|
Post by junon on Oct 9, 2012 2:02:54 GMT
Nice review Dave +1 karma for you (wait... how can I couldn't +1 you) I especially like that you pointed out about the lack of distal taper. Only someone who have handled (and know a thing or two about this sword model) would notice that.
|
|
|
Post by Silver_Fan on Oct 9, 2012 3:23:02 GMT
Nice review,
I always enjoy reading your saber reviews, they are a small history lesson on this type of sword. From a complete novice' view it sure looks like a pretty sword, and I reckon with that chunky curved blade it would be a pleasure to cut with.
With that POB though, quick moulinet cuts could be a little tricky.
|
|
|
Post by William Swiger on Oct 9, 2012 4:03:28 GMT
Nice review Dave. I like sabres but just have the one for now.
|
|
Sébastien
Senior Forumite
Retired Moderator
Posts: 2,967
|
Post by Sébastien on Oct 9, 2012 5:09:11 GMT
Thanks alot for that review Dave. That's a nice-looking saber, but it is sad to see it handles like well-dressed crowbar. I would really like to see a saber with decent handling, at a decent price, but I'll have to wait 'til someone makes it
|
|
|
Post by TheNewDavout on Oct 10, 2012 1:03:20 GMT
You and I are both waiting for the same sabre...wish someone would go ahead and make it.
|
|
|
Post by jcbarnett on Oct 10, 2012 2:56:21 GMT
Great review - Thanks!
|
|
|
Post by Anders on Oct 10, 2012 3:37:29 GMT
Man, no distal taper? And it's such a pretty sword, too. In what way is the grind of the blade wrong? What do you consider to be a decent handling saber, though?
|
|
|
Post by Larry Jordan on Oct 10, 2012 13:42:15 GMT
That about sums up my sentiments, too. The phrase "well-dressed crowbar" should go in our SBG glossary.
My guess is that swords makes are guilty of one or more of the following: (1) they don't know the proper function of langets; or, (2) the guys over in the scabbard departments didn't interface well with the guys in the handle hardware department and the langets don't function as intended; or, (3) the swords designers don't care, their purpose is to create a "replica" and "function" is either an afterthought or one of many on the list of accidentals.
Let my add my voice and say that "I, too, would love a properly designed and functioning saber."
|
|
|
Post by TheNewDavout on Oct 10, 2012 14:22:56 GMT
Odd question, if we could get enough interest, have we considered a SBG custom sabre of some sort?
|
|
|
Post by Elheru Aran on Oct 10, 2012 16:08:04 GMT
That particular subject has popped up here and there, most notably in a shashka thread where we were discussing getting together with TFW or Kris Cutlery (most likely the former) about asking if they could start a production run of shashka. The downside of this is that a.) SBG's administration is generally fairly leery of starting up SBG-specific projects as that has a tendency to end badly, and b.) unless it's something that the board is really involved with like the SBG Leafblade Project, generally you don't really get much interest; you'll get two or three people who are really into it, ten to twenty who are intrigued or semi-interested, and then everybody else is like, "nice if you can get it to happen but it's not my thing".
Personally I would love to get on board with something like that, though. Being able to handle an original 1796 Light Cav saber really brought home just how different the originals were from what we have now... it started with almost a full 1/4" thickness of steel, and tapered to practically nothing a full 8" or 10" from the point! Handling was beautiful and deadly. Amusingly enough IIRC, I almost liked the reground Cold Steel reproduction that I also handled better...
|
|
Sébastien
Senior Forumite
Retired Moderator
Posts: 2,967
|
Post by Sébastien on Oct 10, 2012 17:10:23 GMT
Anders, and others :
What kind of handling would I expect from a ''real'' saber ? Good question. I'd say I would like a saber that feels like a weapon, like a tool that someone could use with confidence on a battlefield. That is, one that can strike with autority, but be nimble enough for parrying and feint-ing (is that a grammatically-correct word ?). To me, a replica that has a far-off POB doesn't cut it. It might be a satisfyinf blade to beat around a backyard, but it won't feel like a serious weapon.
I may also add that the replica that I would like the most would be the one that handles like an original, but that one would likely cost at least as much as an Albion ...
|
|
|
Post by TheNewDavout on Oct 10, 2012 17:58:36 GMT
Part of it comes down to what period and what country one has in mind. A Napoleonic French light cav sabre perhaps something like this ( www.napoleon-series.org/military ... ssabe.html) replicated wonderfully would handle differently than say, a 1871 italian sabre, both handle well, but for different styles of use. My personal interest would tend toward Napoleonic, but I would love to see some later and earlier stuff get reproduced, especially since for some of the later stuff (ie, the italian sabre mentioned) living lineage to period fencing masters exists, making it slightly easier to understand the style of swordplay they were used for.
|
|
|
Post by Anders on Oct 10, 2012 18:13:32 GMT
Recreation. I was specifically asking Sébastien how exactly he thinks a repro saber in this price range should realistically be expected to handle.
That's the real trick, isn't it?
See, the reason I asked is because you used the phrase "decent handling saber for a decent price." Now, of course we would all want a reliable saber that handles just like an original. But that's not decent, that's perfect.
"Decent" implies something tolerable but not great. So, assuming a sword in this price range will always be somewhat flawed in handling, where do we draw the line between "crowbar" and "a reasonably okay weapon"?
|
|
|
Post by Elheru Aran on Oct 10, 2012 18:57:52 GMT
There you get very subjective to some degree.
I think part of the answer is distal taper, something which is largely lacking in most modern India-made reproductions. The Chinese have it down (for the most part; see the sword in OP), but for some reason Indian reproductions tend to be somewhat indifferent when it comes to taper. It doesn't have to be as extreme as the originals were, but more than what we're getting now, for certain. This by itself would make a *big* difference.
|
|
|
Post by Anders on Oct 10, 2012 23:18:10 GMT
Well, if you are already using fairly thick stock, there seems to be little reason not to get rid of material we are already paying for in order to make the sword better.
Maybe it comes down to how much manual labour they can expend on each sword, or something.
|
|
Sébastien
Senior Forumite
Retired Moderator
Posts: 2,967
|
Post by Sébastien on Oct 11, 2012 0:51:22 GMT
Yeah, I agree that I shouldn't expect perfect/historical-level handling from a sub-300 $ blade. However, I also think many of the sub-300$ sabers could be improved by removing/grinding some metal and slight fitting changes. They might not be exactly like antique sabers, but at least they won't feel like a crowbar with a fancy handle
|
|
|
Post by Anders on Oct 14, 2012 0:05:16 GMT
Well, of course they could be improved, but the question is what standard of handling quality it's actually reasonable to hold a $300 saber to. Especially one that's made to represent a historical pattern first and foremost, rather than being especially designed for handling and cutting.
Mind, if they made an ahistorical saber only for the purpose of producing a good practical weapon for $300, I would be first in line to buy it. I'm just wondering at what point we are expecting too much.
I mean, I wager your average $300 medieval sword doesn't exactly handle like a dream either. Maybe the Hanwei Tinkers, I guess, but other than that we'd be looking primarily at, what, Darksword Armoury?
|
|
|
Post by Kilted Cossack on Nov 25, 2012 3:59:14 GMT
As always, the standard has been set. (The review, not the saber itself.)
|
|
|
Post by aussie-rabbit on Nov 25, 2012 12:35:19 GMT
Far above my simple attempts A 1796 Pattern British Infantry Officer's Sword for me please
|
|
|
Post by Kilted Cossack on Jun 24, 2013 18:29:24 GMT
It lives . . . again! I've noticed that,when it comes to discussing repro sabers, there are two things I seem to bang on about unceasingly. One of them is distal taper. (And for that matter, why is it that sabers exhibit such radical distal taper, compared with other swords? Anyway.) The other is "the angle of the dangle," that is, the idea that the grip should not follow the curve of the blade. Rather, it should curve away from the curve of the blade. For some reason as I was rereading this review, this picture really leap't out at me. Up top, of course, is the DF, and below is the 1812 light cav officer's model. That curve makes a difference. That curve puts the point of the blade much more in line with the forearm when you point it, even on a blade with some decent "sori" to it. Grrr, grrrr. The things they get wrong on repros, when it would be so very easy to get it right! Edited to add: The same kind of "grip recurve" is visible in these pictures (you'll have to click through, he's got the images copyrighted and asks that it be respected) from the Napoleonic Swords and Sabers collection. swordscollection.blogspot.co.uk/2012/02/french-light-cavalry-offier-sword-grand.html
|
|