Which One for EDC - Buck 110 or 112 and Why?

Different 112 with stud
20161014_144623_zpstsf6oct3.jpg
[/URL][/IMG]
20161014_144632_zpsagjjiotk.jpg
[/URL][/IMG]
20161014_144648_zpsacbzhj6j.jpg
[/URL][/IMG]
20161014_144653_zpswnkoynmr.jpg
[/URL][/IMG]
 
Redhat said:
What leaves me undecided is the handle length. I can get all 4 fingers on but it just feels like it would be "better" if it was about 1/2" or so longer.
Click to expand...

Give it some time, it might "grow" on you. ;) You'll appreciate the shorter handle when you don't feel like using the sheath and put it in your pocket. Glad to hear the fit and finish was acceptable.
 
Redhat said:
Well, the new 112 arrived today for pick-up and after checking it out for the last hour or so...I have to say I'm undecided. I really like the front bolster and the blade with it's shorter snout. Fit and finish are very good, as expected and the lock-up is wiggle free.

What leaves me undecided is the handle length. I can get all 4 fingers on but it just feels like it would be "better" if it was about 1/2" or so longer. And I know it goes against tradition but I actually like the nylon sheath better than the leather as it has a more flat profile.

The deciding factor though will be when I actually get to use it this weekend...whittling a stick!
Click to expand...

You won't regret getting this knife for the simple reason of it's beauty. IMO, it's the most beautiful production knife made.

But mine stays in my knife roll or on my dresser where I can see it, but it doesn't make the cut and put in my EDC knife/loose change bowl that sits on top of my fridge where my Buck 110 has permanent status and my 500 has regular status.

I've switched to rear pocket carry (run a seam up the bottom half of my right rear pocket to hold the knife vertical) and the 110 carries as easy or easier than the 112 there. Full 4 finger hold.

And for the times I need front pocket carry, the thinner 500 gets the nod and it gives me a better, more comfortable grip than the 112.

For whittling, when doing close work requiring some carefully control pressure, I'll sometimes choke up on the knife and put my right thumb on the spine and my left thumb on top of my right thumb. This allows me to control both the wood and knife with one, stronger interlocked "hand made of two hands", so to speak. One thing I really, really love about the Bucks is the lack of the choil which gives me usable edge right up to the tang and when combined with the flatish front bolster of the 110 and 112, I can do this sort of work very comfortably.

I find that knives with bolsters like the 112 or Spitfire/Slimline interfere with this sort of hold. I should also note that I typically end up grinding off of the fixed blade knives I use for wood working and whittling for the same exact reason.

Having said all that... function and beauty are still, at the end of the day, different things. The lines of the 112 are dead spot on. It's just a gorgeous knife and IMO nothing that comes close. I would love to see a thinner version of the 112. I think it would make the knife more popular as it would make it a true pocket knife.
 
To be honest, my criticisms might be nit-picking. It occurred to me...when I was a kid, I didn't have all these choices, I was given my first pocket knife that somebody else picked out, and I learned to use it all types of ways and for pretty much anything that came along. I didn't think about its suitability for this material, this environment or this grip, I just used it. Heck, I was just happy to have a knife!

And the truth is, I don't believe it ever failed to deliver. So my points about the new 112 are just small druthers that I'm sure won't matter one bit when I begin to use it today.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top