trade offs in production swords poll.
Oct 14, 2012 0:24:36 GMT
Post by nddave on Oct 14, 2012 0:24:36 GMT
hi guys.
overall I feel the true perfect sword is one that carries three primary examples of what a sword is. also what I feel makes swords appealing to enthusiasts. here's what I believe these three are and some insight to what I feel basically fits into these three examples.
1) blade durability: consists of steel used, level of heat treatment, blade geometry, and edge retention.
2) handling: consists of weight, balance, and shape of the handle.
3) aesthetics: materials used, level of accuracy regarding detail and design ( hamon, blade geometry, sculpting koshirae, pommel, guard ect)traditionally designed/forged or historically accurate.
obviously we as enthusiasts want all these factors in our purchase. it'd be our "perfect sword" so to speak. unfortunately the production market we primarily buy from doesn't have much in the sub $300 market that truly encompasses all these factors. there's usually trade offs.
here's were the poll comes into play. pick one option that describes which of the three primarily suits your preferences, taste or needs in a sword you buy. and what trade off your willing to sacrifice.
here's some examples of manufacturers or sword types I feel meet the options descriptions.
1) like a musashi katana or windlass european type. decent handling and aesthetics, but lacks the durability of other makers
2)kinda thinking tactical types here. decent blades and handling but lacks the more aesthetic feel of other more traditional looking swords.
3)I think hanwei and darksword fit this option pretty well. they look good have decent blade durability but lack something in handling.
4)this option fits swords like cheness and gen 2 pretty well. swords that don't really hand well or look that great but are tougher than a brick shithouse.
5) this kinda fits the wallhanger or slo swords. beautifully detailed but lack or have little handling or blade durability. kinda like the uc lotr swords.
6) this is kinda tougher to describe. I think this option best describes iaito or blunt trainer swords not used for blade on blade contact. they don't cut, some aren't very articulate. but they handle like a sword.
anyway, I hope alot of you vote and leave comments on why you chose what you chose. I think it'll help many of us who've been around awhile and new people understand what we like and why we say what we say about different swords and manufacturers.
also note my descriptions weren't meant to be deciding factors on what option you chose. for example, just because your a hanwei fan doesn't mean your forced into option three. those descriptions where just given to help some who might be confused a little of the poll's options.
thanks, david
overall I feel the true perfect sword is one that carries three primary examples of what a sword is. also what I feel makes swords appealing to enthusiasts. here's what I believe these three are and some insight to what I feel basically fits into these three examples.
1) blade durability: consists of steel used, level of heat treatment, blade geometry, and edge retention.
2) handling: consists of weight, balance, and shape of the handle.
3) aesthetics: materials used, level of accuracy regarding detail and design ( hamon, blade geometry, sculpting koshirae, pommel, guard ect)traditionally designed/forged or historically accurate.
obviously we as enthusiasts want all these factors in our purchase. it'd be our "perfect sword" so to speak. unfortunately the production market we primarily buy from doesn't have much in the sub $300 market that truly encompasses all these factors. there's usually trade offs.
here's were the poll comes into play. pick one option that describes which of the three primarily suits your preferences, taste or needs in a sword you buy. and what trade off your willing to sacrifice.
here's some examples of manufacturers or sword types I feel meet the options descriptions.
1) like a musashi katana or windlass european type. decent handling and aesthetics, but lacks the durability of other makers
2)kinda thinking tactical types here. decent blades and handling but lacks the more aesthetic feel of other more traditional looking swords.
3)I think hanwei and darksword fit this option pretty well. they look good have decent blade durability but lack something in handling.
4)this option fits swords like cheness and gen 2 pretty well. swords that don't really hand well or look that great but are tougher than a brick shithouse.
5) this kinda fits the wallhanger or slo swords. beautifully detailed but lack or have little handling or blade durability. kinda like the uc lotr swords.
6) this is kinda tougher to describe. I think this option best describes iaito or blunt trainer swords not used for blade on blade contact. they don't cut, some aren't very articulate. but they handle like a sword.
anyway, I hope alot of you vote and leave comments on why you chose what you chose. I think it'll help many of us who've been around awhile and new people understand what we like and why we say what we say about different swords and manufacturers.
also note my descriptions weren't meant to be deciding factors on what option you chose. for example, just because your a hanwei fan doesn't mean your forced into option three. those descriptions where just given to help some who might be confused a little of the poll's options.
thanks, david