|
Post by aronk on Mar 25, 2015 3:14:12 GMT
Empire Costume has managed to produce yet another absolutely stunning sword. This time it's a Shamshir or Scimitar with a Damascus blade with gold wire inlay. about $1,000 US, so out of my price range at the moment, but if it handles half as well as it looks, I might have to save my pennies for it! It would seem that with their new supplier, Empire has managed to raise the bar significantly for early modern repros.
|
|
|
Post by Afoo on Mar 25, 2015 4:30:41 GMT
|
|
Uhlan
Member
Posts: 3,121
|
Post by Uhlan on Mar 26, 2015 15:58:30 GMT
Monsieur Guinhut sure does his best. Pity that at the point he has the merchandise and quality to sell to the US market, Postal Services go and hike rates and throw other logs in his wheels.
|
|
|
Post by aronk on Mar 26, 2015 19:07:32 GMT
M. Guinhut could make quite a bit of money on those sabres if the postal rates were more reasonable.
|
|
Uhlan
Member
Posts: 3,121
|
Post by Uhlan on Mar 26, 2015 19:33:22 GMT
|
|
|
Post by aronk on Mar 26, 2015 21:01:10 GMT
Yeah. That thing is amazing.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 4, 2015 2:53:18 GMT
You now have the chance to wear an Emperor's coronation cloak, for only 39 000 euros 8D
Wonder if they will ever dare to make some of Murat's full dresses, that guy was something!
|
|
|
Post by Dave Kelly on Apr 4, 2015 5:21:49 GMT
Seen at least 2 Murat Uniforms in their secondary market section. Out of my price range; besides if you want to wear that stuff you need to lay off the corn dogs forever....
|
|
|
Post by El Chingon on Apr 6, 2015 22:26:55 GMT
So when all is said and done, how good are these pieces in terms of handling? Are they heavier, less well balanced, etc?
|
|
|
Post by aronk on Apr 6, 2015 22:38:23 GMT
Consensus is that the newer models with non-Universal Swords blades handle well, but not as well as originals. Quite a bit better than Universal.
|
|
|
Post by Afoo on Apr 6, 2015 22:43:51 GMT
How close to the originals? 80%? 60%?
|
|
|
Post by aronk on Apr 6, 2015 23:27:35 GMT
Having never handled both an original and Empire's copy, I can't really say, but I would hazard a guess at 70% giver or take a few percentage points. Dave might know better.
|
|
|
Post by Dave Kelly on Apr 7, 2015 5:57:54 GMT
A lot of these industries have been active in the reproduction market for 25 years or more. The entire character of historical replicas has changed dramatically since 1995 or so. The target audience is more active in sport applications and more aware of real weapons. This has forced older establishments to reengineer what they have offered. The newer models are better than their older offerings.
By and large the oriental production market suffers from poor refinemant of models. Blades seldom demonstrate proper taper and hilts are often not properly sized to original. Fit and finish is usually good; indicative of the static presentation objective of the market for many years.
In Empire Costumne's case. They have been dependent on India based models for years. Get feedback on the indifferent handling qualities of most of these swords EC has sought ought east euro forges to try and get better blades to retro fit their India stock. Results have seen lighter blades; not necessarily correct in stock. Also the deelopment of successful blue and gilt production for period officer swords.
|
|
|
Post by Afoo on May 30, 2015 3:17:55 GMT
en.empirecostume.com/napoleonic-heavy-cavalry-troopers-saber-on-stock-c76-a173.htmCame upon this while grazing. Given the slow slide of the Euro, this is becoming a bit more appealing. However, 88.5cm (or 33 inches) seems a bit short for this type of blade - and 1.7kg seems a bit too heavy for a sword of those dimensions. Is it possible that there is a typo somewhere? I must admit that I know very little about french swords, so any advice would be appreciated. - Alex
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 30, 2015 4:00:42 GMT
34.84 inches
Yes still a little short, maybe for shipping.
The French Cuirassier Mle 1816 sword and the Mle 1854 Carabinier sword had metre (39.37") long blades and my 1854 dragon "only" 97.5 cm (38.39"). My officers dragon has a horn grip and spear point, dates to the 1860s.
|
|
|
Post by Afoo on May 30, 2015 4:21:47 GMT
Thanks for the intel. A closer looks reveals that it is indeed a typo - either that or the hilt and grip assembly is 25cm long
I would be really interested in thos things if only they were not so big and hard to ship!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 30, 2015 4:27:35 GMT
An extract from a old cavalry text regarding weights of the later swords Swords are of three patterns: cuirassiers, pattern 1854, dragoon, pattern 1854, and light cavalry, pattern 1822.
The cuirassier sword, mounted, has a length of 46 inches, its weight if) 2 lbs. 1") ozs., that of its scabbard 2 lbs. 3 ozs., and of the sword and scabbard 5 lbs. 2 ozs. 14 drs.
The dragoon sword, mounted, is 45.87 inches long; it is slightly curved. Weight of sword 2 lbs. 14 ozs.; of scabbard 2 lbs. 8 ozs. 12 drs.; weight of scabbard 2 lbs. 3 ozs. 4 drs.; weight of sword and scabbard 4 lbs. 12 ozs.
The light cavalry sword is more curved than that of the heavy cavalry. Its length, mounted, is 43.3 inches. Its weight is 2 lbs. 8 ozs. 12 drs.; weight of scabbard 2 lbs. 3 ozs. 4 drs.; weight of sword and scabbard 4 11k. 12 ozs.
The weight of the helmet (steel with black horse-hair mane) is 2 lbs. 6 ozs. The cuirass (worn by cuirassiers) is of steel, and has a breast plate and back piece. Its weight varies with the size of the man, from 15 2 lbs. to 13.4 lbsbooks.google.com/books?pg=PA102&lpg=PA102&dq=1854+dragoon+weight&sig=FWdXmxqR4-ORkCE0cyeIzxmKfdc&ei=WjlpVee4Jsq7ggTrioDYCw&id=vgYtAAAAYAAJ&ots=7bt4FjTtnM&output=textI've weighed my 1854 in the past, these are big swords. Subtract the few inches of the repro mentioned and the repro weight doesn't seem too unreasonable. These aren't exactly fencible epee or spadroons.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 30, 2015 4:39:09 GMT
The site weight probably indicates a modern thin steel vs iron scabbard.
|
|
|
Post by Afoo on May 30, 2015 4:42:55 GMT
Fair enough. Dave Kelly sent me his Universal Swords Russian 1809- Now that is a beast, and not in a good way. Mind you, at a bit over 3lb, its not as bad as I had thought.
|
|
|
Post by Dave Kelly on May 30, 2015 14:54:50 GMT
The Russian 1809 USI pallasch was offered for a display piece. It has a backblade thickness of 9mm at the guard and stay pretty much 5.4 mm all the way to the tip. The PoB is 10 inches from the guard. TEN INCHES!! (EEeeeeekkkkk...) One look at the 1809 put out by Pinotte in the Acquisition thread recently and you know that's wrong.
Real military swords are tapered for effect. The variance between cut and thrust swords is a relatively light bias to the point or the guard.
French Heavy Cav Pallasches are thrust weapons. My 1863-3 production weapons loose roughly 1/2 their thickness from guard to shaft and then again from shaft to point. Their PoB are around 3.6 to 4.25 inches. ( All by the way come in at exactly 3 lbs ). These are not light cav weapons, but a seasoned cuirassier could cut and defend with his sword; albeit he was trained to trust his armor and use his point.
|
|