|
|
Post by yuner on Jul 28, 2013 14:22:16 GMT
Good morning all. I have narrowed my choice of new sword between a Windlass 1906 cavalry sword and a Cold Steel 1830 Napoleon. I realize Napoleon died prior to 1830 so probably not really historically accurate, but which in the opinion of the members here is more durable and solidly put together? All comments and advice appreciated.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave Kelly on Jul 28, 2013 23:08:12 GMT
Cold Steel is a commercial pimp when it comes to presenting their wares. The so called 1830 is in fact french light cav sabre of something like 1805. I believe it is inscribed on the back of the blade with a Klingenthal 1813 production date.
It's historically "off" in a number of aspects, but if you want a light, manageable out of the box cutter, it's not bad.
The Windlass 1860/1906 was commissioned by the US Cav Association. It's pretty accurate and very well made. But veracity doesn't necessarily mean that it is a happy cutting sword. The historical sword was a remodelled down grade of a large dragoon heavy saber. The redesign does manage to make this a bit easier to handle but it is fussy about edge alignment and still favors blade heaviness more than a "light" blade should.
If you want a fun to play with light sabre the Cold Steel works. If you lean more display of a very real military saber the 1906 is superior. ( If you want to cut with the 1906 I'd spring for the sharpening by KoA ).
|
|
|
|
Post by yuner on Jul 28, 2013 23:21:51 GMT
Thank you kind sir. Yes, cold steel is a bit over the top, but I like their products. Any opinion on their Austrian saber? I believe it has a threaded pommel, but is that a deal breaker?
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave Kelly on Jul 29, 2013 0:42:07 GMT
The threaded/bolted tang is historically correct. I bought the CS and later got an historic 1904 (officer and enlisted) The CS sword is spot on with my original regards performance and handling. Surprisingly the enlisted saber is rather nose heavy and unresponsive, not anywhere near as good as the 1869 sabers that they replaced.
The Imperial German M1852/79 is the better of the two.
|
|
|
|
Post by yuner on Jul 29, 2013 0:45:18 GMT
Thanks for the info Mr. Kelly. Probably leaning towards the Windlass 1906 as it seems to be a very sturdy sword, but that Napoleon is also still in the running.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave Kelly on Jul 29, 2013 1:56:39 GMT
Thanks for the info Mr. Kelly. Probably leaning towards the Windlass 1906 as it seems to be a very sturdy sword, but that Napoleon is also still in the running.
Well, ya know my solution: "buy both". :mrgreen:
|
|
|
|
Post by yuner on Jul 29, 2013 2:01:16 GMT
It may come to that, decisions like this are tough.
|
|
|
|
Post by yuner on Jul 31, 2013 19:55:33 GMT
I went ahead and ordered the 1906 Windlass with the sharpening service, my next purchase will be the cold steel Napoleon.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave Kelly on Jul 31, 2013 21:14:16 GMT
I went ahead and ordered the 1906 Windlass with the sharpening service, my next purchase will be the cold steel Napoleon.
Great!
Can't wait to hear some feed back! I think... :? :mrgreen:
|
|
|
|
Post by yuner on Jul 31, 2013 21:36:45 GMT
I assume you still have yours Mr. Kelly. You gave an excellent review of it some months ago. Still pleased with it?
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave Kelly on Jul 31, 2013 22:03:17 GMT
Yup. Very solid saber. About one out of 15 Windlass projects are home runs, where they get all the boxes filled right. Musketeer Rapier is one of those. I think this one is also.  |
|
|
|
Post by yuner on Aug 1, 2013 0:41:45 GMT
I also have 3 of the 1860 light cavalry sabers, as well as the 1913 Patton. Probably off historically, but they are pretty durable pieces.
|
|
