|
Post by Afoo on Dec 24, 2017 6:10:48 GMT
This review has been featured on SBG! CLICK HERE to read it in its new and improved format
|
|
pgandy
Moderator
Senior Forumite
Posts: 10,296
|
Post by pgandy on Dec 24, 2017 17:46:54 GMT
Thanks, nice review. About the gap between the scabbard and blade; without seeing the product, just guessing, would that better allow a wooden shim/filler to be inserted in order to retain a sharp edge longer? Glad to see Universal using 1055 steel more and more.
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Dec 24, 2017 23:44:21 GMT
Nice write up. Does the guards rear quillon facing down bother your hand at all? All the Austrian swords I've seen with that kind of guard have them facing the opposite way, kinda seems like in sabre fencing it would dig into the wrist when you maneuver it.
Nice to see a newer production model reviewed, especially with the recent influx of them.
|
|
|
Post by Afoo on Dec 25, 2017 6:39:26 GMT
Thanks.
The rear-facing quillon is an interesting choice. It does interfere with some movements, but you can work around it.
Or, just get a wrench and bend it back! Which I think is going to be one of my first orders of business
|
|
Uhlan
Member
Posts: 3,121
|
Post by Uhlan on Dec 25, 2017 9:24:55 GMT
Thanks for the review. This sabre reminds me of my ,, Sabre a Guarde Tournante '' and makes a good case for it being an Austrian one instead of French. One thing I do not get: The rear facing guillon. I do not see it. I see nothing that would interfere with handling? I see the guard slightly bending forward in the direction of the blade, as it should be. The sword knot going through the two slits would make an excellent thumb stop for the open grip, but the two slits alone would help here too. What am I missing?
|
|
|
Post by Afoo on Dec 25, 2017 14:51:55 GMT
At the very top, the front plate/quillon bends back towards the handle. It can interfere with 1 and 2 sabre parries. Again, you can work around it but its something you notice the first few times and figured its good to point out. It removes about 5-10 degrees from the full backward rotation of my wrist.
The objection also comes from the fact that there is no good reason for this shape - the few pictures I can find of the 1827, along with the later models have the guard bent forward at the top. I don't mind the limitations on movement, but there has to be a reason
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Dec 25, 2017 20:40:47 GMT
|
|
|
Post by pellius on Dec 31, 2017 4:21:46 GMT
Thanks for the nice review.
|
|
pattyb0009
Member
Getting into antique sabers...
Posts: 1,870
Member is Online
|
Post by pattyb0009 on Jan 8, 2018 20:40:54 GMT
Great review. I've been wondering about the quality of Universal recently. Thinking of picking up a saber from them. Maybe. That gap really bothers me!
|
|
|
Post by Afoo on Jan 17, 2018 21:16:22 GMT
Its...unusual. My impression was that Universal had better fit and finish, but worse handling that Windlass
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Jan 19, 2018 4:17:19 GMT
Great review. I've been wondering about the quality of Universal recently. Thinking of picking up a saber from them. Maybe. That gap really bothers me! I have to second Afoo here. I owned their Revolution Sabre and the Windlass sabre, and the Windlass had a much more lively balance. Also, all the Uni made swords I've had (not very many tbh) have had a large gap like that. A symptom of less expensive production swords. Universal has more military models but often suffer as far as handling.
|
|
pattyb0009
Member
Getting into antique sabers...
Posts: 1,870
Member is Online
|
Post by pattyb0009 on Jan 19, 2018 20:11:50 GMT
Great review. I've been wondering about the quality of Universal recently. Thinking of picking up a saber from them. Maybe. That gap really bothers me! I have to second Afoo here. I owned their Revolution Sabre and the Windlass sabre, and the Windlass had a much more lively balance. Also, all the Uni made swords I've had (not very many tbh) have had a large gap like that. A symptom of less expensive production swords. Universal has more military models but often suffer as far as handling. Thanks for seconding that. I'll probably go with a windlass. I had a Cold Steel saber once upon a time and found the balance really great. Very easy to handle.
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Jan 19, 2018 20:43:13 GMT
I have to second Afoo here. I owned their Revolution Sabre and the Windlass sabre, and the Windlass had a much more lively balance. Also, all the Uni made swords I've had (not very many tbh) have had a large gap like that. A symptom of less expensive production swords. Universal has more military models but often suffer as far as handling. Thanks for seconding that. I'll probably go with a windlass. I had a Cold Steel saber once upon a time and found the balance really great. Very easy to handle. If recommend the Windlass Hungarian. Super nice profile, and feels very nice. Also the M1850 officers, M1860 cav officers are are very nice, however they all have very thin grips.
|
|
|
Post by Afoo on Jan 20, 2018 14:56:33 GMT
My *general* rule is that Universals tend to be better put together and capture the look of the originals, but the Windlasses are better handling swords/ The Universal Princess of Wales seems to be an exception (its both well made AND handles well - so much so that my brother and I both owned one at one point in time).
|
|
|
Post by bfoo2 on Jan 20, 2018 16:58:56 GMT
My *general* rule is that Universals tend to be better put together and capture the look of the originals, but the Windlasses are better handling swords/ The Universal Princess of Wales seems to be an exception (its both well made AND handles well - so much so that my brother and I both owned one at one point in time). Their Patton and the now-out-of-production 1906 were pretty good in both departments. Lovely swords, but more expensive than their cheap civil-war 1840/1860/1833 clunkers at the $175 - $200 price range.
|
|
|
Post by Afoo on Jan 20, 2018 17:55:54 GMT
The Patton was around $130 was it not? The 1906 was $200, which is not bad considering the price of some Universals.
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Jan 21, 2018 7:10:08 GMT
The Patton was around $130 was it not? The 1906 was $200, which is not bad considering the price of some Universals. It's at 160 I think now. The 1906 was 200 when it went on closeout sale iirc.
|
|