Old Fixed Blade Construction

Generalist

Generalist

Gold Member
Joined
May 10, 2025
Messages
137
This is a rambling manufacturing/construction question for those familiar with pre-1961 Bucks. The below is my understanding and may be incomplete or inaccurate. Please add/correct if you can. I feel fairly uneducated in this area.

Pommels
Some 1940s fixed blades (and maybe earlier?) had pommel rivets. I presume those indicate pinned construction? From 1951-1963 Buck switched to/between threaded pommels and barrel nuts and seems to have switched which more than once (around '55 and in '61?).

Blades
Until 1961 blades were used files, which were hard from being previously heat treated, and therefore probably difficult to drill for pinned construction. The early 1960s forged blades were similarly pre-hardened? This seems to explain why brazing a bolt to the tang might have been easier than drilling for a pinned connection. However, for some period, tangs were actually threaded (prior to bolt brazing). That seems more difficult than drilling a hole for a pinned connection?

The main question(s)
Were the earliest Buck knives truly pinned construction, and if so, was the switch to and from threaded tangs/bolts for ease of manufacturing using pre hardened blade material? Or were other factors driving all the changes in blade/handle connections from the '40s-'60s?
 
This isn't directly related to your question, but it may be of interest. The photo is of a 1961 barrel-nut 102 with leather spacers. Before the barrel-nut, a threaded pommel was standard and the pommel was rotated around the threaded end of the tang. Leather spacers could be easily damaged by this rotation so a metal spacer was used to protect the leather. If you look closely at the photo, you can see the metal spacer between the leather and the pommel. Of course with a barrel nut that protection wasn't needed. The 102 in the photo must be an early one, and the metal spacer was a carryover. Someone must not have gotten the memo about the new construction and no need for that spacer.

Bert

102 barrel nut, leather 1961.jpeg
 
I'm glad you posted this. It's a rare and excellent example of one of the transition periods.
 
I really have a problem with the notion that file blades were worked in the hardened state, or the 440C forged blades for that matter. Annealing would be the FIRST step in making a blade from a file IMO. Forging introduces stress and irregular grain structure which much be relieved thru annealing, then final hardening and tempering after the blade is worked. I stumbled over your wording a bit but pommels were always threaded after 1951 and barrel nuts did not appear until 1961. (AFAIK ;) )

bertl bertl That 102 is just a thing of beauty.
 
Last edited:
The pommel is drilled & threaded all the way thru and you are seeing the end of the threaded tang. The pommel itself is the nut. I have a bunch of those LV knives. To get around the problem of clocking, the shaping of the pommel and handle together is completed after the pommel is affixed.
 
Thanks, that makes sense and clears up some of my confusion.

Some interesting context from Vern Taylor's article in the Aug 1997 BCCI newsletter. This section makes it seem like they were never pinned pre factory? If so, what is the pommel rivet in some of the '40s knives for?

1000019885.jpg

This section of the same article implies the files were pre hardened, but the early '60s forgings were not. So I was wrong about the forged blades being hard at least.

1000019884.jpg

Not my photos, but this is the pommel rivet I'm asking about from a couple of lucite knives.
1000019886.jpg
1000019890.jpg
 

Attachments

  • 1000019886.jpg
    1000019886.jpg
    46.7 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
Good find. So this says the forgings were still soft and files were ground hard....still not convinced.
Well.... unlike the Pope, I'm not infallible...
I'm 14 years retired but could have had one x-rayd one back in the day to see if the pined tang was also threaded. Either the pin is antirotation or the retention itself. Was there loctite pre 1951? According to Google... invented 1953, publically available 1956.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top