Anorexic Badger -- design goals?

Michael_Aos

Michael_Aos

Joined
Jan 25, 2001
Messages
1,639
Jerry,
What did you have in mind when you designed the Anorexic Badger? What I mean is, why does it look the way it does?

To my, it seems like too much "handle" to "blade" -- something like 3.75" of "blade" to about 6" of handle.

Admittedly, I have small hands, so maybe that's all there is to it -- or were you going for something specific? Does it make a better chopper? Does it serve to balance the feel of it? I think it's going to work out well when I have a custom sheath made, since I can have 6" in the "pouch" and STILL get a handful of handle.

Just wanting to get "the rest of the story", so to speak.

Thanks,

Mike
 
Jerry can certainly speak for himself, but here is my two cents' worth. Although there are a lot of collected Busse safe queens, the rationale for Busse Combat Knives is as an extreme-use knife which will not fail you in a pinch. Form follows function. A knife isn't worth much in hard use situations if you can't hold on to it to exert leverage. You might even want parts of two hands on it at times. And yes, I have moderately large hands. I am one of those who think the E-handles were great, and they are quite large.

And me posting this is kind of funny, since I have an AB LE pending with the rear handle metal ground back to the micarta contour. I just thought that this would make a neat, handy little hunting and fishing knife. But it is certainly not out of the question that it will become a safe queen and the standard DAB or JABA will get to go hunting and fishing. We'll see.
 
Michael Aos,

That's a good question. We had fielded quite a few complaints about the length of the old Mean Street handle being too short. It was agreed that in many defensive situations that the extra length on the Badger would make it more stable when being turned, flipped, and thrusted.

As for wilderness chores the extra handle adds a fair amount of leverage for additional chopping and hacking power. My hands are fairly large and the handle is at the minimum length for someone with my size meat hook.

Also, according to the courts, fixed blades without slip over guards must now be measured to the front of the handle material. Thus the BA is closer to 4.5"

Knife handles are like beer. . . It is always better to have too much, than not enough. ;)

Nuke on!
 
Originally posted by Jerry Busse
Also, according to the courts, fixed blades without slip over guards must now be measured to the front of the handle material.
Click to expand...

That's good to know... my knives have been growing then! Will they become more valuable?;) Actually that IS a good piece of information to have, thanks!
 
Originally posted by Jerry Busse


Also, according to the courts, fixed blades without slip over guards must now be measured to the front of the handle material.
Click to expand...

I guess my next question would be, what if they don't have scales?:eek: :eek:
 
In that case, the handle material would be steel. And since the steel goes all the way to the tip... there must not be any blade length... just an "edgy" handle.:cool:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top