Tampered knife?

JD Mandrell

JD Mandrell

Joined
Apr 20, 2001
Messages
18,423
Is it just my eyes, or does this 110 seem to have had the "U.S.A." ground off to make it appear to be an earlier version??

300250182773
 
I do believe your right.

I think my previous comment was to strong so it's been removed. :(
 
Last edited:
Possibly...but until you get it in your hand, it's impossible to tell from pics...that lighter area might just be from where he polished it...

Why not ask a question and get an answer in writing??? If you bid & win and it is not what it seems, you can more easily substantiate any claim for refund you make to eBay for fraudulent listing...
 
OK, I sent him an email and stated that it looked like a 4th Version with the USA stamp missing. To Wit, I recieved this:

"Sorry, but I don't agree ,All 4th version have steel spacers that were a tad thicker than the brass. Not the case here, Seperate Brass ,and not cast or integral with the right hand side. Location of Stamp is just as a first version and is thinner.Late 2nd & 3rd version stamps are just a tad thicker. I have also seen Quite a few 1st versions with the flat tangs in comparison to the early rounded. I stick to the First version , but if someone could point out something really out of the ordinary, I will always listen. These knives were not set in stone and many differances appeared from time to time , even seen one with a almost sideways stamp on lower tang , not at top Flat of Blade like the real early 1963 or 1964 had, that a collector had years ago, but he would not sell. Thanks for your concern."

Now this all reads very well to me...he sounds very knowledgable but I was certain that the Third version was the first 110 to receive the tang or ricasso. So I reply with a yes but......and he replies with this:

"Alot of Pre 1968 versions were stamped on the tang.Third versions also had Forged Brass, not cast.Early also had Stamped nail nics , Later was thicker and machined. This is an early pre 1968 , just not sure which exact year, I did by the way add this to my description. Also , if Blade was messed with there would be a hollow, this does not . Just a light struck stamp, but not real light, still has depth but bad pics ! Thanks Again !"

Opinions on these two explanations??? I have to say he has very good explanations but I'd really like someone who knows tell me that a 1st Version had a Buck stamp on the tang instead of the blade.
 
"Sorry, but I don't agree ,All 4th version have steel spacers"
Click to expand...


Seems a little odd, no mention of the spring holder/spacer being a separate piece of brass until the 4th versions and steel ones did not start until 5th versions I thought??????
 
cattaragus is a seller i have watched for a good while.. i have bid on his knives before..and i may have bought from him at some time in the past ... i dont recall..

FIRST : Know that when dealing with any Buck Knife you need to recall :
That if Buck found some older blades they would put them in newer frames and sell them!
this makes the published information only the Best Known information and not Complete information!

i have seen the blades lightly stamped as his shows..
he calls attention to the brass rocker pin -and the that it has the separate spacer
which takes it out of the very first few issues..

heck i collect the 110 and i dont have the details in my head
it is likely the last issue of the one line blades..

he provided reasonable pictures were you can tell what it is..

for what it is worth i would have no issue with biding on this knife..
or on any thing he may sell ...but i wont be able to bid as am broke..

but if some generous formite wants to buy it and donate it to
Buck Rest Home
for lost and lonely one tens ...
why i would welcome it on in !! ;)
 
Last edited:
334dave said:
...this makes the published information only the Best Known information and not Complete information!...for what it is worth i would have no issue with biding on this knife...
Click to expand...

I am by no means any kind of "expert" but I agree with 334dave on both counts... :):thumbup:

His comment on the hollow is 100% correct.

The only caveat I can see is how high it goes... :(
 
334dave said:
FIRST : Know that when dealing with any Buck Knife you need to recall :
That if Buck found some older blades they would put them in newer frames and sell them!
this makes the published information only the Best Known information and not Complete information!
Click to expand...

Pretty good summin' up there! :thumbup:
 
So did this guy cancel his auction due to the questions?

Anybody talk to him?

Looks like he thought all the discussion might have driven away potential bidders.
 
Looks more to me like he either didn't like anyone asking questions, or maybe realized he might not be accurately describing it and has pulled to do more research.

"This Definately has been confirmed as an Early Pre 68 version"

Wonder how?
 
what i seen was most likely a pre 68 blade... pre 65 .. well i dont know...
not every one has access to information like we do ...
never won any thing from him... but have bid on his listings before..
at any rate
if i was doing a early hunter display like a few i know..
i would want this one in it
Jest Because it does not fit neatly in a slot!!!
MHO = another heretofore un-known unique early buck knife..
inverted 3 lines were thought to be figments of the imagination once also..
 
So if I understand right, the rear spacer, aka the spring holder, is a separate piece of brass? That did not come along until 1970-1972. This was when the sides were forged brass. There are 2 variations of the brass spring holder Version. One with brass rocker rivet and the other with stainless. Both are stamped BUCK, U.S.A. in an inverted fashion.
The hollowgrind line says it is not as old as does the overall shape of the handle.
If it was just stamped BUCK, the spring holder would be integral to the right hand side (one variation), or made of bone hard fiber (two variations), or a much thinner piece of stainless (one variation).
If I had to bet, I would say the U.S.A. got worn off somehow...
 
Possibly...but until you get it in your hand, it's impossible to tell from pics...that lighter area might just be from where he polished it...
Click to expand...

Cattaragus added this yesterday:
"Knife was Purchased some 35+ years ago From a Display in Amherst Ohio. This Definately has been confirmed as an Early Pre 68 version , Just not sure the Exact Year. There has always been Skepticism with and those who think they Know it all about Knives, But " BUCK " Contraversy Has always Existed as to Transitional years and Parts Configuration. To Those who Blindly Slander and then submit Offers , ( I atleast Like to Hold the Knife in Hand before stating my Opinion ). Sometimes Pics Just Don't Cut it !!! I also Give a 100% Gaurantee , if your not satisfied , No Problem , Just Return it !"

I sent him a message with a link to this thread this morning. I thought he should be aware of the discussion. The thread seems to have peaved him. To bad he canned the auction this morning. I was interested to see what the sale price ended at.

The thing is, if he purchased this knife 35 years ago that was 1973. That would have been the right timeline for a 4th version, 1st Variation finding a home as an older displayed knife particularily if the guy hawking the knife did the tampering (if it was in fact altered???). Never know, this could be a real unusual knife, but I'll get in line with Joe...it looked altered to me, wrong location on the tang, Buck stamp to small for the one line stamping of previous version. An interesting knife non the less.
 
edbeau said:
Glad you are back, Joe. Feeling better?
Click to expand...

dittto here on being back ! you has us worried there guy!
did you get some relief?

yes the frame shape and spacer points that it is from 1970

i looked at images at 200% and it does not look that it the blade was polished out..
Joe - are there thickness differences that will show in measurements that would date the blade?

the blade did appear to ME that it could be a 68 blade and
i did email to him that i though it was an older blade..

scott you have a good set of older knives... could you mike some for us?

is it possible that it had an older blade put in from older stock ?

it is noted that the stamping is light at the lower part,
humm on that knife is it possible
maybe it jest did not get USA stamped on it due to miss stamping..
you know crooked or warn out die?
either way this knife has proven to be an enigma ..
an i stand with if i were doing early knives i would want this one...
if for nothing else but that it is an enigma!
 
If I was the seller, I would not have posted those questions or addressed them publicly like he did.

He was trying to be a nice guy, but the situation got out of hand.

I would have answered the questions privately only.

His auction was, intentionally or unintentionally, sabotaged......but he allowed it to happen by responding publicly and allowing the questioners to create an atmosphere of doubt.

It's a good knife and should bring a good price, but it was well on its way to selling too cheap, so he was smart to cancel the auction.

Hope he has better luck next time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top