Does a Good Production Made Replica Cutlass Exist?

I've got to say I think you did a fine job setting forth what you were looking for, and why. I don't know beans about the klewang personally. If no one here has hands on experience, you might want to try myarmoury.com or the vikingsword.com ethnographic forum. Regardless of what happens, keep us posted as to your discoveries and conclusions.

OK, this is just being cruel, but check out Old Dominion Forge.

How about DT5174, Del Tin's German Dussack? See it Here at Kult of Athena.

This looks pretty interesting.

kultofathena.com/product.asp?ite ... ng+Cutlass

I might have to pick one of these up and do a review.

Well I finally made my decision. I bought a 1860 Naval Cutlass from Rick at Kult of Athena, a Cold Steel Machete/Cutlass (Klewang ‘want to be’), a Cold Steel 1917 Cutlass (alias Klewang), a real made in the former Dutch East Indies M1940 Klewang, and a Dutch made Hembrug Klewang (about 1930 vintage). Perhaps I went overboard. None of the Klewang type blades have arrived as yet. It is one of the problems living in Australia. You have to wait for most purchases. For those unfamiliar with the Dutch Klewang, it was a cutlass first used by the Dutch in about 1898 and a major part of its development was for land warfare against certain indigenous Indonesians for the next 50 or so years. It seems to still be the national sword of the Netherlands for ceremonial purposes. The US identified its advantages and copied it in 1917 for naval use but not many were produced by the US at that time.

I initially bought the 1860 Cutlass. Unfortunately it arrived with some minor damage to the hilt and Rick gave me a $35 discount. It is still a functional cutlass with just some minor damage to the hilt. I do like this one. I hate blades that are too heavy and this is one of the lighter cutlasses (just under 2 pounds) and has a point of balance relatively close to the hilt so is easy to handle. I paid to have it sharpened by Rick and he did a fine job. The very heavy weight of some cutlasses (getting up towards 4 pounds) was probably a factor in my decision not to buy certain other models.

Unfortunately or fortunately, depending on your point of view, I then read a book titled the Klewang. That eventually cost me a lot of money (financed by selling of some other blades). It is a fine book and provides the history to what was arguably the last cutlass used by a Western nation in war – the Dutch Klewang. My initial interest in buying a cutlass came about when I became interested in finding a sword that would indicate the final development of a Western sword so I could compare it to my Japanese Katana blades – and the Klewang appears to suit my purposes. I have some Dutch ancestory which made the Klewang even more appealing. I initially started cheaply by buying the Cold Steel Cutlass/Machete. All reviews are glowing and this thing reportedly weighs more than the 1860 and costs very little. It sounds more cutlass than machete.

I then really became interested in the real Klewang and realised that the Cold Steel 1917 Cutlass is not a reproduction of the US cutlass but the Dutch Klewang – probably the US Milsco version that was first issued post World War 2. These Cold Steel reproductions were described as similar to wielding a crow bar by one reviewer (relatively heavy – just over 2 pounds - with a point of balance a fair way from the hilt) but the bulk of reviewers stated this was the one sword in their collection they would take with them if times became hard. And in fact, if you ever saw the movie “The Duel” you would see that the combatants used both hands to wield the sabre (related to the cutlass) in ground combat. I for instance found the 1860 cutlass really comfortable to use with two hands and I am sure the cutlass was often wielded with two hands. Remember the cutlass is not a duelling sword, it is a melee sword for fighting in close spaces and the forward weight had some advantages. The Cold Steel 1917 is probably very close to the Milsco version of the Klewang. It is funny reading on ebay (often) where the Milsco version was a weapon used in World War 2. My research indicates that is not true – it was only issued post war. As well the Milsco version was described as heavier than the Netherlands East India M1940 and the Hembrug Cutlass. The M1940 and the Hembrug versions are the ones held in the highest esteem for handling and steel type. Hence my purchase of these two vintage models, one from the US (ebay) and one from the Netherlands.

I have now received a number of cutlasses and am probably in a position to answer my own question. Bearing in mind that most replicas relatively closely approximate the length etc. of the real cutlass, what I was most interested in was a comparison of their handling characteristics to the real thing. In my mind, there are two important physical quantities that closely relate to the handling – one is the overall weight of the cutlass, and second is the point of balance (POB) as measured from the hilt, especially when lengths and basic shape are the same.

The cutlasses I now have in my possession include two Windlass 1860 US Navy replicas, one Cold Steel Cutlass/Machete (Klewang style), one Cold Steel 1917 Cutlass (Klewang style), and one real Hembrug Klewang. I also obtained the weight and point of balance for a real 1860 Naval Cutlass from a forumite on another sword forum. The weight and point of balance data are listed below. I have listed these in two groups – the 1860 group first and then the Klewang group.

Weight (grams/ounces) POB(cms/inches)

First Windlass 1860 US Naval Cutlass 895/31.6 11.8/4.6

Second Windlass 1860 US Naval Cutlass 873/30.8 10.7/4.2

Real 1860 US Naval Cutlass 880/31.0 8.4/3.3



Cold Steel Cutlass/Machete 752/26.5 17.6/6.9

Cold Steel 1917 Cutlass 978/34.5 15.4/6.1

Real Hembrug Klewang 796/28.1 15.7/6.2

As you can see, the two Windlass Cutlasses closely approximate the weight of the real 1860 Navy Cutlass. They are both more forward heavy as reflected in their point of balance measurements but both do feel good in the hand and I would not feel guilty about recommending either. Unfortunately I don’t have access to a real 1860 for comparison of the handling characteristics but I can tell you that the second Windlass Cutlass is in a class of its own compared to all the other cutlasses. It feels magnificent in hand. It’s only 22 grams lighter than the other Windlass and its point of balance is only 1.1 cms closer to the hilt but it feels significantly better in the hand – not that the other Windlass feels bad. It would appear to me that the Windlass is probably not a bad replica of the real 1860 Cutlass. I suppose the thing that surprised me most about the Windlass Cutlasses was the difference between the two. In appearance they appear identical but one probably is wider at some point. Whereas the lighter one will fit both sheaths, the heavier one will only fit in its own sheath. The reason I bought two of these was that I was very impressed with the first one but it had received some damage to the brass hilt and leather during transport. I wanted another for my wall cabinet and as luck would have it, I ended up with a great cutlass. So there is a fair amount of variety even within the same brand and model.

My real surprise was the major differences between cutlasses in the Klewang group, especially the difference between the Cold Steel 1917 Cutlass and the real Hembrug Klewang. I didn’t expect the machete version to come close to the real thing but the Cold Steel 1917 version is nearly 200 grams heavier and is supposed to be a replica. That’s an amazing difference.The only explanation that could justify this being called a replica (besides looks) is that the Cold Steel Klewang is based on the US made Milsco version that was released in large numbers after World War 2 and which is reportedly heavier than the prewar Dutch version. I should point out however that I was impressed by the quality of the Cold Steel 1917. It oozed toughness and quality but it handles like a dead brick. What a pity they didn’t get the weight right. Together with its forward point of balance, it handled dreadfully unless I used both hands to swing it which I suppose would happen in a melee situation. I suppose the other thing that impressed me was how more machete like the real Klewang was. The nice thing about the real Klewang is that it doesn’t handle too badly and it fits very nicely in the Cold Steel 1917 sheath which is a reasonably good quality sheath. (I have ordered a replica of a real 1860 sheath for my Windlass Cutlass. I hope it fits just as well, not that he Windlass sheath is all that bad.) It has to be remembered that history records that the Hembrug Klewang saw a significant amount of use in combat situations and was designed from hands on experience of battle in the former Dutch East Indies (now Indonesia). The light weight must have been appropriate for that situation and yet a lot of records of other historical cutlasses have them weighing a lot more than even the Cold Steel 1917 Cutlass – men must have been real men in days gone by to swing those things around.

Handling is a very personal thing but for me, the list below places the cutlasses I have in order of best to worst handling characteristics: 1. Second Windlass 1860 US Naval Cutlass; 2. Hembrug Klewang; 3. First Windlass 1860 US Naval Cutlass; 4. Cold Steel Cutlass/Machete; 5. Cold Steel 1917 Cutlass.

To answer my original question – Does a good replica Cutlass exist? – I don’t have an original US 1860 Naval Cutlass to directly compare to but the Windlass version is not a bad cutlass.

A WWI era Dutch Klewang was one of my first real sword purchases. I like the fact that they were among the last of the swords issued and used as fighting weapons (as opposed to uniform accessories) makes them really interesting. The authenticity counts in my book. That and the fact that I scored it for less than a Cold Steel forced me to buy it. I called Cold Steel and bought a scabbard that fits it perfectly, and now I'm a happy guy with a cutlass. It's got a little crack in the handle but I figure when I'm nearly 100 years old, I'll look worse.

Thanks, man. You know, they come so close, and it would be so simple for them to push it that extra few millimeters, and it would make SUCH a difference in handling.