|
Post by Daigoro on Feb 26, 2016 1:17:27 GMT
I have no words...
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Feb 26, 2016 2:55:53 GMT
Oh but how words are so nice to read sometimes.
|
|
|
Post by Timo Nieminen on Feb 26, 2016 3:06:26 GMT
Looks pretty good for a production replica shashka, and even more so considering the price.
Chunky-looking scabbard though.
Somebody at Deepeeka must like shashkas. With this, they have 3: this Caucasian/Circassian shashka, their Cossack shashka, and their dragoon shashka.
|
|
|
Post by aussie-rabbit on Feb 26, 2016 3:09:05 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Afoo on Feb 26, 2016 3:10:19 GMT
I guess it would make a good hockey stick?
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Feb 26, 2016 3:32:45 GMT
My thought was xtreme butter knife.
|
|
|
Post by Afoo on Feb 26, 2016 4:49:33 GMT
Blade looks similar to this actually. Dunno which is worse - the comical scabbard or the horrid yellow grips
|
|
|
Post by Dave Kelly on Feb 26, 2016 7:09:38 GMT
Actually they look pretty correct. You will note KoA WILL NOT sharpen a Deepeeka. Dispaly pieces.
|
|
|
Post by Daigoro on Feb 26, 2016 21:08:35 GMT
Actually they look pretty correct. You will note KoA WILL NOT sharpen a Deepeeka. Dispaly pieces. They really shouldn't list it as "Battle Ready".
|
|
|
Post by randomnobody on Feb 26, 2016 22:36:07 GMT
I'd forgotten about this thing.
As much as I love the look (ignoring the scabbard), good lord, 9" PoB? 6.2mm thick? 1lb 13.9oz? Yikes, thanks, but no thanks.
As for Deepeeka and "battle ready," well, that's such a broad, generic term that one can usually just take it to mean "made with 'carbon steel' and/or 'full-tang'" rather than a company actually suggesting the sword is, in fact, "combat ready" in the way we might expect. As for sharpening, I may be wrong as I've never had one, but I'm wagering the key reason KoA won't sharpen Deepeeka is simply that the edges are that thick, that it would require a different method and significantly more time to provide even a subpar result, that they simply don't bother.
Then again, it was our own Danny-boy who, years ago, sharpened up and summarily broke Deepeeka Charlemagne...
|
|
|
Post by Daigoro on Feb 26, 2016 23:05:00 GMT
The 6.2mm thickness is likely the thickness of the spine at the hilt. But that 9" POB is ridiculous. Also, the 3.5" grip is going to be very uncomfortable for alot of people.
|
|
|
Post by Daigoro on Feb 26, 2016 23:08:02 GMT
I guess it would make a good hockey stick? Someone got it...
|
|
|
Post by Timo Nieminen on Feb 26, 2016 23:51:22 GMT
The 6.2mm thickness is likely the thickness of the spine at the hilt. But that 9" POB is ridiculous. Also, the 3.5" grip is going to be very uncomfortable for alot of people. It's too thick at the tip, but at under 3mm, it's better than any other shashka I know of in its price range (or within 4 times its price). Sharpen it, and thin the blade past the fuller, and it will be somewhat better. 6.2mm at the hilt is OK. Some blades are thin all the way, and some are thicker than this at the base. I think that this particular blade doesn't thin quickly enough. From the overall weight, I wouldn't be surprised if the distal taper is somewhat convex, and I think a concave taper would be better. 9" POB is bit far out, but 7-8" is pretty normal for light-hilted swords like this. Sharpening and thinning the tip should easily bring this back into that range. 3.5" grip should be enough for almost everybody, if that's the measurement between pommel and stop at blade end of the grip - the little finger sits against the pommel, and the heel of the hand sits against the back of the pommel. The grip length needs to be enough for the fingers, not the rest of the hand. But would be easy enough to widen the grip by taking off some of the pommel or the top of the grip with a file.
|
|
|
Post by randomnobody on Feb 27, 2016 1:39:41 GMT
Timo may be right with the starting thickness, but it strikes me as a but chunky, anyway. Same for PoB, but then I can't even remember how the Hanwei military pattern measures up, albeit a different beast. Likewise, I have one or two other swords balancing near the 9" mark, but those also handle rather, shall we say, uncomfortably.
You'd be surprised how small of a grip you can use comfortably. I have a "tiny" Algerian (Moroccan?) flyssa with a grip (measured from the inside of the pommel to the blade) of just over 3", and I can hold it comfortably multiple grips. I have a choora or two measuring about the same that area equally comfortable. On the other side of the spectrum, I have numerous swords and knives with grips that are much too large for my preferences. Like a 7" tsuka on a wakizashi; I'd like it better at 5.5-6".
I haven't met many with hands as big as, never mind bigger than, my own. For a shashka, a smaller grip like this is not only adequate, but probably preferable as the style dictates.
Timo, any plans to "take one for the team" on this one? I'm tempted, but I haven't the spare funds or the means to adjust what needs to be adjusted.
Where's ol' Kilted Cossack?
|
|
|
Post by Afoo on Feb 27, 2016 2:46:17 GMT
The stats look okay - its just that the blade itself looks so clumsy - the edges are all round and the fullers are dug in there with a backhoe. Does not inspire confidence for me.
|
|
|
Post by randomnobody on Feb 27, 2016 3:02:08 GMT
Aside from the obvious signs of being a blunt sword (fat edge, round point, shallow bevels) I don't think it looks that bad. Especially for Deepeeka, really. I expect them to look awful.
|
|
|
Post by Timo Nieminen on Feb 27, 2016 3:14:20 GMT
Shipping from the USA would approximately double the cost, which makes it less of a bargain. If our local Deepeeka vendor gets it in stock, then it might be worth checking (and being able to handle before buying is a big plus).
The Hanwei should balance closer in. The military Cossack shashka has rather more weight in its metal pommel than the Caucasian/Circassian shashka; the pommel is hollow but not super-thin walled. As for repro military Cossack shashkas, the Hanwei, Cold Steel, and Windlass balance at 6-7", the Universal at a bit past 9", and I don't know where the Deepeeka balances but it's probably way out there since their dragoon shashka balances past 9" (vs the Universal dragoon at 8").
|
|
|
Post by randomnobody on Feb 27, 2016 3:18:30 GMT
For $80, I'm really tempted by the old "How bad could it be?" Unfortunately, $80 is not in my budget right now. Maybe next month or so, if nobody has gotten their hands on one yet...
|
|
|
Post by bfoo2 on Feb 27, 2016 6:37:09 GMT
For $80, it might make a good victim for belt-sander practice Although I suspect that the blade lacks both taper AND a proper profile (ie doesn't thin at all towards the edge) Good news, bad news. Good news: the person's hand (I guess you can call him a sword-model?) seems to fit okay without too much squeezing. Bad news: check out where the yellow grip meets the ferule/pommel. Ewwwwwwww.......
|
|
|
Post by bfoo2 on Feb 27, 2016 6:48:43 GMT
BTW has anyone actually owned a Deepeeka early-modern era repro? I'm curious if they're actually as awful as they look... (or possibly even worse than we could possibly have imagined?)
|
|