It is interesting to see the information about the American Edition, though it has no place within the progression of pure Bibles (i.e. London, Cambridge, Oxford and Cambridge again).

First, it is plain that the American Edition of pre-1851 (the ABS revision began in 1847 so Norris has very scholastically supplied us with an example from 1846) is not close to the Oxford at all, and does not even seem to really follow Blayneys 1769 Edition.

However, it already bears the signs of certain Americanised peculiarities. To what extent some of the differences are gained from pre-1769 texts, or the 1762-following Cambridge editions, it can not be told without detailed study, but a cursory glance shows that the American Bibles had their own branch of textual history.

When the ABS decided to revise its text, it must have been to bring into alignment to the Blayney text as presented by London, Oxford and Cambridge. Notwithstanding that some modernisations may already have existed, after the Blayneyising process, they also revised the spellings more substantially than any ordinary British Bible.

It is clear that some of this was toned back in from the 1860s and beyond.

To this present day, the ABS Bibles do not seem to have been a major factor in the world history of the KJB. Even the most common American KJBs (as far as I can tell, living in another country) are printed by Thomas Nelson, which until recently has presented a text that falls somewhere between Oxford and Cambridge. (I assume that the Thomas Nelson is actually the Edinburgh Edition.) Thus, probably for at least the greater portion of the twentieth century, ordinary KJBs have dominated in America, whether they be Oxfords, Cambridges or Thomas Nelsons.

Of course, I do not know these things first hand.

I can tell you that British printed KJBs have dominated in Australia, historically (19th Cent.), firstly Cambridge, then Oxford, then London; and in the twentieth century, firstly Collins (following the Pure Cambridge edition), then Cambridge (Pure then the Concord), then Oxford. In the latter part of the twentieth century the market has been increasingly dominated by Thomas Nelson (especially), with others such as Zondervan, Holman, Kirkbride and David Cook, etc.

The ABS edition has never been recognised or used as a standard edition internationally. Many KJBs on the internet today seem to be something like an Oxford. Less are Pure Cambridge Editions (but this can change). Before someone says that I have a double standard rejecting the ABS because it is not the most common, and then accepting a text that is not the most common, is because it is commonly attested to by anyone who knows about which edition of the KJB is better, that a Cambridge one is in fact the received text.