My First Buck (the 112) reviewed.

Hi LX_Emergency -

A nice pass at the review - I noticed a few discrepancies, but it appears that you have gotten some feedback here to correct it.

It is frustrating that these fine knives are burdened with such a high monetary penalty in your country. Might I ask what adds so much to the cost of a knife that can be had here in the USA for $30 or so?

Thanks for the review, and I look forward to more in the future.

One bit of advice - you can never have too many pictures of the knife being reviewed, at least in my opinion.

Keep up the good work! Who knows, I may be spurred into writing up a review of one of my blades sometime soon!

best regards -

mqqn
 
Opinions vary; hence the reason they're called opinions. Data on the other hand, does not; hence the reason it is called data. Data is factual supporting material which opinions cannot change.
Click to expand...

It has nothing to do with opinion. The review fits the dictionary definition of a review.

That's a fact, not an opinion. Hence you are wrong when you say "it is not a review at all."

Most of the information in the review was his own and only a couple of changes came from this forum.

That's a fact, not an opinion.

Here's another fact: you have been mean and inhospitable toward a newcomer to the forum.
 
Last edited:
Got to go with 110 on this. While it may be true that the OP's intentions were good, the actuall result wasn't.

Anyone planning on doing a "review" and not just a first impression really needs to have all their facts straight and do an actual hard use test before putting something online that is going to be read and probably believed by untold numbers of readers.

Had the proud reviewer not dropped in here and provided a link to the "review" who knows how long the mis-information might have stayed there? JMO
 
Main Entry: 2 re·view
Pronunciation: \ri-ˈvyü\
Function: verb
Etymology: in sense 1 of v.t., from re- + view; in other senses, from 1review
Date: 1576
transitive verb
1\also ˈrē-ˌvyü\ : to view or see again
2 : to examine or study again; especially : to reexamine judicially
3 : to look back on : take a retrospective view of <review the past>
4 a : to go over or examine critically or deliberately <reviewed the results of the study> b : to give a critical evaluation of <review a novel>5 : to hold a review of <review troops>

I'm in agreement with Edge on this one.
I believe the young man pass the test for "examine critically or deliberately." He also readily agreed to correct his errors. I think he spent some fair amount of time with this project and did so because he was excited about the knife and excited that he did a good job with his effort.

I completely agree with Edge and found Buck_110's response toward the young man to be nothing less than rude and uncalled for.

I think it better to encourage people with new found interests in Buck knives rather than beat them up for getting the steel used wrong or thinking brass and laminated wood is a bit mediocre compared to G10 and titanium liners.
 
Buck 110, that hole you're in is just getting deeper and deeper.

It's not so difficult.....just toss away the shovel.

;)
 
Buck_110 said:
Listen. The reason that this site is so good is because it is loaded with GREAT information. It has the best data on every manufacturer's forum here. Unlike other sites on the internet that are chock full of mis-information, this one is not. It is the very reason I roost here.

The only information I post is about 110s and 110 variants. I NEVER claimed to know anything about any other Buck models(except the Colt firearms 500 and 124). Since I am not at all knowledgeable about other models, I don't post about them. I don't believe in posting incorrect data; so I don't. Nobody benefits from erroneous information.
Click to expand...

However rude I might find your reaction, a review IS opinion. It's giving an evaluation of something. An evaluation although based on facts always results in opinion.

A review should always be based on opinion otherwise it's just test and test-results withouth interpretation.

I've had this discussion a couple of times before. Just like I've had people claim that I don't use my knives hard enough to review them.

On the other hand, they're MY knives and I'm giving MY opinion on how suitable they are for MY use. The fact that my daily life doesn't ask for hard use knives has nothing to do with that.

Like I said, I've gotten some things wrong and will correct that, it's not all that easy to find a lot of information on a 22 year old model of anything.

Having all that aside, I'd love to have a review written by you on my website. Maybe that way you cacn show directly how it should be done.

regards
LX
 
Plumberdv said:
Got to go with 110 on this. While it may be true that the OP's intentions were good, the actuall result wasn't.

Anyone planning on doing a "review" and not just a first impression really needs to have all their facts straight and do an actual hard use test before putting something online that is going to be read and probably believed by untold numbers of readers.

Had the proud reviewer not dropped in here and provided a link to the "review" who knows how long the mis-information might have stayed there? JMO
Click to expand...

Ah, but the proud reviewer HAD dropped in here. As for the "hard use" argument. I don't use my knives very hard, that's all there is to it. Can a man only have an opinion on something if he's going to use it a certain amount of times? Please..

That's a straw man argument. It junk, because not everyone uses their knives heavily. If you do, maybe you should write a review and let me host it to "offset my false data" I'd be glad to do it.

Don't think I want to spend money on a brand where the company is going to tell me how to use their product. Buck doesn't do this, and therefore I don't think you have any buisiness doing it either.
 
It's a review, of course and everyone has a right to their opinions. However, I don't find it a review that is particularly suited to most of the people I've corresponded with here. You are directing this to a knowledgeable crowd in general. You based your 6/10 (first section) on a spec sheet, not on knowledge of Buck's proprietary heat treatment and how that upgrades the steel. You don't have any personal knowledge of the materials in the knife, hence statements like "420 HC isn't exactly known for..." "Bladesteel: 425M". You could have e-mailed Buck Knives to get more specific info on the wood and lamination/impregnation process used.


LX_Emergency said:
When first looking upon the 112's spec list this doesn't seem like all that much. 420HC isn't exactly known for being the best of the best and of the handle scales the actual type of wood isn't even specified. And by and by it isn't all to impressive to be honest. Everything about that list says "mediocre" to "poor". So I'm not really impressed with all of that. They hold their own. But they're nothing special really. Just decent and hardworking stuff. I'll give it a 6/10. Partly because this is an old knife and for it's time this was not very normal. Stainless steels just weren't respected back in the day. So I'll give credit to Buck for taking a not very respected steel and giving it a good name.

Bladesteel: 425M
Liners/bolsters: Brass
Handle scales: "Natural Woodgrain" according to the Buck website.
Click to expand...

I could go section by section, but the gist of it is that this review WILL seem shallow and uninformed to the members of this forum. These people are the ones who may best critique and polish up your review if you were to treat it as a draft, if they were to post constructive criticisms, and if the correspondences were to be kept in good faith.
 
If you look further down in to the review, you'll find that I (from the start) already gave Buck credit for their heat-treat. But I included it under the heading Built Quality
Plus added kudos must be given to Buck who took a steel that is almost spit on by most knife collectors and figuring out a heat treat that makes them love it. Even my father in law (who's not that big into knives) loves...no LOVES Buck steel. All the critics have to admit that the way Buck heat-treats their "mediocre" stainless steels make it perform like

champs. I'll give Buck a solid 9/10 for the finish on it's 112.
Click to expand...
 
LX_Emergency said:
If you look further down in to the review, you'll find that I (from the start) already gave Buck credit for their heat-treat. But I included it under the heading Built Quality
Click to expand...

Yes, I read the review. You still gave a rating on the materials based on a skeletal spec sheet. That was my point. You did not go into any depth on why heat treat makes a difference, which would be interesting to readers.
 
mqqn said:
Hi LX_Emergency -

-snip-

It is frustrating that these fine knives are burdened with such a high monetary penalty in your country. Might I ask what adds so much to the cost of a knife that can be had here in the USA for $30 or so?

-snip-
Click to expand...

To be honest, I don't really know. It has something to do with the dutch distributor I'm sure. He's known for ripping people off on certain brands. Pricing for benchmade, Spyderco, Leatherman and a few others are similarly price hiked.

The man feels he can charge whatever he likes and calls anyone that (because of his extorbitant pricing) buys from the US an smuggler.

For example, the Leatherman Charge TTi (which I own) costs close to €200 euro's here.

I bought mine through a friend on the dutch forums who imported it from the states, cost me €87 euro's. Much closer to the US price.
 
wolfdog said:
Yes, I read the review. You still gave a rating on the materials based on a skeletal spec sheet. That was my point. You did not go into any depth on why heat treat makes a difference, which would be interesting to readers.
Click to expand...

You're wrong, I did but I didn't do it under the materials heading which seems to somehow annoy you.

Because it's not the material that deserves the high grade, but what Buck does with it in my book.
 
LX_Emergency said:
You're wrong, I did but I didn't do it under the materials heading which seems to somehow annoy you.

Because it's not the material that deserves the high grade, but what Buck does with it in my book.
Click to expand...

Have it your way. The review fails to impress me.
 
Ah......LOL......we've traveled a long road and come full circle.

Some here apparently have a huge problem with reading comprehension.

The review was good and will be even better when the final draft is finished.

You did fine, LX......and to make it perfect you should incorporate the U.S.S. Ranger history that I mentioned.

Good luck.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top