Kuya
Registered
Posts: 1,396
|
Post by Kuya on Aug 16, 2012 22:22:50 GMT
I've noticed that when others measure the point of balance on their reviews, they are balancing it on their finger and not a fulcrum. It's easier to balance on a finger, as it has more surface area to balance onto, and also are people measuring up to their finger, or up to the center of where the blade rests on their fingers?
I currently use a triangle block fulcrum with a millimeter wide surface on the top "point" where I rest the sword. I have it there, because if I left it pointed completely, I could never be able to balance anything on it, as I don't have nanometer adjustment ability. This is still more accurate than resting it on a finger, though. When I do it the finger way, I can easily shift and move the balance point just by turning/twisthing my wrist a bit. Also, the added friction of skin can also help keep a blade that isn't actually balanced correctly on the finger's surface on it.
|
|
|
Post by frankthebunny on Aug 16, 2012 22:33:31 GMT
I'm not sure I understand the need to narrow this down to a fraction of an inch or mm. I don't think even a 1/2" one way or the other will throw off someones kata or cause the sword to fail cutting water bottles or tatami. for the most part, we are talking about sub $300 beater swords, not finely tuned and precisely balanced parts on a space shuttle
|
|
Kuya
Registered
Posts: 1,396
|
Post by Kuya on Aug 17, 2012 3:47:11 GMT
True, our measurements aren't life and death, but numbers sell products. I don't know about others, but a lot of what I consider buying and end up buying is influenced from what information I gather from here or other reviews. Where I live, and with the shift to internet stores over "brick and mortar," we can't just go to a store and take a physical look and take a few practice swings to "feel it out."
I'll go to the Munetoshi Mokko example. Every time someone asked for a light and agile cutter, I recommended it, because of the stats given and the previous review done on it. It may be my old journalistic training bugging me, but when I do a review or give an observation/suggestion... I want it to be as accurate as possible. It's another person's money at stake, and they may have worked hard for it. This is also why I measure on two different scales several times, to get as precise a weight measurement for my reviews as I can.
From my fulcrum measurements, the Mokko and 26-A only have a half-inch difference in weight balance, and even though the 26-A is 5 oz heavier, I can definitely feel how much more agile and "fast" it is. I even did a blind (as in they didn't know the stats and measurements, and didn't share their thoughts with each other until after writing them down) test where I had a group of friends sample and dry swing with both swords, and asked them which felt easier to maneuver. All said the 26-A.
Anyway, this is why I posted and asked about how others are measuring in their reviews. When we post them, we may have a bit of power and influence over someone's choices. We should review and measure responsibly.
|
|
Razor
Senior Forumite
Posts: 1,883
|
Post by Razor on Aug 17, 2012 4:21:56 GMT
And this is why you should only recommend swords that you personally know of and not swords that you only know of from what others say or write about.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 17, 2012 4:59:10 GMT
Kuya, understand that the point of balance will give you some indicator of the feel and handling of the sword, the value judgement of how good or bad that is will be decided by personal preference. There's no need to be exact to the millimetre with the POB, because it's just an indicator of where it balances, not an engineering tolerance value, where the closer it it to a certain figure, the better, that, it is not. The best way to determine if a sword is a light and agile cutter is to pick it up and make a few proper cuts in the air (proper technique), or even better, perform a basic kata which transitions between several cuts so you get the feel of how easily the blade changes from one cut to another. Looking at the stats will tell you the overall weight, and that's a rough guide, for example, it's obvious that a lightweight Hanwei Shinto Katana (Weight: 1lb 14oz, POB 4.41") is going to handle very differently to their heavyweight Wind and Thunder Katana (Weight: 3lb 5oz, POB 6.22"). Don't get too hung up on figures, they just indicate what type of a sword you're getting, how it performs and whether you like how it peforms is a different thing. As a real life example, my Cheness Tenchi weighs 2 lbs 5 oz (with fuller or bo-hi) and has a POB of 5". it feels like a fairly tip heavy sword that has a lot of power in the cut but doesn't manoeuver very easily, ideal as a heavy cutter, while my Hanwei 47 Ronin which features a bo-hi is 2 oz heavier at 2lb 7oz, with a POB of 4.92" (basically the same POB) yet it feels very much lighter and is extremely agile. They feel like completely different swords, and they are, there's much more to it than basic weight and POB specs. So much for the numbers...
|
|
|
Post by ineffableone on Aug 17, 2012 5:12:08 GMT
It should also be pointed out that the POB will change from sword to sword of the same line. These swords are not mass produced by machines to exact dimensions. There will always be differences between each different sword of a specific line. So any reported POB for an individual sword is just an approximate for that line, someone else may buy a sword from the same line and find the POB forward or behind the one reported.
So as others have mentioned being overly exact isn't that big of a deal, as it only says what that specific swords POB is not every sword from that line.
|
|
|
Post by jcbarnett on Aug 17, 2012 5:13:39 GMT
I measure POB using a short stiff cigar mailing tube - it's about 2 inches in diameter but allows me to get pretty darn close to an accurate measurement.
|
|
Kuya
Registered
Posts: 1,396
|
Post by Kuya on Aug 17, 2012 5:32:35 GMT
I'd prefer that more accurate information is provided. If people only recommended swords they owned, the person asking for recommendations would be lost. I don't think anyone could really help anyone else. Like if someone were to say, "I need a new car, I want something economical, but with good fit and finish and reliability."
A lot of people would recommend an Accord or Camry, even though they don't actually own one, because enough accurate information and reviews are out there for people to be pointed in the right direction. If said car-buyer were to be more specific and say they want a really high-tech interface, then there's enough accurate information to add a Fusion w/ Sync.
Anyway, I just figure that as a community, we should be trying to provide the best information we can to others. It's the honest and right thing to do.
OK, you two are right. And I get that the numbers may or may not always be the same and are just an estimate. But I still believe that it's better for us to give the most accurate estimate for others when we do a review. This isn't just about POB now, I guess. I just had it as my main topic/example, because of how crudely the measurement was taken. It's almost as bad as "eye-ing" the blade length and listing it. If all people who review a certain model of sword were to take as accurate a measurement they can, we can also come up with an "accepted range" of variance.
For example, the KC 26-A I had a chance to review had a 0.3 lbs variation from KC's listed 2.6 lbs. That's over 10% off the mark. The Mokko's balance point was 0.5" off the listed 4.75" for a 10.5% miss. Yes, our swords are mostly handmade and can't be as precise as a machine, but is a 10% difference is disastrous in other things. Would you not mind if your engine was putting out 10% less horsepower? What if your paycheck was missing 10% of the money you were owed for your work? Or is +/- 10% acceptable in the sword field? If 10% variance is an agreed upon amount by the vast majority of the community, I'll accept it as how it should be. I'm just trying to learn more, as I'm relatively new to this scene.
Thanks for everyone's time and input!
|
|
|
Post by Gaufried on Aug 17, 2012 5:50:02 GMT
I do not get it. This guy has a demonstrably accurate way to measure the POB of a sword, utilising a rather precise fulcrum-block to do so. He should be applauded rather than dismissed. I say good for him, and thanks for the idea and his dedication to metrical accuracy. :idea:
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 17, 2012 5:56:31 GMT
Just be aware that 10% less engine power is a bad thing, while having 10% more or less weight in a blade can be eithe good or bad either way, depending on the user! If I like a tip heavy sword for more authorative cuts, well, the 10% extra weight will be great, if I practice kata, or prefer a more agile blade/faster cutter, 10% less weight will be fantastic. To put it in perspective, traditionally and historically, no two swords were alike, whatever came out of the forge was unique, even if they were exactly the same style. Even modern swords that have a component of human workmanship will vary. Ideally, the best way to buy a sword is to handle it first, but that's not always possible to make sure it feels right to you. What you like might not appeal to another, and so on. It's not reasonable to expect the cookie-cutter uniformity of CNC milled clone blades wich are identical to within a fraction of a millimetre to hand-forged blades. You aren't getting more or less of anything unless you consider the value of the steel per ounce, what you're getting is a one-off handcrafted piece, that level of uniformity is neither possible nor actually benficial. Youre mixing up quantitative (more engine power, money, etc) with qualitative (ie. different feel to a sword). If your sword is heavier, you aren't getting "more sword", and making a sword longer or heavier won't make it better necessarily either. A variation from a basic specification is not quantitatively worse, it's slighly different qualitatively, and what determines whether the variance is better or worse is the preferences of the swordsman. To put it simply, it it feels right for you, it is right. There is no engineering specification for what you'd like or dislike, though there is the concept of Harmonic Nodes, which make a sword feel right during a cut by minimising the vibration or oscillation at the handle and the centre of percussion, so the shock of blade impact isn't transferred to your hand, and the sweet spot of the blade doing the cutting moves very little during the cut. It would suffice to say that a well made sword has the harmionic nodes in the right place, and 'feels right' when cutting. It's like trying out a golf club or tennis racquet, give it a swing, you'll know if it's right for you!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 17, 2012 6:00:50 GMT
I balance mine on a piece of dowel about an inch thick, probably even more precise, we're just indicating how relevant the measurement is to keep it in perspective. All of us get hung up on one point or another of sword design when we start off, I know I did, but we soon realise that these things aren't all that important and we can enjoy our collections without stressing about the less critical points, that's all.
|
|
|
Post by Dave Kelly on Aug 17, 2012 7:05:28 GMT
Personally I use two fingers. I've been handling swords for 40 years. A more scientific measurement may prove me to be off as much as a 1/4 inch from time to time. I'm not going to lose sleep over that much deviation should it represent a 3-4% variance.
No one is being dismissed. Just some of us older handlers are telling neophytes not to get to concerned about the fractiles. Blackthorn and others have already mentioned harmonic considerations that go into composition of a sword, and the variance inevitable in hand finished crafts.
It has been pointed out before that another stat, Point of Concussion, is almost superfluous; as in its case, this measure is inevitably 2/3ds up the blade.
Measure the taper of the blade up the shaft and the gross weight of the sword and you can probably do the math to determine the probable POB.
Which ever methodology you wish to use will be appreciated, and will fuel dialog to further enlightenment.
Cheers
|
|
|
Post by Jakeonthekob on Aug 17, 2012 7:39:51 GMT
This is an interesting discussion...
As far as handling goes.... POB can be deceiving. You have to take into account every single gram of weight from every single piece, as well the the geometry of the blade as a WHOLE. That means motohaba, sakihaba, motakassane, sakikassane, tapering of the nakago both width and thickness-wise, then if it has grooves or no, how deep and approximately how much weight it reduces, how the handle is made (thickness and overall profile of the tsuka), how long the handle and nakago are, how much weight the habaki, tsuba, seppa, and other koshirae lends to the sword overall, etc.
Sorry for the rant but it's true. My MAS for example weighs 2.2lbs and has a pretty robust nakago and thin wide blade, with custom tsuka and good weighted kodogu. It has a POB of 5 inches from the tsuba but it is still a little hard to wield compared to my SBG. My SBG by comparison is 2.4ish lbs and much thicker, but pretty narrow with a good tapering nakago as far as width and thickness goes. The POB is 5.5 inches from the tsuba. The kodogu weigh roughly the same as well. I find I can move this sword faster than my MAS despite the weight difference, and POB difference.
The handling is different, and obviously cutting performance but everything put together determines how the sword handles. Sometimes an easy switch can change the handling, other times it's impossible to change the handling characteristics.
Remember POB does not determine how a sword handles. Everything together actually does.
|
|
|
Post by Lukas MG (chenessfan) on Aug 17, 2012 8:04:40 GMT
The PoB is completely overrated, it is simply a result of how you place harmonic nodes, pivot points and all that truly important stuff. As already said, the PoB can AT BEST be an indication, a tendency and while admittedly it is not completely useless to measure it's way too often taken as proof of how good a sword is (mostly people seem to think the closer, the better or more agile). So I try to avoid placing any emphasis on it, mostly.
|
|
|
Post by MOK on Aug 17, 2012 10:03:16 GMT
There's A LOT more to balance and mass distribution than just where it's centered - the Center of Balance is merely the simplest aspect of it, the easiest to measure and report, but quite often not the most important or informative. For a grossly simplified analogy, imagine two dumbbells like this: They would be the exact same length, width and thickness, would weigh the exact same and have the exact same CoB, but would handle VERY differently.
|
|
Kuya
Registered
Posts: 1,396
|
Post by Kuya on Aug 17, 2012 10:33:07 GMT
Ugh... so much goes into handling. It's almost as complicated as cars.
I guess this is why my DF O-Katana is defying my limited sword and physics knowledge, and is handling better than what the general listed measurements are telling me.
I still believe that that we should still try to give the most accurate measurements we can if doing a review, though, and not use "eyeball estimates."
|
|
|
Post by Vue on Aug 17, 2012 10:43:29 GMT
|
|
|
Post by wolf_shade on Aug 17, 2012 13:38:00 GMT
No, no it really isn't. It might be as complicated as what's required to make a piston to the correct tolerances for balanced performance (I doubt it), or to balance the tire's appropariately for load distribution, but just combining those two (let alone the rest of what goes into a functioning vehicle) makes a car and its construction considerably more complicated than a sword.
You keep referencing cars. I have to ask, how can one expect anything made by hand be expected to match the tolerances and level of precision of something with machined parts? Especially when the variation in price between those two things is at minimum an order of magnitude?
|
|
|
Post by Elheru Aran on Aug 17, 2012 16:34:27 GMT
The fact of the matter is that manufacturing swords is never really going to be as cost effective as manufacturing cars, as there's simply not enough demand for them in this day and age. If it gets to the point where three quarters of the world's population wants a sword, then sure, someone's going to figure out how to make a machine to crank them out by the millions. When it gets to that point, then start worrying about whether the POB is within a sixteenth of an inch between different swords of the same model or not.
Until then, yes, some swords are made by mechanical means-- CNC milling, for one-- but they are always finished by hand and oftentimes there's much more hand-work than that. It's been this way for centuries. This is why most people don't have just one sword-- they're looking for the one that fits them best. You have to be willing to accept a certain variability, a certain lack of precision, having a 'feel' for things rather than being able to rely on fixed figures.
|
|
|
Post by frankthebunny on Aug 17, 2012 19:32:27 GMT
|
|