|
|
Post by steelhound on Mar 28, 2011 23:10:17 GMT
Tom and Hiroshi,
I have been admiring both of the XVIII's offered in the Munition Grade section for some time now, and would love to hear a little more about them. Specifically, I was wondering how the XVIII.2 compares to the 1557 in terms of stiffness and COP length. Would you say that it's a sword suitable for heavy cutting? With the XVIIIb.x I am just curious in general - do you know what model it is a one-off of, or anything about it's handling?
Normally I would just send an email with these questions, but I figured others out there might be curious as well.
Thank You,
-Steelhound
|
|
|
|
Post by chuckinohio on Mar 29, 2011 0:24:49 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by steelhound on Mar 29, 2011 0:47:46 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Hiroshi on Mar 29, 2011 16:15:38 GMT
Tom knows more about these then I do, so I'll let him field this.
|
|
TomK
Member
Senior Forumite
Posts: 2,377
|
Post by TomK on Mar 29, 2011 18:24:07 GMT
the XVIIIb.x is indeed a 1503.
The XVIII.2 is quite different than the XVIII.1 (which is the updated model of the 1557 with historically correct point cross section). For starters the XVIII.2 is a lot longer in the blade and this makes a large difference in feel. The XVIII.2 is a very interesting blade to me. It accelerates very quickly and hits hard, but if you try to arm it instead of using proper body mechanics it will wear you out. It is the manliest 2 pound sword I've ever encountered. I don't recall how long the COP sweet spot is but as with most ATrims it is fairly long though nothing like the XIIa.4 or some of the newer models that have sweet spots close to or over a third of the length of the blade. I haven't cut anything heavier than single rolls of tatami with it so I can't comment on how it handles stuff larger than that but I bet it could. If you cut with good form and body mechanics this sword rewards you with great and smooth cuts and moves and changes direction faster than you'd ever expect, but if you try to just arm it you're gonna have a hard time of it. This is a huge difference from the XVIII.1 (1557) that doesn't care about your technique and just cuts like mad no matter what. I think this sword can cut as well as the 1557 but you have to play by the rules and it doesn't tolerate slackers. I love it, but if you aren't interested in body mechanics and form this sword isn't for you. It is much less of a casual cutter than a serious trainer that will correct you when you do something wrong.
I hope this helps. I also hope this doesn't scare people off the XVIII.2 because it is one of the more interesting and fun swords I have ever swung.
|
|
TomK
Member
Senior Forumite
Posts: 2,377
|
Post by TomK on Mar 29, 2011 19:51:53 GMT
I've been thinking about it and I'd like to add one more comment about the XVIII.2
I have performed a cut with the XVIII.2 that I was unable to do with any other sword, ever: a horizontal cut on an empty bottle (and through the neck no less) I actually did this four times so I know it wasn't a fluke. so why this sword and no other? I think the answer is tip speed. I feel like I am able to get more speed at the tip of this sword than of any other sword I have ever used.
|
|
SeanF
Member
Posts: 1,293
|
Post by SeanF on Mar 29, 2011 23:28:12 GMT
This intrigues me. Just when I was going to let the sword acquisition's cool down for a bit.
|
|
|
|
Post by steelhound on Mar 30, 2011 11:18:13 GMT
Thanks Tom, that's a lot of great information, especially on the importance of body mechanics with the 1510. I was curious from the description on T&T about how it can tire you out, but it sounds like the kind of training aid I might be interested in. No shortcuts, but very rewarding when mastered. With big brass cajones.  Just to be clear, am I right in thinking the 1510 comes with a 1557-style cutting tip? |
|
TomK
Member
Senior Forumite
Posts: 2,377
|
Post by TomK on Mar 30, 2011 18:28:32 GMT
the tip seems to cut pretty well for me, but I'm cautious about comparing it to the 1557 as the shape and profile are different.
|
|
|
|
Post by steelhound on Mar 30, 2011 19:37:11 GMT
That sounds good, I was curious if it was a tip for cutting or more like the new XVIII.1's.
|
|
TomK
Member
Senior Forumite
Posts: 2,377
|
Post by TomK on Mar 30, 2011 19:48:08 GMT
I haven't seen the new XVIII.1 so I'm not sure but the tip on the XVIII.2 is broarder than it is thick (working off memory here) and seems well suited to cutting but it is still fairly thick and does indeed thrust very well.
|
|
|
|
Post by steelhound on Mar 30, 2011 19:59:43 GMT
Many thanks, Tom, this has been very helpful information.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 17, 2011 15:25:51 GMT
-Spam content removed-
|
|
