|
Post by Jayhawk on Feb 6, 2016 2:13:56 GMT
LOL...too true.
|
|
|
Post by Afoo on Feb 9, 2016 21:49:20 GMT
On a related note, appears that Universal now has an "1840 cavalry sabre on Kult.
They did an inverse CS here - named it an 1840, but actually has the stats for an 1860, with a 34 inch blade. The numbers on KoA look good - taper from 8.2mm to 2.7mm. Grip also looks of better quality than the Windlass 1860.
Seems like the competition is heating up on the subcontinent.
|
|
|
Post by Dave Kelly on Feb 9, 2016 22:36:28 GMT
On a related note, appears that Universal now has an "1840 cavalry sabre on Kult. They did an inverse CS here - named it an 1840, but actually has the stats for an 1860, with a 34 inch blade. The numbers on KoA look good - taper from 8.2mm to 2.7mm. Grip also looks of better quality than the Windlass 1860. Seems like the competition is heating up on the subcontinent. KoA is just getting some flesh out catalog stuff in. This isn't a new sabre. Frankly it's same ole schlock; inadequate taper, Nose heavy, small hilt with strange grip and pommel.
|
|
|
Post by Elrikk on Feb 9, 2016 23:59:42 GMT
On a related note, appears that Universal now has an "1840 cavalry sabre on Kult. They did an inverse CS here - named it an 1840, but actually has the stats for an 1860, with a 34 inch blade. The numbers on KoA look good - taper from 8.2mm to 2.7mm. Grip also looks of better quality than the Windlass 1860. Seems like the competition is heating up on the subcontinent. KoA is just getting some flesh out catalog stuff in. This isn't a new sabre. Frankly it's same ole schlock; inadequate taper, Nose heavy, small hilt with strange grip and pommel. Dave, if you were designing a 1840 repro, what would the stats be?
|
|
|
Post by Dave Kelly on Feb 10, 2016 0:31:29 GMT
KoA is just getting some flesh out catalog stuff in. This isn't a new sabre. Frankly it's same ole schlock; inadequate taper, Nose heavy, small hilt with strange grip and pommel. Dave, if you were designing a 1840 repro, what would the stats be? Did that article on US 1840 long ago. The Ames was based on the S&K version of the French 1822. S&K added 4ozs to the foible and took a fairly big and quick LC saber and turned it into a clumsy hand axe. There were a lot of forges in Solingen. Not all of them followed the same model. The Peter Luneschloss and Weyersberg versions have superior balance. ( The PDL I is not the official Tiffany steel hilted one. The one I own is an aberant mini-1840. :) Historically you follow the Ames. Preferentially I'd prefer the PDL. Above all I'll keep my three M1822LCs.
|
|
|
Post by bfoo2 on Feb 10, 2016 0:31:59 GMT
Dave, if you were designing a 1840 repro, what would the stats be? I'm not Dave, but I'd bet the stats on a "Dave Kelly 1840 repro" would be identical to, say, I don't know... an antique 1840?
|
|
|
Post by Elrikk on Feb 10, 2016 0:57:28 GMT
Ya...after I asked my question I slap3ped my head...it was a dumb question...lol.
|
|
|
Post by airborne on Apr 7, 2020 18:28:38 GMT
renewing the thread , I am totally confused now
|
|