I would like to get myself a folder with a belt sheath. I haven't bought a knife in over a year! So I think I am due for one. Anyways, I am partial to the 112 as I do not need anything as big as the 110. I want classic styling and a leather sheath. Will be used around the homestead as well as fishing adventures.
I love my 112. Every time I hold it, I think this is one of the most attractive production knives I know of. It rests in the hand wonderfully, the curve of the front bolster gives great control and there's something about how the whole knife comes together. If you're already partial to the 112, I would suggest you just go in that direction.
I own several other Buck lockbacks with blade in the 3" range. Here are some loose thoughts on them, all of which are intended in supporting the 112 for you.
I find the 3" blade size perfect for EDC type use. But, when I'm on the trail backpacking or when doing a lot of food preparation, I do prefer a longer blade in the 4" range, more like the 110. I also prefer a longer blade for heavy wood cutting and cutting shavings for fires. My solution is to carry the 112 (or another knife in that size range) in my RFP for EDC use and then use a larger knife for back up in my pack.
The clip point of the 112 is among the only clip point that I like. If you're doing a lot of fish cleaning, the clip might be a better choice than a drop point, but really, for small fish, I can use either.
All of the Bucks I have in this size range are pocketable, even the 112. Yes, I notice it but (provided you get one with softened bolsters) it's small enough to be pocket carried much easier than, say, a longer 110 is.
The Buck 500 is a stunning knife. It's my "dress up" knife. It's so "bling", I sometimes feel self-conscious when deploying it. I'm proud at other times. For general EDC use, I prefer the 500's drop point to the 112's clip. But, the blade on the 500 is narrower edge to spine than pictures might suggest. I like this for crude wood work as it makes the handle a lot of leverage and control over the blade. But for food prep, the blade can feel smaller than the length suggests. Also, the front bolster of the 500 is more like that of the 110, so I have to rely more on the balance of the knife and a good grip. It's not as secure feeling in the hand as the 112 or the 482 Bucklite.
The Ecolite 112 frame has the same shape and classic lines of the 112, but is lighter and much, much easier to pocket carry. I'm liking my Ecolite a LOT. It's modern and classic at the same time. The finger grooves in the Ecolite rock. Great feeling knife in the hand. Doesn't have the... um... gravity of the brass and wood though.
Lastly, my Bucklite 482 is a very, very capable knife. I have the version that lacks the thumbstuds and pocket clip. Of all of the knives I've mentioned, I like the blade on the 482 the best, by far. It's almost as nice as a 442 blade, which is my favorite Buck blade (discontinued). It's a drop point but has more belly than the 500. In the field, the 482 has great feel in the hand. It weighs nothing. It's embarrassingly ugly and cheap looking. Fell out of the ugly tree and hit every branch on the way down ugly. Great to use. Awful to look at. NOTE: current 482s have a pocket clip (which can be removed with careful dremmel work) and no sheath).
Hope some of this helpful. I would say just get the 112.
