machete vs sword

For a little over $30, that katana machete (and many other sword machete items from CS) would be extremely tough to match, price point wise.  That, I believe, is a big part of their appeal.

The wording is off only because of Cold Steel's own marketing in this case.  'Outperforms' is an awfully vague word, and you can stage almost any kind of demonstration.  It depends what you want to do with them.  If you want to just go 'cut stuff up'?  Have a ball with the CS machetes.   They're tough, cheap, and you can make them nice and sharp with a little work.

I personally enjoy swords that feel good in the hand, the H/T lines - and what ATrims and Tinkers I've laid hands on.  I have never touched an Albion yet, so I can't give my personal opinion there.  But... as subjective as it may be, there's a huge difference if you pick up something with some crafting behind it, rather than just a flat bar of sharpened and tempered steel with a bit of a curve to it.  (I'm not saying that's what the CS Machete lines are, I'm just giving two ends of a spectrum.)

Sorry if this came off a bit strong - bad day at work.  In short, no problems with the CS Machete lines if you just want to cut things up and have something relatively durable - a great deal for the price.  It's just not something I'm super-interested in, and I'm not a fan of Cold Steel's generally attitude for what they are.

(As to your minor point... no, I doubt anyone could make something with the absolute same specs for 100$ that wouldn't fall apart.  There's a great deal that goes into the geometry and physics behind a sword's handling.  Just my two cents, not meaning to derail the thread.)

Albion for swords are like Sebenza for folding knives, very nice but not totally necessary to get the gob done.  A good budget sword would probably be in the $2-300 range and CS machete/sword hybrid in the $25-40.  You get closer historical function with dadao style, weight forward, chopper type than the "finesse" style swords, though the CS cutlass is very similar in handling to the real deal historical specimen.

A machete can outperform a sword in "hewing power" but an axe will outperform a machete there too.
I think the difference between a sword and a machete lies in "defense power".
A sword is designed to fight against other armed persons not to cut them in halves.
So it usually has more or less hand protection, is longer to keep distance to the opponent, is faster in attack and parrying because of mass distribution and distal/profile taper.
Even the mentioned flexing design helps in a fight but not in tree cutting.

Besides this I like the Cutlass Machete and want a Chinese Warsword Machete 2017 too.

I assure you - original swords weren't 'chopping through' chainmail or plate.  I can also assure you a cold steel machete might slightly dent actual platemail - and would bash pretty good against properly made chain, but there would be no 'chopping through' in either case.  Cold Steel's demonstrations are to sell a product.  They're likely attempting to put their product in the most positive light possible by hitting poorly made targets, or worse, targets that are made to fail.  (My own opinion, can't be proven, yadda yadda, but conversely they can't prove the validity of their targets either.  So we're at an impasse.)

I'm not saying their machetes are not tough, just that Cold Steel is known for over the top marketing.

It's an interesting question. The best comparison would be between a machete and a weaponized machete--the langes messer. You can get a fine machete for under a hundred bucks. It costs ten times that for a fine langes messer. So what are you paying for?

--Better steel with superior hardening. Machetes are not intended to last terribly long. They will wear out and are working tools intended to be resharpened in the field, get rusty, etc. The messer will take a sharper edge and the steel spring back rather than bending. 
--Better balance and combat performance. The messer will be perfectly tuned to move very rapidly in the hand, with tapering and counterbalancing used to put the balance point near the grip.
--False edge and thrusting tip.
--Crossguard and nagel
--The entire messer is a weapon. Not just the blade
--R&D. The hard work that went into creating the weapon compared with the simple process of creating the machete

Still, this doesn't seem like nearly enough to justify the cost differential. I put it to you that the biggest difference is a result of supply and demand. The supply for high end swords and messers is quite limited and demand--while increasing--is still pretty limited.  So a premium will be paid for them. Machetes, OTOH, are a dime a dozen with an enormous amount of production and consumption. If 500,000 people were buying quality swords from huge factories, they would cost far less.

So are we paying "too much" for high end swords?  Yeah, probably.  But then again the more of us out there demanding and paying for quality work, the more people will provided it and the lower the price will be.  And I think we've seen real improvement esp. in longsword quality as more manufacturers have started figuring out they shouldn't be six pound wall hangers.

I think the big thing being forgotten is, one the machete is a tool and two the sword is a weapon. Both are steel both have sharp edges but the truth of the matter is one is meant to fight with and one is meant to work with. Can you do either with both? Sure but they both won't do equally the opposite of what they're meant to do. Now obviously with swords their function has long lost its prime so we pretty much do what we do with machetes to have some functional purpose to them, that being cut up stuff. Does the Machete outperform a sword in those regards? Well to an extent depending on the targets, mainly because it's doing the job it's built to do. So does a machete equally do what a sword does? Similar to the Sword yes it does but not with the efficiency or reliability of the sword.

So we got sword vs machete. So first off we got to pick what sword we're using.

Arming Sword vs Machete? OK let's look at the strengths of both as weapons. Generally an arming sword is anywhere from 24"-34" with a few in the longer extreme of 36"-38". A machete usually averages out at a 17"-22" blade. The reach advantage obviously goes to the arming sword. Then you have profile, a arming sword has primarily been a cutting focused weapon with a wide double edged blade that tapers to the point, with the majority having an acute tip for thrusting. A machete is primarily a chopping weapon with a wide single edged blade and rounded tip. In regards to hilts the arming sword has a cross guard of various shapes averaging around 4"-7" in length to protect the hand primarily but also to be used with various marital techniques for offense or defense. The handle is on average 3"-4" with either a corded, leather or wired wrap. The sword also has a pommel that not only is used to compress the hilt to the blade but also to add a counter weight to the Sword and can be used with various martial techniques as well for offense or defense. The machete hilt is more simplistic with no cross guard and a simple wooden cross plated handle rivited to the tang. There is no pommel either and the handle usually ends in a rounded shape for a more comfortable grip.

So if two persons (not knights or warriors familiar with either) decided to fight it out with each other one with each, who would have the advantage? Well obviously the one with the weapon meant to be a weapon. With the arming sword you have all the advantages of a blade meant to be a weapon of both defensive and offense measures. You have reach, cutting ability, thrusting ability, hand protection and grip stability as well a multiple offensive and defensive capabilities outside the just the blade. Can someone win out with a machete? Sure but the odds are going to be in favor of the person with the arming sword as its the only one of the two built as an offensive and defensive weapon.

I could go on with other sword types like Longswords katana rapier and ect but I think the gist is made clear with just the arming sword. As all those other swords have similar or better defining examples of the design of a weapon with various offensive and defensive attributes. As opposed to a tool with one primary function that is similar to one of the primary offensive attributes of the sword.

So I'd disagree that the primary design and function of the sword is inferior or only left to aesthetic appeal. There is so much more a sword is capable of than a machete and that is why we see the sword evolve from what basically was the rudimentary and primitive machete in the early B.Cs to what the sword was in its prime from various cultures around the world.

Wouldn't those just be swords though? I know they're more rudimentary but overall they're still a sword in design and style. I think that's where CS's marketing get people confused. They say Katana/machete or cutlass/machete but what they really have is a sword with a basic hilt and blade profile. I'd consider CS's sword/machete types more along the lines of a tactical sword over an actual machete since they have properties of sword even if the blade is more in line with the profile of a machete.

My 26” machete handles much like a sword w/o a guard. I can slice cocoanuts cleanly in half as well cut through a pig’s leg bone and all. The only issue that I have using it in combat is that my hand feels downright naked. I was watching an hour and half documentary last night concerning the US-Spanish War, most scenes were of actual footage. The Cuban grunts appeared to be armed with machetes in the neighbourhood of 26’ possible 28” blades. I’ll tell you I’d hate for that horde to come at me.