Just for fun... opinions on the age of this 305...

Well, that is what I was going to hang my hat on. Inventory says I have one but can't find it...

edit... Just after I posted this I looked in one more place and found 2!!!
Bad news is I do not think they match. On both of mine the '5' ends under the 'C' where as on the question knife it appears to extend under the 'K'. Interestingly, the 305 font on one of mine is smaller than the other. I'll post images tonight.

It's more time than I have at the moment to find the 40+ 305's in my collection to try and find a match. I do not know how informative looking at font sizes would be when I just found 2 from the same year that are different. My inventory does not show any that bracket the 2005 year. (2004 & 2006)
 
Last edited:
Stirring the pot. This must be the plumbers 305. American Standard printed on blade, NO tang stamp on main tang. Idaho outline on secondary tang. Nothing on reverse. Idaho stamp considered a 2005. But, some came out sans Idaho, were they regular tang but undated ?

standard.jpg
 
Interesting...

I'm rummaging through photos everywhere (as I make time to) looking for similar stamp on a 305 not made by Camillus. So far, nothing...
 
Since it seems everyone is finished ..... there's always clues to at least get close. The SS spring rivet is most obvious. The lists checking off factors is a good way to go. The Idaho stamp I posted is a "oddball". And so is OPs original photo. No date stamp is the main issue. Tin may be right, Bert narrowed it to after 99 to 2005, but not 2002 because it would be the anvil stamp. But again no date stamp. I did not look hard for an example of the Idaho stamped versions. The original may be as Tin says a 2005, but the lack of a Idaho stamp still puts it in the "oddball" group. i.e. a switched secondary blade. A 1977 version will have the model number, 305, stamped on reverse besides all the brass and long pulls.

So my opinion, is it's not true production but 'oddball' with something wrong, from the mid to early 2000's. I lean to the 2005 era.

DS's little lady is either just plain wrong or maybe the knife shop wanted a old Camillus 305 and pulled a "switch-a-roo" on her........300
 
Last edited:
Where does the hammer and bolt logo/shield in the OP's photo play into this in dating? Preston
 
Basically all but 86-88 are KBH (knife, bolt, hammer). From 86-88 the shield wa "BUCK".

From memory here so someone will correct me if I'm wrong.
 
I'm really confused...why is this knife so hard to date. It has the KBH shield and no date code...indicating prior to 1986. It has the moon nail nick = Buck. Is it the pivot pin that is causing the problem? Preston
 
MT_Pokt said:
Basically all but 86-88 are KBH (knife, bolt, hammer). From 86-88 the shield wa "BUCK".
Click to expand...

That's my opinion, also, but don't forget 1985, which was also "BUCK". In late 1988 the shield went back to KBH. What's interesting about the 305 is the KBH design. For all of the other 300 series the Camillus shields had a hammer with a tapered, short handle that was open at the end. When Buck went back to the KBH in late 1988, they kept that design and then in about 1990 changed to a handle that was longer, straight, and closed at the end. For some reason, even with Camillus, the handle was always longer, straight, and closed at the end. I have never had an explanation for that.

Bert
 
pjsjr said:
I'm really confused...why is this knife so hard to date. It has the KBH shield and no date code...indicating prior to 1986. It has the moon nail nick = Buck. Is it the pivot pin that is causing the problem? Preston
Click to expand...

Preston,

Take a look at posts #8, #14, and #17. They might answer your question.

Bert
 
Last edited:
Thanks, Bert. I did reread those posts several times. I confess, my knowledge of the 300 series is very limited. You, 300Bucks and others can see from the OP photo things like springs, liner and metal differences that I don't. I'll follow along, learn and await the outcome. Preston
 
@Preston:
That's why I posted a photo of a Camillus 305. Telltale Camillus 300s have the long nail pull, brass liners, brass pivot, KBH shields, and blades shared springs.

When Buck brought production in house in 85, the only obvious changes were the nail nick and the "BUCK" shield.

All blades were supposed to have date codes from 86 on with the only exception I know being the 2005 model when they used the Idaho outline on a secondary blade.

If the nick and shield were the only things different from the Camillus knife I posted, the subject knife would be an 85.

This is where the other issues come to play.
1) the subject knife has one piece liner & bolster. This didn't happen until later when Buck changed back to the KBH shield and used one spring per blade. Which about when they changed the pivot from brass to stainless.
2) the blades in the subject appear hollow ground, which is even later.

What's so hard about it, is the blade doesn't have a date stamp but has all other characteristics of a newer 305.

It's the minutiae that baffles and makes this a particularly interesting knife.

The Bucktectives are hard at work to solve this mystery though.

I'm still claiming to be the winner with my 12 years old guess :D, but I agree with the others that this is one of those "oddballs".

Well worth the space on this page! Well done Roger! I'm looking forward to the next one!:thumbsup:
 
I mushed some info together in my points above. I'm typing on my phone and after spell check changed "model" to "midol", I threw in the towel...
 
I think I understand now. Her husband purchased this knife sometime in the mid 2000's, traveled in time back to the 80's where he had the blade replaced, then carried it all the time before finally putting it in a drawer in 1984 because they moved to NYC.
 
Look at date code sheet in the Buck knife date sticky. Two marks for 2005.

I am sure you all know from your knife buying, ' the dead never lie (were wrong)'.

300
 
MT_Pokt said:
I mushed some info together in my points above. I'm typing on my phone and after spell check changed "model" to "midol", I threw in the towel...
Click to expand...

Thanks, Greg, that does clear up some points and explains others. I appreciate your effort even more knowing you typed it on your phone...I've seen your paws in photos:D Preston

From another poster's signature line on another forum..."Dear Autocorrect, I'm tired of your shirt"
 
Now I know what that guy meant when he said I was full of shirt.........

Was looking for something else and found these old 300 posts. Most of you have seen them. Just in case someone hasn't, since everyone has worked so hard on the 305 300
http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/s...e-300-info-fromSMKWs-seminars?highlight=SMKWs
http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/s...Cadet-Handle-colors-and-years?highlight=SMKWs
http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/s...eries-Seminar-5-317-319-and-321?highlight=315

Would also recommend Bert's recent article in the BCCI Newsletter on the 303.
 
Last edited:
Unless something else comes up, I think I'll go along with Greg and the year 2005. Lack of the Idaho stamp on the secondary blade might be from early production and they were using inventory without the stamp or late in production when they had used all the stamped secondary blades.I have to admit that the small interest I have in the 305 ended with the 1999 version, more or less.

Bert
 
Last edited:
One more odd photo to add to mess...it's not a 305 but a 310 with no date stamp, BUT does have Idaho stamp. Oh, and in background a 303....More 'oddballs'.......300

standard.jpg
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top