|
Post by Afoo on Feb 14, 2015 22:07:04 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Sir Thorfinn on Feb 14, 2015 23:18:49 GMT
MMMMMM...Dave?
|
|
|
Post by Dave Kelly on Feb 15, 2015 3:09:04 GMT
Don't ask me. That's new for 2015. Only 37 inches long and 2.1 lbs. German look. 32 inches is a little to short for a cavalry blade. Need to see more stats.
|
|
Paul
Member
Senior Forumite
Posts: 1,771
|
Post by Paul on Feb 15, 2015 3:33:21 GMT
|
|
|
Post by aronk on Feb 15, 2015 4:01:45 GMT
Looks like a model 1803 flank officer's sword with a bowl guard (indeed an improvement over the knucklebow of the original) and a 1904 hilt. The false edge may be a bit shorter as well. Dave is quite correct though, the length suggests an infantry sword, not a cavalry weapon. A bit heavier than I would prefer for a weapon of that type. Now, if it weighed a few ounces less and had good distal taper and handling, it could be quite interesting. But this is Cold Steel, so it's overweight, probably under-tapered, and likely handles like a meat cleaver.
|
|
|
Post by Afoo on Feb 15, 2015 5:47:37 GMT
Also interesting that it has a fair bit of curve, but the grip is canted forwards and has a thumb rest on top to promote the use of the point. It also seems like the tip of the blade would not actually line up with your hand in this position, being a bit too far back.
Seems interesting when I first saw it, but on second thought, would rather get the hybrid cutlass or the 1904 - not something in between.
On the flip side, it might offer better handling than the 1904 saber, if anything.
|
|
|
Post by aronk on Feb 15, 2015 5:57:16 GMT
Also interesting that it has a fair bit of curve, but the grip is canted forwards and has a thumb rest on top to promote the use of the point. It also seems like the tip of the blade would not actually line up with your hand in this position, being a bit too far back. Seems interesting when I first saw it, but on second thought, would rather get the hybrid cutlass or the 1904 - not something in between. On the flip side, it might offer better handling than the 1904 saber, if anything. Well, I would argue that the thumb rest is to promote the use of the sabre grip over the hammer grip more than anything. You'll notice something similar with the appearance of chequering on British infantry swords in the post Napoleonic and Victorian periods. The chequering appears before the curved cut and thrust sabre blade finally gives way to the thrust-oriented blade typical of the twilight of the sword's military relevance. Also, it is indeed true that the curvature of the blade prevents the point being brought on line. This is best overcome by giving a thrust with the blade horizontal, and, where possible, in a curving motion.
|
|
|
Post by Afoo on Feb 15, 2015 6:19:49 GMT
I find that for curved swords (at least the ones I have), the handle is slanted so that the hand will still line up with the point, even with the curve. However, that does not appear to be the case for this CS sword. Maybe its just not clear from the pictures. However, I do suspect that this is a bit of a copy-paste job composed of various leftover bits.
|
|
|
Post by aronk on Feb 15, 2015 16:21:26 GMT
I find that for curved swords (at least the ones I have), the handle is slanted so that the hand will still line up with the point, even with the curve. However, that does not appear to be the case for this CS sword. Maybe its just not clear from the pictures. However, I do suspect that this is a bit of a copy-paste job composed of various leftover bits. Indeed, many weapons do have that particular feature, particularly those from regions with martial traditions that favour giving point over the cut. Though you do find things like this that are clearly entirely useless for thrusting:
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 19, 2015 2:04:51 GMT
Hmm, I wonder if we'll see the CS fat guy with shorts cut a whole buffalo...it's his design so he could have the right (or excuse) to boast of its cutting performance :D
|
|
|
Post by Afoo on Feb 19, 2015 3:00:32 GMT
cut a buffalo, or cut like a buffalo? With those huge baseball swings that they take, hard to tell.
|
|
|
Post by aronk on Feb 19, 2015 3:10:28 GMT
I seem to recall a video of them trying to cut with a smallsword.
|
|
|
Post by Afoo on Feb 19, 2015 5:02:02 GMT
You can cut with anything if you try hard enough - or so their mindset goes.
|
|
Razor
Senior Forumite
Posts: 1,883
|
Post by Razor on Feb 19, 2015 6:15:28 GMT
This saber looks handed, so unless they make a left handed one, I won't be getting one. I would like to see more stats to see if he added more of a distal tapper or if he just but a hilt on another blade.
|
|
|
Post by Afoo on Feb 19, 2015 6:26:48 GMT
They have a LH version - have seen it floating around e-bay. It is indeed handed - a preliminary review I saw mentioned that it is like the guard of the 1904, but the left side (right side for you lefties) is truncated to make it easier to carry.
Blade shape doesn't match anything else they have - so don't have much to go on there
|
|
Razor
Senior Forumite
Posts: 1,883
|
Post by Razor on Feb 19, 2015 7:03:30 GMT
They have a LH version - have seen it floating around e-bay. It is indeed handed - a preliminary review I saw mentioned that it is like the guard of the 1904, but the left side (right side for you lefties) is truncated to make it easier to carry. Blade shape doesn't match anything else they have - so don't have much to go on there This is promising. I wonder if Thompson understands what a distal tapper is and how important it is to the blade? I kinda like this monstrosity of a saber.
Why would they truncate the guard for lefties, if they didn't do it for righties? Unless it's a RH guard and they mod it for lefties.
|
|
|
Post by aronk on Feb 19, 2015 7:16:52 GMT
Afoo: Compare the blade to a 1796 or an 1803. Effectively the same thing.
|
|
|
Post by Afoo on Feb 19, 2015 13:27:00 GMT
They have a LH version - have seen it floating around e-bay. It is indeed handed - a preliminary review I saw mentioned that it is like the guard of the 1904, but the left side (right side for you lefties) is truncated to make it easier to carry. Blade shape doesn't match anything else they have - so don't have much to go on there This is promising. I wonder if Thompson understands what a distal tapper is and how important it is to the blade? I kinda like this monstrosity of a saber.
Why would they truncate the guard for lefties, if they didn't do it for righties? Unless it's a RH guard and they mod it for lefties.
I meant that they truncate the left side for us righties. The lefty version is inverse (ie: has the right side truncated instead) aronk - I have. Its similar, but the tip is not as heavy as in the 1796 - definitely not as much mass up there. The fuller on the 1796 is also wider, and the blade is larger overall (both in length and in width). I am also sure that this somewhat suggestive statement is making whoever designed the 1796 very very pleased with themselves.
|
|
|
Post by aronk on Feb 19, 2015 14:30:27 GMT
This is promising. I wonder if Thompson understands what a distal tapper is and how important it is to the blade? I kinda like this monstrosity of a saber.
Why would they truncate the guard for lefties, if they didn't do it for righties? Unless it's a RH guard and they mod it for lefties.
I meant that they truncate the left side for us righties. The lefty version is inverse (ie: has the right side truncated instead) aronk - I have. Its similar, but the tip is not as heavy as in the 1796 - definitely not as much mass up there. The fuller on the 1796 is also wider, and the blade is larger overall (both in length and in width). I am also sure that this somewhat suggestive statement is making whoever designed the 1796 very very pleased with themselves. Indeed. The blade looks much more like an 1803, which is what I am guessing fat man in shorts intended, given that the 1803 was designed for use on foot.
|
|
|
Post by Afoo on Feb 19, 2015 17:18:21 GMT
But it will reduce his ability to slice implausibly large targets with overblown bravado!
|
|