Which came first, the Puma or the Kershaw?

Norcaldude

Norcaldude

Joined
Dec 19, 2014
Messages
1,983
Is this pattern of knife considered generic enough that one of these is not a 'clone' of the other?

Puma

Kershaw
 
I have one of the PUMA versions of that knife, identical to your photo. Bought it about 30 - 40 years ago, if I recall correctly. Don't remember what I paid for it.

Just speculating, but it might be something produced under a limited-run/SFO contract between the two companies, as many such contract partnerships exist in the production knife world. The PUMA version always struck me as odd, in that it really didn't live up to the aesthetic or fit/finish standards of PUMA's original line of knives of similar vintage. I don't know what sort of quality was coming from Kershaw back then, but the 'modern' influence more associated with Kershaw is obvious in this knife, as opposed to the old world craftsmanship & beauty seen in PUMA's hunting/camp knives of the same period. Again just guessing, and I might be totally wrong - but I'd more likely assume it might've been a Kershaw pattern first, and then integrated into the PUMA line afterward (maybe a 'consumer' line or similar), under a contract. I just don't see the design people at PUMA coming up with this in their own house. By contrast, I have a stag-handled Puma Original Bowie that I bought around 1981-82 (it's date-coded for '81), and consider that knife to be perhaps the most beautiful I've ever owned. It's a work of art, by comparison.
 
afishhunter said:
Puma came first. Their lockback which looks like a Buck 110 pre-dates the 110 (110 came out in 1964) but has a different locking mechanism.
The Puma Company dates back to at least the 1800's.
Ka-Bar also makes a lockback that looks like the Puma and Kershaw.
Click to expand...
I didn't know the Puma version predates the 110, always thought Buck originated that particular style.
 
I think of the Kershaw as copying Puma but I think that is because I became aware of the Puma version before the Kershaw.
 
I can't speak to the Kershaw but the 2 Pumas that I have are well made and well finished knives. The stag is dated 1981, the other 1982.
mPlpPUN.jpg
 
afishhunter said:
Puma came first. Their lockback which looks like a Buck 110 pre-dates the 110 (110 came out in 1964) but has a different locking mechanism.
The Puma Company dates back to at least the 1800's.
Ka-Bar also makes a lockback that looks like the Puma and Kershaw.
Misplaced Hillbilly said:
I didn't know the Puma version predates the 110, always thought Buck originated that particular style.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

I think you'll find that Al Bucks rocker-bar lock model 110 design from 1963 was the first of this sort of lock back. It was never patented though and its been copied by just about every knife maker since....
https://www.tactical-life.com/tactical-knives/puma-classic-lockbacks/
 
To answer the original question, "Is one knife a clone of the other"? That answer is yes. The Kershaw 3100 series was introduced after the Puma 200 series knives as direct competition. (read the Kershaw ad enclosed)

As far as the other statements that have been made, Buck introduced the 110 in 1964 (developed in 1963). The Puma "Game Warden" which was originally called the "Plainsman", was introduced in 1965 and was a similar copy to the Buck 110. The original knife posted is one of the Puma 200 series which was introduced in the late 1970s as more economical versions of the original "Game Warden" models. (picture enclosed)

Bernard Levine has stated that the Buck 110 was the first knife to use the rear type lock back mechanism, which is simply not true. Some European cutlery companies had used that exact type of mechanism long before Buck had used it. Shown is a J. A. Henckels from the late 1800s below a Buck 110 for comparison. Not only do the back locks work in the same manor, pivoting on a center handle pin, but even the general curved handle shapes are similar. New ideas aren't always new ideas.

View attachment 1490079

View attachment 1490080

BF Henckels and Buck .jpg
 
Simply put, the Buck 110 styling and lock mechanism was first used by Puma in 1965 on the Plainsman, which later was renamed as the Game Warden. That was some 10 years before Kershaw was started. Either way they are both copies of Al Bucks design....
 
herder said:
To answer the original question, "Is one knife a clone of the other"? That answer is yes. The Kershaw 3100 series was introduced after the Puma 200 series knives as direct competition. (read the Kershaw ad enclosed)

As far as the other statements that have been made, Buck introduced the 110 in 1964 (developed in 1963). The Puma "Game Warden" which was originally called the "Plainsman", was introduced in 1965 and was a similar copy to the Buck 110. The original knife posted is one of the Puma 200 series which was introduced in the late 1970s as more economical versions of the original "Game Warden" models. (picture enclosed)

Bernard Levine has stated that the Buck 110 was the first knife to use the rear type lock back mechanism, which is simply not true. Some European cutlery companies had used that exact type of mechanism long before Buck had used it. Shown is a J. A. Henckels from the late 1800s below a Buck 110 for comparison. Not only do the back locks work in the same manor, pivoting on a center handle pin, but even the general curved handle shapes are similar. New ideas aren't always new ideas.

View attachment 1490079

View attachment 1490080

View attachment 1490081
Click to expand...

Thanks for the info and that Henckels is nice!
 
The Puma was my first quality knife. Kershaw knife was a ripoff and not as good in many ways. My first negative experience with a cloned knife. To me, there is a big difference between a 110 and Puma. I bought the Puma butdidn't like the 110. I still don't own a Kershaw :)
 
brownshoe said:
The Puma was my first quality knife. Kershaw knife was a ripoff and not as good in many ways. My first negative experience with a cloned knife. To me, there is a big difference between a 110 and Puma. I bought the Puma butdidn't like the 110. I still don't own a Kershaw :)
Click to expand...
Its not really any secret that Puma build quality is better. I have right now in front of me a Puma Duke and a Buck 110DB. While both are nice knives, the Puma is unquestionably better quality.
 
A lot of my own ignorance about this knife has been subsequently clarified in other postings here. Glad the question came up, and thanks to all whom responded.

I looked again at mine, having previously been oblivious to the significance of the date code on it. Turns out, mine was even older than I'd suspected, being dated for the 1st quarter of 1977. I'm certain I bought it some years after that (early '80s or later), though I don't remember when or where exactly.

Mine does have some blade play, mainly side-to-side, but also a tiny bit of vertical play as well. Gonna have to give myself some time to get reacquainted with it.

Edited to add:
Thanks to the image attachments posted by H herder above, I've also now ID'd my model as the 16-265 'Sergeant' model (3-1/8" blade), based on size description.
 
Last edited:
H herder Very useful post thank you. Surprised Levine contended that the 110 was the first rear locking LB, maybe in a USA context but plenty of 50s and pre War European lockers of that design.Think I've seen an early c20th French knife with that feature. Well, even Masters are fallible and that's what makes them mentors :thumbsup:

Those Pumas were not cheap back then, it would appear.

Regards, Will
 
brownshoe said:
The Puma was my first quality knife. Kershaw knife was a ripoff and not as good in many ways. My first negative experience with a cloned knife. To me, there is a big difference between a 110 and Puma. I bought the Puma butdidn't like the 110. I still don't own a Kershaw :)
Click to expand...

I handled one of the Kershaw last year and it seemed like a decent enough knife, but it was definitely not the same as a Buck 110.
I can't exactly say it was functionally worse, but it just felt much cruder
Will Power said:
H herder Very useful post thank you. Surprised Levine contended that the 110 was the first rear locking LB, maybe in a USA context but plenty of 50s and pre War European lockers of that design.Think I've seen an early c20th French knife with that feature. Well, even Masters are fallible and that's what makes them mentors :thumbsup:

Those Pumas were not cheap back then, it would appear.

Regards, Will
Click to expand...
Maybe it has to do with Buck making it in the way they did without the lock bar sticking up.
Since the 110 came out nobody would ever think of making a new lockback with a protruding lock bar I would guess.
 
Obsessed with Edges said:
A lot of my own ignorance about this knife has been subsequently clarified in other postings here. Glad the question came up, and thanks to all whom responded.

I looked again at mine, having previously been oblivious to the significance of the date code on it. Turns out, mine was even older than I'd suspected, being dated for the 1st quarter of 1977. I'm certain I bought it some years after that (early '80s or later), though I don't remember when or where exactly.

Mine does have some blade play, mainly side-to-side, but also a tiny bit of vertical play as well. Gonna have to give myself some time to get reacquainted with it.

Edited to add:
Thanks to the image attachments posted by H herder above, I've also now ID'd my model as the 16-265 'Sergeant' model (3-1/8" blade), based on size description.
Click to expand...

If it has blade play, the Puma’s desigh with the exposed rivets allow for easy adjustment using a small hammer and the anvil on a vise. It’s a design feature I like and used once or twice since mine is old and used constantly for many years.
 
Thanks, Norcaldude, Obsessed with Edges, and Will Power.
It's always interesting to compare various knives and dig into some history.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top