← Back

Comparison Console

CRKT HVAS vs Kershaw Oso Sweet

EDC Knives comparison. Compare price, weight, specifications, materials, and real-world use case.

Add gear
Command Brief

Recommended read

Kershaw Oso Sweet stands out as the lightest option for weight, with about a 14% gap from the closest alternative. Kershaw Oso Sweet stands out as the cheapest option for retail price, with about a 18% gap from the closest alternative.

Decision Signals

What stands out

Cheapest

Kershaw Oso Sweet stands out as the cheapest option for retail price, with about a 18% gap from the closest alternative.

Most expensive

CRKT HVAS stands out as the most expensive option for retail price, with about a 23% gap from the closest alternative.

Lightest

Kershaw Oso Sweet stands out as the lightest option for weight, with about a 14% gap from the closest alternative.

Heaviest

CRKT HVAS stands out as the heaviest option for weight, with about a 16% gap from the closest alternative.

Shortest

Kershaw Oso Sweet stands out as the shortest option for closed length, with about a 9% gap from the closest alternative.

Longest

CRKT HVAS stands out as the longest option for closed length, with about a 10% gap from the closest alternative.

Shortest

CRKT HVAS stands out as the shortest option for blade length, with about a 31% gap from the closest alternative.

Longest

Kershaw Oso Sweet stands out as the longest option for blade length, with about a 45% gap from the closest alternative.

Specification Profile

Relative dimensions at a glance

Each axis is normalized against the largest raw value among the products in this comparison. Farther outward means a larger value, not necessarily a better result. Axes with an unverified value are omitted.

CRKT HVAS — Blade length: 55 mm (2.17 in)CRKT HVAS — Overall length: 201 mm (7.91 in)CRKT HVAS — Closed length: 115 mm (4.53 in)CRKT HVAS — Blade thickness: 3.2 mm (0.13 in)CRKT HVAS — Weight: 105 g (3.70 oz)CRKT HVAS — Retail price: US$53.97Kershaw Oso Sweet — Blade length: 79.5 mm (3.13 in)Kershaw Oso Sweet — Overall length: 184.4 mm (7.26 in)Kershaw Oso Sweet — Closed length: 105 mm (4.13 in)Kershaw Oso Sweet — Blade thickness: 2.8 mm (0.11 in)Kershaw Oso Sweet — Weight: 90.7 g (3.20 oz)Kershaw Oso Sweet — Retail price: US$43.99Blade lengthOverall lengthClosed lengthBlade thicknessWeightRetail price
Price & carry
Retail price
US$53.97Most expensive
US$43.99Cheapest
Weight
105 g (3.70 oz)Heaviest
90.7 g (3.20 oz)Lightest
Dimensions
Blade length
55 mm (2.17 in)Shortest
79.5 mm (3.13 in)Longest
Overall length
201 mm (7.91 in)Longest
184.4 mm (7.26 in)Shortest
Closed length
115 mm (4.53 in)Longest
105 mm (4.13 in)Shortest
Blade thickness
3.2 mm (0.13 in)Thickest
2.8 mm (0.11 in)Thinnest
Materials & mechanism
Blade steel
1.4116 stainless steel
8Cr13MoV Stainless Steel
Handle material
Glass reinforced nylon (GRN)
Glass-Filled Nylon (GRN)
Finish
Satin
Satin finish blade
Lock type
Liner Lock
Liner Lock
Opening method
Thumb Hole
SpeedSafe assisted opening (flipper/extended tang)
Clip type
Metal pocket clip, tip-up, reversible
Reversible pocket clip (tip-up or tip-down)
Use case profile
Best for
Everyday carry (EDC)OutdoorsCampingHikingFishingHuntingUtilitySurvival
Everyday carry useBox openingLight outdoor tasks
Not best for
Unknown
Unknown
Common praise
Easy maintenance with Field Strip technologySmooth action and good blade designLightweight and durable glass reinforced nylon handleSecure liner lock mechanism
Fast and smooth assisted opening actionSecure, comfortable grip with textured handleLightweight and well balancedAffordable price point
Common complaints
Handle has multiple hot spots and can feel cheapPocket clip and scale edges may cause discomfortConsidered a good limited use knife but not great value
None clearly supported by sources

Dataset Expansion

Missing a brand?

Suggest an EDC brand for CarryCrew to research and add to the comparison database.

Community indexing queue online