No Kool-Aid here....

Eh....I'm on the fence on the ASH-1....I'm not sure on the handle, and I wish it was a little longer. Right now, I'd rather have a SFNO.
 
Personally I love the ASH1 handles. They're fantastic obese or anorexic, but it's the blade shape I'm not so keen of. It is more like the spear tip than a drop point, just not my cup 'o' tea, but like I said before, I am happy for those that like it.
 
Grimspoon said:
SFNO = smaller blade (length) than ASH1 right?
Click to expand...

034.jpg
 
The ASH-1 SE has a blade length - 6 7/16", width - 1 15/16" & thickness - 0.22".
The SFNO was listed as having a 7" blade, (t - 0.22" with a width of, I'd estimate 1 7/8 to 1 15/16") but so was my HR, which checks in at 6 7/8" while my newly acquired Basic 7 shows 7 1/4" of M INFI. Jerry's blade lengths are more or less close approximations. Perhaps someone who actually owns a SFNO could post measurements. Knob Creek flat and old school saber grind to see if there are any differences. I'd like to know. Thanks. Pete
BTW, I'd REALLY like a SFNO. Perhaps a good bit of the excitement about the ASH-1 is due to the fact that Jerry hasn't released a normal combat/general utility blade for a while. There was the WB (a karambit fighter), the FBM (a chopper), the SS (a hawksbill/Wharncliffe hybrid) and the SD (a conversation piece). When WAS the last time Jerry released a "normal" blade? Pete
P.S. How could I forget the BATAC? Got 2. BUT, its at the low end of the blade length scale for me. Most of my small collection is 6 to 7 " blades.
 
Although I have held both of these styles, I have to admit that after looking at PMs pic, my opinion of the blade is changing. My original estimation of the ASH1s blade being more of a spear point in comparison to the SFNO was wrong. I still can't nail down why the ASH1 doesn't flow for me, but I might have to order one just to try it again.;):thumbup:
 
Haven't had one in hand so I'm guessing on how it would feel but the handle shape looks just right for me. As for size, it falls into the range of my favorites and if I don't get one I'll be sorry later. Grabbed an LE, glad it's the thinner of the two because I'm not a fan of thick blades unless they're large choppers.
 
I just saw the specs on thickness for the CG. Holy Crap .320 is thick. I have held the thinner ones, and they all feel great, but a fatty like this might push me over the top despite my feeling on the shape. I'm not a big fan of thick blades, but the grind on the ASH1 could make it a most succesful user. My SFNO is full height grind, and I don't think I would ever intentionally go back to a sabre grind.
 
I'm with Resinguy :o, I still haven't warmed up to the 2007 SE I have, we'll see when the other's show up.

I'll blasphemely (?) say :o, that the BB pommel seems to mess with my pinky while chopping, ............ but they look cool as get out !

I figure worst case, I'll could sell the others and hang the SHE ASH-1 on the wall :eek:.

I'm an Ergo, SHSJ kinda knife knut, but I've got 3 ASH-1's on order !



:D
 
Personally, I like the thinner grind concept of the ASH, and the general handle shape is great, but I'd like the handles smoother.

Unfortunately, for me anyways, it comes down to budget, and I may wait on a different Busse, though. Having an early INFI SH that I've used and abused to death, having a slightly shorter version of the same basic blade shape creates a small redundancy in my tiny and limited Busse cabinet. I don't have what seems to be a true hog budget to have one of everything.

For somebody without a Busse in the 6-1/2" to 7-1/2" range, I think this would be a must-have in the LE thickness.
 
I might warm up to the ASH by the time Skunk puts 'em up at the BCS. I'm pretty poor right now, though. The price seems right on the CG.:thumbup:
 
aesthetically the blade of the new Ash1 would look better (in my eyes) when the plungeline had a more rounded shape, like the "original" SteelHeart.

See:
 
I'm looking forward to testing out the ASH1 LE against my RD-7. Should be a fun spring or summer.
 
Does anyone else wish the CG's were 3/16"?

I was really looking forward to a tan/tan CG to match my EU-17's but .320 is too fat for a trail knife IMO. I went with an LE instead.
 
If you don't really like the fatties you can always go with the LE version of the ASH1. I believe it is only .22" thick which is significantly thinner than the CG version


El_Toro said:
Guess I can just buy one and if it doesn't feel right, turn around and sell it. Or send it to Ban and have it turned into a "Anorexic" version.:D
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top