I make knives of all sorts and configurations using both hand forging and stock-removal methods. Have tinkered w/ designs for many years, the ability to work steel allowing for really any idea to take form. Then use them all year, all seasons, hunting, trail clearing, livestock butchering, in the kitchen, etc.

I've owned a Puma Bowie but while always intrigued by the WH since a very young age, to your question, which is a really good one, the WH, to me and based on using many different shapes and sizes, embodies a lot of bad design "features".

It is a mini-Waidblatt but where the Waidblatt has the mass and balance of a real chopper, just as you say, the WH is a small knife for its shape, way smaller than it looks online or in the catalogue, lending itself by sight (as long as a ruler is not close by) to chopping but not by execution...I don't believe. Concave edges are a pain to sharpen quick & on those that sport the serrations, well, I can do w/o them as that is the portion of the knife that allows for close and fine pairing if they aren't there. And it's not really pointy, but sort of "is" like an old worn out knife is.

Now here's the thing. Any and I mean any piece of sharp metal can be used for cutting and made-do with (wasn't it John Hunter who used a bread knife to kill a lion?) but as a design for really maximizing what it...looks...to be, I think the WH comes up short.

All that to say however much this critique seems rough, I STILL think the WH is a really neat knife and would like to own one! C'mon, it's a classic Puma and even if a shelf wore it like a woman wears pearls, the shelf would be better for it!

And yours is a dandy!!! Very nice!!