Single strike or 4-strike tang stamp?

C

CRK1969

Joined
Jul 28, 2006
Messages
26
Picked this up today from the estate of a man who lived here (in San Diego) for the last 60+ years. He had a few cool knives, though this was the only Buck. Single line (pre-1967) stamp... approximates a 120 in OAL, though there's no clip point - just a regular spear-point tip. FWIW, has two (red) micarta and two aluminum spacers both on the guard and at the pommel.

Anyway, here's the stamp... the letters don't line up perfectly - there's a little variation in both their vertical alignment and in the spacing from one to another. So is that a 4-strike stamp, or just an early (pre-CNC) made single-strike stamp?

bsingleline.jpg


And when did Buck begin using phenolic grips? :confused:
 
CRK, Welcome . Its a single blow and the hammer landed just a tad on the rightside toward the 'K' hence alittle deeper impression . Buck began using phenolic in 1961 . Those spacers look dark to me . Micarta spacers didn't come along until 1969 and the stamp would have a USA on it as well . Maybe they are leather . Check the pommel and tell us if there is a circle on the end . DM
 
Hi David,

Thanks... The only circle I can find on the pommel is the giant single pin (that runs through the tang and is visible on both sides)... Leather spacers, eh? Were the earlier Buck (single-strike) stamps non-CNC made? I ask as the spacing between the letters isn't quite even.

So is there any way to narrow down the '61-'67 date range? I'll take a picture of the whole knife tomorrow and throw it on the thread... I've never seen a Buck before with this blade profile.

Thanks again...
 
CRK, Thats what I was trying to do was gather enough information inorder to accurately date your knife and your giving me that . The pin thru the sides (as you state) dates it as that mfg. method started June 1963 . So, I'm mostly sure the spacers are red bone hard fiber which further dates your knife . Without a better photo I'd say your knife was mfg. between June, 1963 thru 1966 . As to the model, Buck did not make a large spearpoint during this time in their mfg. line, unless at a special customers request . So, I'll have to see the shape . DM
 
Last edited:
Thanks again David...

I'll take a few pictures of the knife tomorrow and post them - I'll send you a PM once they're up. I'm holding the knife right now, and I guess there is a very slight "clip" to the blade profile, though at best its subtle / hardly noticeable, and it doesn't recurve like any clip point Buck I've seen. Maybe calling it a spear point may not be quite accurate either, but anyway, a picture is worth a thousand words, so I'll defer to the photo once I take it and post it.
 
The blade shape could have been modified but the stamp looks quite normal, like my one liner Bucks . DM
 
Here's a few additional photos of the knife. The first photo shows the full knife - forgive the poor picture. The second shows a close-up of the spacers in the pommel, and the third shows the grind of the tip of the blade (again, a poor representation, but hopefully along with the first, conveys a sense of the blade shape). IMHO, the blade does not look to have been re-profiled - the reverse of the tip has the same hand-forged appearance of the rest of the knife (it lacks the grinding marks present on the obverse false edge)... Hope these help, and thank you once again for the same.

bsinglelineknife.jpg


bsinglelinespacers.jpg


bsinglelinetip.jpg
 
What's the exact length of the blade?

They were 7 and 5/8ths inches in those days and yours looks a bit short.

Suspect a broken and re-worked tip as the likely explanation.

Interesting look, though!!
 
It sure does look like a reworked tip on the knife. One can see where the grind began and extended to the tip of the blade. The grind marks are coarser than usually found on Buck products.

bsinglelinetip.jpg


Telechronos:):):)
 
BG42EDGE said:
What's the exact length of the blade?

They were 7 and 5/8ths inches in those days and yours looks a bit short.

Suspect a broken and re-worked tip as the likely explanation.

Interesting look, though!!
Click to expand...



2/8 of an inch shorter, to be exact... Measures 7 3/8 from the guard to the tip.
 
Telechronos said:
It sure does look like a reworked tip on the knife. One can see where the grind began and extended to the tip of the blade. The grind marks are coarser than usually found on Buck products.

bsinglelinetip.jpg


Telechronos:):):)
Click to expand...


Noted as such in the post with the pics, though as mentioned, the reverse of the tip has no visible grinding marks whatsoever.

I'll take some additional pics of the other side as well as trace the tip shape, though based on BG42Edge's post, it sounds as if this isn't as long as it should be for its age... which I never would have guessed, as the blade length is within 1/32 of my 120's.

So was this a precursor to what was to become the 120?
 
I'd call it a 120, just before they got stamped with a model number.

The newer 120s seem to be just under 7 and a half and the older ones just over.....that's the way the ones I have seem to measure up.

They do vary a bit.
 
It definitely looks to have been reworked as BG said. Bone hard fiber spacers and pretty much everything else DM said.
The only thing I would add in regards to the stamp is that those early blades were made of 440c forgings. The sides were not parrallel and before they stamped them they hand ground the forging "skin" off. This meant that the stamp depth could vary, letter by letter and blade to blade becuase the thickness varied so much.
Hope this helps.
 
Joe Houser said:
It definitely looks to have been reworked as BG said. Bone hard fiber spacers and pretty much everything else DM said.
The only thing I would add in regards to the stamp is that those early blades were made of 440c forgings. The sides were not parrallel and before they stamped them they hand ground the forging "skin" off. This meant that the stamp depth could vary, letter by letter and blade to blade becuase the thickness varied so much.
Hope this helps.
Click to expand...


That's interesting... Thanks for that bit of history, Joe, and thank you all for your help.

I'm hoping DM can help me pin down the age - he thought '63-66 before I put these latest pictures up (unless you want chime in with a suggestion, Joe)...
 
CRK, The age is pinned down as close as we (I can anyway) can . When you go from a knife being mfg. sometime in 1961 to 1966 and whittle that down to 1963 to 1966 thats close only 3.5yrs.. Realize these early factory knives cannot be definitively narrowed down to ONE year unless yours happens to have the RIGHT stamping on it . Even then theres only one or two cases I can think of that would allow that narrow an interpretation . Then, as to the shape; I'm not sure what I'd call that other than a modified clip point by someone with not much experience . I've looked at those clips alot and it would be difficult to modify them . So, perhaps they did as good a job as could be . Thanks, Joe and Tele . Right it's still a 440C blade from the early 60's . Thanks, for posting this . DM
 
The 63 to 66 must be (as must be any of these conclusions) qualified with the caveat that production of a specific knife never stopped or started exactly on December 31 or January 1 of the new year.

So, a given knife most likely slopped over into one or the other (if not both) of the adjoining years even once we narrow it down to a fairly specific time-frame.
 
CRK, I might can narrow your knife down further . But that depends on whether you'll accept someone's years of research and evidence from studying Buck's history and looking at examples . DM
 
Hi DM & BG,

No worries... at the end of the day, I think any additional effort on anyone's part might very well pass the point of diminishing returns. We'll call it a '61-'66 and I won't sweat which of those years it might be. ;)

Thanks again to you both...
 
Yes, we're certainly at the point of 'diminishing returns' on information about your knife . Your welcome . DM ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top