Early Buck 112 value rarity

[austin37]

Evening, What are the no nail Nick, 2 dot 112 worth these days? Micarta vs wood handles. Used vs mint. Sheath value? Just general ballpark will do. Thinking of getting one to carry and use, prefer the 112 and the squarer design than more modern round.

 

[pjsjr]

I'd check 'the bay's' completed sales, for what you're asking.

Not many of the micarta or segua wood handles ones around...these would be the early versions. Price wise, I don't know what to tell you, except, it depends on many things.

Ballpark, average, run of the mill 1974-1980, $50.00-100.00. If you're a good shopper less, if you're not more. Good luck in your search.

From BCCI website...
CATEGORY III: 1974-1980
VERSION I
Mark side blade stamp, BUCK, *112*, USA
Stainless steel rocker rivet
Stainless steel spacer/spring holder
Macasar ebony inlays 440C Stainless steel blade
A single dot on each side of the model number tangstamp indicate an internal change in the shape of the blade tang
Two, small brass inlay rivets
VERSION II
Same as Version I, but inlay rivets now number four.
VERSION III
Same as Version I, but inlay rivets now number three.
VERSION IV
Same as Version I, but inlay rivets number three, and are larger, measuring 1/8” in diameter

Here are are couple of links....

Some Buck 112 Love

Buck's 112 needs love:), I'll start. Please feel free to post yours. Preston Here are two, first is a Category I, Version I, Black Micarta, 1972. Then a Category II, Version II, Segua wood.

www.bladeforums.com

The Lone Ranger: 112 Dedication Thread

There's been a lot of chatter and interest in the 112 lately. I highly encourage you to post in the other current 112 threads. This thread isn't as specific. Thought I'd give a platform to this cool, compact lock blade that isn't quite as popular on the open market as its big brother, but has...

www.bladeforums.com

 

[bucksway]

Since you are looking for a user you can find many cheep. It's only when you want NIB (correct shieth and paperwork) you will have to get close to the hundred mark. And then as soon as you use/sharpen 1/3 to 1/2 the 'value' goes away just like a car. Flat frame no nail nick 112's were made in the 10's of thousands.
Frankly 420 in a recent issue is just as good a user or even step up to S30V. The real rarity is a finger grooved 2 dot. Early 112's are NOT as collected as 110's and values lag far behind. If you like nickel silver frames Buck just made a run of drop points in both 420 and S30V which were never made way back then.

 

[rhino]

Since you are looking for a user you can find many cheep. It's only when you want NIB (correct shieth and paperwork) you will have to get close to the hundred mark. And then as soon as you use/sharpen 1/3 to 1/2 the 'value' goes away just like a car. Flat frame no nail nick 112's were made in the 10's of thousands.
Frankly 420 in a recent issue is just as good a user or even step up to S30V. The real rarity is a finger grooved 2 dot. Early 112's are NOT as collected as 110's and values lag far behind. If you like nickel silver frames Buck just made a run of drop points in both 420 and S30V which were never made way back then.

I agree on the 420HC. I was a little sad that the no-nail-nick 440C blade on my two dot pawn shop rescue went to the big scrap pile in the sky, but in terms of function, the 420HC blades beat those old 440C blades hands down. While it may not have the same wear resistance, 1) the 420HC is much easier to sharpen, 2) it takes a sharper edge ultimately than the 440C, and 3) the edge geometry of the modern 420HC blades is superior. My rescued two dot frame sporting a new 112 blade is the bee's knees!

 

[Obsessed with Edges]

The old blade grinds in 440C were also very thick behind the edge. I have a 2-dot, pictured below, and have loved the aesthetics & the heft of it. But getting it to cut well, by thinning the grind behind the edge, was a big project and it's still not as thinned out as the newer factory grinds from Buck.

The best thing the new Bucks have going for them is the improved grind on their blades. Much better cutting straight from the factory with thinner primary grinds and more acute edge geometry by spec. And they sharpen up beautifully and easily. I also have a later model 4-dot with the finger-grooved handle (3rd & 4th pictures below) and its primary grind is considerably thinner than the 2-dots. Compares very similarly with its 425M blade, in terms of cutting geometry and ease of sharpening, to the more recent Bucks in 420HC. And ergonomically, the finger-grooved handle is the most comfortable of any knife I've held.

 

[austin37]

Have any of you sent in your older 110 or 112 to have an edge 2000 modern grind placed by the factory? Best of both worlds old and new ?

 

[rhino]

The old blade grinds in 440C were also very thick behind the edge. I have a 2-dot, pictured below, and have loved the aesthetics & the heft of it. But getting it to cut well, by thinning the grind behind the edge, was a big project and it's still not as thinned out as the newer factory grinds from Buck.

The best thing the new Bucks have going for them is the improved grind on their blades. Much better cutting straight from the factory with thinner primary grinds and more acute edge geometry by spec. And they sharpen up beautifully and easily. I also have a later model 4-dot with the finger-grooved handle (3rd & 4th pictures below) and its primary grind is considerably thinner than the 2-dots. Compares very similarly with its 425M blade, in terms of cutting geometry and ease of sharpening, to the more recent Bucks in 420HC. And ergonomically, the finger-grooved handle is the most comfortable of any knife I've held.

Years ago I acquired some old 440C 110s and 112s via the big auction site. I did the same thing with reprofiling the edge to get it as thin as possible and the results were disappointing across the board. I don't know if it's due to carbide size, grain size, or what, but when I tried to go really thin (like you can with 420HC, 425M, S30V, etc.), it seemed like the apex would just "disappear." It's what soured me on 440C.

 

[Obsessed with Edges]

Years ago I acquired some old 440C 110s and 112s via the big auction site. I did the same thing with reprofiling the edge to get it as thin as possible and the results were disappointing across the board. I don't know if it's due to carbide size, grain size, or what, but when I tried to go really thin (like you can with 420HC, 425M, S30V, etc.), it seemed like the apex would just "disappear." It's what soured me on 440C.

I attribute that to the large chromium carbides and maybe also coarser grain size, in 440C. I think it's known that either or both of those factors will usually reduce toughness, making it more prone to breakage, chipping, etc. The carbides make it tricky to thin out the apex as much as I'd want while still maintaining edge stability. I have the same overall impression of 440C as you've mentioned - and it's also made me drift away from that steel in favor of the others (420HC, 425M & S30V), all of which don't have the same issues with carbide size in particular, if not also grain size. I'm spoiled for thin edges on all my knives, which is why I'll always favor steels with finer grain, even if that means they're not as wear-resistant.

The 2-dot 112 I pictured earlier, I thinned it out on SiC sandpaper, which also convexed the grind behind the edge. I then took it higher in grit on the sandpaper for polishing that convex, with some more polishing done on a hard strop with either aluminum oxide compound ('white rouge') or perhaps some 3-micron diamond paste. Even though it still wasn't quite so hair-popping sharp, the polished 'shoulders' of the convex grind still made for a very aggressive, extremely slick-cutting cardboard slicer. In that capacity, I think the extra wear-resistance of 440C is helpful in reducing dulling by abrasion in heavy, dirty cardboard. That knife works very, very well in that sort of use.

 

[rhino]

I attribute that to the large chromium carbides and maybe also coarser grain size, in 440C. I think it's known that either or both of those factors will usually reduce toughness, making it more prone to breakage, chipping, etc. The carbides make it tricky to thin out the apex as much as I'd want while still maintaining edge stability. I have the same overall impression of 440C as you've mentioned - and it's also made me drift away from that steel in favor of the others (420HC, 425M & S30V), all of which don't have the same issues with carbide size in particular, if not also grain size. I'm spoiled for thin edges on all my knives, which is why I'll always favor steels with finer grain, even if that means they're not as wear-resistant.

The 2-dot 112 I pictured earlier, I thinned it out on SiC sandpaper, which also convexed the grind behind the edge. I then took it higher in grit on the sandpaper for polishing that convex, with some more polishing done on a hard strop with either aluminum oxide compound ('white rouge') or perhaps some 3-micron diamond paste. Even though it still wasn't quite so hair-popping sharp, the polished 'shoulders' of the convex grind still made for a very aggressive, extremely slick-cutting cardboard slicer. In that capacity, I think the extra wear-resistance of 440C is helpful in reducing dulling by abrasion in heavy, dirty cardboard. That knife works very, very well in that sort of use.

You are clearly an erudite and perceptive individual, as evidenced by your agreement with rhino!

I had not considered applying a more pronounced convex edge on those 440C knives. What you relate make sense. If I revisit 440C, I will try it!