History of the M124 Frontiersman?

RickJ said:
Everything I have read is that the m122 Nemo came first then the m124 Frontiersman came along a little later.
Click to expand...

This from Joe Housers history of them indicates otherwise.
 

Attachments

  • 122 124.jpg
    122 124.jpg
    63.6 KB · Views: 69
Plumberdv said:
This from Joe Housers history of them indicates otherwise.
Click to expand...


If you read that close, is uses the word probably alot, so if you go back to what has been said that the original ones had no number and the difference was the sheath, then you can make the case that the m122 Nemo was first and the 124 followed. LOL! I am really laughing to be honest.
 
Last edited:
Plumberdv said:
And this from the 1968 supplement catalog. Both were introduced in the catalog at the same time.
Click to expand...

I thought 1967 was the first year not 1968, and the Frontiersman followed 6 months later so that would put both of them out at 1968, so that is correct.
 
The ad that EEE posted would seem to show the Frontiersman coming along after the Nemo had "won the hearts" of divers (which it apparently didn't).

Bottom line is.......however you may try to spin it, the 124 that I hold in my hand this day is of full-tang construction.......and that's a different knife from the Nemo with its more complex and vulnerable hidden-tang construction.

No changing that.

But I will agree that my 124 is an "off-shoot" of the early Nemo/Frontiersman/122/124 knives that came out in the late sixties at roughly the same time.

:)
 
Last edited:
RickJ said:
If you read that close, is uses the word probably alot, so if you go back to what has been said that the original ones had no number and the difference was the sheath, then you can make the case that the m122 Nemo was first and the 124 followed. LOL! I am really laughing to be honest.
Click to expand...

If you think you're laughing now......wait until we discuss "Which Came First? The Chicken or the EGG???"?
 
I want to say this is a great discussion and I am glad we are having it, but I want to take a post just to say Thanks again to Buck for a fine knife in the M124LE. I want to pay honor to the Buck Craftsmen (both Male and Female) that work to make fine knives for all of us. I look forward to many more knives in the future and I hope many more M124's w/Ivory Micarta and Burgandy Micarta and maybe some others as well. Thanks Buck.
 
I do agree and have to say I am shocked by the flawless build quality and attention to detail of the 2012 124.

Right up there with the best non-custom big knives ever manufactured and better than some customs costing five times as much.

No doubt.
 
BG42EDGE said:
The ad that EEE posted would seem to show the Frontiersman coming along after the Nemo had "won the hearts" of divers (which it apparently didn't).

Bottom line is.......however you may try to spin it, the 124 that I hold in my hand this day is of full-tang construction.......and that's a different knife from the Nemo with its more complex and vulnerable hidden-tang construction.
No changing that.

But I will agree that my 124 is an "off-shoot" of the early Nemo/Frontiersman/122/124 knives that came out in the late sixties at roughly the same time.

:)
Click to expand...

That may well be but don't forget, the 124 and 122 of that era were identical as were the 124 and 122 of the later issues that had the full tang. The same thing, (different knife) can also be said of the 124. If you picked up a 122 from the year that they were reintroduced, it was the same as the 124 of the same time.

Could anyone take an old 122 and 124 with out the sheath or box available and be able to say absolutely which model it was sold as??
 
Plumberdv said:
That may well be but don't forget, the 124 and 122 of that era were identical as were the 124 and 122 of the later issues that had the full tang. The same thing, (different knife) can also be said of the 124. If you picked up a 122 from the year that they were reintroduced, it was the same as the 124 of the same time.

Could anyone take an old 122 and 124 with out the sheath or box available and be able to say absolutely which model it was sold as??
Click to expand...


I think the thing that confuses me about the Nemo, all of them that I have seen have the phenolic and hidden tang, so in my mind thats how they were, I have still not seen an actual picture of a full tang Nemo. I am not saying they didn't exist but I have never seen a photo of a full tang Nemo.
 
2008Bucks170.jpg

2008Bucks171.jpg

2008Bucks172.jpg
 
RickJ said:
I think the thing that confuses me about the Nemo, all of them that I have seen have the phenolic and hidden tang, so in my mind thats how they were, I have still not seen an actual picture of a full tang Nemo. I am not saying they didn't exist but I have never seen a photo of a full tang Nemo.
Click to expand...


Perhaps the confusion lies in what constitutes a full tang. In my opinion, a full tang is one which extends the entire length of the handle, which is the case for both the Nemo and Frontiersman. The fact that some tangs on the Frontiersman are wider and are visible (as opposed to be being hidden) between the handle scales is immaterial to the fact that the tang is still "full".
 
Well... That's That... Now if Buck would only make a new 122... Nice pics EEE... Love that 122.... :thumbup:
 
Plumberdv said:
That may well be but don't forget, the 124 and 122 of that era were identical as were the 124 and 122 of the later issues that had the full tang. The same thing, (different knife) can also be said of the 124. If you picked up a 122 from the year that they were reintroduced, it was the same as the 124 of the same time.
Click to expand...

Which was never the question.

We started out questioning Dave Martin's statement that the 124 had been full-tang from the beginning.

Now, although it took a while, we see that the 124 was not full-tang at first, but hidden-tang, which is quite different.

Could anyone take an old 122 and 124 with out the sheath or box available and be able to say absolutely which model it was sold as??
Click to expand...

The question for this thread would be--could you tell if it was full-tang or hidden-tang and the answer would be yes.
 
Tin Sue said:
Perhaps the confusion lies in what constitutes a full tang. In my opinion, a full tang is one which extends the entire length of the handle, which is the case for both the Nemo and Frontiersman. The fact that some tangs on the Frontiersman are wider and are visible (as opposed to be being hidden) between the handle scales is immaterial to the fact that the tang is still "full".
Click to expand...

There's no confusion.

If they were both full-tang we'd call them both full-tang.

They are not, so we don't.

Two different systems that are physically and demonstrably quite different.
 
BG42EDGE said:
There's no confusion.

If they were both full-tang we'd call them both full-tang.

They are not, so we don't.

Two different systems that are physically and demonstrably quite different.
Click to expand...

BG, I am not going to get into an argument here with you about what constitutes a "full tang" knife, but just maybe you should do some "googling" on this subject. According to wikipedia ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tang_(weaponry) , "A full tang extends the full length of the grip-portion of a handle, versus a partial tang which does not." Now, let's see you give some references to support your opinion!! I'm done; you can continue jousting windmills all you wish!!!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top