Both knives have very strong positive points. Unlike everyone else, I don't have a strong preference. In fact, I believe either one will appeal to a different customer equally.
If I had to make a choice I'd take A for no other reason that I prefer the finish on the handle.
A:
pros:
The handle finish is fantastic
I prefer the full flat grind you gave it
the choil at the ricasso being squared off looks more refined
cons:
the sharpening notch is a little big. As Gruff says, it draws a little too much attention from the rest of the knife.
B:
pros:
I prefer the handle lines and softness of the sweep in the belly. The lines on A's handle look more dramatic, and would probably be a bigger seller, but on my personal knife I like friendly sweeps versus dramatic lines.
I really like the lanyard slot
cons:
Such beautiful wood deserves to be shown. The finish on A is more to my liking. Again, just personal preference. Many will take the opposite view.
The choil/ricasso would look a lot better squared off.
I prefer a full height flat grind. Flats on a blade have their place, but they should be striking if they are there. In other words, flats need to look like a design element and not just that the bevel ended before it got there. The grind on your blade is perfectly fine. There's nothing wrong with it. Again, just personal opinion. As they are, they don't detract from the knife at all. To be honest, I don't have much use for flats on a knife. Any knife. It seems to me like if you have room for flats you could have brought the bevels higher and improved cutting performance. But that's just my own philosophy on knives in general. Flats are there to give the blade strength via thickness. I don't generally need my knife to be stronger, I want it to cut as well as possible.
