Joe,Joe Houser said:That stamping is one of those that I think are especially special. It does not show up in the date code list. Goose and Larry are correct, it was done in 1992 to indicate a mid year change in the 110. It was a new design of some sort and only effected the 110.
In 1992, we were also making the 110 stag, the 560 xlti titanium, and the 426Bucklite III's. I would imagine that it is a possibility to see those models with the same date stamp although I have not seen or heard of one yet.
Hi Mike...Mike Kerins said:Joe,
Is there any indication that you can find that says exactly what the mid-year change was?
Mike
Ahh There's one in every crowd! :jerkit:Buckaholic said:Hi Mike...
Upon some exhaustive research, I found that it was the addition of another "-" to the tang stamp.
You're Welcome...
Goose.
Mike Kerins said:Ahh There's one in every crowd! :jerkit:
Could it possibly be the change from ebony wood scales to the new, impregnated wood????Joe Houser said:That stamping is one of those that I think are especially special. It does not show up in the date code list. Goose and Larry are correct, it was done in 1992 to indicate a mid year change in the 110. It was a new design of some sort and only effected the 110.
In 1992, we were also making the 110 stag, the 560 xlti titanium, and the 426Bucklite III's. I would imagine that it is a possibility to see those models with the same date stamp although I have not seen or heard of one yet.