095?) whereas the Buck is made from 425 stainless, which is not regarded as a good stainless steel. It has even less carbon than 440A. Most authorities say that an inexpensive carbon steel knife will be much better than an inexpensive stainless steel knife. For myself I avoid any stainless knife that is not made from 440C or better.
 
Both the Buck & the Camillus are very good knives,but the two you have selected
are not true apples to apples to compare. The Buck is a wilderness hunting
knife while the Camillus is a military do it all knife

Not knowing the intended use I'll suggest a third choice that covers both areas
well enough to get by at a reasonable cost. The Buck Nighthawk. It was developed
for the Navy seals as a do anything knife and I can tell you it does that job very well.

Good luck in your search, mate.
 
Hello Tightwad,
What are your thoughts on the 425 stainless steel used by Buck? From what I have read it seems to be a step above 420 stainless, but that isn't saying much, since 420 is generally regarded as the worst of all stainless cutlery steels.
 
Mandragore,

I forgot to mention, if you don't mind spending closer to $100, you might want to consider the Spanish brand, Aitor. They make military style knives with blades made of a steel they claim is better than 440C. I tend to believe their claim about the steel, because the vast majority of Aitor owner comments I have read are very positive.

I have an Aitor Nato Bowie, which has a 7.25 inch clip point blade, and an excellent double guard. The price was $89 from a mail order company in Maryland (I forget the name of the company).
 
I will also suggest that you go outside the two choices that you are looking at, and go with the Buck Nighthawk. I have 2 of them (sorry, not for sale), and I think the Nighthawk is one excellent knife, that is often overlooked. The handle has a very nice, ergonomic feel, and the knife has an excellent blade-shape. There is a very "sturdy" feel to this knife.:).
 
Since the Nighthawk was developed for the Navy seals the 425m blade steel has
to easy to sharpen ......anywhere. Just for grins one time I actually did sharpen
mine on a rock and got a fairly decent edge to boot. While the Nighthawk isn't
a zip & flash knife it does give the owner a huge gob of real work ablitly.

I compare any possible straight knife I want buy to the Nighthawk I
already own. Ya' know, I've saved a lot of money doing that. I like the "hawk
so much the other knives I'm drooling over are very soon forgotten. I've cut
down 6" TREES with mine with not to much extra effort and still gutted and
skinned a deer of two when I was still able to hunt. Like I said the "hawk is one
dandy sleeper of a knife. Try a plain blade clip point and you'll never look back.
 
After reading the above comments from Glockman99 and Tightwad I did some searching on Buck and 425 steel, but I am no closer to a revised or better opinion of Buck.

One thing I did learn is that Buck no longer uses 425m, but switched at some point to 420HC. That explains Tightwad's comments about the Buck Nighthawk being easy to sharpen. I have read several places that 425m is harder to sharpen than 420HC. On the other hand, it seems that ease of sharpening, along with rust resistence, are about the only good traits of 420HC.

Those who like the Buck knives stress their good designs. However, comments I have read from knife experts like Joe Talmadge and Cliff Stamp aren't very flattering of Buck's choice of steel.
 
Sometimes we should really consider looking a little beyond our own hype. 420HC has been used on Buck knives for years. They are one of the best selling knife brands in the US, and they are marketed to people who will probably use their knives much harder than most of us on the forums. If the blue collar trades use these knives, without generating mountains of broken blades, or creating enough of a durability problem to cause these people to go elsewhere; then the knives work.

420HC vrs. 1095 is a pretty close match up. I would make a call based on my needs rather the steel. The Buck is primarily a hunting knife while the Camillus is primarily a utility knife.

n2s
 
Obviously, with so many ardent defenders Buck must be doing alot of things right. Still I greatly respect the opinions of some of the very knowledgeable experts who contribute to these forums, and I don't think their comments on knife steels are the result of snobbery.

There are valid reasons to buy knives made with lesser grades of steel. The Tru-Sharp stainless used in Case knives has a very poor reputation, but I bought a Case Silver Script folder because I liked its looks. Since I bought is as a collectors' item rather than a using knife, the quality of the steel was not an important factor.

The Buck Nighthawk was originally designed for use in a marine environment, so stain resistance was a paramount concern. The stainless steels with better edgeholding are also less stain resistant, so 420HC may well have been a better choice for the Nighthawk, than say, ATS-34.
 
The Nighthawk is a very good knife, price aside, and a great value for the money. Everything about the knife works well - the handle, the blade, the sheath. A very well thought out knife in terms of design and construction. As to the steel, mine(1995) is 425M, but I believe the Nighthawks made for the SEAL competition were in ats-34, and the steel changed to 425M for the mass market version to keep the price down. I removed the black coating on my Nighthawk, and it didn't come of too easily, so I would say that the coating is pretty tough.

As to the Camillus kabar, it looks like a nice enough knife, and if you bought one you'd have a good knife, but I would prefer the more refined design of the Nighthawk over the Camillus.
 
A question for the Buck fans - what about the Bucks with the "Ionfusion" coating? I haven't seen the Nighthawk advertised with this feature, but Cabela's has the Special, Vanguard, Zipper, and two folders with it.

This coating is said to greatly improve edge-holding. However, since it is a coating what happens when you sharpen it? Wouldn't the coating be worn away by sharpening?
 
W.T., The infusion coated blade are chisel grinds to allow the coating to do the cutting.
It works kinda like a piece of glass does. There is always a super thin edge that you can't see
that does the cutting.

Buck does a lot of "neat stuff" trying to better the product they make as well as always
being in the lead to defend our right to carry use knives. I ,too, wasn't much of a Buck
knife fan until I tried a few of the knives they make and found out they really mean what
they say in their warranty. While they don't use the latest steels they do know how to dial
in cost effective steels that will serve the owners very well without generating huge warranty
cost for them. I 've never had a reason to fault any Buck I've ever owned.

I'll get off my soapbox now, sorry.
 
Thanks for the info, Tightwad. Actually I have been giving some thought to buying a Buck 110, since it is such a famous folder. The Ionfusion sounds like it will work but I am not sure I want a chisel grind blade.

I've seen three models of the 110 - regular, the one with the Ionfusion coating, and a third with finger groves. I am leaning toward the one with finger groves, since I prefer knives that give some protection from the hand sliding onto the blade.
 
W.T.
If you are thinking about a Buck 110, you might want to look at their custom shop. You can choose how you want it built. The web page is interactive so you can see what it looks like as you choose the options. The page starts here: http://www.buckknives.com/pcks/

The General and Marine Knife are both pretty much the same pattern blade and good knives. One stainless, the other carbon.
The biggest difference is in the handle shape and size of the double guard. I perfer the smaller size and contour of the General's grip along with the smaller guard on it.

Happy Holidays,
Greg
 
I'm not a huge fan of Buck knives, although I have had some that have served me well, but the fact of the matter is that your average knife user will be perfectly well-served by the steel Buck uses. We who post on these forums are into knives, and are much more particular about knife performance than most people.

Buck is a reputable company who markets well designed knives at a price point that doesn't leave anyone out. The guy who uses his hunting knife to field dress one Buck a year can get along fine with one of Buck's offerings.

But with that said, I still prefer 1095 to any of the low-end stainless steels.
 
Hello Coonskinner,

I've seen some highly regarded custom knives that are made from 1095. Newt Livesay uses 1095, for example.

In reading the threads on low priced slipjoints, I found that the general concensus was that those with carbon steel blades were best.
For example, the Case knives with the chrome vanadium carbon blades were always said to be better using knives than those with the 420 stainless.

That is one reason I choose knives with carbon steel blades when the price is low. It is just that those knives usually get higher praise. If Buck were to offer a Nighthawk with a carbon blade, I'll bet most forum members would recommend that version.
 
I think that both knives are time-tested and have proven their worth over and over again.
Which one is better probably depends on your habits.
If you enjoy the way the carbon blade blackens over time, and you don't mind the taste of carbon steel in the food you cut, and you don't mind spending the extra time to prevent rust, and you don't mind re-sharpening more often, then I would recommend the Camillus.

Otherwise I would recommend the Buck (especially if you work in water alot).

Good luck,
Allen.
 
Hello allenc,

You guys have gone a long way in this thread toward balancing out the negative comments on 420 stainless! I read one thread lasts night comparing the Camillus 420HC EDC folder to the version with a 154CM blade. At least one respondent claimed he couldn't tell the difference. It was also said that Camillus had refined the heat treatment of 420HC, resulting in a big improvement.

I do get the impression that 420HC is probably good enough for the average user, who might think ATS-34 is some new software package from Microsoft.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top