|
Post by rammstein on Dec 7, 2006 21:14:36 GMT
Heh. I thought this might provoke some good opinions about Paul's two favorite european swordsmithing companies, gen2 and windlass. Obviously, both make fine products for this price bracket, but I's like to see people's personal opinions. Gen2 is known for its high quality beaters that can ake a hit like nothing else in its category. However, it might sacrifice this for a little historical accuracy. Windlass on the other hand, doesn't not make as "durable" swords as gen2, but slightly surpasses them in historical accuracy. I'm sure this is all just preference, but your opinion matters. It's always nice to see what swords and/or manufacturers draw more people to them. Personally, I find windlass to be my type of sword as historical accuracy is what matters to me. How about you !? (needless to say) Vote or die! ;D
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2006 3:55:46 GMT
I am about to answer that question this weekend. I am working on a side by side comparison test of the top three brands in this price range. Windlass, Paul Chen, and Gen 2 I have accomplished the preliminary reviews shown at: www.swordsofvalor.com/swordcomparisons.htmlYou can see by the weights and balance points that Gen 2 has come a long way in reducing weight and maintaining strength and ridgedity. This weekend I will be cutting with each against a rice mat rolled around a 3/4 inch wooden dow rod. I will post as soon as the results are up on the board.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2006 4:49:12 GMT
I think the two brands are there to fill different niches. The Gen2 are for Steel to Steel combat, and as a result are exceptionally tough and strong. The Windlass is for celebrating history by recreating swords that are as good(or better than) historical examples - forged historically and in historical style. Though Windlass has some less than perfect models, they fill this niche well(not as well as say, Albion, but then again, a differenct customer base is there as well). Gen2 fills their niche well. Neither are particularly bad at all.
Both are good, most reviews I've seen of windlass swords say they're far sturdier and tougher than say, Depeeka, CAS Iberia, Rittersteel, and so forth; while simultaneously looking better. And the Gen2's are far far FAR superior to those 'Stage-Steel' pieces of junk, so I'd have to say that for their respective niches, they're the top of the line.
So I don't think one is better than the other.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2006 13:30:47 GMT
They may all be similar in quality, but I don't think the main purpose of the Gen 2 is just for blade on blade contact. Otherwise they would all have dull edges.
The Gen 2 Swords are razor sharp and are ideal for cutting. Another point is the historical aspect. Nearly all the Gen 2 Swords have peened pommels (historical) where as the Windlass have screw on nuts (not historical). And of course the Gen 2 has thinned out their blades and improved tempering over the past year.
Arms of Valor sells both brands, so I really have no reason to favor one over the other as they both sell and both make us money. I have used both in practice cutting and handled a good number of models from both brands and still favor the feel of the Gen 2. My biggest reservation about the Windlass is the over flimsiness of the blades. For example when Paul tested the Towton and tried to thrust through a target of multiple box layers it folded on itself. It did spring back, but how could it penetrate chainmail. If that is historically accurate I would be very nervous about using it in battle. A similar profiled sword made by Gen 2 does not flex that easily, but when it does flex beyond a certain point will stay set. Gen 2 has been working on this issue and I will be doing a controlled flex test of both swords in the very near future.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2006 16:18:36 GMT
I would like to enter in on this. Working with Hank Reinhardt as I have here recently. Flex is the one big issue Hank had with Windlass. Once they got to where they flexed they went overboard he said. Yes, by all means a sword is suppose to flex but there has to be some stiffness other wise how would it have penetrated armor (chain or plate). Hank has stated that the rigidity and flexability of our blades (and no they do not flex like Windlass and according to Hank they should not) is where they should be. And I agree with him, not just because we are the owners of Generation 2 but if you really think about what he has said, he is correct. Not that I am singing the praises of Hank Reinhardt but since Ewart is no longer around Hank is the sword history expert now. We do have the one sword the first in his collection coming in 2 weeks and you can get hem from your favorite Generation 2 retailer with his signature or without. We will have soon a beautiful (and historically accurate) Viking sword with copper diamonds in the pommel and guard.
I hope this helps in educating more on the flexability of Eurpean Swords. This is a time when they sould and a time when they should not. A Rapier yes, because they usually did wear armour, but earlier European Sword some, but more stiffness or ridigity.
I will come in and post when time allows, but right now we are busy with several new items and I will be traveling back and forth to meet up with Hank.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2006 17:40:40 GMT
I have not been satisfied with windlass very much. I bought one viking sword from them that I immediatly sent back and exchanged for their classic medival. I found that the oversized handle shifts over the undersized tang to make the sword unstable. The peening job is also weak and the blade is too soft. The sword might feel good if you are cutting are or watter bottles, but if you hit a semi-hard pell you will see how the handle shifts over the tang. I have also noticed the blade itself twist sideways on hard impacts. Its hard to expain, it twists sort of like a ribon might begin to twist. I have had no such problems with Gen 2. I have heard that they have corrected those problems in thier new lines but I can not be sure.
A word of caution on going too light on all swords. The spotlight these days seems to be on late 15th century two handed dueling swords, but their are other fighting styles. Also keep in mind that dueling is not combat. Heavier bastard swords in combination with a kite shield for defence can be very effective.
|
|
|
Post by rammstein on Dec 8, 2006 20:37:26 GMT
As I see repeated here as well as elsewhere, windlass seems to be more on the flimsy side whereas gen2 is more robust and sturdy. However, I find aesthetics to be a bit higher than pure functioning (just my opinion). Gen2 seems just a little...bland, for lack of the right word.
Tsafa, actually, many of windlasses swords seems to have the same problem --loose construction. All of the blades I've bought have this as well. However, it doesn't impact cutting ability other than some loud disconcerting pings.
Clyde, you might have misunderstood me. In no way would I think that gen2 was designed for blade on blade contact. Obviously they would have blunt,wide, flat edges. I'm assuming you design them to be functional beaters that can withstand the rigors of combat well. That is, as everyone is mentioning, where windlass is falling short.
Jason, not all windlasses have threaded pommels. The sword of war that I own is obviously peened and I believe that the european sword review by paul shows that that sword is also peened as well (correct me if I'm wrong?). That being said, you are quite right that swords are meant to be peened. Windlass has many swords that are not, quite off the ball historically.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2006 20:50:53 GMT
Clyde, you might have misunderstood me. In no way would I think that gen2 was designed for blade on blade contact. Obviously they would have blunt,wide, flat edges. I'm assuming you design them to be functional beaters that can withstand the rigors of combat well. That is, as everyone is mentioning, where windlass is falling short. Yes you are correct we are making them to withstand use as an original and for their original purpose. But as you can see we are working on the cosmetics. Look at the Lucerne and now also with the Dordgone with the drawing made from an original sword and the drawing given to Hank Reinhardt, we did it exactly as per Ewart's drawing. And you will see it as well with the Viking we are working on. We have also made made historical Recreations on the Bowie knives as well. We have the strength and rigidity, and as many can see we are working on the cosmetics.
|
|
|
Post by rammstein on Dec 8, 2006 21:24:32 GMT
Yes you are correct we are making them to withstand use as an original and for their original purpose. But as you can see we are working on the cosmetics. Look at the Lucerne and now also with the Dordgone with the drawing made from an original sword and the drawing given to Hank Reinhardt, we did it exactly as per Ewart's drawing. And you will see it as well with the Viking we are working on. We have also made made historical Recreations on the Bowie knives as well. We have the strength and rigidity, and as many can see we are working on the cosmetics. Of course. I personally like the direction you are taking in terms of accuracy. I've admired your quality for sometime, but have held back a bit because of accuracy. The dorgogne look plain viscous now ;D!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 9, 2006 5:17:22 GMT
Greetings,
I have a few Windlass swords and for the price I really have no complaints about them. I picked up a Shrewsbury on the stength of the review on SBG. It is whippy but I've had no trouble cutting or stabbing with it. The hilt was wobbly and too big for my hands so I modified the sword to suit me. I have an old Atlanta Cutlery viking sword (the one with the brass five lobed pommel) which I re-hilted, improving the aesthetics considerably. I find this price class of swords perfect for us DIY types who can't resist the urge to customize our swords. I'm interested in seeing how Gen2 improves their aesthetics now and in the future.
Regards,
audax
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 9, 2006 6:38:16 GMT
I picked up a Shrewsbury on the stength of the review on SBG. As the author of that review on SBG (yep, I'm the guy ), I'd sure like to hear how accurate you think it was, now that you have your own Shrews. In the interest of improving any reviews I do for SBG in the future, if there's anything you think I was way off on, or anything that was particularly helpful, or anything like that, please let me know. As to the hilt, it does loosen up after numerous cuts, and I have a couple of ideas on that (more permanent than the method I described in the review): 1. Add some lok-tite(<sp?) to the threads before snugging it down. OR, 2. File down the blade shoulders between 1/16" and 1/8", epoxy the handle to the tang, snug down the nut (before the epoxy dries), and then peen the end of the tang over the nut. The second idea is one I'm strongly considering, as we speak.
|
|
|
Post by jpfranco on Dec 9, 2006 16:22:26 GMT
I prefer Windlass primarly for one reason: the finish. I know some will argue that grinder marks are not a big deal but I beg to differ. Medieval swordsmiths were experts sword makers and part of guilds (unions if you prefer) which controlled the quality of the swords made. Also, if you consider the price of a sword in Medieval Europe, roughly the price of a sub-compact car today, this was a lifetime investment. Thay's why I prefer Windlass swords. I am an historian and I have researched this topic long and hard, I have an extensive collection of $300 price range swords and Windlass is the best. I am not much into cutting and beating swords, for this, Gen 2 is probably the best, I am for historical accuracy. Unless you want ot pay $800 for a Arms & Armour sword or $1000 for a Albion sword, Windlass is your best bet. It all depends on what you want to sword for.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 10, 2006 2:31:01 GMT
I agree that Gen2s seem more solid, but don't always match Windlass for finish... and yet, despite preferring Gen2 overall, I have more Windlass. I have more short blades than long, and with something like a coustille there's no worry about the Windlass steel being too flexy or whippy. I haven't felt 100% confident when it came to the tang in a couple of Windlass models, but that is also less likely to matter in a 2' weapon.
The real thing stopping me from buying more Gen2s isn't anything about their designs or construction, it's that their catalogue is much smaller. As with short swords, for example -- if I want something similar to the coustille and at least as sturdy, it's going to be a DelTin cinquedea or pricier, because Gen2 has nothing even similar.
If they offered everything that Windlass does, I'd definitely own more Gen2s than I do!
|
|
|
Post by rammstein on Dec 10, 2006 2:35:04 GMT
Thats a good point hardy, glad you brought that up. I think catalogue availibility is a key issue as well. No matter how good your swords are, if there is a limited variety, you won't get many sales (unless you are a movie sword maker). And who voted "what's a sword" ?
|
|
|
Post by rammstein on Dec 10, 2006 3:11:17 GMT
As the author of that review on SBG (yep, I'm the guy ), I'd sure like to hear how accurate you think it was, now that you have your own Shrews. In the interest of improving any reviews I do for SBG in the future, if there's anything you think I was way off on, or anything that was particularly helpful, or anything like that, please let me know. As to the hilt, it does loosen up after numerous cuts, and I have a couple of ideas on that (more permanent than the method I described in the review): 1. Add some lok-tite(<sp?) to the threads before snugging it down. OR, 2. File down the blade shoulders between 1/16" and 1/8", epoxy the handle to the tang, snug down the nut (before the epoxy dries), and then peen the end of the tang over the nut. The second idea is one I'm strongly considering, as we speak. I thought you might want to know, kriegschwert, that I bought my shrewsbury based on your review and I found it most helpful. I second everything that you said, especially the suprise about the two-handed grip! I found the sword to be an excellent buy for an absurdly low price.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 10, 2006 4:08:14 GMT
I thought you might want to know, kriegschwert, that I bought my shrewsbury based on your review and I found it most helpful. I second everything that you said, especially the suprise about the two-handed grip! I found the sword to be an excellent buy for an absurdly low price. Thanks. I appreciate the input. When you write something yourself, it's hard to know whether or not your getting your points and ideas across to the reader. You also wonder if you left out something important, something about the sword that someone may be wondering about, that you just didn't think of addressing, etc. Thanks, again.
|
|
|
Post by ShooterMike on Dec 12, 2006 2:41:37 GMT
Greetings all,
I noticed at the top that Jason mentions three brands, Windlass and Gen2, but also Paul Chen. I am curious about experiences board members have had with the Chen/Hanwei line... I am mostly concerned with the European swords in the line, but also have an interest in the Chinese swords as well.
Thanks for all the interesting posts.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 12, 2006 2:43:28 GMT
Greetings all, I noticed at the top that Jason mentions three brands, Windlass and Gen2, but also Paul Chen. I am curious about experiences board members have had with the Chen/Hanwei line... I am mostly concerned with the European swords in the line, but also have an interest in the Chinese swords as well. Thanks for all the interesting posts. I've never even held a Hanwei product, but I've heard a lot of good report about them. Maybe someone else can put forth more information. L.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 12, 2006 3:17:27 GMT
I have actually completed the cutting test of all three brands and will be posting the results sometime this week.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 12, 2006 3:38:41 GMT
I'm not a fan of the Paul Chen practical series of european swords. They're WAAAAAAY too bendy.
Recently I was at a ren. faire where a dealer was selling the aforementioned bendy swords, advertising them by bending their tip all the way to the pommel. Granted that's damn impressive, but there comes a point where too much flex is a bad thing. I can't imagine a sword like that, no matter how sharp, penetrating any sort of armor on a thrust. It's just a glorified sword-shaped spring.
For stage/theatrical mock combat, they'd be great I'd imagine. Otherwise, I'd just stay away from those.
|
|