All About Pocket Knives
Loading



All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 27 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Jun 15, 2012 11:01 am 
Online

Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 11:43 am
Posts: 695
Images: 281
Location: Just North of Sydney,Australia.
A Schrade Uncle Henry LB7 is for-sale on eBay at present. ::shrug::
It is listed as a Copy of a Buck 110.
I do not know how Copied how - any information on this subject? ... Ken

_________________
HI FROM AUSTRALIA
A.A.P.N. # 5197: Member of Australian & U.S Blade Forums...KEN -
I collect Schrade knives - made in the U.S.A.


Top
 Profile Personal album  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jun 15, 2012 12:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2011 12:56 am
Posts: 250
i would have to agree with the seller the buck 110 has about 20 years or so on the lb7 if memory serves me right

_________________
my avatar is what happened the last time someone tried to sell me a bogus knife


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jun 15, 2012 6:44 pm 
Buck 110 came out in 1964. In 1977 Schrade made their first LB7. Buck collectors call the LB7 a "Buck 110 copy" while I call the LB7 an improved version of the innovative but tragically flawed Buck 110 lol. I prefer the way Schrade made a "copperhead" type bolster that leaves no pokey corners exposed that could rip a hole in your pocket.


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jun 15, 2012 9:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2012 3:20 am
Posts: 12
Buck had the market for folders but that was a bit before my time. The LB7 is in a different realm and I was able to compare side by side. The LB7 is heavier and the blade seems thicker. Locking mechanisms differ until the later years of Schrade. The nice thing about Schrade was the loss guarantee. Both are excellent brands and Buck as far as I know is still produced here in the USA in Idaho. Before Schrade closed I happened to live close to Ellenville and I had a broken LB8. The person I asked said he would see what could be done to repair it. However, the assembly line only had the LB7 at the time and I was given the LB7 model as a replacement. If you can find a good LB8 it is worth some money. The LB7 is more common along the lines of the 110. Rare Schrade folders as for large lockbacks are the LB7DP, LB8 and the old timer 9OT which is still manufactured oversees as the 157OT. And Dave made a good point, Schrades rivets are smooth!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jun 16, 2012 3:50 am 
Online

Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 11:43 am
Posts: 695
Images: 281
Location: Just North of Sydney,Australia.
Thany you all for that Information on the Buck110, I have never seen one.
And I try very hard not to look at any knives other then Schrade made knives.
I do like my Buck 301 knives that were made by Schrade back in 1967… Ken

_________________
HI FROM AUSTRALIA
A.A.P.N. # 5197: Member of Australian & U.S Blade Forums...KEN -
I collect Schrade knives - made in the U.S.A.


Top
 Profile Personal album  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jun 16, 2012 6:45 pm 
Hogums wrote:
And Dave made a good point, Schrades rivets are smooth!


It wasn't the rivets I was referring to. It was the blade/front bolster. Here are some pics to show what I meant.

Buck 110 (not mine):
Image

Schrade LB7:
Image

This:Image versus this:Image


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jun 17, 2012 1:47 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2011 1:56 pm
Posts: 107
Location: Western Australia
correct me if i'm wrong but from memory i think the buck is 420HC and the schrade 440c


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jun 17, 2012 7:07 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 6:23 am
Posts: 12077
Images: 90
Location: Willamette Valley, Oregon
The Buck 110 was made with 440C in 1964.
In 1981 they switched to 425 modified stainless.
In 1994 they switched steels again to 420HC (high carbon) stainless.

The LB series are mainly made with Schrade+ stainless. To the best of my knowledge that was Schrade’s trade name for their 440C. There were a few early ones made with 1095 carbon steel, they are rare, but make a dandy user knife!

Of course we all know a blade is only as good as the heat treating. The man who wrote the book on heat treating stainless steel, Paul Bos, is the one who oversees the heat treating for all of Buck’s US made knives. While I would usually pick 440C over 420HC, if the heat treating of the 420HC is by Paul Bos, I will choose it over the 440C.

I have several Buck 110s and LB-7s, LB-8s, 6OTs, 7OTs & a 9OT. I have a user LB-7 I have had since the 1980s and 2 or 3 user 110s; I prefer the feel of the 110 in my hand. I think the 110 will hold the edge a bit better than my LB-7 does. Though I think if I had an LB-7 with a blade of 1095 carbon steel I would prefer it.

From a mechanical point of view, I think Schrade made a BIG mistake when they switched from the bar spring and spacer/holder to the two flat springs. The flat springs tend to break and it is impossible to get that type of springs to replace them. If I get an LB into my shop with broken flat springs I make a spacer and a bar type spring and convert it over to the old style spring. The bar springs are easy to replace and anyone with some mechanical skill can make something that will work. Not so with the flat springs.

If the LB series is a copy of the Buck 110, IMHO as a knife user and a knife mechanic, they did a poor job of copying the 110.

_________________
Dale
AAPK Administrator

orvet@comcast.net
Please visit my AAPK store: http://www.allaboutpocketknives.com/kni ... e37-y.html

"Buy more ammo!" - Johnnie Fain


Top
 Profile Personal album  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 18, 2012 8:54 pm 
orvet wrote:
The Buck 110 was made with 440C in 1964.
In 1981 they switched to 425 modified stainless.
In 1994 they switched steels again to 420HC (high carbon) stainless.

The LB series are mainly made with Schrade+ stainless. To the best of my knowledge that was Schrade’s trade name for their 440C. There were a few early ones made with 1095 carbon steel, they are rare, but make a dandy user knife!

Of course we all know a blade is only as good as the heat treating. The man who wrote the book on heat treating stainless steel, Paul Bos, is the one who oversees the heat treating for all of Buck’s US made knives. While I would usually pick 440C over 420HC, if the heat treating of the 420HC is by Paul Bos, I will choose it over the 440C.

I have several Buck 110s and LB-7s, LB-8s, 6OTs, 7OTs & a 9OT. I have a user LB-7 I have had since the 1980s and 2 or 3 user 110s; I prefer the feel of the 110 in my hand. I think the 110 will hold the edge a bit better than my LB-7 does. Though I think if I had an LB-7 with a blade of 1095 carbon steel I would prefer it.

From a mechanical point of view, I think Schrade made a BIG mistake when they switched from the bar spring and spacer/holder to the two flat springs. The flat springs tend to break and it is impossible to get that type of springs to replace them. If I get an LB into my shop with broken flat springs I make a spacer and a bar type spring and convert it over to the old style spring. The bar springs are easy to replace and anyone with some mechanical skill can make something that will work. Not so with the flat springs.

If the LB series is a copy of the Buck 110, IMHO as a knife user and a knife mechanic, they did a poor job of copying the 110.


I'm afraid I have to disagree, Dale. Here's why (WARNING! it's verbose lol):

Carbon LB7? The LB series were always stainless. LB1, LB3, LB5, LB7, LB8 all stainless, always. There were no early carbon versions (unless a sample knife or two that never made it to production are out there). If you wanted a 1095 knife like the LB7 you had to go with the delrin handles on the 7OT. The 7OT knives stamped "Schrade" not "Schrade+" are 1095 carbon. Great knives!

Heat treating: Yup we all know that to realize the full potential of a certain type of steel it must be correctly heat treated. Maybe Buck does produce a better cutting tool from 420HC than anyone else but it still is 420HC. 440C when properly heat treated and tempered is a superior steel with superior qualities. It has waaaay more carbon in it and can retain a higher hardness. This does make it less rust-resistant of course but improves edge retention. I challenge anyone to show me some research proving that 420HC out-performs 440C when both are hardened and tempered appropriately and the blade geometry is the same. My understanding is that Paul Bos is retired and sure, he did train someone to follow in his footsteps but saying that Paul Bos oversees the heat-treating at Buck these days is an incorrect statement.

Buck changed to 420HC mainly as a way to lower production costs. Some folks had a hard time sharpening the very hard (likely 58) 440C and some complained of edge chipping and these were minor factors so Buck will focus on them but the main one was to save money by using cheaper/softer steel. Buck produced "Catra" tests supposedly "proving" that 420HC was superior to 440C but I still don't buy it. They could never admit to switching to crappier steel and still expect them to sell well.

Here are some of those often referred to CATRA results: http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showthread.php/421313-a-model-for-cutting-ability
In my opinion Buck "cooked the books" to produce the outcome they desired when comparing 420HC to BG42. Note the high-performance steels are sharpened at 40 degrees and the Buck 420HC knife uses its thin "Edge 2000" profile in the first graph. When the better steels are sharpened with the same geometry (2nd graph) they surpass the 420HC. Buck gets the most from 420HC when they use it but that sure doesn't make it better than BG42. The first graph is provided by Buck to specifically mislead a casual reader into thinking 420HC is better than BG42. It's a con. Why compare apples to oranges? The 440C is shown as "inferior" to both BG42 and 420HC but I don't buy it. I think it is suspicious that the CATRA machine produced exactly the results that Buck wanted. They "proved" cheaper 420HC (that was currently marketed) was better than more expensive 440C (that was no longer available and cannot be "fine blanked") and that BG42 (being currently marketed) was worth a premium price. That is, "proof" that what they are doing now on standard models is not only cheaper, it's better too. They did the testing to justify their use of 420HC and surprise, surprise, it did just that. They knew there was a large potential for lost customers when they made the change to 420HC and they need something to reassure knife buyers. I won't accept these results until I see non-biased (not a manufacturers results) tests. Note that 440A isn't even in these test results. My guess is that Buck did test it as well (to prove their knives were better than competitors 440A knives) but when it did out-perform their 420HC they didn't add it to the graph. It's absence in the data is significant I believe.

Bucks own site shows misleading data. Their FAQS state that the maximum hardness that can be achieved using 420HC is 58. They Do Not guarantee (or even say) that's the current hardness of their blades. They use the "In general" discalimer as a way to avoid making a commitment too. I suspect 56 is about as hard as they ever get when you buy one off the shelf at Wal Mart and it might be less than that. If their heat-treat was as consistent and an exact a science as they would like us to believe it is they would say "Every Buck knife made from 420HC is guaranteed to have a hardness of 58". They don't dare say this which can be taken to mean that 420HC Buck 110s are NOT Rockwell 58. The old 440C 110s were indeed hardened to 58. Has anyone independently tested the hardness of current Buck 110s? I'd love to see the data. At the same time, I am sure the 420HC knife they chose to use when producing those CATRA results was a perfect one, pre-tested to be at Rockwell 58 and tempered right. I strongly suspect the 440C blade was less-than-perfect and incorrectly treated to produce their desired result: "New is better". http://www.buckknives.com/index.cfm?event=about.feature

Springs? I'm 99.99% sure that Schrade never made a single LB7 with two flat springs. This configuration showed up first in 1981 on the LB1. Later the LB5 did indeed make this change so early LB5 knives with the two-line stamping are of superior construction to the later LB5s. The 3OT, 5OT, 6OT all used the double springs but the LB7 never did. It always had the separate spacer/retainer and spring. The LB1 always used double springs I believe. I can't recall the guts of all LB3 vintages so I won't comment on them. Dale, I think you are picturing the guts of the 6OT in your head not an LB7.

There were changes made to the spring stock used by Schrade in their LB7s though. Originally it was "squareish" in profile. Then years later it switched to "rounder" stock. Heat treatment and type of steel for springs is important as well. My purely anecdotal opinion formed from buying a lot of Schrade 5" lockbacks is that the early "square" stock was superior. A well made spring should not "relax" under sustained compression (cycling weakens springs not sustained compression within design range) but some Schrades I have that were stored half-open in their displays for decades have weakened springs.

Schrade+ steel was 440A for the most part not 440C. Saying Schrade+ was 440C is incorrect. They may have produced some knives made from 440C (the first "brown box" UH167 I bought was waaaay harder than later UH167s I've purchased) but these were the exceptions to the rule not the rule itself. Schrade+ was basically 440A until a running change to 420HC occurred that began in 1998. A few years later all Schrade+ was 420HC. It was cheaper for Schrade to make 420HC knives just as it was for Buck and making knives for less drove the change not the quest for the ultimate blade.

I like the way the LB7 feels in my hand better but of course that's highly subjective. I guess we have to agree to disagree, wise and intelligent friend. :D

In my opinion an early 4-pin "Ultimate Lockback" LB7 by Schrade is a superior knife to a current Buck 110. Were some earlier 440C versions of the 110 superior to the LB7? Perhaps...

Cheers!

ps. here's a a great early Buck 110 data sheet put together by Joe Houser that tells you everything about all the different variations:

First Version, Thin steel Spacer & Spring one piece, 2 variations

Variation 1 (1964-1965)1
Blade Stamp: Horizontal, BUCK, Right hand, 440C steel, thin.
Blade/Butt rivets: Visible on left side of bolsters only.
Inlay rivets: 2 (tiny)
Rocker rivet: Brass, no head.
Sheath: Thin leather, black or tan. A
Packaging: 2 piece yellow box about 1 ½” high-(3), Guarantee Registration/Remember card with Federal Blvd. address-(3)(2 types seen), Use and Care leaflet with Federal Blvd. address-(1), rice paper guarantee slip-(1), white tissue-(2), tips on care card-(1), knife sharpening card-(1).

Variation 2 (pre 1967)2
Stamp: Horizontal, BUCK, etched, Right hand, 440C steel, thin.
Blade/Butt rivets: Visible on left side of bolsters only.
Inlay rivets: 2 (tiny)
Rocker rivet: Brass, no head.
Sheath: Thin leather, black. A
Packaging: 2 piece yellow box about 1 ½” high-(0), Guarantee Registration/Remember card with Federal Blvd. address-(0)(2 types seen), rice paper guarantee slip-(0), white tissue-(0), tips on care card-(0), knife sharpening card-(0).



Second Version, Fiber Spacer, Spring in rocker design, 3 variations

Variation 1 (pre 1967)3
Stamp: Horizontal, BUCK, Left hand, 440C steel.
Blade/Butt rivets: Visible on left side of bolsters only.
Inlay rivets: 2 (tiny)
Rocker rivet: Brass, no head.
Sheath: Thin leather, black. A
Packaging: 2 piece yellow box about 1 ½” high-(0), Guarantee Registration/Remember card with Federal Blvd. address-(0)(2 types seen), rice paper guarantee slip-(0), white tissue-(0), tips on care card-(0), knife sharpening card-(0).

Variation 2 (pre 1967)4
Stamp: Horizontal, BUCK, Left hand, 440C steel.
Butt rivets: Visible on left side of rear bolsters only.
Blade rivet: Visible on both sides of front bolsters.
Inlay rivets: 2 (tiny)
Rocker rivet: Brass, no head.
Sheath: Leather, black. A
Packaging: 2 piece yellow box about 1 ½” high-(0), Guarantee Registration/Remember card with Federal Blvd. address-(0)(2 types seen), rice paper guarantee slip-(0), white tissue-(0), tips on care card-(0), knife sharpening card-(0).

Variation 3 (1967)5
Stamp: Horizontal, BUCK dot, Left hand, 440C steel.
Butt rivets: Visible on left side of rear bolsters only.
Blade rivet: Visible on both sides of front bolsters.
Inlay rivets: 2 (tiny)
Rocker rivet: Brass, no head.
Sheath: Leather, black. A
Packaging: 2 piece yellow box about 1 ½” high-(0), Guarantee Registration/Remember card with Federal Blvd. address-(0)(2 types seen), rice paper Guarantee slip-(0), white tissue-(0), tips on care card-(0), knife sharpening card-(0).



Third Version, Integral Brass Spacer/Spring holder, 9 variations

Variation 1 (1967)6
Stamp: BUCK dot, Inverted, Left hand, 440C steel.
Butt rivets: Visible on left side of rear bolsters only.
Blade rivet: Visible on both sides of front bolsters.
Inlay rivets: 2 (tiny)
Rocker rivet: Brass, no head.
Sheath: Leather, black. A or B.
Packaging: 2 piece yellow box about 1 ½” high-(2), Guarantee Registration/Remember card with Federal Blvd. address-(1)(2 types seen), rice paper guarantee slip-(2), white tissue-(2), tips on care card-(2), knife sharpening card-(2).

Variation 2 (1967)7
Stamp: BUCK, Inverted, Left hand, 440C steel.
Butt rivets: 2 visible on left side of rear bolsters only.
Blade rivet: Visible on both sides of front bolsters.
Inlay rivets: 2 (tiny)
Rocker rivet: Brass, no head.
Sheath: Leather, black. A or B.
Packaging: 2 piece yellow box. **

Variation 3 (1967)8
Stamp: BUCK, u.s.a., Inverted, Left hand, 440C steel.
Butt rivets: 2 visible on left side of rear bolsters only.
Blade rivet: Visible on both sides of front bolsters.
Inlay rivets: 2 (tiny)
Rocker rivet: Brass, no head.
Sheath: Leather, black. B or C.
Packaging: 2 piece yellow box about 2” high-(1), about 1 ½” high-(1), “Attention” leaflet orange-(1), knife sharpening card-(1), Guarantee Registration/Remember card with Federal Blvd. address-(1)(2 types seen), Use and Care leaflet with Federal Blvd. address-(1), Navy exchng sales slip date 12/1/67, Al Buck note-(1).

Variation 4 (1968-1970)9
Stamp: BUCK, u.s.a., Inverted, Left hand, 440C steel.
Butt rivets: Visible on left side of rear bolsters only.
Blade rivet: Visible on both sides of front bolsters.
Inlay rivets: None.
Rocker rivet: Brass, no head.
Sheath: Leather, black. B or C.
Packaging: 2 piece yellow box about 2” high. **

Variation 5 (1968-1970)10
Stamp: BUCK, u.s.a., Inverted, Left hand, 440C steel.
Butt rivets: 3 visible on left side of rear bolster 1 visible on right side.
Blade rivet: Visible on both sides of front bolsters.
Inlay rivets: 2 (tiny)
Rocker rivet: Brass, no head.
Sheath: Leather, black. B or C.
Packaging: 2 piece yellow box about 2” high. **

Variation 6 (1968-1970)11
Stamp: BUCK, u.s.a., Inverted, Left hand, 440C steel.
Butt rivets: 1 visible on left side of rear bolster, 1 on right side.
Blade rivet: Visible on both sides of front bolsters.
Inlay rivets: 2 (tiny)
Rocker rivet: Brass, no head.
Sheath: Leather, black. B or C.
Packaging: 2 piece yellow box about 2” high. **

Variation 7 (1968-1970)12
Stamp: BUCK, u.s.a., Inverted, Left hand, 440C steel.
Butt rivets: 1 visible on left side of rear bolster, 1 on right side.
Blade rivet: Visible on both sides of front bolsters.
Inlay rivets: 2 standard sized.
Rocker rivet: Brass, no head.
Sheath: Leather, black. B or C.
Packaging: 2 piece yellow box about 2” high. **

Variation 8 (1968-1970)13
Stamp: BUCK, u.s.a., Inverted, Left hand, 440C steel.
Butt rivets: 2 visible on both sides of bolsters.
Blade rivet: Visible on both sides of front bolsters.
Inlay rivets: 2 (tiny)
Rocker rivet: Brass, maybe headed.
Sheath: Leather, black. B or C.
Packaging: 2 piece yellow box about 2” high. **

Variation 9 (1968-1970)14
Stamp: BUCK, u.s.a., Inverted, Right hand, 440C steel.
Blade/Butt rivets: Visible on both sides of bolsters, 2 rear, 1 front.
Inlay rivets: 2 (tiny)
Rocker rivet: Brass, maybe headed.
Sheath: Leather, black. B or C.
Packaging: 2 piece yellow box about 2” high-(1), Use and Care leaflet undated-(1), “Attention” leaflet orange-(1), **



Fourth Version, Brass Spacer/Spring holder separate piece, 2 variations

Variation 1 (1970-1972)15
Stamp: BUCK, U.S.A., Inverted, Left hand, 440C steel.
Blade/Butt rivets: Visible on both sides of bolsters, 2 rear, 1 front.
Inlay rivets: 2 (tiny) or 2 small headed.
Rocker rivet: Brass, maybe headed.
Sheath: Black leather. C.
Packaging: 2 piece yellow box about 2” high-(1), Use and Care leaflet undated-(1) **

Variation 2 (1970-1972)16
Stamp: BUCK, U.S.A., Inverted, Left hand, 440C steel.
Blade/Butt rivets: Visible on both sides of bolsters, 2 rear, 1 front.
Inlay rivets: 2 (tiny) or 2 small headed.
Rocker rivet: Stainless, headed.
Sheath: Black leather. C.
Packaging: 2 piece yellow box about 2” high, Use and Care leaflet. **



Fifth Version, Stainless Spacer/Spring holder separate piece, 7 variations

Variation 1 (1970-1972)17
Stamp: BUCK, U.S.A., Inverted, Left hand, 440C steel.
Blade/Butt rivets: Visible on both sides of bolsters, 2 rear, 1 front.
Inlay rivets: 2 (tiny)
Rocker rivet: Brass, stainless?
Sheath: Black leather. C.
Packaging: 2 piece yellow box about 2” high, Use and Care leaflet. **

Variation 2 (1972)18
Stamp: BUCK, 110, U.S.A., Inverted, Left hand, 440C steel.
Blade/Butt rivets: Visible on both sides of bolsters, 2 rear, 1 front.
Inlay rivets: 2 (tiny)
Rocker rivet: Stainless, headed.
Sheath: Black leather. C.
Packaging: 2 piece yellow box about 2” high, Use and Care leaflet. **

Variation 3 (1972-1974)19
Stamp: BUCK, 110, U.S.A., left hand. Read with tip point up, 440C steel.
Blade/Butt rivets: Visible on both sides of bolsters, 2 rear, 1 front.
Inlay rivets: 2 (small headed)
Rocker rivet: Stainless, headed.
Sheath: Black leather. C.
Packaging: 2 piece yellow box about 2” high-(4), Use and Care leaflet dated- 4/4/72-(3),1/73-(1), white tissue-(1), “Attention” leaflet orange-(3).

Variation 4 (1974)20
Stamp: BUCK, *110*, U.S.A., left hand. Read with tip point up, 440C steel.
Blade/Butt rivets: Visible on both sides of bolsters, 2 rear, 1 front.
Inlay rivets: 2 (small headed)
Rocker rivet: Stainless, headed.
Sheath: Black leather. C.
Packaging: 2 piece yellow box about 2” high-(1), Use and Care leaflet dated-1/73-(1), “Attention” leaflet orange-(1), Al Buck note-(1).

Variation 5 (1974-1980)21
Stamp: BUCK, *110*, U.S.A., left hand. Read with tip point up, 440C steel.
Blade/Butt rivets: Visible on both sides of bolsters, 2 rear, 1 front.
Inlay rivets: 4 (small headed)
Rocker rivet: Stainless, headed.
Sheath: Black leather. C.
Packaging: 2 piece yellow box about 2” high. **

Variation 6 (1974-1980)22
Stamp: BUCK, *110*, U.S.A., left hand. Read with tip point up, 440C steel.
Blade/Butt rivets: Visible on both sides of bolsters, 2 rear, 1 front.
Inlay rivets: 3 (small headed)
Rocker rivet: Stainless, headed.
Sheath: Black leather. C.
Packaging: 2 piece yellow box about 2” high-(4), Use and Care leaflet-dated 10/76-(4), “Attention” leaflet orange-(3), Al Buck note-(3).

Variation 7 (1974-1980)23
Stamp: BUCK, *110*, U.S.A., left hand. Read with tip point up, 440C steel.
Blade/Butt rivets: Visible on both sides of bolsters, 2 rear, 1 front.
Inlay rivets: 3 (large headed)
Rocker rivet: Stainless, headed.
Sheath: Black leather. C.
Packaging: “2 piece yellow box about 2” high-(2), Use and Care leaflet dated 4/77-(1), 10/76-(1), “Attention” leaflet orange-(2), white tissue-(1), Al Buck note-(1)”, 1 piece yellow box about 2” high-(3), Use and Care leaflet dated 12/78-(1), Al Buck note-(2).

**Information incomplete. Not all details known at this time.

Sheaths:
A. Angeles Souvenir—late 1962 to late 1967. Thin leather, BUCK on snap, no rivets, no model number.
B. Atcheson Leather—late 1967 to early 1969. Leather, BUCK on flap, Model #, tooling lines and dimple rivet on belt loop.
C. Buck leather shop—started early 1969.
1) Leather, BUCK on snap & flap, tooling lines on belt loop. Used maybe 2 years?
2) Leather, BUCK on snap and flap, plain belt loop, model # on back.

Knives with date code mark of 1994 (\) can be found with either Macassar ebony or Obeechee wood inlays. Obeechee is more prevalent though.
Blade steel was changed in 19


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 19, 2012 2:04 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 17, 2006 8:23 pm
Posts: 1248
Location: Wallkill, NY
Dave, I wouldn't be so hard on 420HC, it's actually a darned fine steel and can defintely hold its own against 440C, plus it's far tougher. You'll chip a 440C blade a lot easier than you will 420HC, and on top of that it'll take a keen edge a lot faster, those are proven facts, not just Buck's opinion. If you take note of the graphs where all the blades are sharpened at the same angle, there's really very little difference in performance between the two steels. 440C is difficult to sharpen because of its molecular make-up, not its hardness. Although I'm sure cost was a big factor in Buck's decision to go with 420HC, they certainly IMHO didn't settle for an inferior steel either.

Eric


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 19, 2012 3:47 am 
ea42 wrote:
Dave, I wouldn't be so hard on 420HC, it's actually a darned fine steel and can defintely hold its own against 440C, plus it's far tougher. You'll chip a 440C blade a lot easier than you will 420HC, and on top of that it'll take a keen edge a lot faster, those are proven facts, not just Buck's opinion. If you take note of the graphs where all the blades are sharpened at the same angle, there's really very little difference in performance between the two steels. 440C is difficult to sharpen because of its molecular make-up, not its hardness. Although I'm sure cost was a big factor in Buck's decision to go with 420HC, they certainly IMHO didn't settle for an inferior steel either.

Eric


I hear you Eric. I know I came on extra strong but I was playing "Devil's Advocate" and giving the other side of the argument as they say. I just couldn't resist.

Me, I don't use knives to cut things that are hard enough to chip a blade. Never a good knife anyway. I use an axe for heavy work. I want an edge that can get extra sharp at home and then stay that way while I am in the field. I have used a 440C Buck 112 for decades and haven't seen any chipping problems. The superior edge retention wins the day for me and I'm comparing Buck 440C to Buck 420HC. I have a finger-grooved Buck 110 in 420HC and it's a good enough knife but I prefer 440C and I think for valid reasons. In a fillet knife chipping is never going to be a problem because fish bones are pretty soft and a 440C fillet will take a wicked edge and stay that way nearly indefinitely if all you are cutting is skin and flesh.

440C is tough to sharpen because of it's molecular make-up AND because it is usually hardened to higher Rockwell than 420HC imho. I don't want to beat this to death but the bottom line is that if 420HC was all round "better steel" than 440C it would be a more expensive "super steel" and not the cheapest steel on a cutlers list. What kind of steel are the cheapest Canal Street knives made from (I see they have a large number of steels on their site) and if it's 420HC then why pay a premium for the other types? What are the comparative Rockwell ranges of Canal Street 440C versus Canal Street 420HC? I bet the 440C is hardened to a higher number but I'm guessing. I'm quite open to being all wrong but I need proof. :)

I like a good debate lol forgive me if I seem aggressive, I'm not. Just being an opinionated Schrade and 440C fan.


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 19, 2012 8:59 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2012 3:20 am
Posts: 12
Yes, Schrade did make LB7's with double flat springs in the last of their years. They came in the blue boxes. I had one but sold it and bought a round bar type instead. Also have the 4 pin LB7 which feels best in hand to me. That being said, I mentioned the rivets and how they are flush smooth. The LB7 has all smooth rivets and on the other lockbacks such as the 7OT and LB8 the backspring rivets are rounded brass. Now what makes the LB7 superior to the LB8 and 7OT (besides the 7OT's carbon type)? I would say it is the steel backspring rivet on the LB7 while the other models used a brass backspring rivet. They are all great knives even Buck if you handle them right and take care of 'em right.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 19, 2012 5:48 pm 
Hogums wrote:
Yes, Schrade did make LB7's with double flat springs in the last of their years. They came in the blue boxes. I had one but sold it and bought a round bar type instead.


Interesting, that's news to me. I guess my efforts to avoid 420HC has saved me from the bad springs too. I don't even look at LB7s with no serial number and this ensures a 1980s or earlier production date. The last six years ('98 and on when the steel change happened) of Imperial Schrade were not the best ones imho.

I am going to research this further to rule out "end-of-days" knives. Perhaps the LB7 with the bad springs wasn't an LB7 at all but a mixed bunch of parts that formed a sale-able knife that was then sold as an LB7.

Thanks for the info!


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 19, 2012 8:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2012 3:20 am
Posts: 12
And now take a close look at this late model LB8 with the backspring pin in the middle. These later LB7 and LB8 with the pin towards the middle used a round stock lock bar spring or the double flat type. Here: http://www.ebay.com/itm/SCHRADE-UNCLE-HENRY-LB8-USA-LOCK-BACK-HUNTER-KNIFE-USA-/200776482850?pt=Collectible_Knives&hash=item2ebf360022#ht_3160wt_1037


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 20, 2012 1:50 am 
Hogums wrote:
And now take a close look at this late model LB8 with the backspring pin in the middle. These later LB7 and LB8 with the pin towards the middle used a round stock lock bar spring or the double flat type. Here: http://www.ebay.com/itm/SCHRADE-UNCLE-HENRY-LB8-USA-LOCK-BACK-HUNTER-KNIFE-USA-/200776482850?pt=Collectible_Knives&hash=item2ebf360022#ht_3160wt_1037


I'm well aware of this difference in pin placement but it's great info for those who are not. The only thing new to me is that LB7s were ever made with the double spring. Does anyone else have an example they can post? Considering Schrade was pumping out a hundred thousand a year or more of these knives then it stands to reason that there are many examples of this so-called late "blue box" variation. Until I see a number of these in links or photos I'm still going to be convinced that you have been duped by an "end-of-days" knife stuck in some shiny packaging. SEE EDIT!

I'm not new to the LB7... trust me. It is the main pattern I collect. I review 9000 listings weekly and have done so for over three years now. I have Never seen a knife like you describe.

Where's the pics?

EDIT! I just went looking a a whole bunch of late LB7s I wouldn't normally look at and sure enough, I was wrong, there are LB7s out there with the crappy springs. I wonder when this change happened?

I'm in full agreement that these double springs are lame. Too bad Schrade went that way near the end. Keep to ones with serial numbered ones...


Top
  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 27 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group