[Mad Dog vs Busse]
a matter of personal preference
Everything is a matter of personal preference but lets not get too vague here. Just like you can comment on liner vs integral in regards to security, strength, ease of opening/closing etc., most knife aspects can be compared in a meaningful way.
There are distinct differences in composition and I would assume procedure in knives from the above two makers. This should lead to actual performance differences in edge holding, edge durability, handle durability and ergonomics, chopping and slicing ability, tip penetration and durability, corrosion resistance, coating durability, overall strength etc.
For example compare the TUSK vs the Trailmaster :
The TUSK has better edge holding on soft materials (it resists rolling stronger and wear slower) and worse edge holding on hard materials (it chips easier).
The TUSK's blade is tilted slightly which increases its chopping performance over the Trailmaster significantly and also reduces feedback which allows more force to be used in chopping which of course against increases performance.
The Trailmaster is uniformly heat treated and thus the edge is not a great deal weaker than the spine (scale with cross section). The TUSK has an untempered very hard edge which means it is very weak and will easily be damaged.
The uniform hard heat treatment of the Trailmaster means it is also very hard to flex it will sustain more force and return to true while the TUSK will take a perm. bend.
And so on.
[This message has been edited by Cliff Stamp (edited 05 August 1999).]