|
Post by code on Jun 17, 2008 19:20:09 GMT
I'm currently working on sharpening my strongblade warspike. After filing it looks pretty messy but it'll cut paper really well, but after a few runs with the accusharp and hitting it with some 400 grit sandpaper to smooth it out it's not cutting paper quite as easily. I'm sanding it upwards toward the edge just as if I was filing it. After filing the edge is pretty rough, so it's really sawing the paper more then actually cutting I think. If I sand it with some 800 or 1000 grit after going over it with 400 would this make the edge sharper? Now, I know swords don't need to be razor sharp and as such cutting paper might not be the best was to judge sharpness? How sharp is sharp enough, and how do you test this without actually going out every 5 minutes during sharpening to do test cuts?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 18, 2008 0:08:19 GMT
Um, I have always been under the understanding that because of the purpose medieval swords are made for that they shouldn't be paper cutting sharp.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 18, 2008 0:57:10 GMT
Code, I believe that Bloodwraith is correct. While the edge should be sharp, it should not be as fine as paper cutting sharp with great ease, or you run the high risk of denting, chipping, etc the edge very easily.
My regards, Tim
|
|
|
Post by Brian of DBK on Jun 18, 2008 2:21:56 GMT
www.albion-swords.com/articles/images/sword-myth-quiz.pdfHighlights from the PDF: "Medieval swords were not sharp -- FALSE Some surviving samples of Medieval swords are still sharp -- many are razor-sharp." "Japanese swords are the sharpest and best swords ever made -- FALSE Japanese swords have many admirable qualities and were well-suited to their intended use, but they are not necessarily sharper or better than a properly designed and sharpened Medieval sword." "Not all swords should be as sharp as a razor -- TRUE The sword’s intended purpose is always the guide to use -- thrusting swords are not intended for cutting, so some may not even have an edge at all, just a well-defined and reinforced point."
|
|
|
Post by Tom K. (ianflaer) on Jun 18, 2008 3:10:47 GMT
well, while Brian is right, his answer is not very specific for this sword. so how do you see your sword? I know you are going to do backyard cutting maybe tatami, plastic bottles, etc. but that's not what I'm asking. what do you think your sword was designed for? is it best for the unexpected duel when you get jumped in the pub? is it for the battlefield used to hold the flank against the encroaching enemy formation? why do I ask? if it's for hitting through armor then make sure you sharpen it so it has a very fat appleseed cross-section; what the Japanese would call lots of niku. if it's for the unexpected duel then make it with less niku, narrower and therefor sharper. I always thought that a medieval battle sword should feel like a rather sharp axe. dueling swords I think are lighter, faster and sharper.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 18, 2008 3:11:57 GMT
There are different definitions of razor sharp mate and most sword I have handled are not as sharp as a razor as that is a misnomer. They may be as sharp as their function requires but few swords are razor sharp.
|
|
|
Post by Tom K. (ianflaer) on Jun 18, 2008 3:53:14 GMT
too true Blood, most people (myself included) tend to call it razor sharp if it will cut hairs off your arm, but that really isn't RAZOR sharp it's just really sharp. I've handled a properly sharpened straight razor and I don't think it's really possible to get a big ol' fat (by comparison) sword that sharp. but I think the term is pretty well understood so I don't have any qualms about tossing it out. even though it isn't REALLY razor sharp.
|
|
|
Post by hotspur on Jun 18, 2008 4:20:21 GMT
Quite obtuse angle edges can be shaving sharp. That doesn't mean they will cut bottles well unless the operator is precise.
Swords were not made to pound on armour.
The problem with sharpening any blunt to a sharp is that quick and dirty will yield an edge that does not favor the backyard cutter. if you want a better cutting experience with it, start blending that secondary bevel back onto the main grind and draw filing is the most efficient home remedy this side of a belt grinder.
One can get hair popping sharpness at 400-600 grit but it takes practice and technique. Honestly, the only time I use paper is to polish file and stone scratches (or when wild men take belt griders to antiques). You would be using the grit perpendicular to the edge to acheive this, not longwise strokes. Longwise strokes to refine an edge. My Hanwei PK is going on it's fifth season and has seen only a fine diamond pocket hone and an extra fine ceramic along the edge. You have to look pretty close to see even that. No perceptible secondary bevel imposed and truly shaving sharp. The difference is that it was pretty sharp when I got it, not a blunt.
All my swords will cut newsprint folded over the edge with no tear out some will whittle newsprint as well. Most will at least scrape hair off and a couple are indeed shaving sharp.
Technique in cutting plays a large role as well but I do not feel sharper necessarily leads to poorer technique.
Practice sharpening on knives before you feel you have sharpening swords down pat. They are a lot easier to deal with in getting general principles down. if your edge is tearing paper, there is either a burr there, or the two planes just haven't met closely (sharp) yet. if there is a burr or wire edge, it will usually feel less smooth on on side of the blade than the other. the two sides must meet cleanly for the edge to be truly sharp. You can then size teeth/microserrations (grit size) or polish smooth. You can also angle your teeth for push or pull cutting (or straight for shaving).
I always suggest folk do their first roughed in edge on a butter knife. Then move up to making pocket knives and kitchen knives sharp. Look to tools like an Accusharp as just one more pencil in the box. I have used mine for more than a decade and only to remove large amounts of metal quickly. An extremly light touch with one might refine an egde, I have never used one that way.
Cheers
Hotspur; lots of ways to stay sharp but getting there can be a real chore, the first go of it
|
|
|
Post by ShooterMike on Jun 18, 2008 5:23:44 GMT
I agree with what Hotspur has stated, and I would add:
Medieval swords are a widely varied lot, and they were meant for different techniques and uses. For instance, you wouldn't sharpen a Type XVII war "spike" anything like a Type X, XI or XII single hander designed for cutting and slashing.
Later period swords, from Type XVI forward have mostly flattened diamond cross sections. IMO, for practical use these swords should initially carry the edge in a straight line from the thick center of the diamond all the way to just shy of the edge. There thwy should gradually roll around until they meet as just a slightly steeper angle than the primary (blade body) bevel. This is exactly how the VA Practical sharp swords are delivered. Once they begin to get a little dull you can maintain the edge by stoning at a slightly steeper angle, with the stone passing over the central rib of the blade with about .25" of clearance. Or use the next method.
The more cut-dedicated swords have flatter blade cross sections. I prefer those swords to have an appleseed edge. But without a lot of obvious rolling effect.
My preferred method to maintain/finish either of these edges is to get them established with a file if they weren't originally sharp. Then use 320 grit paper on a sanding pad to strop the edge clean of file marks, while keeping the pad at an angle that just prevents scratching the surface finish of the majority of the blade. By "strop" I mean sand in a straight line away from the center of the blade such that your not dragging the flexible paper over the sharpened edge, thus rounding it off instead of sharpening it. That's what happened to the sword mention at the start of this thread.
Progress to 400 grit for getting it sharp. If the sword started out sharp, then I start the process with stropping at 400 grit. If it's an Albion, the edge stays at 400 grit, then the flat of the blade is re-polished first with the 400 paper, then with steel wool in longitudinal strokes, taking care not to touch the edge lest it be dulled.
For swords from Arms&Armor and Angus Trim, I progress down to 600 grit, then use the 600 grit to do a final longitudinal polish to remove the strop marks.
For keeping my ATrim sword sharp, I just give them a light stropping at 600 grit to maintain the edge sharpness however I want it.
For other swords, I follow either method, depending on the final finish I desire. I don't care for a highly polished blade at all. So I avoid any finer polishing. But if you desire a brighter blade you can just carry on with the longitudinal strokes with ever-increasing media until you get what you like.
My general rule is, the lighter the sword, the sharper I want it. But NONE of my swords will cleanly lift hair. I just find that degree of sharpness too much hastle to maintain. If the sharpest ones will cleanly slice little ribbons off a piece of paper with a slicing motion, that seems perfect to me.
Oh, one other thing. I HATE the use of the term "razor sharp" in the sword industry. Razors cleanly shave whiskers and other hair. I've never seen a sword that was anywhere near that sharp. And I hope never to see one, as a big blade that's that sharp will be extremely fragile and will chip at the slightest swordly provocation. I know I'm in the minority, but it still makes me grit my teeth anytime I see it used.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 18, 2008 5:41:05 GMT
www.albion-swords.com/articles/images/sword-myth-quiz.pdf"Japanese swords are the sharpest and best swords ever made -- FALSE Japanese swords have many admirable qualities and were well-suited to their intended use, but they are not necessarily sharper or better than a properly designed and sharpened Medieval sword." This sounds like a rather bias opinion especially coming from a manufacturer of European swords.... I mean don't get me wrong i'm not trying to start a flame war at all,... i'm just saying some of the finest weapons experts in the world who have a lifetime of studies in every kind of sword used through history regard the Japanese sword as the finest weapon ever made. And these are sword historians. I personally am not saying one is better than the other,... but to state it as - FALSE - without the proper qualifications seems a little unfair does it not? Sorry back on topic,.... My Tenchi has a tameshigiri polish which is different depending on who's polishing it. This particular blade has alot of niku (meat) on the ha (edge). The blade is very "full" because of this and will not cut paper. However this gives the blade edge strength to prevent "rolling" or "chipping" if your cut is not 100%. This sword cuts tatami like no ones business even though to the touch it seems dull. This type of sharpness or lack of sharpness if you will,.. seems to maintain its cutting ability for much longer than the razor sharp blades. It sort of feels easier to cut with as well? I think the extra meat on the blade also helps split the target better. Creates less resistance against the steel as the blade travels through the target. I know that sounds weird,... but i'm tired and can't figure out a better way to explain it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 18, 2008 5:46:50 GMT
Sharper doesn't mean it'll cut better. If you get REALLY sharp but it messes up your blade geometry, your sword won't slice through targets because you'll create drag and or sucktion.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 18, 2008 5:51:09 GMT
www.albion-swords.com/articles/images/sword-myth-quiz.pdf"Japanese swords are the sharpest and best swords ever made -- FALSE Japanese swords have many admirable qualities and were well-suited to their intended use, but they are not necessarily sharper or better than a properly designed and sharpened Medieval sword." This sounds like a rather bias opinion especially coming from a manufacturer of European swords.... I mean don't get me wrong i'm not trying to start a flame war at all,... i'm just saying some of the finest weapons experts in the world who have a lifetime of studies in every kind of sword used through history regard the Japanese sword as the finest weapon ever made. And these are sword historians. I personally am not saying one is better than the other,... but to state it as - FALSE - without the proper qualifications seems a little unfair does it not? Yeah well I dare any sword historian that says that to look at wot(sp?) steel sword and still say that with a straight face. And the finest weapon ever made is definately NOT a sword. Something missle based maybe...but definately not a sword.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 18, 2008 7:07:31 GMT
wot steel? Could you possibly be referring to wootz steel?
The finest swords ever made in my opinion are definitely arabian swords made from wootz or possibly the 2500 year old sword they discovered in china or...
You see my point right? No sword is definitely the finest sword ever made, to say that is a crock of semprini in my opinion. As to any weapon of this or last century being defined as "the finest weapon ever made" well I just won't even say what I think of that.
|
|
|
Post by hotspur on Jun 18, 2008 7:36:44 GMT
I disagree with a lot of what is being said but not only am I a disagreeable sort, it is a pretty subjective subject. Sharp blades are easily maintained. I use my sharp swords for cuttiing mats and bottles, sometimes other quite odd things like lead shot in plastic surrounded by leather. The only sword edge I had ever let degrade to less than folded paper cutting sharpness was my first Gus Trim sword which pounded some pretty dense carboard tubing with a lot of silica in it. Even that was many, many cuts at those tubes (pallet wrap cores). I regretted letting it degrade as much as I did. Yes, you can cut Mugen Dachi tatami omote with less than sharp blades. No, I don't agree that a lot of niku makes iot easier (neither do the folk winning competitions with broader, flatter, raazzzor sharp blades). Water bottles aren't tatami and a lot of baseballing goes on with less than sharp swords. I zing my dullest sword (one sharpened from blunt) through empty cracker boxes. It won't cut mats or bottles for beans. Another blunt I sharpened (much sharper) is a great mat cutter and a single hand sword at that. Lots of niku can make for a stronger edge but unless I was cutting a lot of bamboo, would still keep my PK as sharp as I do. Mine's got a bit of bulk that was lost in the next generations. The fragility of an edge is somewhat regulated by what is backing it up, I agreee with that. However, if you are trying to sharpen a blunt, you are actually trying to finish a job left undone. This means more than putting a 60 degree inclusive secondary bevel on it. that's why I mention more draw filing to extend that bevel and reduce the angle. One could start at the middle and work out as well but that's where a belt grinder would be handy. You would then be truly doing what someone intending a sharp would set out to do. Even my A&A XVa is kept pretty darn sharp. Right out to the point, where the blade and an almost square crossection. I'll end this post the way I began my first in this thread and will also say again tht it all gets a bit subjective. One of the most subjective sword topics to be found. Cheers Hotspur; Quite obtuse angle edges can be shaving sharp. That doesn't mean they will cut bottles well unless the operator is precise.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 19, 2008 0:25:20 GMT
Ah yes, wootz...thanks BW .
|
|
|
Post by Darksword Armory on Jul 2, 2008 19:57:00 GMT
I won’t add to the debate about how sharp your sword should be. I think the real question is “how sharp do you want it to be” (obviously). Different type of users will need a different type of edge. That edge will depend on the use of your sword.….what is its purpose ? (wall décor, reenactment costume, reenactment combat, cutting tests, historical accuracy? all of the above ?) ...everyone will have their own opinion about a sword’s edge, hence this debate. You should decide on your own merit what purpose your edge will serve. This is all very obvious though. ….more importantly is the sharpening advice. You should use 1200 or 2000 grit to polish off the blade after your sharpened it to your liking. A 2000 grit with a bit of water dropped directly on your blade , will leave a beautiful polished look and will remove any sharpening “errors” caused by “natural” movement. Hope this helps, DSA, www.darksword-armory.com
|
|
|
Post by ShooterMike on Jul 2, 2008 21:43:13 GMT
Polish is a bit like "how sharp?" only more contentious. A lot of folks see medieval swords that are polished above 800 grit as "too shiny" and being indicative of a lower-quality reproduction sword. They would note that most mid- to higher-end production medieval swords such as those from Albion, Peter Johnsson, Arms&Armor, Del Tin, Tinker, ATrim, Lutel, etc. don't polish medieval swords above 600-800, or even less less. Albion, for instance, finish their swords to about 400 grit, then complete the finish with steel wool. This is believed to more realistically reproduce actual period originals from medieval Europe.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2008 4:44:37 GMT
Jimdangello you keep saying this.
"some of the finest weapons experts in the world who have a lifetime of studies in every kind of sword used through history regard the Japanese sword as the finest weapon ever made. And these are sword historians. "
Best In what reguard ? since every combat sword around the word is pretty much made for a different envinroment of combat how could the katana be the best type of sword ever made ?
could a sword historian make the mistake of claiming this ? The quality of every sword type and individual sword differs to its inherent design and moreso to the level of skill of the smith. So is there one single katana that is better than every other sword ever made ? Because I'm not sure I understand how the katana type could be the best ? Best at what ? perhaps you mean "finest" swords as far as production value, presentation etc. ? which is very opinionated. every sword is an individual.
Could you please post a source on these claims as i've never heard anyone claim this or ever heard any historians you speak of claim this. who are they? any links? I read in another post where this started some controversey. I own 3 katanas and 2 medievals. its not a matter of bias for me.
These types of posts seem misinformed and bias to the extreme as I dont see any way for them to be correct. please post a source where you got this info. I'm not intending to hi-jack this thread but this has to be cleared up.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2008 10:11:22 GMT
I'm not sure if this is the correct thread to post this response... maybe this thread? /index.cgi?board=japaneseswords&action=display&thread=5398&page=7
nomorewords, the only place where I have seen such claims is on discovery channel and their 'historians' who seem to be completely in love with japanese swords - to the extent that in a pretty poor test they disregard the similar cutting abilities of the XXII-ish out of hand and not saying how they were better... just offering unsubstantiated opinion.
The test involved to my eyes a hanwei practical plus katana vs some reproduction of what looked like a type XXII to me (I looked but couldn't find a similar sword made by any manufacturer I know) cutting beach mats (being held together by zip ties!) by a guy who didn't seem to know what they were doing, or decided to not use any finesse on camera... holding a single handed sword in two hands and completely overpowering the cuts with both the katana and euro style sword.
I own and really like both my japanese and european style reproductions and if anything the katana was my first love... but I don't think they're any better than each other... different purposes and uses, that's all.
|
|
|
Post by rammstein on Jul 4, 2008 14:51:03 GMT
Without proper qualification? Peter Johnsson is more than qualified to make those statements.
|
|