Bruce,

I think you are making too big a deal out of "Toughness" for this smallish 3.5" blade.

If you really need so much toughness in a blade that size, Jerry made the AD.

Personally, I rank "toughness" of the AD pretty low compared to the other qualities of the AD. The AD also has a great blade design, a great handle design, great edge holding qualities and pretty reasonable corrosion resistance.
The extreme toughness of the AD is over-kill and just something that is there, but most people can't even make use of it. No significant value or benefit for most.
I would equate it to Reconseed's recent "Abraham's Tank" analogy.
But, would add that it is like owning an "Abraham's Tank", but need to get groceries. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif" alt="" /> ....... You just don't need the "Abraham's Tank" in most cases.

These days, 154CM is probably just Honda, Toyota or Nissan type stuff. With Jerry's heat Treatment, we might be dealing with Acura, Lexus or Infiniti type stuff (????). But, it is practical and GOOD for what most people need a knife of this type design to do.


I haven't handled the Hairy Carry yet. But, from the off-angle picture:

- The blade shape appears to be very good (although, I am not so sure about what appears to be a full-length swedge ????). - possibly on par with the AD.

- Personally, I think 0.170" thick is a good thickness for a fixed blade. I don't have much problem with blades down to 0.125" thick on some 3.5" or smaller blades, but I prefer 0.150" to 0.180" thick on my fixed blades. I like the thickness and find that with proper edge profiling (convexing <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />) a 0.170" - 0.180" can slice about as well as a 0.125" thick blade unless slicing apple slices and not wanting the apple slices to crack up or similar. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif" alt="" /> - But, I acknowledge personal preference on blade thickness. Conversely, I have VERY little interest in most "Fatty" blades. I consider a "Fatty" 0.32" thick Game Warden to be just silly. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif" alt="" />
For me, blade thickness has a LOT to do with type of grind and blade height almost as much as blade length. I don't consider 0.170" too thick at all on a full height 3.5" blade similar to the Hairy Carry. Sounds just right to me. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/thumbup.gif" alt="" />

- The handle appears to be a slightly slimmed version of the RMD/HRLM handle which should be very good. Possibly on par with the AD

- Edge holding should be sufficient and probably at least as good as SR-77. But, not likely as good as INFI.

- Toughness may be less than half of what INFI is. BUT, it is more than sufficient for it's size and for how 99.9% of the people will use it for!

- Being stainless, it should have sufficient corrosion resistance for most cases. Significantly better than the AD.

- It is satin. The AD was available in satin, but at about $150.00 more! or about twice the price!



------------

If you feel every knife you own needs to handle concrete blocks, 3 pound sledge hammers and 60 - 90 degree vice clamp and pipe torque bends, then this knife is not for you.

If you can appreciate a knife that is utilizing a steel that should perform well for 3.5" knife as most people would use the knife, then 154CM should do fine.


------------

There is nothing wrong with testing them to compare if you want. But, sorry, no, even if I had the money, it wouldn't be interesting enough for me to chip in to pay for one for Noss to break.

It is a no brainer. SR-101, SR-77 and INFI ARE tougher.

The "POINT" is, "THIS" knife doesn't need INFI level of toughness for most people.

It still has a Swamp Rat Lifetime warranty and I have a reasonable understanding of what to expect from normal 154CM.

If Busse made this 154CM stronger than normal 154CM, then great. Without Eric posting torture test pics of 154CM, I assume it is reasonably similar to most 154CM. But, that is generally tough enough for me on a 3.5 inch blade. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif" alt="" />

Without handling the Hairy Carry, I don't know just yet. But, I am optimistic that the Hairy Carry might actually be a better over-all package than the (current version of the) AD even if they cost the same.

..... If the AD had the choil and guard fixed appropriately and a satin blade, AND a price MUCH closer to the Hairy Carry's (say around $150.00 or so), then I would "think" (considering I haven't handled the Hairy Carry yet, but I have handled a couple of AD's) the MUCH improved and modified versions of the AD might be better.


I sent some pics to Jerry with hopes of a modified run of the AD. I just couldn't keep either of the two attempts at trying to appreciate the AD with it's choil and Talon hole. But, Jerry has never replied to any of my multiple attempts to PM him. So:

I wish the AD looked more like this:



Even this would be O.K. (but, I do prefer the above):




Compared to the regular AD's:






...... and cost closer to $150.00!!!!!!!! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crossfingers.gif" alt="" />

I would buy one of the above modified concepts of the AD even if in 154CM.

.... But, I would prefer closer to $108.95 to $118.95 than $138.95 . <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" />

.