Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 29, 2008 23:41:15 GMT
/index.cgi?board=swordreviews&action=display&thread=1199920252&page=1 Dont know if youve seen this one but it is my favorite of my collection. Very well balanced and fast.....though it might be a bit short for your tastes if you prefer a longsword. Not at all-thanks for showing me this. Another good candidate. I like it. A lot. This is a tough decision but I'm learning a lot and I'm sure I won't wind up making a horrible decision like most newbies do.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2008 0:09:09 GMT
Well, I actually called KOA, and they were very friendly, helpful, and objective. I asked mainly about the Windlass Flared Longsword, which I really like the design of and can't seem to find anyone on here familiar with it, and these were some of the answers I got.
I asked about the pommel, and they told me it was threaded...which I really don't know what that means, except that people on here tend to prefer peened(which I'm not quite certain what that is either, but I hear its sturdier)-I'd like some clarification on this.
I asked about the flexibility of the blade, and whether it was a bit whippy like Windlass blades tend to be. They told me though some swords from Windlass have that problem, this one was fairly rigid as far as Windlasses go-flexible, but not "whippy". This is a plus I guess.
I asked about the handling, and they told me that due to the flare style, it was a bit "blade heavy"...Is this good, bad, or just simply different/depending on prefference? Would a historical blade of this design have been a bit blade heavy too?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2008 0:22:16 GMT
One is screwed on, like a bolt, and the other has the end peened over (which involves mushrooming the steel over the hole, like a home-made rivet).
|
|
|
Post by Jeff K. ( Jak) on Mar 1, 2008 0:59:37 GMT
Peened definitely are preferred by the majorty. If the hilt becomes loose and rattly from use you can hammer the peen block and tighten it up but taking it apart for maintenence is a bit of a problem because you have to remove some of the shoulder of the blade to get enough of the tang protruding out of the pommel to peen it again, where as a threaded pommel is easy to take apart but the drawback is that usually the threaded part of the tang is welded on and can be weakest part of the hilt (not true in ALL cases). i have a few threaded swords, 2 of which have been, uh, "well used", and i've had no problems, so dont let threaded pommels dissuade you from buying an otherwise fine sword. a blade heavy sword is slower and more ungainly in handling but packs a mean punch. My Windlass Sword of Guy is quite blade heavy and being a single handed sword its not as maneuverable as, say, my windlass bastard sword or my Hanwei Godfred (which are both wicked fast)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2008 1:18:43 GMT
Peened definitely are preferred by the majorty. If the hilt becomes loose and rattly from use you can hammer the peen block and tighten it up but taking it apart for maintenence is a bit of a problem because you have to remove some of the shoulder of the blade to get enough of the tang protruding out of the pommel to peen it again, where as a threaded pommel is easy to take apart but the drawback is that usually the threaded part of the tang is welded on and can be weakest part of the hilt (not true in ALL cases). i have a few threaded swords, 2 of which have been, uh, "well used", and i've had no problems, so dont let threaded pommels dissuade you from buying an otherwise fine sword. a blade heavy sword is slower and more ungainly in handling but packs a mean punch. My Windlass Sword of Guy is quite blade heavy and being a single handed sword its not as maneuverable as, say, my windlass bastard sword or my Hanwei Godfred (which are both wicked fast) Thank you for explaining that to me. You know, the more I look at that bastard sword you linked the more I like it. It is German(like my heritage), It looks great(I actually love the black antiquated finish and the quarterfoil ring thingies) and I really don't mind the blade not having a fuller though that might have made it look a tad bit sexier. From your review, it sounds like it's a really well rounded sword: It's sturdy, fast, historically plausible, handles very well, and looks great. I think it's now down to that or the flared longsword, but I'm leaning towards the German Bastard.
|
|
|
Post by Jeff K. ( Jak) on Mar 1, 2008 1:26:45 GMT
no problem, thats what this site is all about. If you like the German bastard, check out windlass' Sword of Novara....its kind of a dressed up version of mine....although the blade looks a bit narrower..... kultofathena.com/product~item~500850.htm edit: just read the specs on that one for the first time...its HUGE!!! 50" overall and 5lb 7 oz....shes a heavy girl!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2008 2:50:12 GMT
The main complaint I have with the german bastard sword is the blade type. That blade looks like something from pre 1300's while the hilt is obviously post 1300. So it's really not that historically plausable. Then again I'm a little more nit picky about that then is healthy for a sub 300 sword hehe.
If that flared longsword is blade heavy, then I would say stay away from it. The reason you flare a sword is to PREVENT it from being blade heavy. The metal closer to the hilt should be bring that PoB back and making the sword faster...not slower. If the latter is true, then something is done horribly wrong. When I see a flared longsword I expect a quick and agile blade, not a blade heavy cutting sword.
Sorry to stick holes in your sword choices.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2008 3:39:37 GMT
I may have to ask KOA again about the flared just to double check if I heard right. As far as the bastard sword, well, if they took two things from two eras and combined them in a way to work well together and very effectively(which it seems they did with this sword) then I really have no complaint there.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2008 3:48:03 GMT
What about the two handed gothic from DSA? I have read nothing but rave reviews about it, great furniture and a beast of a long sword and my personal favourite from DSA.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2008 4:01:31 GMT
What about the two handed gothic from DSA? I have read nothing but rave reviews about it, great furniture and a beast of a long sword and my personal favourite from DSA. I have looked at that one and considered it as well, it seems to be a good sword.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2008 4:02:20 GMT
Well that DSA is a bit out of the 250 cap the OP put. But then again with free shipping when ordered from SBG store maybe it'll work.
|
|
|
Post by Jeff K. ( Jak) on Mar 1, 2008 20:59:54 GMT
The Gothic is also my DSA favorite as well....kind of a ray of light for those who cant afford a $1300 Albion Regent. As for the bastard being a mix of styles you're right napalm....the origional did have a fullered blade...but hexagonal/lenticular cross-section does give iy extra rigiditity. Really it comes down to your priorities...if you want a historically accurate replica of a period sword....or just a sword that functions well. Personally i dont care if its historically accurate to a "t". Just because there is no historical example of a sword having this or that doesnt mean that a knight in say 1400 didnt have a taste for something a lttle more 1250 and had one made. If you're goin to a Ren faire of something where the goal IS period accuracy then by all means buy a sword that fits the bill, but if you just want a good looking functional sword...theres nothin wrong with that
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2008 21:18:16 GMT
Well there is nothing wrong with want a sword just because...but that design would be considered by most of the sword collecting community as not historically plausible. Now in the sub 300...it's fine since...well your not gonna find historically plausible very much in this group. For instance the gen 2 lucerne and black price while historical plausible in general shape, balance and handling is not so plausible due to overly large crossguard and two metal spacers in the handle. The DSA are not very plausible due to weight and balance issues. Many of the windlass attach the wrong blade type to hilt. There are some however like the windlass type XIV and the towton sword which is very historically plausible. So really for sub 300 collectors, I guess that german bastard sword could be considered historically plausable...but rest of the collecting community will not is all I'm saying. Hey if you like how it looks and feel and perfroms, who cares what anyone else says right?
|
|
|
Post by Jeff K. ( Jak) on Mar 1, 2008 21:32:03 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Jeff K. ( Jak) on Mar 1, 2008 21:49:26 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2008 21:52:13 GMT
Umm neither of those have lenticular cross cection. Both of those have hexagonal cross at the base and a diamond tip.
|
|
|
Post by Jeff K. ( Jak) on Mar 1, 2008 21:55:14 GMT
they are not a diamond cross section. yeah they dostart as a hex...so does the windlass bastard....then they ektend into a lenticular x-sec. I dont see the central ridge on any of these swords
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2008 22:04:40 GMT
Well it sounds like windlass messed up a type XVII blade into something not even remotely plausable.
Those two swords look like type XVII to me. I see the hexagonal cross clearly and I see a ridge on the top one further down the blade...although it is harder to see the diamond in the lower one. It almost looks like it could be a hexagonal cross all the way down.
|
|
|
Post by Jeff K. ( Jak) on Mar 1, 2008 22:18:02 GMT
niether the windlass, nor Wallace origional are a type XVII. The XVII ends in a very acute tip. its closer to an XIII or XIIIb both of which are lenticular. Just to be sure are we both on the same page to what lenticular is? the top picture MAY extend into a diamond (idont think so) but since the pic doesnt extend that far i wont argue it any further but the bottom pic is clarly lenticular.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2008 22:22:43 GMT
I think your confused...type XVIII are diamond cross...or hallow ground diamond cross.
|
|