Razor
Senior Forumite
Posts: 1,883
|
Post by Razor on Jun 27, 2016 21:12:44 GMT
|
|
|
Post by darth on Jun 28, 2016 0:52:36 GMT
She drank Cantaloupe juice today. Cut like a kitchen knife with the first 2" of blade on a #1 cut, then it slid down the bamboo pole I had it on. WTF? I nailed it with a #5 cut with a little past the POP toward the point, she of coarse took out the loupe on that side, but also cut into the bamboo a bit and splintered it. Not a ding or mark on the sword.
Felt good! Still going to drop them a line. Anyone have a ink with CS giving that 6mm spec? I like to have my stuff in order. Got a melon, either the backsword get it or I'lll sharpen the Bavarian.
|
|
pgandy
Moderator
Senior Forumite
Posts: 10,296
|
Post by pgandy on Jun 28, 2016 3:05:26 GMT
|
|
Razor
Senior Forumite
Posts: 1,883
|
Post by Razor on Jun 28, 2016 3:28:12 GMT
She drank Cantaloupe juice today. Cut like a kitchen knife with the first 2" of blade on a #1 cut, then it slid down the bamboo pole I had it on. WTF? I nailed it with a #5 cut with a little past the POP toward the point, she of coarse took out the loupe on that side, but also cut into the bamboo a bit and splintered it. Not a ding or mark on the sword. Felt good! Still going to drop them a line. Anyone have a ink with CS giving that 6mm spec? I like to have my stuff in order. Got a melon, either the backsword get it or I'lll sharpen the Bavarian. www.ltspecpro.com/Product/88SEB/ENGLISH_BACK_SWORD.aspx
|
|
|
Post by darth on Jun 28, 2016 4:57:42 GMT
Thank you, gentlemen.
|
|
pgandy
Moderator
Senior Forumite
Posts: 10,296
|
Post by pgandy on Jun 29, 2016 15:33:20 GMT
When I saw that the CS Mortuary was being sold on Amazon and visited hoping to see reviews. There was only one and it rated 4 stars. I than posted a question a question regarding the blade and its thickness and opinion hoping the reviewer would respond. He did not. However someone else did and here is his response. Mortuary Sword.docx (138.69 KB)
|
|
|
Post by adtharp on Jun 29, 2016 16:32:04 GMT
Dave - how would you rate (overall) the Cold Steel vs the Cromwell vs the Practical. I had always heard that the Cromwell was one of the best on the market, has the Cold Steel dethroned it?
|
|
|
Post by Dave Kelly on Jun 29, 2016 21:27:50 GMT
Dave - how would you rate (overall) the Cold Steel vs the Cromwell vs the Practical. I had always heard that the Cromwell was one of the best on the market, has the Cold Steel dethroned it? I really like the CS handling; with the large hilt it handles like a sabre; moreso than the other two. I can go thru attack and counter drills with no impedements due to a cramped hand. The foible is soft; lot of give in the point. I don't believe it is a particularly effective thruster. The Cromwell. Heavier and balanced to the hand. This seriously tapered backsword is made to thrust. Most cavalry in period still worn a helmet, vambraace on the rein hand, and a bullet proof cuirass. The thrust was a more economical attack than cutting. Pretty sword; but the hilt garnish is painted on and will go fast with sword use. The Practical is an elliptical blade stout forte and a stiff blade through out. Excellent cut and thrust characteristics. It has the smallest hilt and plays with the blade I find somewhat limited as a result. Am somewhat ambivalent naming one. But if you want cutting and a good price point the CS looks good, although the data spread on delivered pieces is a bit disconcerting.
|
|
|
Post by howler on Jun 30, 2016 8:18:14 GMT
Razor, I concede that your basket hilt fits nicely into the CS pattern, but you may have to take in account that over the many decades this backsword might have lost some steel due to de-rusting the blade, or keeping it up to spec. I know from my experience that shaving off 0.5 mm either side is not such a big job. I am not saying your backsword started out 9 mm thick at the base, but 5.5 mm would not suprise me. I have two swords that over the ages have been ,, shaved '', a 18th c. Spanish Bilbo and an 17th c. Amsterdam Guard broadsword. Both have quite thin and tired blades due to maintenance. In the end all this is not very important. What is important though is that CS makes a promise, the 6mm. Taken with a grain of salt, this being hand hammered blades, a reasonal margin would be 5.5 to 6.5 mm I think. They simply do not deliver. That's looking like false advertising. In the end many people buy this sword and expect a blade thickness around 6mm and they get this 4.6 mm. Not good for the buyer and not so good for CS either, since they will have to handle the blowback. Is it a QC problem, or just a ,, first batch '' problem? I do not know, but I will email them too and ask some questions. They need to know that there is a problem somewhere down the line. I'm the guy who sent mine back, and am awaiting a replacement as I type this. My first impression was that the thing felt quick in the hand (one of the selling points in their advertisement of this backsword). Then I noticed the blade was very flexible (whippy)...GALACTICALLY different than most of my other CS specimens. The less than 6mm bothered/bothers me as well. Not that it was a little off, but LESS than 4mm. We are talking about a high thirties percentage wise difference (maybe 37-40% less thick), and almost nine ounces lighter (not a bad thing, historically), but bordering on a different beast. I asked for a thick one to be picked out. We shall see.
|
|
Uhlan
Member
Posts: 3,121
|
Post by Uhlan on Jun 30, 2016 10:07:37 GMT
I posted my email to CS in the other thread: sbg-sword-forum.forums.net/thread/48152/steel-english-backsword-arrived-today?page=2and for good measure will do it here also: Dear Sir / Madam. I recently purchased the English Backsword at Midway USA. Contrary to what you advertise ( 6 mm ) the blade is only 4.6 mm thick. My sword is reviewed here: sbg-sword-forum.forums.net/thread/48266/cold-steel-mortuary-sword-review?page=1&scrollTo=662008There are many more people on the forum having the same problem.We know swords and are aware of the tolerance regarding hand made blade thickness, but if you advertise with 6 mm, this 4.6 mm is taking it a bit too far. With new reports coming in at the SBG Forum where the thickness at base wildly varies and KOA advertises the English Backsword as having a blade thickness of 4 mm!!, I hope we can have a conversation about this, for us, important problem. Thank you very much for your time. Sincerely, P. Kuipers. ( Uhlan ) I hope CS will respond. Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by darth on Jun 30, 2016 17:36:09 GMT
Sent this.
"Hello,
I recently bought the new Cold Steel English Back Sword through Midway USA.
The advertised thickness at the tang of 6mm is well below that on my sword. On my example I have a thickness 3/16" or 4.7625mm.
I have seen on internet sword forums, most notably Sword Buyer's Guide other examples of wide variances with these blades. I know of 3 swords you took back and one that broke when cutting a plastic water bottle.
While my sword feels great in the hand, I am concerned that I possibly have a time bomb here, and am hesitant to let my teenage son use this sword, even under my supervision. Half the reason I purchased it was for him to train with.
Also, though I accept there will be some small variances from sword to sword, especially when a new model comes out. It is concerning that quality control did not catch this, or CS announce the difference in size from advertised, although there are examples on blades much thinner than mine.
You have my email, my phone is #####. I understand your customer service man is named Dylan, so tell Dylan to drop Dylan a line sometime soon. :-)
I will say I congratulate you on efforts to make replica swords that handle closer to the originals and and not make excuses that "Well, most people just put them on walls" and " we could make them like the originals, but we don't want to." of other established replica sword makers.
I know you guys will make this all right.
Thank you,
Dylan Thomas Woodbridge, Va. USA"
|
|
pgandy
Moderator
Senior Forumite
Posts: 10,296
|
Post by pgandy on Jun 30, 2016 19:43:29 GMT
The advertised thickness at the tang of 6mm is well below that on my sword. On my example I have a thickness 3/16" or 4.7625mm. 6mm<3/16”?
|
|
|
Post by darth on Jun 30, 2016 21:17:21 GMT
Google Fu it! :-)
|
|
Uhlan
Member
Posts: 3,121
|
Post by Uhlan on Jul 1, 2016 16:00:02 GMT
Mine came in today.
Two things that need to be rectified in the review:
1. The sword is Windlass made. It has the usual semi floppy Windlass scabbard. There is no wood or fiberglass inside. 2. The grip is covered in ray or shark skin. NOT PLASTIC. The only thing plastic is the paint and the filler in the seam. I have seen this sort of grip on plenty of swords and on all I have cleaned the grip with acetone. The horrible plastic paint dissolves very quickly and good old ray - shark skin emerges. The use of an old toothbrush will speed up the procedure. It still will take half an hour to clean it though. Where the grip covered in a plastic substitute, the entire grip cover would have dissolved in the acetone by that time. Never happened. Ray - shark skin is a very cheap, almost worthless, by product of the fishing industry, so there is absolutely no incentive to use plastic. Only the skins with Emperor Nodes will cost you plenty. By the way, plastic can never immitate the micro hooks on the natural skin. Here the hooks are covered in the thick plastic paint, but you still can feel them a bit when you run your thumb over the grip. When cleaned, the hooks come free again and the grip will be much more ,, grippy ''. The way it should be. If this bothers you, because it can really bite the bare hand, the only thing is the get a good, still sharp, metal file and try to file the little nodes down a bit. You need a metal file because those are very though. Even with a new and sharp file this will take forever. That is why in the past this type of skin was used in the first place. Much longer lasting than any leather. Almost indestructable. Shagreen, the cover for ao the Prussian M1889 IOD grip, had the nodes filed down and is much thinner. Still very though, it was used on boxes for glasses, cigar cases, furniture, ladies bags, wallets, shoes and so on.
I will prove this ( Again! ) when the time for customizing comes. First the 6mm question has to be resolved. If I can get a thicker blade I will have to send this one back.
Still no news from CS....
Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by Dave Kelly on Jul 1, 2016 16:01:51 GMT
Okay. I decided to go out and buy one for myself. I ordered from Amazon. ( They collected 15.00 in taxes, which Midwaysports doesn't.)
Arrived this morning and I have degreased, handled and measured.
Dimensionally it is the same sword in numbers and weight as the first one. About the only thing I felt was a difference in the temper of the blade. The second one is stiffer. It doesn't give in the foible; it "bends" in the midshaft. I don't like that. I don't think I'd ever apply the sort of pressure to the blade that I would actually bend it, but I much prefer the flex of Uhlan's.
Damn, now I'm learing at that Cavalier Rapier...
|
|
Uhlan
Member
Posts: 3,121
|
Post by Uhlan on Jul 1, 2016 16:19:22 GMT
I find this really disturbing news Dave.
Windlass is the only outfit with an electrical tempering oven. That practically guarantees a steady output. Together with the highly fluctuating thickness problem I start to smell trouble. Like Palace Revolution? Rebellion within the Clan?
|
|
Uhlan
Member
Posts: 3,121
|
Post by Uhlan on Jul 1, 2016 16:42:43 GMT
,, Damn, now I'm learing at that Cavalier Rapier...''
You are not the only one, but that thing costs around Euro 720 ex shipping over here. Maybe I have to email that swordnut from SBG. What's his name again? Major something something.....
|
|
|
Post by Dave Kelly on Jul 1, 2016 16:49:47 GMT
,, Damn, now I'm learing at that Cavalier Rapier...'' You are not the only one, but that thing costs around Euro 720 ex shipping over here. Maybe I have to email that swordnut from SBG. What's his name again? Major something something..... Midway is still 398.00 for it (free shipping to here). Asked KoA if they coule confirm that the 36.5 inches of blade is above the guard and not at the quillons. They said above the guard. (Temptation increases).
|
|
Uhlan
Member
Posts: 3,121
|
Post by Uhlan on Jul 1, 2016 17:14:21 GMT
Darn.
|
|
|
Post by howler on Jul 1, 2016 22:26:08 GMT
,, Damn, now I'm learing at that Cavalier Rapier...'' You are not the only one, but that thing costs around Euro 720 ex shipping over here. Maybe I have to email that swordnut from SBG. What's his name again? Major something something..... A few things worth considering...or maybe worthless, as I'm a neophyte who merely "ponders" things of interest (so bear this in mind). Anyway, I think people interested in the CS Cavalier may want to have a look at the CS 1908, instead...performance wise (NOT historic, aesthetic, etc...). They are almost the same dimensionally (1908 is about an ounce lighter, with a reach (where your fingers are-near guard...how I measure-to the tip) of 2 1/2" or so less. The POB (again measured from your finger area) is probably around 1 1/2" closer to your fingers with the Cavalier...hey, I never said the 1908 would be a better dueling sword, overall...but FOR THE PRICE). The advantage to the 1908 is that IT CAN NEVER BREAK...as it's a stiff cavalry saber, but watch how it can be used (a video on YouTube) on foot. Oddly, the original weighed MUCH more (I think), so CS made a lighter version (for once) that would improve performance for a person using it for personal defense. Now for another observation: I would not consider either a rapier...as one would (in my opinion) use a historical rapier. Honestly, rapiers (light and heavy versions) shine with 39" blades minimum, and ideal blade lengths of 42-25 inches) and one of the reasons is SINGLE TIME ATTACK (I'm no fencing expert), and that extra reach makes a rapier a rapier (otherwise, just get a long single hand sword-with 32'-36" bld.-of some type that's better at cut/thrust). I like the heavy version (used earlier) because it was used at a time when you could be expected to fight ANY weapon (including polearms...gulp) in MANY different environments. You didn't swing these suckers (they were often 3lbs or more and a bit blade heavy), but they were often sharpened for PUSH and PULL cuts (if the opponent got within the tips reach) and used with an off hand dagger...EXTREMELY IMPORTANT, as these two components (sharp blade, off hand dagger) made you (when properly trained) near invincible against a side armed foe (pole arms are still the king...which is why they were the main battle weapons in war). Btw, look at the CS Ribbed Shell Swept Hilt Rapier (with Crab Claw or Shell Hilt daggers)...I have all three (and remember, YOU REALLY MUST HAVE AN OFF HAND DAGGER...or any longish blade when using heavy-or even light, IMO, rapiers). I'm rambling on, but this is all food for thought and hopefully entertaining (if not enlightening) for you people who are more experienced than I.
|
|