Thinking of getting a Buck fixed blade.

shane

shane

Joined
May 20, 1999
Messages
944
Looking at picking up a Buck fixed blade or two. One for woods and one for EDC. Looking at 117, 119. Is it worth about double the price to get the S30VN/Micarta over the 420HC/Phenolic?
 
depends on whether ya want to sharpen more often or not, as well as whether you want to have longer or shorter sharpening times.

to me, not really. I'm good with the 420hc, with the cutting tasks I do.

in the handle Buck tends to polish their micarta handles very smooth so grip wise not much difference between the micarta and phenolic. course you can rough the texture up on both if wanted.

looks wise thats up to you. i like both.

I collect various Buck model knives so I have lots of the upgraded steels and handles, but use wise I don't mind 420hc and phenolic.
 
It's pretty easy to put a sharp edge on 420hc.

I'd go with that.
Make sure you like the knife and require a upgraded steel before you spend the extra money.

420hc has done everything I've wanted a knife to do.
There's a difference between want it and need it.
 
I think the 119 is too wide and thick bladed. To my hand it's too brick-like and unwieldy for many tasks.

I don't know the 117.

You can find good bargains on used Bucks on the Internet.

If I were you I'd be looking at the 105 and the last version of the 121 where they thickened the blade and re-named it "The Guide."

This version of the 121 was the last and best after Buck decided that the "Fisherman" version was not going to succeed. You can find them on e-Bay at good prices.

Be sure to get the "Guide" (1985 to about 2000) and not the earlier, thin-bladed "Fisherman." I have used Guides and they are excellent all around knives.

The 105 is very similar and just as good. I think the "Guide" was discontinued because because it basically replicated the 105.

As others have said, get them in 420HC or the old 425MOD in the older ones.

The high priced steels are not really necessary and are developed mainly to get people to buy new knives at higher prices.

When you make such good knives that last forever--you need a hook to get people to buy more.
 
What do you anticipate using your EDC fixed blade for?

I try to keep my EDC blades around 3". Seems to be about all I need for virtually any cutting tasks I encounter in my normal days. Depending on the sheath type, they can be much easier to carry as well.

A 113 perhaps?

I have a couple I'll carry but normally, if I'm packing a fixed blade, it's this little guy.

20241213_111328.jpg

If I get up in the morning and know I'll have a bunch of cutting to do, I carry a 113.

If I'm in the woods, that could mean anything from hunting to hiking. My preferred hunting knife is a 118, and my preferred hiking knife is a Hood Punk or Thug.
 
I carry a 117 in 420hc/phenolic as my primary work knife. It has been great for me as a general use knife. I also love the 119, for certain tasks. There is a reason why the 119 is iconic. As stated above, different models have very different sized handles.
20240726_195948.jpg
I have limited experience with S30V, so I can't really comment on it. But the 420HC holds an edge for a long time, and is fairly easy to sharpen. Good luck to you.
 
Meadowlark said:
If I were you I'd be looking at the 105 and the last version of the 121 where they thickened the blade and re-named it "The Guide."

Be sure to get the "Guide" (1985 to about 2000) and not the earlier, thin-bladed "Fisherman."
Click to expand...
Just as an FYI, the Guide, that was in the Buck catalog until 2000, is the same thickness as the later Fisherman at 0.08" thick. When the Guide was offered in the custom shop from 2001-2005 and the B&C 121 in 2012 and 2013, it was thicker at 0.12". I have a pre date 121 and was looking for a thicker version. I bought a 1997 121 and discovered that it was the same thickness as the pre date 121.
 
shane said:
Does anyone have experience with the Buck 103?
Click to expand...
Yes, it's primarily a skinner as is the 113. IMO, the difference is the 113 can double as a multi-purpose knife better than the 103 because of the blade shape.
The 113...
DcZ0aTq.jpg

The 103...
kVRAumw.jpg
 
I agree with much, maybe most of the advice given here. I have use a 102 in black phenolic for decades (really!) and it is enough knife for most things I have done, including field-dressing about 60 medium game animals like deer and pronghorns. Also almost any everyday task. I have used and like the 121 and 105 a great deal; they are excellent functional knives if you really want something a little bigger. Now here is where people will hate me: I think that the 119 is a wonderful collectible and a ridiculous huge knife unless you are a major bushcrafter mountain man of some kind-- hard to even imagine. I also have a very poor opinion of the 103; I think it is an ok knife to use as a skinner but there are many other skinners that are much better. It is basically a thick club. No good for anything else than skinning. And if you really want to get upset with me I will offer one last opinion. Although the Bucks in this series all have a place, none of them should be a first choice in the kitchen; they are just not made for that with the guard keeping the cutting edge off the cutting board. For this you want a chef knife or a santoku and a good fillet knife (BUCK made one). I just took possession of the new BUCK vegetable cleaver and it is magnificent. There you go. Bob's my Uncle.
 
TheFishman said:
Just as an FYI, the Guide, that was in the Buck catalog until 2000, is the same thickness as the later Fisherman at 0.08" thick. When the Guide was offered in the custom shop from 2001-2005 and the B&C 121 in 2012 and 2013, it was thicker at 0.12". I have a pre date 121 and was looking for a thicker version. I bought a 1997 121 and discovered that it was the same thickness as the pre date 121.
Click to expand...
There are definitely a few variations.

Some make sense only if some old blades were discovered and used up at a later date.

Some old notes that I have reveal thicknesses of .051 on the oldest two-line and .061 on a slightly newer two-line.

Archives from this forum reveal that three-lines were pretty uniform at about .078 and .079 and that lasted until about 2000 when some of the 121s went to .115 or a little thicker.

Any 121 from .078 to the .115 is a handy knife. That covers quite a few years.

However.........with Buck there are often inexplicable exceptions in all lines of knives.
 
tongueriver said:
I have used and like the 121 and 105 a great deal; they are excellent functional knives if you really want something a little bigger. Now here is where people will hate me: I think that the 119 is a wonderful collectible and a ridiculous huge knife unless you are a major bushcrafter mountain man of some kind-- hard to even imagine. I also have a very poor opinion of the 103; I think it is an ok knife to use as a skinner but there are many other skinners that are much better. It is basically a thick club. No good for anything else than skinning. And if you really want to get upset with me I will offer one last opinion. Although the Bucks in this series all have a place, none of them should be a first choice in the kitchen; they are just not made for that with the guard keeping the cutting edge off the cutting board. For this you want a chef knife or a santoku and a good fillet knife (BUCK made one). I just took possession of the new BUCK vegetable cleaver and it is magnificent. There you go. Bob's my Uncle.
Click to expand...
How could I get upset? You agreed with most of what I've said.

:D

I find that the 120 feels far better balanced than the 119 in my hand. The real mountain man or Bushcrafter would probably want the 120 instead (better for killing griz, too).

If some (like the 103) are only good for one thing it's because Buck wants you to buy a lot of knives to get all the jobs done. :)

I think most of us agree that standard old Bucks are not the greatest kitchen knives.........but we use them anyway.

I have a couple of the actual filet knives you mention and they are indeed great knives.

I'm going to have to take a look at that vegetable cleaver, too.

:)
 
shane said:
Does anyone have experience with the Buck 103?
Click to expand...

GPyro said:
I'd be interested if anybody has used a 103 as an edc....🤔
Click to expand...

The 103 is a dandy skinner, but also a great knife to modify. I love the 212, but a modified 103 has the potential to be even better.

eveled

Thread 'Buck 212 and modified 103 picture thread.'

I really wanted a modified 103, (like DM’s) it seemed like it would be a perfect EDC. I never found a good deal on a used one to modify so when the 212 was released I was all over it.

Here is a comparison shot. They are similar sized. I like the plunge line better on the 103 it has a higher blade grind and it comes with a better sheath. But the 212 has that really beautiful top grind. (Even though it isn’t really clipped or dropped). The point is pretty much in line with the spine on both knives.IMG_4720.jpeg...
  • Like
  • Love
  • Wow
 
It would be nice to find a local retailer that stocked some of these knives so you could handle them.
There's lots of knives I probably would never have purchased had I been able to handle them first.

Buying knives online isn't always a great thing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top