what's wrong whit Buck Knives?

pinnah said:
As I have Bucks from both eras, I'll comment...

Most important thing to note here is that Buck did not replace 440C with 420HC. The replaced it with a choice between 420HC (for people who prefer fine carbide steel) and S30V (for people who prefer carbide rich steel).

The edge geometry issue with some of the older Bucks is that they used what some people refer to as a "semi-hollow" grind. It's hard to describe but possible to feel with your finger if you hold one in you hand. It's as if they pulled the blade away from the rounded grinder belt as they got close to the edge. The result is that there is a slight swell in thickness as you move down the blade from the spine to the edge. That is, the edge is actually thicker behind the edge and then gets thinner just above.

You might be able to see it in the shading of this older 2 dot 110. Look for change in shading just above the edge, particularly back along the edge near the tang.
Buck 110 and Opinel #10 by Pinnah, on Flickr

One of the results of this slightly thicker edge (not blade, but edge) geometries is that the older Bucks make wood shavings better (for me) for the same reason that a Mora does. The thicker geometry behind the edge allows for more control of the edge angle and less "diving" into the wood. Conversely, the older Bucks are less good at slicing and cutting, both of which favor a thinner edge profile.

This extra thickness behind the edge is one reason people had troubles keeping the old Bucks sharp, again, for same reason people have troubles sharping on convex or Scandi ground blade. You need to commit to aggressive use of a back bevel to maintain the edge profile, otherwise, the 'V' edge gets thicker and thicker as you wear away steel. This, of course, is one reason people like hollow grinds... The blade itself is thinner and doesn't demand as much back beveling.

Buck did a great job with the 440C and does a great job with 420HC. We know how both steels behave and they are very different steels. 440C has carbides and is much better for jobs that demand a toothy edge. If I'm cutting down a large amount of cardboard or cutting carpet - stuff that's super abrasive - I'll reach for this old Buck 500, which has the 440C steel.

Untitled by Pinnah, on Flickr

For general EDC use or for working with wood, I prefer 420HC. It takes a keener edge, handles lateral stress well and is easily touched up quickly.

The replacement for a carbide rich steel in Buck's line is S30V, not 420HC.



Schrade USA (as opposed to today's Taylor-made Schrade) used 440A up until the late 80s early 90s and then switched to 420HC. Their heat treat was very good on both.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the awesome and informative post! :thumbup:
 
If it's not broke don't fix it. It's a great design and still sells. I have lots of new style knives but I love the 110 as well. The design is fine, what most people seem to be complaining about is the materials. All are changeable, from wood to bolsters to steels. I don't see a problem. Buck has covered almost every aspect with the same design. Literally something for everyone who likes the design.
 
Are there better knives out there? Better is a pretty subjective word. Some people just dig old fashioned knives like 110s. Some people dig higher end spydercos or benchmades. Does the higher price you paid make my buck low quality? No. Just different preferences. I like brass and steel that's easy to sharpen. You may like carbon fiber and steel that holds an edge longer.
 
pinnah said:
As I have Bucks from both eras, I'll comment...
Click to expand...

I rarely comment on much here anymore, but this post is really spot on. I just wanted those that may not be familiar with Buck's steels or pinnah to know just how good this information really is, and how spot on.

I too have the same steels from that era, including a 119 I bought back in the early 70s. My experiences and comments mirror pinnah's exactly.


pinnah said:
The edge geometry issue with some of the older Bucks is that they used what some people refer to as a "semi-hollow" grind. It's hard to describe but possible to feel with your finger if you hold one in you hand. It's as if they pulled the blade away from the rounded grinder belt as they got close to the edge. The result is that there is a slight swell in thickness as you move down the blade from the spine to the edge. That is, the edge is actually thicker behind the edge and then gets thinner just above.
Click to expand...

Exactly!

pinnah said:
One of the results of this slightly thicker edge (not blade, but edge) geometries is that the older Bucks make wood shavings better (for me) for the same reason that a Mora does. The thicker geometry behind the edge allows for more control of the edge angle and less "diving" into the wood. Conversely, the older Bucks are less good at slicing and cutting, both of which favor a thinner edge profile.
Click to expand...

This is exactly why I eased back the edge a great deal. I had the same experience. I found this knife made a great utility camp knife for cutting rope, making shavings for the fire tinder, cutting tent stakes, even a bit of very light batoning. I used it for kitchen chores (not so good), and some game processing. Heavy cuts in flesh were just fine for beginning the butcher of game, but slicing finer cuts just weren't a good match for the blade no matter how sharp. I was finally out on a hunting trip with an older fellow somewhere in the 70s and he talked me into thinning the edge. It was a new knife! It did all the old chores just as well, but the utility value went through the roof.

Still, it is a good slicer, but not excellent. But as an overall camp knife, really hard to beat. And the 440c holds and excellent edge and has been very rust resistant even on extended canoe trips where it has stayed wet in the sheath for days at a time.

pinnah said:
This extra thickness behind the edge is one reason people had troubles keeping the old Bucks sharp, again, for same reason people have troubles sharping on convex or Scandi ground blade. You need to commit to aggressive use of a back bevel to maintain the edge profile, otherwise, the 'V' edge gets thicker and thicker as you wear away steel. This, of course, is one reason people like hollow grinds... The blade itself is thinner and doesn't demand as much back beveling.
Click to expand...

Again, excellent post. Regardless of my stable of newer knives, different steels and designs, heat treats, etc., I never feel under equipped with my 119, even in light of my other knives.

Robert
 
My Tenacious is excellent quality, does what it needs to do. It is still a budget knife though, no two ways about it and no amount of emotion on my part will make it any less a budget knife.
 
At first; thanks to all of you for the very usefull and comments concerned. Over here we have only the standard suply available for purchasing a Buck Knife. Indeed, edging the 440 knife blades could be a bummer..
Somebody told me once that even the famous Buckmark survival was manufactured from 440-C steel.
 
There's nothing wrong with Buck knives. I just don't want/need one - not when I have a handful of Spyderco back lock knives already.
 
Ankerson said:
Bottom line is one NEVER gets something for NOTHING unless it's a gift.

And knowing how things work one is not getting anything high quality for $28 Retail, will NEVER happen because the MONEY just isn't there in that $28 total price for that to happen.

What you do get is a functional knife that works OK.

Don't make it sound like more than it is because it's just not.

That said I have a 110 not even 2 ft from me as I type this and every time I look at it I thank GOD how far the knife world has really come.
Click to expand...


Just going to put it out there that something is going on with your comments. If the knife was such a low quality piece of $28.00 steel you would be telling us all about the one(s) that failed you. I'm sure we will get one now but all you've done is told us how bad it is based on price. Just saying people would find this easier to believe if you gave even a low quality story of failure to show us it's low quality or low end or whatever.

All I've seen in every negative comment looks more like personal image protection. One simply does not associate with these lowly knives when they have such delicate more costly Spyderco knives (or your favorite over priced brand). I guarantee you a lowly buck 110 will endure hard actual work, not work shop "tests", better than almost every Spyderco. I've seen and used a Rubicon I think the name was, it might keep up, but it's more than 10x the price. If you put a Spyderco in the same price range against it, oh man I can't stop laughing. Now that's a great joke right there.

I respect your opinion. I'm just letting you know it won't convince me the 110 is such a low end knife.

Sometimes you have to ignore price and look at the knife. This is the case for the 110.
 
bodog said:
I really don't understand why people keep buying bucks if they know there's more on the market.
Click to expand...

bodog said:
I was going to talk about how a spyderco military is a better platform than a buck 110 is, but....
Click to expand...

I am very aware of other knives on the market. I carry a 110 because I don't care for tactical looking knives with synthetic handles. I want a nail notch in my blade, not a hole. One-hand opening and closing, weight, and pocket clips are not important to me. The 110 has cut everything that I have asked it to cut. Add in great looks, exceptional comfort in the hand, a proven design, outstanding customer service and company values, USA made and you have a real winner. :thumbup:
 
Duane Sanders said:
Just going to put it out there that something is going on with your comments. If the knife was such a low quality piece of $28.00 steel you would be telling us all about the one(s) that failed you. I'm sure we will get one now but all you've done is told us how bad it is based on price. Just saying people would find this easier to believe if you gave even a low quality story of failure to show us it's low quality or low end or whatever.

All I've seen in every negative comment looks more like personal image protection. One simply does not associate with these lowly knives when they have such delicate more costly Spyderco knives (or your favorite over priced brand). I guarantee you a lowly buck 110 will endure hard actual work, not work shop "tests", better than almost every Spyderco. I've seen and used a Rubicon I think the name was, it might keep up, but it's more than 10x the price. If you put a Spyderco in the same price range against it, oh man I can't stop laughing. Now that's a great joke right there.

I respect your opinion. I'm just letting you know it won't convince me the 110 is such a low end knife.

Sometimes you have to ignore price and look at the knife. This is the case for the 110.
Click to expand...

You gotta tread careful Duane, Ankerson is a BEAST when it comes to testing knives and steels he does more than what 90% of what most knife nuts would do. I do respect his opinion greatly as does probably most on the board. That said, I've learned that I'm ok with not having the latest super steels. For what I do with knives, I've beat up 8CR13, Sandvik, High Carbon, VG10, S30V all up to a moderate level of abuse and they've all held up well for my purposes. Really quite surprised how well too!

I really dig sharpening as it relaxes me, so I don't mind sharpening, it's not like I don't have half a dozen different sharpeners lying around and quite a few more portable touch up stones. But in any case 420HC isn't horrible, you're not getting a material with a poor heat treat. And in a field of $30 knives the 110 is quite decent.
 
TAH, Well said.^ I won't spend money on a blade with a hole in it nor a pocket clip. I like a sheath and comfort in the hand when I use it. American made is another plus. DM
 
Last edited:
Duane Sanders said:
Just going to put it out there that something is going on with your comments. If the knife was such a low quality piece of $28.00 steel you would be telling us all about the one(s) that failed you. I'm sure we will get one now but all you've done is told us how bad it is based on price. Just saying people would find this easier to believe if you gave even a low quality story of failure to show us it's low quality or low end or whatever.

All I've seen in every negative comment looks more like personal image protection. One simply does not associate with these lowly knives when they have such delicate more costly Spyderco knives (or your favorite over priced brand). I guarantee you a lowly buck 110 will endure hard actual work, not work shop "tests", better than almost every Spyderco. I've seen and used a Rubicon I think the name was, it might keep up, but it's more than 10x the price. If you put a Spyderco in the same price range against it, oh man I can't stop laughing. Now that's a great joke right there.

I respect your opinion. I'm just letting you know it won't convince me the 110 is such a low end knife.

Sometimes you have to ignore price and look at the knife. This is the case for the 110.
Click to expand...

Failure? :confused:

I am trying to be realistic NOT NEGATIVE, there is a large difference.
 
Geez, I have to say the 110 isn't low quality really at all. It's just got that tiny little peened in pin, holding the blade in that big burly brass bloster. If you can't see how that's weaker, than the big oversized threaded pivots, nearly everything uses today on folders of size and single bladed. Buck could put in a bigger pivot with threads and improve strength markedly. But, why change it, they sell the way they are.
 
Duane Sanders said:
Just going to put it out there that something is going on with your comments.
Click to expand...

So, Duane...instead of just making claims you have pulled out of nowhere again, how about actually telling us what you think is "going on" with Ankerson's comments? What's the vast conspiracy this time?
 
Anderson has used Buck 110's and had them fail. I remember him saying so. I bought one some years ago, from Walmart and had it go from dead tight to sloppy loose in 4 directions on a short hike snap cutting small thorns off the trail. Something I've never had any other locking knife do.
 
jill jackson said:
Anderson has used Buck 110's and had them fail. I remember him saying so. I bought one some years ago, from Walmart and had it go from dead tight to sloppy loose in 4 directions on a short hike snap cutting small thorns off the trail. Something I've never had any other locking knife do.
Click to expand...

They do tend to loosen up don't they? :D

I do think a screw pivot and lightening up the handle quite a bit would go a long away.
 
That's what happens when you use a little tiny peened pin, suitable for a small slip joint on a nearly half pound lockback.
 
jill jackson said:
That's what happens when you use a little tiny peened pin, suitable for a small slip joint on a nearly half pound lockback.
Click to expand...

I remember the 110 Lite, that was actually pretty nice..

Discontinued though... :rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top