|
Post by rammstein on Dec 31, 2007 22:52:10 GMT
since we're talkin about cut and thrust swords i wanted your guys' opinion on an idea ive been thinking about. My hanwei bastard's blade tapers down to about 7/8ths of an inch before ending in a semi-spatulate point...ive been thinking of shaping it into a more acute point for better penetration. the tip still has quite a bit of meat in the thickness so i think it woud stand up well to thrusting. Opinions? If you feel you have the ability to do said task, I don't see why you couldn't attempt it. I for one am not up to par on my reshaping skills and could never trust myself to do it ![;)](//storage.forums.net/forum/images/smiley/wink.png)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 31, 2007 22:58:04 GMT
true,true...i have been fancying DSA gothic and the albion regent...but the tip on this somehow looks out of place. i do however like your solution better...just buy another sword..now why didnt i think of that. ;D I recently had a chance to handle both of those weapons and there are a LOT of differences. (But then there should be for a difference of about 800 dollars) DSA gothic does not handle nearly as well the albion, granted it's still a very good sword for the price, and it has a wickedly penetrating tip which distal tapers, then thickens slightly for a stronger point before coming down to the final point. My cutting performance was not nearly so good using western blades but that's becasue I'm not very good at putting a draw into the cut while I swing.
|
|
|
Post by Jeff K. ( Jak) on Dec 31, 2007 23:28:22 GMT
yeah i know i could do it...a few hours of file work...im not thinkin of any thing drastic but i've got three other fuctional swords with pretty much the same tip...and since this one is so slender in width anyway.....ive also got united cutlerys Narsil (my first sword, broken, back before I knew anything about the diff between wallhangers and practical) and boromirs sword. iwas thinkin of shaping the tip something like these, closer to narsil than anything i suppose.
|
|
|
Post by Jeff K. ( Jak) on Dec 31, 2007 23:36:02 GMT
true,true...i have been fancying DSA gothic and the albion regent...but the tip on this somehow looks out of place. i do however like your solution better...just buy another sword..now why didnt i think of that. ;D I recently had a chance to handle both of those weapons and there are a LOT of differences. (But then there should be for a difference of about 800 dollars) DSA gothic does not handle nearly as well the albion, granted it's still a very good sword for the price, and it has a wickedly penetrating tip which distal tapers, then thickens slightly for a stronger point before coming down to the final point. My cutting performance was not nearly so good using western blades but that's becasue I'm not very good at putting a draw into the cut while I swing. while making the tip more acute will lessen the cutting power as tsafa pointed out...this is quite a long sword so theres a lot of edge for a draw cut...although this wont avail you much if your say slashing the front of a dummy but if your attacking the shoulders, neck, limbs i think it will still have significant cutting power there. maybe i should have started my own thread...since im veering away from the black prince
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 1, 2008 3:39:58 GMT
Wow. Just... wow. First of all - historically, people didn't cut with the portion of their blade a foot back from the tip. They cut with the final 6 inches or so of the blade. If you want my sources for this, go look up any period fechtbuch or treatise on the subject. The idea that cuts so far down the blade were somehow better than tip cuts is silly - In fact, a gentleman debunked that very notion somewhere on myarmoury, and I believe I also read something from ARMA to that point as well. And anyway, about swords that try to both cut and thrust and do neither well... Gee. Golly. Whiz. (<---trying really hard not to curse here) A quick second glance at any of the aforementioned fechtbuchs or treatises will illustrate that the masters taught both thrusting and cutting with their weapons. Obviously some weapons cut only(falchion) and some were primarily thrusters(spears) but in every section dedicated to the sword both cuts and thrusts were illustrated and taught side-by-side with the same weapons. In fact, Meyer makes a point in his teachings to say in regards to the longsword that though he teaches thrusting, one should only use cuts in friendly practice, sparring, or duels that were not to the death as thrusting with their swords was considered too deadly. Meyer had over a dozen different named cuts for the longsword in the same section, which clearly indicates that their swords did both. A quick look at Talhoffer's Fightbook of 1459 shows many plates of duels to the death, and many won by cut, but many other's won by thrust. The cutting power of the swords in enough to decapitate, and the thrusting power is enough to go clean through a body wearing a padded gambeson. ![](http://img170.imageshack.us/img170/5091/thrustandcutrx9.png)
|
|
|
Post by randomnobody on Jan 1, 2008 3:59:33 GMT
Ooh, pretty pictures... (wow, that's graphic)
I can't offer much on the subject, but I would personally expect my sword to be just as good at thrusting as cutting, but I'll agree that some are certainly more focused on one than the other, such as the falchions as mentioned. Likewise, I wouldn't expect a rapier to be much of a cutter, but this is why I don't currently own either of the two types.
Shame about your Black Prince bending, but if I recall, you say it's only the very extreme tip? I think at one point you said the last millimeter? That's not much, really. Heck, I bent the tip on my Hanwei Saxon Scramasax some 40 degrees a good half centimeter or so back by dropping it on the floor, but that's a very, very acute point on that thing, so I'm not surprised a drop into a wood floor did this. Straight in, off just a touch to one side, tip penetrates wood but is off balance, sax falls over, bending tip in process. It straightened out, but I won't be doing that again if I can help it. I might even file it back and round it off a bit more...
I don't blame the blade itself, I'm sure it's a fine sample, but the very forces acting on it at that point were more than I think I could have handled if done to scale on myself. Dropping some four times my own height head first onto a solid surface? Ouch...
Glad to hear it's not had problems since, though. Keep us posted.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 1, 2008 8:21:13 GMT
For the unarmored dueling you see in the first sketch, you don't need a thick diamond cross-section. You can use a tapered sword with thin cross-section that will cut well and can still thrust through flesh. Myself, I prefer a multipurpose thrusting sword with a thicker cross-section near the tip for armored fighting too. In a unarmored duel, I would not care about taking a head clean off. I would be satisfied with cut that only goes an inch into a skull, but thats my preference. Like I said, all swords were costume made back then. You can get yours anyway you want. I think that historical sketch is probably exaggerated but can't prove it and it does not matter either way. I seems people like drama in the 15th century too. 15 th century manuals were sold to rich people for money or to attract them to fencing schools, a little hype was good for business back then too. Some people today also suggest Talhoffer was just as much showman as swordman. You can see his sense of humor in his 1467 Fechtbuch on Men and Women fighting. The big hole and the upside down grappling obviously have sexual undertones. faculty-staff.ou.edu/H/Kenneth.Hodges-1/combat.htmlAdam, no reason for you to get upset, people have different tastes. I like tapered thrusting swords to have an extra thick cross-section near the tip. I am willing to sacrifice some cutting ability for that extra thick cross-section. I like side-rings and a wheel-pommol too. I'm paying, so its my choice.
|
|
|
Post by rammstein on Jan 1, 2008 16:02:50 GMT
Who cares if you don't "need" a thick diamond cross section. Hell, a thick diamond cross section would be pretty detrimental to that cut. What it shows is that that same cut is possible even with a pretty thrust oriented sword (XVa - read: giant sewing needle).
Tsafa, that's not true, I thought I debunked that earlier. Some swords were custom made but the vast majority were munitions grade and not made to order.
I don't think those sketches are exaggerated for anything more than blood. It's pretty obvious a type XVa can take a head off. That's rather unquestionable in my mind, and if you'd like proof I can provide it.
As I've said before, why bother with swords, then? You seem to like specialty weapons, so I recommend you switch to spears and axes rather than swords. It's not that we're getting upset about your tastes, what you've requested is reasonably accurate. What we're upset with is your believe that a thrusting sword can't cut and a cutting sword can't thrust. There are numerous examples to prove that erroneous claim incorrect, but you appear to not be listening.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 1, 2008 16:28:31 GMT
My suspicion is that the sword din't fail so much as the thrust itself. If wrengtched after the thrust, then I can see many a good sword fail. If it WAS a good thrust, then it probably was another dud. I'm not trying to slight gen2, you all know I've got full respect for your work, but I can't rule out the possibility that you've still not got the black prince right. And that's nothing to be ashamed of, it's a very hard blade type to do correctly. But this is all speculation upon speculation, the sword is very likely not to be the culperate at all. I bent it on an old 5 subject notebook, but I have a feeling it was my angle. I was trying to see the penetrative power, and gave it a bit of a second push after my initial thrust, which I have a feeling did it. After I fixed it (at least hypothetically) I did a few against some wood and an old interior door, and it seems to have held up to that. He clearly feels that it was his angle and that can happen to the best of them. Now if we did not make our thrusting swords sharp (we do this because that is what the public wants) then the tip would have more steel surface and that would probably not have happened. It all depends on how much angle a person moves after the initial thrust. Heck I have done so as well. But with it being sharp all the way to the point removes extra surface and thickness (which includes rigidity) at the point where it is needed. Adam is right, most people do not cut with the last 8 inches or so from the tip, but if we did not sharpen it people would continually call and say my sword is not sharp. So we have to go with the masses, if we want to make money and that is what we are in business for. If the tip was not sharp, I will not say it would not happen, but I will say there would have been a better chance it would not have happened.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 1, 2008 16:52:55 GMT
Ram, if something as odd as a type XVIIIe, exclusive to Denmark and a few other places, can make the Oakeshott typology then there is plenty of room for some "specialty" swords. Only a small number of swords survive, there are many historical styles that are most likely unknown to us. Most of the swords that do survive have been sharpened down or rusted significantly. Most of the swords you see in new condition were dress-swords or ornamental swords. There is a thread in the cafe area that has pictures of swords from the MET. If you go to that thread, I can show you which swords are decorative, which are missing tips, and which are rusted through. Museums also don't tell you the extent to which they fill in the missing pieces on their armor displays. This is something I learned recently.
|
|
|
Post by rammstein on Jan 1, 2008 17:31:18 GMT
Yes, thank you, I've been to museums in america and germany and I've seen many originals.
There are specialty swords, yes, but to claim that ALL swords were specialty swords is clearly wrong. Most swords fall into the oakeshott category and almost all that don't can be worked into a combination eg: a type XI/XIIa early bastard sword which I personally love and is on display in washington DC. Very, very, very few are just "missing" and cannot be described at all.
Direct quote from you. Types XVI and XIX are exceptionally good cutters and thrusters. Were you talking about those? You are correct to some degree in that cutting swords won't cut as well as thrusting swords and vice versa, but there is plenty of wiggle room in the extremity of cutting vs. thrusting - a messer vs. an estoc for instance? The problem with your theory is that there are just so many different types of swords in medieval europe. I'd go out on a limb and say that medieval europe probably has the most diverse styles of swords in the whole world. You can't just lump them all into cutting swords and thrusting swords. Some (many) were meant for both, and did their just exceedingly well.
|
|
|
Post by rammstein on Jan 1, 2008 20:57:07 GMT
By the way, tsafa, types XVII and XXa both often exhibit sturdier tips. The latter, especially: www.myarmoury.com/review_mi_xxa1.html(Really and truly, no one here really cares what sword you buy as long as you're happy with it. I don't think a single person here has hinted that they are trying to stop you from buying a sword with a reinforced tip - As I've pointed out, they were certainly seen historically.)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 2, 2008 9:01:15 GMT
Yes, you found a perfect example of a sword with a reinforced tip. This is exactly what I was talking about. The review explains how the thicker cross-section is detrimental to cutting, which is what I said. I don't think we have any disagreement then on this issue. Such swords existed, some people like them, others don't.
|
|
|
Post by rammstein on Jan 2, 2008 14:08:56 GMT
Then we're on the same page. I guess I'll just strike your comment off as unneeded absolutes, but other than that we're in full agreement ![:)](//storage.forums.net/forum/images/smiley/smiley.png)
|
|