Why SS3.5 ? Would an SS3 not make more sense after having an SS4....just curious ?
Well, I don't really care what it is called. But, I think a 3.5" blade is much more appropriate for the proportional size of the mudder grips.
I think the handle would feel too large if it only had a 3.0" blade.
I feel the Mudder grips are very condusive in design to having a choil.
Normally, on a 3.5" blade, I would start to lean away from a choil. But, I think it would be fine.
With a 3.0" blade, I wouldn't want a choil and another reason I don't think the Mudders would be so suited for a smaller 3.0" blade.
I don't personally feel there is a Res-C handle that is well suited for a 3.0" blade.
Also, the concept is based on the AD and the AD has about a 3.5" blade.
I generally prefer a 3.5" blade over 3.0" blade. But, if designed just right, I could be swayed towards a well designed 3.0" blade.
And I think there is a significant enough difference between the SS4 and this SS3.5 concept to justify it.
---------------
If we want a 3.0" blade, I would probably vote for a skelly (NO Choil) like my Rat Tooth Tasker concept. But, I don't really care which logo is on it. I think the Rat Tooth Tasker or "Dog" Tooth Tasker concept would be well served in 154CM as well.
The Swamp Warden has a pretty good blade, but for smaller knives I prefer a little more spear point or even semi-Wharncliffe. But, the main issue I had with the Swamp Warden was the handle. It just didn't fit my hand. I kept wanting to choke up onto the guard. My design should offer more grip area in the handle. And I designed the Rat/Dog Tooth Tasker with pin holes so that scales could be added for those who prefer.
I would probably add scales as I just don't generally like the feel of a skelly. Even thin scales are big improvement to me. But, the great thing is a "Design with Options"!
I prefer satin. But, the drawing is with coated colors. I haven't taken the time to change it to satin yet.
........ But, these are just my opinions.
.