300 Series History 1966 to 1990

[Nexus-6]

Looks to me your right, all round. 309 72-74. First model 309 and 303's to some degree were 'watch pocket' knives and competed in the market against other companies same size designs. The BUCK 309 was just a little smaller than the 3 bladed 303. The very small 305's were attractive for people to carry in dress pants pockets. I call them 'Sunday-Go-to-meet-in' knife. The 309 scaled up the size and fit well in watch pockets, regular pants pockets and women's handbag's. Sadly for the Model 300 collectors they have been discontinued as a American made product.

I can't thank you enough for this. Greatly appreciated!

 

[Heirphoto]

From this thread I assume the 1989 301 models were made in house by Buck, not Camillus. Did Buck still use 2 back springs and cranked blades or had they switched to 3 springs on the 301 at that point and parallel blades?

I saw a 2 spring with 1989 date code. Buck factory made or an earlier Camillus knife with a warranty re-blade by Buck later ?

 

[bertl]

From this thread I assume the 1989 301 models were made in house by Buck, not Camillus. Did Buck still use 2 back springs and cranked blades or had they switched to 3 springs on the 301 at that point and parallel blades?

I saw a 2 spring with 1989 date code. Buck factory made or an earlier Camillus knife with a warranty re-blade by Buck later ?

Heirphoto, Buck took over production of the 301 in 1985 and introduced the three spring design in 1988. My guess is that the two spring with 1989 date was a matter of using old inventory.

Bert

 

[Heirphoto]

Heirphoto, Buck took over production of the 301 in 1985 and introduced the three spring design in 1988. My guess is that the two spring with 1989 date was a matter of using old inventory.

Bert

Thanks. Was just going back through archives on every 301 thread I could find and saw a similar report, 1988/1989 was the change from two spring to three spring. Also found answers on why my 2010 Chuck Buck 301 has no shield and the etched name is on the mark side. Look like th shield was added to the Chairman knives around 2011

 

[Heirphoto]

1989 301V Stag (elk?) 2 spring Stockman I am assuming made in house by Buck even though it is not a 3 spring knife. I do like that the spey blade is hinged opposite the clip blade so the tip is buried in the scales rather than protruding as on the newer 301 Stockmans

View attachment 1338471 View attachment 1338472 View attachment 1338473

 

[Nexus-6]

1989 301V Stag (elk?) 2 spring Stockman I am assuming made in house by Buck even though it is not a 3 spring knife. I do like that the spey blade is hinged opposite the clip blade so the tip is buried in the scales rather than protruding as on the newer 301 Stockmans

View attachment 1338471 View attachment 1338472 View attachment 1338473

What a beauty!

 

[Neil Presley]

Over the last couple of weeks I have thrown out some history on different threads as requested. But it is spread out and would be hard to find. I pulled that info together in this thread so that it would be easier to locate for someone doing a forum search. This info will 'help' figure out your Buck black sawcut slipjoint folding knife if it was made between 1966 and 1990.

First things first.
To be straight up accurate, Bucks first slipjoint was the 117, back in the lean-to shop days, they took surplus war lifeboat knifes and forged new clip blades to go into the handles. These are few, rare and over priced (for my pocket book anyway). Watch out for fakes....(I can only post so many photos so skipping this one)

Modern Slipjoint Production
Buck wanted to get in the slipjoint market but had no facilities to produce the knives. So it contracted out it's first slipjoint to Schrade Knives of New York beginning in 1966. Schrade produced what would later be considered a 301 sized stockman. It was not marked with a model number. This knife was a three bladed stockman with clip and sheepsfoot blade on same end and spey blade on the opposite. It can quickly be indentified by the deep grooved bolsters, slightly S shaped body, 3 brass rivet on the black sawcut Delrin* scale with the Clip blade only stamped with BUCK, Made In U.S.A. Also notice the relief grind on the top of the clip blade extends well over the finger nail groove. *http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyoxymethylene_plastic

This is the first and only model made with grooved bolsters. Schrade went on to make two additional 301 sized models and two 303 sized stockmen.

In the photo below the identification is similar for both sized models and is represented by the larger 301 sized knife.
Left to right: First model with grooved bolster call this Version 1, next is the face of Version 2, Version 2 Schrades came in variation 1 which had NO marks on the reverse tangs of the secondary blades and variation 2 which had BUCK stamped on the reverse tang of the sheepsfoot and spey blades.

The face markings of Version 2 knives were the same. But notice that there is NO grooved bolsters.

Buck carried these well fit and finished knives for over 6 years, but a weakness became apparent and began to cost Buck time and money.
The Schrade Bucks were designed with a 'hidden pivot pin'. The ends of the blade pivot pins are not visible on the surface of the bolster. They have flat, nail like heads that are fitted into key type slots in the brass liners when the knife is assembled.

With hard and heavy use both the pin and the brass liner key-hole would fail. This can readily be seen by blades that bend pass the normal horizontal when open.

With Bucks forever warranty this led to lots of work for the repair department

In 1971 it was decided that the slipjoint contract would be move to Camillus Knife of New York and their designers used a exposed pivot pin on the bolsters which made blade repair and replacement easier. The Camillus version of the Buck slipjoint was straighter in form, had ends less rounded, gave the appearence of deep finger nic grooves and the first models had small flat scale rivets. The black sawcut scales with Bucks knife, bolt and hammer escutcheon continued.

A few Scharde made knives continued to be issued till the supply dried up later in 1971. As the transition to Camillus proceded additonal models were added. By the time full Camillus production was under way Buck was offering a 301,303,309 and 305 sized models.
Markings were similar and are represented by the 301s listed and pictured below.
Left to right:
1971, Scale rivets, Made in USA on tang, NO model number on tang, two versions - single brass scale liners and double brass liners on one side.

1971, Scale rivet, Made in USA on tang, MODEL number on reverse tang, one version - single brass scale liners

1971 - 1974, NO scale rivets, Made in USA on tang, MODEL number on revers tang, one version - single brass scale liner

1974 - 1985, No scale rivets, BUCK, 301,USA on front tang, nothing on reverse, two versions - single brass scale liners and two liners on one side.

Example of double brass liners under one scale on end. The use of extra scale liners is to 'fine tune' the 'crinking' or bend in the blade so they do not rub when folded into the blade well. (i.e. three blades, only two springs). As an example the last two knives on right show two odd-balls that issued during this era, Winchester contracted to have their name on escutcheon and because the 319 and 301 shared blades some mis-matches occurred. In this poor photo you can barely see 319 stamped in place of 301 on the tang. But sheepsfoot and spey blade in knife well, missing is leather punch to make it a real 319. The next knives in timeline after these begin actual Buck made models.

Camillus produced additional models and its relationship with Buck continued even up to the closing of factory in the mid 2000s. But Buck was making decisions which would set the course for the future.

Buck builds a slipjoint production line and begins to issue there own made models late in 1985. Buck takes over the production of the most popular models of their slipjoint knives, the 301,303,309 and 305. With the remaining models continued to be made by the Camillus factory.
Buck began by marking their knives with a date code stamp following the model number on the tang. They issued their new knives with improved 425m steel. http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=716179
A new excutcheon plate replaced the traditional knife, bolt and hammer. The new plate simply said BUCK in capital letters. A few knives were produced in late 1985 and did not receive date code stamps, but these are rare. Between 1986 and 1988 these version of the four Buck models were heavily produced. This era was consistent and only the date code changes yearly over this period.
Represented here by photo of model 303s.

In 1989 after continued outcries over the escutcheon change from the knife, bolt and hammer Buck went back to the historic symbol. The newer BUCK escutcheon was also prone to have the ink quickly rub off leaving only a shallow indention of BUCK.

In late 1989 Buck designers were busy fine tuning the four models they produced. For the 1990 issue, blade steel was changed to 420HC, the knife,bolt and hammer settled in as the escutcheon plate of choice and the 303 was made with three stainless steel springs, one for each blade. Other changes were on the way in the near future. Here is the historical line-up of the 303, starting top left down and then top right down. 1966 - 1990.

After 1989 things get complicated with issues of special scale material, blade markings and changes in materials to all stainless steel occurr. That history will be written in the future.....you forumites can at least appreciate that I now am in trouble with BCCI as this posting could have been written as a newsletter article.....and may yet be.....good luck on you IDs.
300Bucks

I have a watergate edition buck 301 my dad gave before passing looking for some info.

 

[Sonny14]

My best guess is that one I saw with brass blade pivot was earlier, but I have never seen another brass one. So, it could just be someone's repair, it did have a correctly stamped blade. If I had found either, for say $75 , at a flea market I would have purchased it and been proud to have it.
When these were being converted in the shed blacksmith shop Al Buck would have been a young man starting out on the knife maker journey. This was the era of the long slender 110s with Buck stamped along the top of the blade. And fixed blades could be ordered with different customizations. Yours can rightly be considered a first model. If you want to dig that photo should be in Buck forum history. 300

Well, after years at this collecting 300 Series thing I find out about yet another "must have" Buck, the 117, though it isn't a 300 Series. Since I now have all models of the 300 Series, including all the SFO's, I can focus on finding yet another Buck Unobtanium knife, the 117. You never mentioned this one to me 300, (you were probably worried about my sanity so it's ok), but now that I know I'm skipping down the yellow brick road looking for one of my own. Of course I thank 300 for his sage help, but he warned me that looking for "versions" will keep me busy for years, and he was right, and am now working on collecting all colors of the #305 Clipper, (I have two and have many to go, though I've whittled the "version list" down a bit since we last spoke). I'm still looking for the elusive #317 with serrated secondary blade, so I can add a #117 to that search list, (and a yellow #313, and, and , and....). Thanks 300, glad to see you are still around.

 

[DirtDawg]

Ref: Buck 303 Cadets shown - NFS

Having searched threads and forums until my eyes crossed, I've not been able to get my question answered.
Having contacted Buck Knives with my question, and being referred over here to bladeforums for an answer, I've decided to just jump in and ask...

Both knives shown appear to be of Camillus manufacture.
Both knives shown are of nearly identical construction - blade placement, number of springs, brass liner quantities and construction, etc, etc.

The differences I've noted are as follows:
- #2 closed length is .025" shorter than #1
- #2 is also .025" thinner (over scales) than #1
- #2 is noticeably lighter in weight than #1 (when picking up both knives without paying attention to which is which)
- #2 long-pull is .150" shorter in length than #1
- #2 long pull is also positioned farther from the tang than #1 pull
- #2 swedge is not nearly as significant as on #1

I'm just curious as to why this might be. Is anyone able and/or willing to shed light on my inquiry?



EDITED 10/6/2022 - Added three photos to clarify liner/spacer arrangement. See below.

 

[DirtDawg]

Ref: Buck 303 Cadets shown - NFS

Having searched threads and forums until my eyes crossed, I've not been able to get my question answered.
Having contacted Buck Knives with my question, and being referred over here to bladeforums for an answer, I've decided to just jump in and ask...

Both knives shown appear to be of Camillus manufacture.
Both knives shown are of nearly identical construction - blade placement, number of springs, brass liner quantities and construction, etc, etc.

The differences I've noted are as follows:
- #2 closed length is .025" shorter than #1
- #2 is also .025" thinner (over scales) than #1
- #2 is noticeably lighter in weight than #1 (when picking up both knives without paying attention to which is which)
- #2 long-pull is .150" shorter in length than #1
- #2 long pull is also positioned farther from the tang than #1 pull
- #2 swedge is not nearly as significant as on #1

I'm just curious as to why this might be. Is anyone able and/or willing to shed light on my inquiry?

View attachment 1947725

OOPS! I just noticed that this thread is over two years old. I hope it still works.

Please feel free to move my posting if needed. I'm still learning to navigate around here.

 

[pjsjr]

OOPS! I just noticed that this thread is over two years old. I hope it still works.

This thread is a 'sticky' and meant to be retained and used as needed. Many knowledgeable here and this is good place for your thread.
Hope you get your questions answered.

 

[bertl]

I'm just curious as to why this might be. Is anyone able and/or willing to shed light on my inquiry?

Take a look at the bottom of the frame. Some knives had an extra spacer, or side center, added during assembly to adjust for variations during machining. Does one of these knives have that extra spacer and the other does not?

Bert

 

[DirtDawg]

Take a look at the bottom of the frame. Some knives had an extra spacer, or side center, added during assembly to adjust for variations during machining. Does one of these knives have that extra spacer and the other does not?

Bert

View attachment 1947832

Thank you for that. Both knives do have the spacer.
I actually didn't know about that until recently. I've just never seen an early 303 without it.

 

[DirtDawg]

This thread is a 'sticky' and meant to be retained and used as needed. Many knowledgeable here and this is good place for your thread.
Hope you get your questions answered.

Thank you for your words of encouragement.

 

[bertl]

Having searched threads and forums until my eyes crossed, I've not been able to get my question answered.

Looking at your photo, it seems that knife #2 has had a lot more wear than #1. A difference of 0.025" is about 1/40th of an inch; some of that could be accounted for by wear and may not be significant. Remember that there was a lot of handwork in building these knives. You might ask about this on the Camillus Collectors Forum here on bladeforums. It may take a while since that forum isn't the most active; however, there are some old Camillus factory hands on that forum, including Phil Gibbs who is probably the best authority on the manufacturing of Camillus knives.

 

[DirtDawg]

Looking at your photo, it seems that knife #2 has had a lot more wear than #1. A difference of 0.025" is about 1/40th of an inch; some of that could be accounted for by wear and may not be significant. Remember that there was a lot of handwork in building these knives. You might ask about this on the Camillus Collectors Forum here on bladeforums. It may take a while since that forum isn't the most active; however, there are some old Camillus factory hands on that forum, including Phil Gibbs who is probably the best authority on the manufacturing of Camillus knives.

That is possible I suppose, but the long pull and swedge differences are what really have me wondering.

 

[bertl]

Both knives do have the spacer.

Just for clarification, are you talking about the side center next to the frame liner (at the top of the photo) or about the spacer in the middle?

 

[DirtDawg]

Just for clarification, are you talking about the side center next to the frame liner (at the top of the photo) or about the spacer in the middle?

I'm not understanding what you are asking, so I added some photos to my original posting to clarify.

 

[bertl]

I'm not understanding what you are asking, so I added some photos to my original posting to clarify.

Thanks. That answers my question. Both have the side center spacer.

Bert

 

[cupton]

Just inherited my grandpas 303 after my grandma passed a year ago. My grandpa passed in 1979 so she had it (and his Buck 110) tucked away in her closet for the past 40+ years. There was quite a few more misc pocket knives as well. I cleaned and sharpened the 110 and the 303 this weekend. Both were still pretty dang sharp after all those years, so he must of sharpened them not too long before he passed all those years ago. I know he used his knives just from what my grandma and mom have told me. Glad to have them for the memories. He died when I was young. I purchased a newer 110 a couple years back because I knew he had one but never thought I’d ever get to see it so I just wanted to own one. I was pleasantly surprised when I saw his in the bag of knives I inherited. Plus I know my dad has one as well. I just now purchased a new 303 to go along with my newer 110 and their older siblings.

Going to read this thread further to see if I can figure out which model year 303 this is.