Busse Combat Smatchet !!! . . . Coming This Wednesday, April 24, 2024, at 9:00 PM Eastern . . .

Walll said:
Yep discourse is great. I see the pommel as worse than useless (injury hazard), being sharp and pointy for a tool like this. The total symmetry of the handle and its angular design I don’t think marries well with the flowy, not totally symmetrical blade profile.

So overall I think it’s visually off with the handle characteristics, and functionally disappointing with that pommel.
Click to expand...
Ah, OK. Yeah, I can kinda see that being the case.
I have the FMV8 (I think it was called; the 8" dagger with CBT) that has similar pommel on it. I will admit that I don't carry it much, but when I have, I haven't had a problem with the pommel. On that dagger, it isn't really that sharp. More rounded. Visually, on the dagger, it is quite appealing.
I believe it would be more appealing on this Smatchet if they had gone with a more symmetrical blade. As it is, like I said above, it looks like they took blade design #17 from the long design thread. It probably would have appeared more visually integrated if they had also used the handle from that design.

See if this works. This SHOULD be a link to the first post in that thread. Check out #17. Designs
 
Walll said:
Yep discourse is great. I see the pommel as worse than useless (injury hazard), being sharp and pointy for a tool like this. The total symmetry of the handle and its angular design I don’t think marries well with the flowy, not totally symmetrical blade profile.

So overall I think it’s visually off with the handle characteristics, and functionally disappointing with that pommel.
Click to expand...

Allow me to address each of your points.

First, you state, "I see the pommel as worse than useless (injury hazard)".
The skull-crusher or pommel is definitely an injury hazard! . . . but ONLY to the enemy combatant that it is being used against.
The vast majority of our blades have an exposed pommel due to the feedback that we have received from those who carry our knives in battle and other life-threatening situations, including; deep wilderness survival, victim extraction, building entry or escape, etc. . . .

Second, you then state that the pommel is, "sharp and pointy" . . . This is also incorrect. It is neither sharp nor pointy. It is rounded and has no sharp points.

Third, you state, "The total symmetry of the handle and its angular design. . ." YOWZA! . . . I have NO idea what picture you are looking at.
Yes, the handle is symmetric, just like the blade, guard, handles, and every other aspect of this design. However, there is not a SINGLE Straight line in the entire design. You cannot make angles without straight lines. There isn't enough whiskey in the world for me to find an angular feature in this design. Every line of this design was made with an arc, and you cannot make angles with arcs.

Fourth, you stated, "Not totally symmetrical blade profile". Again, I have no idea what picture you are looking at. The blade profile is perfectly symmetrical! The bevels on each side are different heights for different applications, but the outer profile of the blade, handle, guard etc. . . are perfectly symmetrical.

Let's Drink!

Jerry

.
 
dogboye said:
Ah, OK. Yeah, I can kinda see that being the case.
I have the FMV8 (I think it was called; the 8" dagger with CBT) that has similar pommel on it. I will admit that I don't carry it much, but when I have, I haven't had a problem with the pommel. On that dagger, it isn't really that sharp. More rounded. Visually, on the dagger, it is quite appealing.
I believe it would be more appealing on this Smatchet if they had gone with a more symmetrical blade. As it is, like I said above, it looks like they took blade design #17 from the long design thread. It probably would have appeared more visually integrated if they had also used the handle from that design.

See if this works. This SHOULD be a link to the first post in that thread. Check out #17. Designs
Click to expand...
I will add that while I have to admit that I think the handle from #17 would have appeared more visually integrated to the blade grind on this smatchet, in using blades to chop, I tend to avoid handle designs like #17. That much drop at the butt/pommel consistently creates hot spots pretty quickly for me. I think in actual use, the handle design on this smatchet will work better for the inevitable instances where it will be used for chopping. The only thing I have found that works better for me for chopping is the fusion handle, or maybe the nano fusion. But that handle shape would have been way too discordant visually on this blade, I think. It's interesting... doing a little searching on the 'net this morning, this design seems to hearken back to the earlier smatchet designs during and after WWII than I realized. I was used to seeing later iterations of the design, which were usually fully double edged.
 
Hallelujah! It's a smatchet and also looks like it was made by Busse. Challenge solved! I'll take a coated DE version please!

We just need a nice Kydex sheath from Mr. Brown.
 
Jerry Busse said:
Allow me to address each of your points.

First, you state, "I see the pommel as worse than useless (injury hazard)".
The skull-crusher or pommel is definitely an injury hazard! . . . but ONLY to the enemy combatant that it is being used against.
The vast majority of our blades have an exposed pommel due to the feedback that we have received from those who carry our knives in battle and other life-threatening situations, including; deep wilderness survival, victim extraction, building entry or escape, etc. . . .

Second, you then state that the pommel is, "sharp and pointy" . . . This is also incorrect. It is neither sharp nor pointy. It is rounded and has no sharp points.

Third, you state, "The total symmetry of the handle and its angular design. . ." YOWZA! . . . I have NO idea what picture you are looking at.
Yes, the handle is symmetric, just like the blade, guard, handles, and every other aspect of this design. However, there is not a SINGLE Straight line in the entire design. You cannot make angles without straight lines. There isn't enough whiskey in the world for me to find an angular feature in this design. Every line of this design was made with an arc, and you cannot make angles with arcs.

Fourth, you stated, "Not totally symmetrical blade profile". Again, I have no idea what picture you are looking at. The blade profile is perfectly symmetrical! The bevels on each side are different heights for different applications, but the outer profile of the blade, handle, guard etc. . . are perfectly symmetrical.

Let's Drink!

Jerry

.
Click to expand...

You are being very literal here. I acknowledge this is more accurate but self-serving, for example by saying the pommel is NOT pointy. Sure, it is rounded to a degree, but everyone would recognize it is more pointy than not, especially compared to the rounded-off designs in the design thread.

And an exposed pommel is great for all those reasons you mentioned! But, I would argue a skull-crusher takes away much of an exposed tang's usefulness in reality. Also my mistake by using the term blade profile when I should have said grind. Yes the overall shape of the blade is obviously symmetrical, but of course the grind is not, which is what my eye is drawn to more (on the non-coated versions at least).

I hope this is taken in good faith though; I've owned over a dozen Busse models over the past 14 years and I'm a huge fan.
 
Walll said:
You are being very literal here. I acknowledge this is more accurate but self-serving, for example by saying the pommel is NOT pointy. Sure, it is rounded to a degree, but everyone would recognize it is more pointy than not, especially compared to the rounded-off designs in the design thread.

And an exposed pommel is great for all those reasons you mentioned! But, I would argue a skull-crusher takes away much of an exposed tang's usefulness in reality. Also my mistake by using the term blade profile when I should have said grind. Yes the overall shape of the blade is obviously symmetrical, but of course the grind is not, which is what my eye is drawn to more (on the non-coated versions at least).

I hope this is taken in good faith though; I've owned over a dozen Busse models over the past 14 years and I'm a huge fan.
Click to expand...
It is all good my friend.

I did take your words literally and was confused by what I thought you were saying.

I think that you might be pleasantly surprised at how well this monster handles and feels.

It is very difficult to judge from the pics.

We designed this Smatchet with its rich history in mind and its intended application as primarily a fighter. 👍

Let's Drink! :)

Jerry :cool:

.
 
What handle material is used in the Smatchet Double Edge Stonewashed pic? I would also vote for nuclear option if it can be made available. Wicked looking blade.
 
How about a smaller brother version for throwing 😉or ya know one with a saw back muahahahha
 
I for one sure do :)

Stone washed single edge w/black canvas for me.
 
Garth Reckner said:
Nuclear Option Handles have been added.

Garth
Click to expand...
Aw, CRAP!

Man... this is gonna hurt. Either way... in or out.

I'm guessing there will NOT be a Danny the Bull sheath option for this one.....
 
Last edited:
Stone washed, band breaker, green canvas micarta ordered. Ouch my wallet hurts. 😫 cant believe when converted to Canadian it was just under 1000 dollars 😭. Well there goes my knife money for the entire year.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top