As I understand "snap cut" with open knife in your hand you cock your wrist reach to the target and then snap your wrist swinging the blade into the target then retract the arm. Isn't this using a pinned together folder, designed and manufactured for push/pull cuts on soft meat, like a machete when a machete or shears might be the appropriate tools?
Your post has me thinking of all of the poison oak I encountered hiking in the Ventannas in central CA back in the day. Man, that oil turned up everywhere. Ugg...
I don't "snap cut" as Jill describes but I do "bend cut" brush a lot and can offer this comparison and observation. In the end, I conclude, like you do, that the 110 is a better hunting knife than general purpose cutter.
By bend cutting, I'm referring to bending a branch or sapling over to stress the wood grain and then slice cutting at the point of the bend. A good sharp knife will usually go right through the wood causing it to separate easily - until it doesn't. And then more force is required.
Obviously, a fixed blade is preferred for this type of cutting but not always feasible or practical. Here is my 110 next to an Opinel #10.
Buck 110 and Opinel #10 by
Pinnah, on Flickr
I've found that working on wood and around the property to be (literally) dirty work and have found that dirt and sand tend to foul the pivot and lock of the 110. The Opinel's lockring will get gritty but it produces no damage and the springless friction joint is less susceptible to fouling as well. The flat/convex grind also goes through wood noticeably better (a good reason why Ron Hood speced it for the Punk, I believe).
In contrast, I prefer the hollow ground 110 for cutting meat and it's much easier to clean out a bloody 110 under hot water than it is an Opinel (the wood tends to swell under hot, soapy water).
This is not an add (or bashing) of either knife. Just noting that I prefer different knives for different tasks.
This said, the issue I've had with my Buck lock backs is that this sort of "bend cutting" has produced increasing amounts of vertical blade play due to the hard pressure I use. The Opinels are seemingly impervious to this sort of "abuse" showing absolutely no blade play of any kind despite even harder and longer use.
So for me, this is the issue. If we can agree to set aside the differences in blade geometry, what it show to me is that the Buck lockbacks just aren't as sturdy (for this kind of use) as the lockring design of the Opinel. Or, my experience is that you don't need to move to a fixed blade to get rid of blade wobble.
While I agree that the Buck 110 is a hunting knife and should be used first and foremost as a hunting knife, I grimace when this is used to explain away blade play issues. I don't think that's what the Buck name was built on and I don't think that's what Jeff and his time are striving for - to produce a lock back that is only up to the task of cutting soft meat. I think that sells Buck short.
As an engineer, I have to believe this is a solvable problem.