|
Post by Groo on Mar 30, 2012 8:19:28 GMT
Hey All!
My rudimentary understanding (as a newbie) is that swords have a big bevel all the way, and if you use an acusharp to sharpen them it causes a secondary bevel, like a small bevel just on the edge of the blade.
What are the drawbacks of this secondary bevel? Does it make the blade less efficient as a cutter, or easier to chip? Or is it mainly a cosmetic issue?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 30, 2012 9:30:37 GMT
There's nothing wrong with a seconday bevel, it works fine, and is historically authentic on many swords (not Japanese ones though). Due to its geometry, it has 'shoulders' close to the cutting edge, which increase the resistance in the cut somewhat, so it may not be as efficient as an 'appleseed' convex grind. In a convex grind, the edge tapers out and forms a cleaner wedge if I understand it correctly. Here's an earlier post on the topic by the man himself, Michael 'Tinker' Pearce - viewtopic.php?f=3&t=3412
|
|
|
Post by Tendrax on Mar 30, 2012 10:31:59 GMT
Just to clarify, a well done Secondary bevel has no real downsides, an acusharp is not a well done secondary bevel.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 30, 2012 11:26:53 GMT
That's true, the accusharp does not create a smooth, clean, even edge, it seems to tear bits out of the sides of the edge and leave quite a rough finish. It takes a bit of work with a diamond sharpener to level off and clean up an accusharp edge. Better to use a sharpening stone or diamond sharpener for the job.
|
|
|
Post by Lonely Wolf Forge on Mar 30, 2012 12:28:24 GMT
a WELL DONE secondary bevel like the one that comes on ATRIMS is perfectly acceptable, the problem with secondary bevels is, its often used as a cheap quick and easy way to put on an edge and the resulting steep bevel makes your sword more of a bludgeoning weapon than a cutting weapon because the shoulders of the bevel cause a huge impact before the cutting edge has time to cut. with a poorly done secondary bevel youl start seeing bottles explode or bat with no damage, ive had poorly done secondary bevels that after attempting a cut on a bottle, the bottled batted 50 feet and the WRAPPER didnt even cut. that IMO is what gives the secondary bevel a bad name, but i also think they are ugly as hell, and i always prefer a zero grind.
|
|
|
Post by Lukas MG (chenessfan) on Mar 30, 2012 13:39:08 GMT
Historically, there is both. According to Peter Johnsson, blended in apple seed edges are more common, but there are various numbers of sword were a secondary bevel is seen. These can be the result of re-sharpening in the field but in some cases, it's quite likely they were there in the first place. You see, a secondary bevel is tougher than even a fairly convex single bevel, not that we'd notice on our soft targets but when you're facing steel armor, it becomes clear. On swords that had a good chance of encountering that, you find stronger, more obtuse edges, often with secondary bevel. The blade geometry just sometimes makes a secondary bevel necessary. I recall seeing a very wide, thin original of the type XVIIIc that has this. Here the blade's body made for a very shallow edge angle that needed to me strengthened by a secondary bevel. You also often have them on hollow ground swords. In the end, an edge is always a compromise between the easy with which it cuts and its durability. This is why one sees so many variations, it totally depends on the intended purpose of the sword in question. In civilian or riding swords one usually finds very fine, acute edges, perfect for cutting soft targets like cloth and flesh. If you take such a sword in the field, you can expect severe edge damage when facing mail or plate clad warriors. But for its intended purpose, it's perfect.
|
|
|
Post by William Swiger on Mar 30, 2012 13:43:09 GMT
Well said.
|
|
|
Post by Phillip on Mar 30, 2012 14:02:30 GMT
Sometimes people frown at secondary bevel - nothing to worry about.
|
|
SeanF
Member
Posts: 1,293
|
Post by SeanF on Mar 30, 2012 15:52:53 GMT
Basicaly summing up the posts in a more concise manner:
1) A lot of people like the look of a blended edge better than a secondary bevel. 2) If you are doing a poor sharpening job doing a sub-standard secondary bevel is much easier than doing a sub-standard blended edge. 3) There when done well both cut well and are historical.
Also note that when you blend the edge you are basically forced to have a fairly good angle on the edge, but with secondary bevels it leaves it open to putting really steep bevels that don't cut all that well.
|
|
|
Post by Odingaard on Mar 30, 2012 17:49:05 GMT
Swords from antiquity had both zero-ground and secondary-bevel edges. Despite what many people think, both types enjoyed the same popularity though all historical periods - it's literally a toss of a coin when you go into a museum what type of edges you will find. So, nothing is wrong with a secondary bevel - I have owned both and have no preference toward either as long as they are well-executed, they both cut just as well. The average swordsman is not going to use a sword in the capacity to note much of a difference on common targets if they edges are properly done.
I believe that the secondary bevel gets a bad rap due to poorly done sharpening jobs. Frequently, these types of bevels are too steep to afford a decent cutting edge. Take for example a crappy Accusharp edge - it's not at the right angle, it's uneven, it's jagged, and it does not cut worth a damn. This type of bevel sucks.
But, sharpened to a proper angle, a secondary bevel creates a razor-sharp servicable edge that many people historically and in a modern context, including myself, are quite happy with.
So, it's personal preference. To answer your question, there is nothing wrong with a well done secondary bevel.
|
|
|
Post by chrisperoni on Mar 30, 2012 18:52:53 GMT
-re. the part about the blended edge- I find this to be true for knives I sharpen. I don't really know how I came about it but I manage now to just by polishing knives with sandpaper, put a deceptively sharp edge on them. To look at they appear dull, even to touch you can't feel that biting edge- I'd even say that they feel like you could run your finger across them with no cut. But just try to slice something and .. pow! like butter.
BTW- I do fully understand and respect a proper 2ndary bevelled edge- if you don't then buy a Valiant Armoury sword and you'll get it! Oh, and I also learned my lesson when I asked Tinker this question- I believe the link to that thread was already posted here.
|
|
|
Post by chuckinohio on Mar 31, 2012 1:19:14 GMT
In a nutshell, there is your answer.
|
|