Buck 112 Ranger

M

martineden

Joined
Jun 26, 2007
Messages
621
Hi guys,
here we are whit another small review, this time whit my Buck 112 aka “Ranger”. Here the 112 whit two Buck 110, his bigger brother

Compared to the 110, the 112 is shorter, but has the same shape and thickness


Under a so-and-so sky…


…let’s try it. First, a tent peg





Then, a simple trigger



Now, a guy runner



It’s works very well, combined whit the previous tent’s peg


Finally, a figure 4 trap


And it works too, believe me.

The knife in hand


This folder is a classic, an evergreen that never lost is fashion. It’s works and cut very well, and I like the sharp point that allows to do easily holes in the woods. I’m not sure if I like more the 112 or the 110, I’ll try the 110 too, to confirm my actual feelings. For sure, the 112 is a good folding knife, at a fair cost too.

Ciao,
Alfredo
 
Last edited:
Ever notice how even with a large knife, most of the cutting takes place in about a 2" area of the edge?

I think the 112 will do 98% of the work the 110 will do, and even though heavy, you can carry it in your pocket.
The 110 is really large enough to require a sheath. Nice review, Fredo.
 
Thanx for putting forth such a great review of the 112:thumbup: That is a rather nice one you have there too.The 112 was my first "real" knife, and will always be my favorite :)
 
Great review. Have never owned a 112 but they look great. Maybe I should pick one up sometime :)
 
Thanks guys. I'm in doubt about buying a Case Mako to compare whit the 112, what do you think about it, it worth the money?
 
You live in some great looking country, nice and green! I like those knives especially the stag or bone handled one at the very top of the first picture. The Case Mako isn't anywhere as nice as the Buck, I'd save my money or get another Buck. ;)
 
Nice work with the photos and bushcraft. I really like the 112 myself and got a paper stone one that's very light and ergonomic. The full length handle on the 110 gives a little better grip but like mentioned above, that's offset with the fact I will more likely have the 112 on me because it fits in my pocket a little easier.
 
The 112 Ranger was the first knife I bought when I got in the trade in 1975 a two dot GREATEST Work knife and I like a knife with some heft, I tried the lite series ya can have them.I use the 112 5X more than the 110.
 
Thank you for the excellent review, Alfredo!

The 112 was my first real affectation - I carried one in high school and still have a few examples of older Rangers.

Nice work on your woodcrafting too - your area of Italy looks beautiful!

best regards -

mqqn
 
Great photos and descriptions! My cousin uses a 112 for all his hunting. Turkey, boar, deer, elk, caribou, moose.

He has never needed nor wanted anything else. I wish I were that way!
 
Many years ago, I purchased a Buckllite the same size as the 112
A great size and very light
Never purchased the Ranger
 
I bought one for one of my friend's who is an eagle scout. He previously only carried a leatherman wave, he absolutely loved the 112!!! he thought it was the perfect size and he does not stop carrying it ever haha.

Ive got the 110 and I can attest that its a great blade. I used it to cut drywall and it worked like a champ!
 
I have a few of the traditional wood-n-brass 112s, but never carried them in pocket because of the weight.

Recently picked up a couple of the 112 EcoLite knives, also a couple of PaperStone Rangers (same as 112 EcoLite, but in black-- see Buck Knives "Web Specials" on their site).

They are light enough for pocket carry. Same blade, same size, same shape. Just lighter.

Good prices, too.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top