Best handling sabres on the market these days?

I'm interested in hearing about this myself, actually. However, I do imagine it will depend somewhat on the exact kind of saber and what one considers to be good handling.

I've considered buying a sabre so I'd love to hear about this too. A lot of the ones on the market look like the curvature would make them rather unwieldy when not on horseback, and a number of stainless decorative sabres I handled at a knife showroom definitely felt it too.

Hello all,
I'll toss in what little bit I know. As some of you know I am always posting something pertaining to sabres. I love sabres. But the only repro military sabres I have handled are the 1860 Lt cav sabre from MRL and Ames Swrod Co.,, Mamoluke from Legendary Arms, MRL's Shamshir/Scimitar. I have had like five of them (1860 sabre) and one from Ames Sword Co. (same sword, blades made in India). At MRL's showroom I handled their scimitar/Shamshir, and I have also owned one of the Mamoluke swords/Sabres from Legendary Arms I think. Of those four, the MRL Scimitar/Shamshir was the best as far as being light, quick and deadly, very easy in the hand and so fluid in its movments. But the 1860 Lt. Cav was a good 2nd. The Mamoluke, while an absolutely beautiful, solid made sword, was a bit "too" curved for my liking, and a bit too heavy, and a bit too blade heavy. But now, due to its weight and all, I would imagine if you got a good lick on someone with it it would inflict a horrible wound and/or sever a limb very easily.

Now, even though the Scimitar was lighter and very quick, I still prefer the 1860 lt. Cav. Sabre due to the fact that it has much better hand protection. I value hand protection as one of the things I take into consideration when considering swords. I know I probably will never be in a real sword fight, but I look at them as if I might, so I take all things into consideration: not only handling, balance, etc, but hand protection, probable impact and cutting power, thrusting capabilities, etc.. If a sabre or Scimitar/Tulwar/Shamshire, etc, is too curved, it is not as good for thrusting, at least to me. To me the 1860 Lt. Cav sabre has the perfect blade: just curved enough and with just weight enough to be a good cutter, and just straight enough to be a good thruster.

I also like the U.S. 1840 Hvy, Cav. Sabre but only handled an original once, which was a joy. MRL has a repro of one now but I have yet to handle it so don't know how repros of it go. Repros never compare to original ones. While the the shape, handle, and blade width might be right, the blade thickness and distal taper thus balance is never right. For example, an original 1860 lt. Cavalry sabre's distal taper starts out danged near a 1/4 inch at the hilt and distally tapers to nothing at the point. The repros start at the hilt with 3/16" and keep that thickness to within a few inches of the point. But now if you know what you are doing they can be made a bit better. What I don't understand,with today's technology and means at theri hands, why can't the modern companies make repros be true "repros", with the correct blade thicknesses and distal tapers?!?

I intend to step over to MRL one of these days and handle a couple of more of their sabres, including their 1840 Hvy Cav Sabre.
Just my two cents.
Freebooter

This is a tough question to answer. Lot of variables. What do you want the sword to do, has a lot to do with which on you choose. Many early modern cavalry units carried several different swords and blunt force weapons into battle and drew on them to meet different targets. One weapon doesn't meet all contigencies.

The 1760-1820 Light Saber ( the British is only one famous example which LaMarchant adopted from the Austrians) held sway because it was very fast and cut very well. But it was awkward to thrust with and didn't match up well to a new generation of longer, straigter saber such as the French Montmorency.

The 1820-1860 swords were 34-36 inches long with 1.2 inch wide blades and varied tapers to favor cut (Germans) or thrust. (French). There are a number of nice examples of this style. Fr 1822, Spanish 1860, Austrian 1854, Br 1822, Prussian 1852.

So what do you want in your sword?

Try a WIndlass Shamshir first.

The 1796 is nice, but the Cold Steel is too heavy to be a legitimate 1796.

The US 1860 is a pretty good combat saber with the "quick" side better than the heavier, longer 1840.

The Austrian 1904/ Swiss 1899 sabers are nice smallish packages.

The Spanish 1907 Peurto Segura is a long 35 inch straight blade, but very quick and easy to use. Also can be got for under $300.00 with some patiant shopping.

Hey Little JP,
Was that you playing that piano on that link on your post? If so, you are frantastic man! I love piano music, especially alively piece like that.
FB

What I'd look for in a "perfect" saber would be:

-A gently curved cutting blade, ca 29-32" long, with a hatchet/saber point.
-Guard that offers good protection, such as a half-basket, clamshell guard, siderings, etc. Preferably ambidextrous.
-Some kind of pommel for decent counter-weight.

Unfortunately, finding one with all these characteristics has proven tricky to say the least. Particularly the last one, as the only pommeled sabers I've seen around were the ones Angus Trim used to make.

Anyway, I have been sort of considering the Windlass or Cold Steel shamshir. Not really my favourite type of sword but I keep hearing good things and they seem like fun swords to mess around with. Over-all, I prefer the Windlass as far as looks go, though the Cold Steel one comes with that saber fencing DVD if I buy from KoA, and I've been wanting to get my hands on that for ages now.



You know, I like the Puerto Seguro, but I honestly have a hard time thinking of it as a saber. Whenever I see pictures of it all I can think is "Zorro!"