|
Post by aronk on Oct 14, 2015 3:44:21 GMT
I have a Windlass 1913 Patton "sabre" (sabre in quotation marks for a reason). Handles pretty good for a broadsword and top value for your money, but doesn't really represent a traditional 19th century cavalry sabre in my opinion (hence why I couldn't recommend it earlier). Not sure what Dave Kelly's thoughts are on that topic (I understand he too has one). I looked at the stats of the Universal Swords P1908 Brit. With a PoB of 5', you might actually be able to use it as a half-decent cutter. If you're a fan of irony, that's the choice for you! Well, I'm not Dave Kelly, but I'll tell you that the 1913 and the 1908/1912 are essentially spikes with a hilt. Hand-lances and nothing more. No cutting ability, and the wrong cross-section even if they were balanced for cutting. If you have any doubt, take a look at some of the Pathé footage of cavalry recruits training with the 1908. They are being trained to use it as a lance, not as a traditional cavalry sabre. In fact, many officers kept their 1912s in the saddle scabbards, and wore earlier models (mostly 1885s and 1889's) for use in melee, should they ever find themselves in that situation, as the 1912 would be entirely useless. Of course, the role of cavalry had changed dramatically, with the development of bolt-action rifles and barbed wire forcing cavalry to adopt "hit and run" tactics targeted at isolated clusters of troops away from battlefields.
|
|
|
Post by aronk on Oct 14, 2015 3:47:48 GMT
I will say though, that the 1913 Patton has much more cutting ability though. Contest of the tallest midget and all, but it is something.
|
|
|
Post by bfoo2 on Oct 14, 2015 3:59:03 GMT
The P1908- definitely a railroad spike with a handle (I was making a sarcastic comment when I suggested the US repro for cutting).
The 1913 "Patton" confuses me (I have the Windlass repro by the way, which is apparently quite representative). Contrary to it's well-publicized intended use, I find it a little too heavy and slow for real good point control (I prefer my 1907 Spanish in that regard), although the awesome long blade does help. I actually rate it's cutting ability as decent, and if I had to prosecute some German rear-echelon troops, I'd be more comfortable using it for the cut than the thrust. Feels to me more like a broadsword, but with a bowl hilt. Blade has a profile that seems favorable for cutting too.
Of course, just because it seems to handle like a broadsword in the eyes of an amateur sword enthusiast doesn't mean that that was it's intended design function, or the way the soldiers on the ground preferred to use it
*edit* Sorry, I didn't see your last post before writing
|
|
|
Post by aronk on Oct 14, 2015 4:24:09 GMT
I don't have nearly as much experience with the 1913 as I do with the 1909-1912l, only enough to know that it is actually capable of cutting. Personally, my preferred cavalry weapons (from a standpoint of functionality) are, in no particular order the 1796 LC, 1822 LC, AN XIII curassier/1854 HC (rather similar weapons), and the 1821 LC. The 1796 is the antithesis of the 1908/1912 in nearly every possible way, some good, some bad.
|
|
|
Post by Afoo on Oct 14, 2015 4:33:36 GMT
Both are bad news for those who stand to defy the glory of the British Empire and her Commonwealth!! You too could enjoy this glory had you kept that tea out of the harbour :P
|
|
|
Post by bfoo2 on Oct 14, 2015 4:42:57 GMT
My leather P1897 scabbard is sun-bleached from being exposed to daylight all the time- since the sun never set on the British Empire It's funny... those are the ones I don't have any experience with at all! Maybe one day I'll be rich enough, and the Canadian dollar high enough for me to afford a 1796... As for cavalry weapons: I'm partial to my P1907 Spanish, though I really only have a P1885, Swiss 1860, Argentinian 1889, and a Spanish 1895 for comparison (the latter is a complete piece of sh*t). The foil fencer in me has a soft spot for a good thrust, and that one is the best spike-on-a-stick in my opinion . Italian 1871 and Argentinian are also very good. Also, 1821 pipe-back or not?
|
|
|
Post by aronk on Oct 14, 2015 4:55:11 GMT
Both are bad news for those who stand to defy the glory of the British Empire and her Commonwealth!! You too could enjoy this glory had you kept that tea out of the harbour My ancestors were loyalists to a man, of that I assure you. We lost our land and title to those damned "Patriots". Though I would still rather be chasing after Frenchmen with a 1796 or a 1821.
|
|
|
Post by aronk on Oct 14, 2015 5:01:27 GMT
My leather P1897 scabbard is sun-bleached from being exposed to daylight all the time- since the sun never set on the British Empire It's funny... those are the ones I don't have any experience with at all! Maybe one day I'll be rich enough, and the Canadian dollar high enough for me to afford a 1796... As for cavalry weapons: I'm partial to my P1907 Spanish, though I really only have a P1885, Swiss 1860, Argentinian 1889, and a Spanish 1895 for comparison (the latter is a complete piece of sh*t). The foil fencer in me has a soft spot for a good thrust, and that one is the best spike-on-a-stick in my opinion . Italian 1871 and Argentinian are also very good. Also, 1821 pipe-back or not? I only own a heavily modified repro 1796, and two 1822s, but an 1821 is on my list. I've handled the rest however. The regulation 1821 had a pipeback until 1845 when the whole concept of pipebacks was thrown out of the regulation swords.
|
|
Scott
Member
Posts: 1,676
|
Post by Scott on Oct 14, 2015 6:32:59 GMT
there is a Spanish 1907 going for cheap (less than 50 cdn, or 40-ish USD) with 17h left if you are interested in that. I have one - its a thrust centric sword, but very light in the hand, especially when compared to its 1913/1908 brethren from the states and the UK Do you have a link? Had a bit of a look but couldn't find it.
|
|
|
Post by Sugiyama on Oct 14, 2015 10:37:53 GMT
An alternative to customizing the Cold Steel Shamshir would be the Windlass Shamshir, which is literally the exact same blade, just with different fittings, including a wooden grip instead of the plastic one. Either way, if anybody knew who customized blades like that, or tutorials for customizations like that are it'd be greatly appreciated. The fundamental issue with customising a repro at that price point is that one may well end up putting nearly as much or indeed more money into the work than what was paid for the sword. In either case, the cash outlay frequently ends up being equivalent to what a reasonably serviceable antique would cost. Damn, I should have figured. I suppose I was going to customize it in a hussar style hilt anyway...
|
|
|
Post by Afoo on Oct 14, 2015 14:34:51 GMT
there is a Spanish 1907 going for cheap (less than 50 cdn, or 40-ish USD) with 17h left if you are interested in that. I have one - its a thrust centric sword, but very light in the hand, especially when compared to its 1913/1908 brethren from the states and the UK Do you have a link? Had a bit of a look but couldn't find it. www.ebay.ca/itm/252113254115?_trksid=p2060353.m1431.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AITIts a Canadian seller though, so shipping may be more expensive for you. Its got 5h left and its at 33 usd... - Alex
|
|
Scott
Member
Posts: 1,676
|
Post by Scott on Oct 14, 2015 15:16:24 GMT
Thanks mate. I've sent him a message to see if he'll ship outside of Canada.
|
|
Scott
Member
Posts: 1,676
|
Post by Scott on Oct 15, 2015 3:01:11 GMT
Didn't get a reply so guessing no on the shipping. It went for $66 or so. Always next time. I blame this thread, I've started looking at sabers, need to read up on them to have a better idea what I'm looking at. Anyone have some suggestions?
|
|
|
Post by bfoo2 on Oct 15, 2015 3:51:10 GMT
Serves you right! I can't count how many times a sabre sold for dirt-cheap I can't get it because of "shipping to US only"
Hard to suggest a place to start with regards to sabres. As a rule of thumb, never take anything for granted; ask questions! For example, I've found that antique sabres can have issues with grips becoming loose and wobbly and it if the thing is peened, it's a bit of a pain to fix. It's something that isn't obvious from pictures, and sellers will not mention this defect in their item descriptions (absolving themselves of liability by saying "caveat emptor")
Also, lots of sketchy "antiques" from China and India. Unfortunately, I'd say 99.9% of them are fakes.
|
|
|
Post by Afoo on Oct 15, 2015 4:01:15 GMT
Yeah - I asked him for pics of the tip yesterday, but no response. I would have gotten it if everything checked out. Without better pics though, couldn't tell if the tip was dented or if it has been damaged and then ground down. Better to see it go cheap than take a complete gamble on it, especially with an unresponsive seller. 1907's are relatively common - I got mine for less than $200 USD in good shape. The coles notes is as follows: Sabres come in two forms, infantry sabres and cavalry sabres. Infantry sabres are meant for use on foot, and they tend to be smaller and lighter, though sharing the same basic aesthetic. Examples would include the British 1822 Artillery Officer's Sword and the 1897 British Officer Sword I have the 1897, as well as what I presume is the infantry version of the M1852 Prussian Sword. Again, both are light and maneuverable. All of these are good examples. You will see a lot of 1822p issued to artillery and riffle officers. Cold Steel makes a decent replica of the M1852. Other good examples would be the French 1845. All of these are decently common, being issued to relatively large numbers of officers over a long service life. Replicas do exist for all of these though - a quick study of the Universal Swords replicas on KoA compared to originals will tell the difference. For the British swords, the differences tend to lie in the grip material (aquatic animal vs leather), the etching on the blade (crisp vs gross), and the crest - the 1897 has a royal cypher on it for the reigning monarch. The replicase all have a VRI cypher (Victoria, Empress of India), and a poor one at that. The cypher also tells you about the date of the weapon - a GRVII for example would put it during WWII, whereas an ERVIII would make it super valuable. Also beware that most British infantry swords has a "piquette" weight version - that is a scaled down version for formal occasions. These can be hard to tell apart form pictures, especially if there is no scale reference. In general, the full sized version should have a blade that is at least as wide as the grip (1' for the 1897). Best bet is to ask the seller flat out for the dimensions of the blade, and match it to the pattern. The cavalry troopers swords tend to be a bit larger and heavier, and a bit more expensive due to their desirability. I have a British p1885, a Swiss 1867, an Argentine 1889. Bfoo has the Italian M1871 an the 1907. All of these are good examples, but then again I did buy them, so I may be biased. Dave Kelly likes the Swiss 1867, and it does look like the stereotypical cavalry sword. It is huge, but surprisingly light, with good taper. The 1885p does feel more solid, but it is also heavier. The 1867 also has the advantage of being cheaper, since it does not have the same military heritage as the 1885 did it British hands. The Argentine 1889 and Italian 1871 are pipe backs, and Kelly has a great article on them here. The fact that they come from more obscure countries makes them easier to get I find. The 1871 is Bfoo's, so I do not have much experience with it. The 1889 is unique - I like it. In terms of replicas, both the WIndlass 1906 and Universl Swords Princess of Wales saber are excellent - the 1906 is historically accurate, though the original versions were a bit heavy and unwieldy even by cavalry sword standards. The Princess of Wales is a lot better dynamically IMO - better grips and lighter overall. First: 1883p. Second: Swiss 1867 next to a Japanese Type 32 Both inf and cav swords come in either slash-y or poke-y forms. Which you prefer depends on your style. From the first set of pictures, you can see the difference between the slash-y 1822 and the poke-y 1897. The Spanish 1907 you saw is a great poke-y sword. Very easy to point and control. The Windlass 1913 is a good replica of the poke-y cavalry sword, though I find it heavier and lesss comfortable than the 1907. Slash-y infantry swords also include the Prussian M1873 sword (a cut-down version of the 1822 Blucher saber), while poke-y models include the French 1882 (one of which I am selling here), and the US 1840 NCO sword, a replica of which someone else is selling here. The 1840 is also a good sword - it has a very stiff blade. However, the guard is a bit lightweight and its hard to find an un-damaged original example Well, thats a quick run-down from me :P Choose your poison EDIT: Matt Easton's videos are a good starting place for British swords at least. Maybe not in terms of where to but them, but in terms of what patterns are out there, some information about their history and their design etc. Good place to find what you are looking for. I am not a huge fan of his attitude sometimes TBH, but his information is pretty good, and he presents a nice synthesis of material from a wide range of sources into a concise, cohesive story
|
|
|
Post by Sugiyama on Oct 15, 2015 4:16:02 GMT
I second the suggestion to watch Matt Easton's videos. They're what rekindled my interest in sabers, as well as opening my view to warfare outside of feudal Japan. His videos are incredibly informative, very in-depth, and there's no shortage of them.
|
|
|
Post by Afoo on Oct 15, 2015 4:18:42 GMT
|
|
|
Post by vinland on Oct 15, 2015 4:37:19 GMT
Well I'll be able to say what it's like, sometime this month if the estimated date is correct.
If there is a problem that I don't feel like I could fix, I'll get it to the point where it's worth displaying and have it be able to be sheathed/drawn from it's scabbard. From what I understand this pattern of sword isn't much of a cutter anyway
|
|
|
Post by bfoo2 on Oct 15, 2015 5:12:44 GMT
vinland, did you end up with the 1907? It's a great thrusting sword. Not much use for anything else, but it's fast, got a massive reach, and if I had to go up against one of those in a fight, I'd be pretty worried. Hope you enjoy it! Here's a quick picture I took of my 1907 next to my repro 1913 "Patton". The 1907 is uncannily similar to the rapier on the far left. The 1913 is surprisingly good in the cut, especially considering all the "best of the thrusting swords" publicity it receives. If you want to see a real cutter, ask someone to show you their 1796LC or variants thereof
|
|
|
Post by vinland on Oct 15, 2015 5:17:06 GMT
Yeah I got the 1907.
|
|