Cold Steel Hybrid Cutlass
Dec 28, 2015 16:48:56 GMT
Post by Afoo on Dec 28, 2015 16:48:56 GMT
Preamble:
So, I recently got the CS hybrid cutlass, and figured its time to do my forumite duty and post a bit about it
As some of you know, the Canadian dollar has slid rapidly in value fro almost parity to what is now an 11 year low of 0.7 USD for one Cdn. In sword buying terms, what used to be a $300 sword will set me back $400 cdn just through the currency conversion alone. Given this rapid change in fortunes, I have started to look at buying locally rather than from the states.
I came upon Warriors and Wonders, a retailer on the West Coast of Canada, which was offering the hybrid cutlass on sale in Canadian funds. While I am not a huge fan of cutlasses, the savings were too great to ignore, and I promptly snapped it up. Now lets see if that was a wise choice.
Stats:
Background:
From the KoA website:
“The Cold Steel Hybrid Cutlass is a slightly modern take on the Cutlass. Cold Steel has combined the blade of their Naval Cutlass with a guard loosely based on their 1917 saber. This amalgamation of the two swords creates a Cutlass with a blade that can hack and slash with all the panache associated with the cutlass. The thick-spined blade has enough heft that it can parry longer and even larger weapons and further protection for the swordsman comes with the expansive guard with a rolled edge for strength and holes to reduce weight.”
Basically, you have their 1917 cutlass with the semi-bowl guard taken from their Thompson sabre, ostensibly to improve hand protection over the original model.
Historically speaking, the CS 1917 cutlass is a bit of a misnomer. The actual US M1917 cutlass had a checkered wooden grip and a sheet metal guard, as shown below. The CS item actually resembles the Colonial Dutch model 1911 “Klewang”, which had plain wooden grips and a perforated guard represented in the CS pattern. After the Netherlands were over run by the Germans in WWII, the US did acquire some of their 1911 Klewangs. They were officially sold after the war as USN surplus equipment, though I cannot find any evidence that they were issued. Many Klewangs were captured by the Japanese from the Ducth colonial forces, which were then re-captured by American servicemen, which makes positive identification of the issuing and combat use of Klewangs from US depots hard to verify.
It is ironic to note that the CS promotional material makes a big deal of how Lynn Thompson created this sabre using his “vast sword fighting experience” to craft a new weapon with superior performance and protection etc, whereas in reality he was just taking one of their products and making it closer to what it was supposed to represent in the first place.
The blade:
Historically, the sword has been the weapon of the cultured gentleman officer, while the cutlass was the weapon of the sweaty grunts to hack and slash their way through the opponent in what could be mistaken for a rowdy bar brawl after a high stakes football game. The blade on the hybrid cutlass reflects its working class roots. It is a short, brutish thing that is built like a tank. While I do not intend to do any test cutting, I get the feeling that it can handle a lot of hard work and abuse without much complaint. One downside of this is that the blade weights as much as a proverbial tank. It has no taper to speak of, and that is reflected in the handling performance (more on that later).
There are a set of fullers starting from the ricasso and ending 9.5inches from the tip. While the length of these fullers matches historical examples, they are much narrower and shallower, undoubtedly contributing to the weight problem in the blade.
The CS hybrid cutlass (top) compared to the historical original (bottom)
As expected, there is a huge secondary bevel on the edge. The common perception seems to be that this edge geometry is detrimental to cutting, and tests against a Styrofoam container show that the cutlass tends to smash its way through obstacles rather than actually cutting them. However, this also makes the edge more robust and easier to maintain. Besides, with a blade this heavy, smashing your way through obstacles is a perfectly acceptable solution. Beyond the bevel, the blade has a flat grind all the way to the middle.
Profile of secondary bevel (not to scale)
At the end of the blade we have a vicious-looking clip point. The point itself is very sharp and acute, and I get the chills even just looking at it. Strangely, it has a false-false edge; it looks like a false edge, but it is not sharp. Instead, it appears to be an extension of the flat part of the spine. You could sharpen it in principle, but you would have to remove a lot of metal to do so. Not sure if this part is historically accurate, but it does remove some of the versatility of the blade.
The viscous looking clip point is well done (A) and certainly looks the part. Unfortunately, the false edge (B) is a bit less functional.
The handle:
The handles are composed of a pair of smooth wooden slabs sandwiching a meaty full tang from the blade, with the whole thing being held together by three screws through the tang, and one through the back end. This is an incredibly strong design, and I have faith in its ability to take a lot of punishment and keep on going. The wooden grips themselves are smooth like the Dutch Klewang. Its not the most comfortable sword I have held, but its not bad, and its certainly a lot better than its utilitarian looks would appear. The heel at the end of the grip gives good support, and the slabs are wide enough that you have plenty to hold onto with or without gloves. There is ample space for my hands, though some people with larger hands may find the open grip difficult. I find traction is not an issue, but the plain wooden slabs would likely get slippery when wet.
The grip itself is well beveled, and the screws are recessed, which reduces the risk of blistering and chafing associated with this rather utilitarian design. When I use it without gloves, I find it rubs against the heel of my hand – after less than a minute I get an angry red mark on my hand. After 30 minutes I am certain I will have the beginnings of a blister forming. With gloves, its perfectly fine. This issue could be specific to my individual hand size and shape, so take it with a grain of salt,
The guard:
The guard is made of black sheet steel which has been folded over to give a lip around the edges. This increases its strength, and adds to the aesthetics. While the guard is taken from the Thompson sabre, I believe it has been “squished” to accommodate the shorter grip. When you look at it from the side, it does not look quite right. The width of the guard itself is comparable to my 1852 Prussian sabre (4.5 inches). However, the guard is widest at the level of the grip. This is in contrast to most of my other sabres, where the guard is widest at a point above the line of the grip. This shape means that the back of the hand and forearm is more exposed that the dimensions would otherwise suggest. Personally, I like the look of their new 1904-esque guard from an aesthetics standpoint, but if I were to go into combat, I would prefer something like the original US m1917 cutlass
The guard of the 1917 Cutlass compared to other sabers. (A) Side-on view next to an 1852 Prussian. Next to the Prussian, the cutlass guard looks a bit elongated in the vertical and squished in the horizontal. Also note that a 25 inch blade is actually really, really short! (B) close-up on the guards. Again, the hybrid cutlass guard looks like its been squished to accommodate the shorter grip (C) The hybrid cutlass next to an 1897 infantry officer sword. Despite its relatively "dainty" appearance next to the cutlass, the 1897 guard offers better protection for the back hand. Notice how it bulges out above the level of the grip, whereas the cutlass guard's bulge occurs at the same level of the grip, leaving the top right corner more exposed.
Handling:
While I like to think I have a fair bit of experience with swords and sabres, I have almost no knowledge of cutlasses prior to making this purchase. As such, my ability to make statements about its handling in relation to original examples is limited.
What I can say is that this thing is pretty dead in the hand. Not surprising given its lack of taper. The weight is within reason when looking at the original models (Dutch m1911 Klewang: 2 pounds, US m1917 Cutlass: 2.5 pounds), but something isn’t there. Its not just that it takes energy to move it, but it feels like you are losing energy as you swing it. On my other swords, I put energy into swinging it, but I can carry over that energy and redirect it in other directions to keep the sword moving, much like a yo-yo or a fighter pilot in combat. This thing is hard to get moving, and hard to keep moving. Its not horrible, but its definitely not a nimble weapon.
Now, I bet some people will be yelling at me through their computer saying “but it’s a cutlass – what were you expecting?!?!”, and you would be right. It’s not a subtle or elegant weapon at all.
Technical data on cutlasses are hard to find on the interwebs, and my lack of general interest in naval weapons precludes the purchase of any expensive books to validate the historical accuracy of the CS blade. However, I would hazard a guess that that the CS product is fairly representative of the breed. The Royal Navy cutlasses look like miniaturized swords, whereas the USN products and the colonial Dutch Klewang look like sword-ified machetes. If we think of the CS not as a sword, but as a machete or a working tool, then the lack of distal taper and handling finesse makes sense.
Scabbard:
The scabbard is the same as the Thompson sabre, as reviewed by Dave Kelly here. It comes with a leather frog and belt loop, which I find handy. Part of the reason why I got this was because I wanted to steal the suspension system for my Hanwei Side Sword, but that’s another story. Its functional, though somewhat awkward to draw from – the sword fits in very snugly and the inside face of the guard gets in the way from time to time. As a freebee though, hard to complain. The black leather is still and retains its shape very well.
Close up of the frog and suspension system (A). It works, but the large inside guard gets in the way (B)
Conclusions:
The CS hybrid cutlass is a solid buy. It does exactly what it says on the tin, and has no suprises. It’s a machete in sword form. If that’s your thing, then you will like it. If not, then best to avoid. The execution is generally well done asides from a few small issues. For what I paid, I am very happy with it. Its not my favorite sword, but it occupies a unique niche in my collection, and is amusing in its own way.
Its short length does have one extra advantage in that I can wave it around inside without having to worry about damaging my ceilings or anything else in my room. Since the weight and PoB of the cutlass are broadly similar to full sized sabres, it provides me a convenient way to practice sabre drills at home safely. Its almost like a feder for sabre training.
References:
www.thepirateslair.com/9-m1917-us-navy-naval-cutlass.html
www.thepirateslair.com/9-m1898-m1941-klewang-cutlass.html
So, I recently got the CS hybrid cutlass, and figured its time to do my forumite duty and post a bit about it
As some of you know, the Canadian dollar has slid rapidly in value fro almost parity to what is now an 11 year low of 0.7 USD for one Cdn. In sword buying terms, what used to be a $300 sword will set me back $400 cdn just through the currency conversion alone. Given this rapid change in fortunes, I have started to look at buying locally rather than from the states.
I came upon Warriors and Wonders, a retailer on the West Coast of Canada, which was offering the hybrid cutlass on sale in Canadian funds. While I am not a huge fan of cutlasses, the savings were too great to ignore, and I promptly snapped it up. Now lets see if that was a wise choice.
Stats:
Background:
From the KoA website:
“The Cold Steel Hybrid Cutlass is a slightly modern take on the Cutlass. Cold Steel has combined the blade of their Naval Cutlass with a guard loosely based on their 1917 saber. This amalgamation of the two swords creates a Cutlass with a blade that can hack and slash with all the panache associated with the cutlass. The thick-spined blade has enough heft that it can parry longer and even larger weapons and further protection for the swordsman comes with the expansive guard with a rolled edge for strength and holes to reduce weight.”
Basically, you have their 1917 cutlass with the semi-bowl guard taken from their Thompson sabre, ostensibly to improve hand protection over the original model.
Historically speaking, the CS 1917 cutlass is a bit of a misnomer. The actual US M1917 cutlass had a checkered wooden grip and a sheet metal guard, as shown below. The CS item actually resembles the Colonial Dutch model 1911 “Klewang”, which had plain wooden grips and a perforated guard represented in the CS pattern. After the Netherlands were over run by the Germans in WWII, the US did acquire some of their 1911 Klewangs. They were officially sold after the war as USN surplus equipment, though I cannot find any evidence that they were issued. Many Klewangs were captured by the Japanese from the Ducth colonial forces, which were then re-captured by American servicemen, which makes positive identification of the issuing and combat use of Klewangs from US depots hard to verify.
It is ironic to note that the CS promotional material makes a big deal of how Lynn Thompson created this sabre using his “vast sword fighting experience” to craft a new weapon with superior performance and protection etc, whereas in reality he was just taking one of their products and making it closer to what it was supposed to represent in the first place.
The blade:
Historically, the sword has been the weapon of the cultured gentleman officer, while the cutlass was the weapon of the sweaty grunts to hack and slash their way through the opponent in what could be mistaken for a rowdy bar brawl after a high stakes football game. The blade on the hybrid cutlass reflects its working class roots. It is a short, brutish thing that is built like a tank. While I do not intend to do any test cutting, I get the feeling that it can handle a lot of hard work and abuse without much complaint. One downside of this is that the blade weights as much as a proverbial tank. It has no taper to speak of, and that is reflected in the handling performance (more on that later).
There are a set of fullers starting from the ricasso and ending 9.5inches from the tip. While the length of these fullers matches historical examples, they are much narrower and shallower, undoubtedly contributing to the weight problem in the blade.
The CS hybrid cutlass (top) compared to the historical original (bottom)
As expected, there is a huge secondary bevel on the edge. The common perception seems to be that this edge geometry is detrimental to cutting, and tests against a Styrofoam container show that the cutlass tends to smash its way through obstacles rather than actually cutting them. However, this also makes the edge more robust and easier to maintain. Besides, with a blade this heavy, smashing your way through obstacles is a perfectly acceptable solution. Beyond the bevel, the blade has a flat grind all the way to the middle.
Profile of secondary bevel (not to scale)
At the end of the blade we have a vicious-looking clip point. The point itself is very sharp and acute, and I get the chills even just looking at it. Strangely, it has a false-false edge; it looks like a false edge, but it is not sharp. Instead, it appears to be an extension of the flat part of the spine. You could sharpen it in principle, but you would have to remove a lot of metal to do so. Not sure if this part is historically accurate, but it does remove some of the versatility of the blade.
The viscous looking clip point is well done (A) and certainly looks the part. Unfortunately, the false edge (B) is a bit less functional.
The handle:
The handles are composed of a pair of smooth wooden slabs sandwiching a meaty full tang from the blade, with the whole thing being held together by three screws through the tang, and one through the back end. This is an incredibly strong design, and I have faith in its ability to take a lot of punishment and keep on going. The wooden grips themselves are smooth like the Dutch Klewang. Its not the most comfortable sword I have held, but its not bad, and its certainly a lot better than its utilitarian looks would appear. The heel at the end of the grip gives good support, and the slabs are wide enough that you have plenty to hold onto with or without gloves. There is ample space for my hands, though some people with larger hands may find the open grip difficult. I find traction is not an issue, but the plain wooden slabs would likely get slippery when wet.
The grip itself is well beveled, and the screws are recessed, which reduces the risk of blistering and chafing associated with this rather utilitarian design. When I use it without gloves, I find it rubs against the heel of my hand – after less than a minute I get an angry red mark on my hand. After 30 minutes I am certain I will have the beginnings of a blister forming. With gloves, its perfectly fine. This issue could be specific to my individual hand size and shape, so take it with a grain of salt,
The guard:
The guard is made of black sheet steel which has been folded over to give a lip around the edges. This increases its strength, and adds to the aesthetics. While the guard is taken from the Thompson sabre, I believe it has been “squished” to accommodate the shorter grip. When you look at it from the side, it does not look quite right. The width of the guard itself is comparable to my 1852 Prussian sabre (4.5 inches). However, the guard is widest at the level of the grip. This is in contrast to most of my other sabres, where the guard is widest at a point above the line of the grip. This shape means that the back of the hand and forearm is more exposed that the dimensions would otherwise suggest. Personally, I like the look of their new 1904-esque guard from an aesthetics standpoint, but if I were to go into combat, I would prefer something like the original US m1917 cutlass
The guard of the 1917 Cutlass compared to other sabers. (A) Side-on view next to an 1852 Prussian. Next to the Prussian, the cutlass guard looks a bit elongated in the vertical and squished in the horizontal. Also note that a 25 inch blade is actually really, really short! (B) close-up on the guards. Again, the hybrid cutlass guard looks like its been squished to accommodate the shorter grip (C) The hybrid cutlass next to an 1897 infantry officer sword. Despite its relatively "dainty" appearance next to the cutlass, the 1897 guard offers better protection for the back hand. Notice how it bulges out above the level of the grip, whereas the cutlass guard's bulge occurs at the same level of the grip, leaving the top right corner more exposed.
Handling:
While I like to think I have a fair bit of experience with swords and sabres, I have almost no knowledge of cutlasses prior to making this purchase. As such, my ability to make statements about its handling in relation to original examples is limited.
What I can say is that this thing is pretty dead in the hand. Not surprising given its lack of taper. The weight is within reason when looking at the original models (Dutch m1911 Klewang: 2 pounds, US m1917 Cutlass: 2.5 pounds), but something isn’t there. Its not just that it takes energy to move it, but it feels like you are losing energy as you swing it. On my other swords, I put energy into swinging it, but I can carry over that energy and redirect it in other directions to keep the sword moving, much like a yo-yo or a fighter pilot in combat. This thing is hard to get moving, and hard to keep moving. Its not horrible, but its definitely not a nimble weapon.
Now, I bet some people will be yelling at me through their computer saying “but it’s a cutlass – what were you expecting?!?!”, and you would be right. It’s not a subtle or elegant weapon at all.
Technical data on cutlasses are hard to find on the interwebs, and my lack of general interest in naval weapons precludes the purchase of any expensive books to validate the historical accuracy of the CS blade. However, I would hazard a guess that that the CS product is fairly representative of the breed. The Royal Navy cutlasses look like miniaturized swords, whereas the USN products and the colonial Dutch Klewang look like sword-ified machetes. If we think of the CS not as a sword, but as a machete or a working tool, then the lack of distal taper and handling finesse makes sense.
Scabbard:
The scabbard is the same as the Thompson sabre, as reviewed by Dave Kelly here. It comes with a leather frog and belt loop, which I find handy. Part of the reason why I got this was because I wanted to steal the suspension system for my Hanwei Side Sword, but that’s another story. Its functional, though somewhat awkward to draw from – the sword fits in very snugly and the inside face of the guard gets in the way from time to time. As a freebee though, hard to complain. The black leather is still and retains its shape very well.
Close up of the frog and suspension system (A). It works, but the large inside guard gets in the way (B)
Conclusions:
The CS hybrid cutlass is a solid buy. It does exactly what it says on the tin, and has no suprises. It’s a machete in sword form. If that’s your thing, then you will like it. If not, then best to avoid. The execution is generally well done asides from a few small issues. For what I paid, I am very happy with it. Its not my favorite sword, but it occupies a unique niche in my collection, and is amusing in its own way.
Its short length does have one extra advantage in that I can wave it around inside without having to worry about damaging my ceilings or anything else in my room. Since the weight and PoB of the cutlass are broadly similar to full sized sabres, it provides me a convenient way to practice sabre drills at home safely. Its almost like a feder for sabre training.
References:
www.thepirateslair.com/9-m1917-us-navy-naval-cutlass.html
www.thepirateslair.com/9-m1898-m1941-klewang-cutlass.html