Early Ranger blade length

David Nowlin

David Nowlin

Joined
Jan 17, 2018
Messages
2,781
Were the early 112 Rangers fitted with a shorter blade? I have a 2nd year 112 that is ever so slightly shorter than the groove it fits in. My new 112 slim is simular in having aprox 3/8 of an inch of excess groove. Just thought 1973 Ranger had had a broken tip and a regrind but if so it’s impossible for me to tell.
A comment on the 112 slim thread inspired this thread.
 
Good question David, I have one exactly like you describe but I always assumed it was broken. Compared to a few others I have it was broken, but it sure doesn't look like it was fixed. Now you have me wondering.

In reality, it probably was someone good with their hands who fixed it.
 
Well the slim thread mentiond that the reason the blade seemed much shorter than the handle was Buck wanted to mimick the original design.
I did aqiure a 80’s Ranger that definitely had a broken tip and ok regrind that i ground it from the top to give it a much closer to the original profile and then sent it to Buck for spa treatment. Came back like new. Think its a 1/4 inch shorter in the groove so i can live with that. The 70’s 112 is less than a 1/4
 
I don't know the answer to your question, but here are a couple pictures, of my recent pawn shop find, inverted stamp, 112. If I read the 112 data sheet correctly, it was made in the first half of 1972. Maybe you can use it for comparison to answer your question.

MvMC_soPvXuQNrdYhs07TIMIdalQVoWyZkppPCrMH8zdULwhF8s9FFFWJ1akMSO3WQx9NjvEUx2LrYFKvdxnosELeWALPOvLGDFRhUtOFuPjVZ2Does2Z_wOt7Ntr8bErq9tCEeHxR5gbAGp7HGTdIo3vGZy8NnJXNnFBSPpgHmhAnTeYQxNxH1ipqHhMPhT3a1G5hy9dtLCcjopP8MNIAS7acmfcU19R2yllUC_mhvkvl9dGMm23Z9qbRY-GxS2lM7paUn_Eyu_aJ-a5YZP4ochi6hSn8KBr0TEAQRUYrIbRKtFFMA0OJqFO3OTidBthqVEzDSdpLYIl76lnN0-oMoA8TK6Mb-iZB1TgzdDHCHi351uw-kCvy0EBACL6jqDR8aelZa6rShwjt7RDiGjHCtB9VJG8iHQl47M7zbj093CHuoxWQbaRq2ou4WkFbVMrzcOIintValm8xMXXQNma5Y4JjjjpQkIKkAn2k_fF7bwJU6_G1SodsZQMQ5_wRFxSiDuX2GdR2JuivpAKwj8YeY9mm2Jrkh2SgAewbZx7EuU2l6XxpStw7n-eMMCsnp-WufpSW00eo3aJFFeUbbMyRjv8m9QOUU6wUwI47o3J3ahoPnDG3alJk99zUwqy7vFryakBqtq2NYPXNT69jMB0uH1ju3dVa7b3mdnu7z3J3HSIO2U1rNyOL8oDaW1Lx7aODwxZs2HCMGlFY3z5w=w1024


n0XdVDfMWbMtJUIh6wUVV7qaN7AhZL0nVa-Kp1hURTML9QraPBZK3yhBbhzoBjaj9qtlQ4oQpVhlCkVrh5fEZpotwJTOyGfxhKgGS7jspVXde6PZXDhYCMT-2YBce1eirqcllD0hOf6a1X0-i0NFvPOTmq0DwcGdaxKFI_Kt-69SUGYAwKF5FD59MUH5k2lC87vSNAya50RVg9Do6Q5s0YYpi5S_RjiCZhAr_qksFYR3ae-MUdC06BW2TehuyCbQr2GI7UjF-x1NSrb2IYx3NJbmkZlEJKKY51uAEubna9OxqwrsmYOy3M_Gk7Y4Z3qNhZaquBJAidJLGtiFDskOJvXOwvpU8f9cLFoNnVoeBf96z6a2qPK5AL7MK0POOV82486iBAk056oVa0bEoLaFXXIqgeHHGfOhQZg4zsUbf6R8DpMyBZkZ5Z0jBEjHVs28LCGkyX_0tJ78L1JiZXfZh1HjgYG_CPohOKUF5pITdIeDkd3LhJumljrUbJ_1b4XfGj-ltybOtohyyN3ZRbnRMTSD5q7oLO-OPk5wop4EtG6UsjgoVwHLTiIwiXfuFVopCkh-JX25fvFMr4VN5uC0uf37iLyntHUxC_TDq95E43ivfhhA90rV4hmVnGV4G8uTdLN0tNorUDmpZiShUgpL9vmJS7PeiTqNpQ_jlrYMmvaSnrCouJrcrmZv-hYRRXmVNyNRfGhTXKMRrBr6YA=w1024


O.B.
 
Thanks OB that proves my 73 Ranger is 1/4 inch short. My 2dot is 1/8th short. Some reason i thought those were opposite. Memory at my age is lacking lol. Still wouldn’t part with either of these.
Got the 2 dot while bidding on a old 110 sheath. Got the sheath for less then $20 with shipping so the ranger was free. Lol
 
Seems to me there is some slight variation in length in the older 112's,but due to their age it is hard to tell if it is just wear or if they varied a little due to less advanced manufacturing methods
 
OB and Red C what is the measurement on the line that the forward bolster meets the wood. Mine is 5/8 and my 80’s ranger is 3/4.
 
Just mine seems so narrow in the handle compared to those pictures. Just chose that location so we are on the same page
 
Trying to post a picture of my two older Rangers. The pic is pasted and looks great. Here goes nothing
 
There was a thread on this a few years back..I think there was a run of shorter blades because early 112's I know were NIB had blades 2 and 7/8" and even 3/16" short. I passed on a few 2 line 112's because of this. I think all the early ones were hand sharpened/radiused that also appears slightly short. The 112 was created by Buck to be legal on ships and in places where they had to have a blade 3" or under and since early knives received a lot of hand work compared to now we see a few under 3"..
 
Well Bucksway with that said and the fact that this blade looks un altered with what may be very little sharpenig i’ll bet dollars to donuts it’s not been detipped lol
That’s the story i’ll take to my grave anyways
Thanks
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top