My Old 110....or is it?

Rocinante said:
Does the blade guide book give that information and show how they all differ from each other? Or is there some other reference that does?
Click to expand...

No. *Every* book on knives has some error in it, or something left out, or mis-identified. And the definitive history of the 110 has yet to be written. Or even discovered.

Just keep on asking questions here...after doing a Search, of course... :p
 
Three pages of posts on this thread already? This is why I need to have the Forums on my home computer. :)
I did not read ALL three pages so please forgive me if this has already been said. It does look like your 110, which is in pretty darn good shape for its age, is a Third Version, Variation 7. Why Buck stamped it on the right hand side, when the variations both before and after are on the left, is a mystery.
Only the first Versions, of which there are 2 Variations, have the thin blades.

Goose, I thought we got you all squared away on that knife of yours? Its not actually an "old" knife, just Semi old, variation 6. ;)
 
Ok, Joe.....Buck110 said it was a fourth version, first variation.

You two should confer about this.

And I really want to know....WHERE is this information available?

And thanks much for the help.

Congrats on that big 110 auction, by the way.

:)
 
Idunno.....there seems to be a line down the back of that rear bolster, although it's faint. Maybe Joe didn't see it?
 
Joe Houser said:
...

Goose, I thought we got you all squared away on that knife of yours? Its not actually an "old" knife, just Semi old, variation 6. ;)
Click to expand...

Yep...as the Monkee's would say, "I'm a Believer"...IF I could get the damn rear rivets to show. I can't see a single one on either side.

That in itself perplexes me as I imagine there would be at least one rivet showing on one side or the other...right? :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused:

My wife was just watching me huff on that puppy after rubbing it on my jeans. Just staring oddly at what must be odd to her.

So, I will say it is a Vers. 6.

Thanks Joe. :)
 
Buck 110 first called it as a 4th version, 1st variation.

Then Joe called it as a 3rd version, 7th variation.

Then Buck 110 said this:

Buck_110 said:
If the spacer is integral, it is a 3rd version/7th edition. I took it as the spacer being a seperate piece from the picture. Then again, variations 4 through 7 of the 3rd version are rumored not to have scale rivets. That 110 has scale rivets.
Click to expand...

So maybe there is still a question?

What's Joe's last word on this knife?

Again, thanks to all.

Roc
 
Roc,

I saw the picture of the rear end and can only see one line. This means the spring holder/spacer is integral to the right hand side. I also saw one side of the the rear bolsters. It was the right hand side and it has rivets. This means it has 2 separate rivets that should be visible on both sides of the rear bolsters. (Except for the magic rivetless version we made for Goose! :D )
Stamped on the right hand side, inlay rivets, that seals the deal. 3rd version, Variation 7. Thats my final answer, now wheres my million $$$ ? :D
Buck 110 did bring up something though. There is only one variation that I have seen that has no inlay rivets. I looked at the data sheet and cant come up with a believeable excuse as to why I show variation 3 though 7 as not having inlay rivets. It should only be variation 3. :foot:
I will make that correction and my apologies for that. It is confusing enough to understand the 110 without me making it worse.
Hope this helps.
 
Joe Houser said:
(Except for the magic rivetless version we made for Goose! :D )
Click to expand...

I think you might have made two of those Joe. After reading all of this I pulled mine out again to take a look........and after all the rubbing and huffing and puffing that I could muster.........no sign of any rear bolster rivets. :(

Way back when I first got the knife I could swear that I spotted at least one slight circular mark on the left side of the butt. But now.......bupkis! :mad:

The only thing that I can think of is that it's a 3rd variation and with the rivets being integral to the right hand frame casting. That might make it more difficult to get them to show up with the breath and rub method. :confused:

BTW, How's that new chain saw working out? ;)
 
...Buck_110 or Joe or anyone who knows...Where does the inverted 2 liner with the integral rear bolster and one (1) bolster rivet lie in this group?...Joe, this is the knife I sent you pictures of some time back...:confused: :confused: :cool:
 
...I always stunk at math...These numbers are givin' me a headache...and when would this one have been produced??...
:eek: :eek:
 
DarrylS said:
...I always stunk at math...These numbers are givin' me a headache...and when would this one have been produced??...
:eek: :eek:
Click to expand...
It's like Chinese math trying to figure this out.
I'm glad they started the tang stamps. Whoever thought of that should get a free Buck Revolution.
 
Buckaholic said:
It's like Chinese math trying to figure this out.
I'm glad they started the tang stamps. Whoever thought of that should get a free Buck Revolution.
Click to expand...

...I decided I'm gonna learn Chinese and start keeping track of the numbers beginning with next year...I'm confused up to 2007...:eek: :eek: :p
 
I am going nutso on this one also Goose.

I have 6 laying here with either integeral brass or separate brass spacers that are two liner inverted. And one with a steel spacer two liner inverted. and one, one liner integeral brass inverted, but I think I have that one pegged, maybe... asprins right over here....:o


I gotta get that list from Joe!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top