I just got a Steel Warrior Congress in the mail today. Red walnut jigged bone, 3.5" closed (model SW 118RWJ). I bought it because in searching for my perfect traditional folder to carry and use every day for the next few decades, the Case congress in chestnut bone and CV steel has made it to my short list, but I have/had some reservations about the pattern. Would the blades be too thin? Would the knife be too wide/bulky? Would I like the assortment of blades? I decided to try a Steel Warrior first since $17 is a lot less than $60 if I ended up not liking the knife, and the 118 closely matches the Case 64052 pattern.
I have to say that I'm impressed with the Steel Warrior. It's not perfect, but the Case isn't likely to be either.
Probably the biggest difference is that the SW uses 4 backsprings, one for each blade, whereas the Case uses 2 backsprings, albeit with a spacer between them to allow enough room to bend the large blades so they fit. I was worried that the Congress pattern might be too wide to pocket/use comfortably, and in case of the SW, it's not. And the Case should be even narrower.
All 4 blades have half-stops. Pull is nice; not too stiff, not too soft. Similar to any full-sized SAK you might have. All blades snap closed. Springs are completely flush when closed. They stick out when in the half-stop position, but that is probably better for longevity, and IMO a non-issue unless you're talking about a $1000+ custom. The spring for the large sheepsfoot blade is the slightest bit proud when open, but not enough to get in a twist over. The large sheepsfoot also sits just a bit higher than the large spear blade. I don't know if this is intended (so you know which blade is which) or not; I might file down the kick so it sits a bit lower. The tip sinks below the handles, so either way it's not an issue.
The blades aren't particularly sharp, but it's nothing that a few minutes with a ceramic rod can't cure. There's a tiny bit of blade wiggle in every blade, but less than I expected. I've had plenty of modern "tactical" folders that had as much, if not more blade wiggle. There's a very slight gap between one of the liners and the spring (see picture below) and also a slight gap between one of the scales and the liner at one end (right top on same picture). Again, not really enough to get in a twist over, IMO. The shield doesn't sit parallel to the knife, but instead follows the jigging; if it sat parallel it'd be very proud on one side, so again, I'm not disappointed. Finally, if I wet a cloth and rub the scales, dye easily comes off. I expect this will eventually stop after some use and pocket carry.
The only other real complaint that I have is that, as a result of each blade having its own spring, making all 4 blades parallel, there's lots of space in the handles for longer blades. The congress pattern traditionally uses 2 backsprings and bent blades to fit them all, which means they have to be kept under a certain length to fit. In the case of this SW though the blade length seems to be dictated by matching the traditional blade patterns rather than practical use of handle space. It's a personal pet peeve of mine, but I hate it when knives make poor use of handle space; I hate poor blade-to-handle ratios. Give me longer blades, or shorter handles. I have the same issue with the Buck 301/303. Of course, this isn't a deal killer for me. Having 4 long blades would defeat the purpose of having 2 thinner, shorter blades for more detail, precision cutting. And if the handle was shorter it'd be too short for me to use comfortably. But still, I can't look at all that "wasted" space without some annoyance.
All in all, I'm impressed with the knife. Not perfect by a long shot, but at its price point I can't say that I'm disappointed at all. All these little nitpicks would probably go unnoticed by anybody who isn't a knife collector like you or I. For $17 (shipped!), I'm very happy with the knife and can only hope that the Case Congress, which I'll definitely be buying now, can offer the same value for the money.