The Windlass M1860 Cavalry Officers Sabre
Feb 16, 2018 2:51:41 GMT
Post by Jordan Williams on Feb 16, 2018 2:51:41 GMT
The Windlass Steelcrafts U.S. M1860 Sabre for Cavalry Officers.
Disclaimer – I have no affiliation with Atlanta Cutlery Co., or Windlass Steelcrafts in any capacity, other than that of someone who buys their products from time to time.
Blade
The blade is 34 inches long and measures in at just over 1 and 1/8 inch at the base, and comes to ½ inch 1 inch from the base. Profile – wise, the blade is very similar to the original M1860 troopers, albeit two inches shorter. The curve follows the original closely, and the profile of the tip, which is something Windlass usually makes somewhat dull looking, actually looks nice and pointy, though not quite as tapered as the original. It still very much captures the look of the original.
The etching is nicely executed, however as others have stated it looks like the etching on a 150-year-old sword, and a well worn one at that. Having owned an original American civil war era sword with similar blade etching, I can safely say that the etching is quite a bit duller and somewhat chunky compared to the originals. That said, it does look nice in it’s own right, and in it’s own budget range, which is just around 150 USD after shipping.
Taper wise, on paper it sounds quite poor. Starting out at only 3/16ths of an inch thick, it retains that thickness up until nearly 17 inches from the guard, and from there tapering in a straight fashion to 2/16ths to the tip, it still retains a decently beefy foible, which would seem to be a recipe for a crow bar – esque bar of steel, which leads us into…
Handling
Handling wise, it is only slightly clumsier than the original M1860 troopers, which is in and of itself not a clumsy sword at all. In fact, I quite liked it. The Windlass sword echoes the originals, however like an echo, it somewhat gets muddied in translation. The dynamic balance that made the original such a nimble feeling piece while allowing it to retain a healthy amount of heft for a light cavalry sabre is no longer present, and you find yourself getting tired of swinging it and moving through the motions. There is simply not enough mass near the hilt, and too much mass in the latter half. It’s still nice enough for a reproduction, and actually quite close to the original, but it is of course no effective substitute.
The Grip
The grip is my biggest gripe with the sword. Why those chose this design I couldn’t tell you in a hundred years. It is the same as their foot officers sabre, which is a shame as well as the shape does not work for any of the blades, nor is it particular accurate, the originals having a raised middle section that greatly aided in the handling of the swords and allowed the heft of the blades to be taken full advantage of. It does a great disservice to the sword, and the hilt furniture which is possibly nicer than the blade. It measures in at only ¾ of on inch thick in the center, and only 1 inch wide at the center of its profile. These measures alone would not indicate a poor grip if it not for the fact that there is only ¼ inches of taper from the top of the grip, and heels into 1 and 1/8ths inch. There is no taper distally to the grip. This grip design is used effectively in swords such as the French Mle 1822, however on my model the grip measures in at 1 and ½ inches at the heel, 1 and ¼ inches at the center, and slightly over 1 and ½ inches at the top of the grip. It is 7/8ths thick and gains about 1/16th inches where it enters the pommel cap. It controls the blade excellently. So, no, it is not the design of the grip, but instead the execution which is poorly done. It is too slick, too small, and too wimpy. I realize I’m whining now so let’s move onto the furniture which is actually quite nice.
The Guard and Pommel Cap
The hilt is very nicely made, and the casting is of decent quality. Some aspects, such as the laurel leaves where the bars join the guard, however overall the rest is quite nicely and elegantly done. The guard sadly suffers from the same disease of most Indian made sabres – the knuckle bow is effectively one – half of a circle, whereas on the originals it forms into a nearly or solidly flat section where the bow is in front of your knuckles. I suppose it does give more room for your hand and/or a glove, but it doesn’t look as nice as the originals. The pommel cap is also nicely made, however the mound where the tang is peened to is much too high and small in diameter. It should be fatter and shorter. That said, no real complaints here. It looks nice and looks “officer-ish”.
The Scabbard
The scabbard is an elegant and nicely made thing. It holds the sword nicely and retains it upside down. It doesn’t suffer from the usual ailments of oversized components and ridiculously thick scabbard walls, and the polish is clean and consistent. Not much to say here, it’s a nice addition to the sword. For accuracies sake it should be blued.
Fit and Finish
I chopped up a Christmas tree with it and it hasn’t loosened, as well as a few milk crates. There’s no movement in the knuckle bow where it joins the pommel cap, (an ailment of the 1850 foot officers series) and from what I can tell very little gap in between the guard and tang, however there is the usual windlass epoxy. Still though, to my eye there is very little gap.
Conclusion
Is it worth the asking price of 149 USD from ACC and MRL? (10 percent off will negate whatever discount KoA offers over them) Well, that’s for you and your wallet to decide. Do you want a backyard cutter that’s a nice handling sabre and still on a sort of budget? It’s a fair price for it, sure. If you want a display item? Go ahead, as far as I know the only other M1860 officers sabre on the market is the Universal Swords replica, which is around 225 if I remember correctly. They look similar enough to my eye but I’ve never owned, seen, or handled that one.
To sum up, it’s a nice replica of a great sword, and will look nice hanging on your wall or on your belt as a cutter. It’s miles more accurate than their 1860 troopers, both in blade and guard profile. I don’t own an M1860 Cav officers and likely never will but can say it handles closely to the M1860 troopers.
I’d say it’s worth the asking price, but only if you don’t expect too much from the Indian sabre market. It would be greatly improved by a more accurate grip. At this point, second to the 1840 Cav and 1906 Cav, it’s my favorite piece from Windlass.
And now, for the pictures.
Original and Windlass.
Rest of pictures in the spoiler tabs.
Disclaimer – I have no affiliation with Atlanta Cutlery Co., or Windlass Steelcrafts in any capacity, other than that of someone who buys their products from time to time.
Blade
The blade is 34 inches long and measures in at just over 1 and 1/8 inch at the base, and comes to ½ inch 1 inch from the base. Profile – wise, the blade is very similar to the original M1860 troopers, albeit two inches shorter. The curve follows the original closely, and the profile of the tip, which is something Windlass usually makes somewhat dull looking, actually looks nice and pointy, though not quite as tapered as the original. It still very much captures the look of the original.
The etching is nicely executed, however as others have stated it looks like the etching on a 150-year-old sword, and a well worn one at that. Having owned an original American civil war era sword with similar blade etching, I can safely say that the etching is quite a bit duller and somewhat chunky compared to the originals. That said, it does look nice in it’s own right, and in it’s own budget range, which is just around 150 USD after shipping.
Taper wise, on paper it sounds quite poor. Starting out at only 3/16ths of an inch thick, it retains that thickness up until nearly 17 inches from the guard, and from there tapering in a straight fashion to 2/16ths to the tip, it still retains a decently beefy foible, which would seem to be a recipe for a crow bar – esque bar of steel, which leads us into…
Handling
Handling wise, it is only slightly clumsier than the original M1860 troopers, which is in and of itself not a clumsy sword at all. In fact, I quite liked it. The Windlass sword echoes the originals, however like an echo, it somewhat gets muddied in translation. The dynamic balance that made the original such a nimble feeling piece while allowing it to retain a healthy amount of heft for a light cavalry sabre is no longer present, and you find yourself getting tired of swinging it and moving through the motions. There is simply not enough mass near the hilt, and too much mass in the latter half. It’s still nice enough for a reproduction, and actually quite close to the original, but it is of course no effective substitute.
The Grip
The grip is my biggest gripe with the sword. Why those chose this design I couldn’t tell you in a hundred years. It is the same as their foot officers sabre, which is a shame as well as the shape does not work for any of the blades, nor is it particular accurate, the originals having a raised middle section that greatly aided in the handling of the swords and allowed the heft of the blades to be taken full advantage of. It does a great disservice to the sword, and the hilt furniture which is possibly nicer than the blade. It measures in at only ¾ of on inch thick in the center, and only 1 inch wide at the center of its profile. These measures alone would not indicate a poor grip if it not for the fact that there is only ¼ inches of taper from the top of the grip, and heels into 1 and 1/8ths inch. There is no taper distally to the grip. This grip design is used effectively in swords such as the French Mle 1822, however on my model the grip measures in at 1 and ½ inches at the heel, 1 and ¼ inches at the center, and slightly over 1 and ½ inches at the top of the grip. It is 7/8ths thick and gains about 1/16th inches where it enters the pommel cap. It controls the blade excellently. So, no, it is not the design of the grip, but instead the execution which is poorly done. It is too slick, too small, and too wimpy. I realize I’m whining now so let’s move onto the furniture which is actually quite nice.
The Guard and Pommel Cap
The hilt is very nicely made, and the casting is of decent quality. Some aspects, such as the laurel leaves where the bars join the guard, however overall the rest is quite nicely and elegantly done. The guard sadly suffers from the same disease of most Indian made sabres – the knuckle bow is effectively one – half of a circle, whereas on the originals it forms into a nearly or solidly flat section where the bow is in front of your knuckles. I suppose it does give more room for your hand and/or a glove, but it doesn’t look as nice as the originals. The pommel cap is also nicely made, however the mound where the tang is peened to is much too high and small in diameter. It should be fatter and shorter. That said, no real complaints here. It looks nice and looks “officer-ish”.
The Scabbard
The scabbard is an elegant and nicely made thing. It holds the sword nicely and retains it upside down. It doesn’t suffer from the usual ailments of oversized components and ridiculously thick scabbard walls, and the polish is clean and consistent. Not much to say here, it’s a nice addition to the sword. For accuracies sake it should be blued.
Fit and Finish
I chopped up a Christmas tree with it and it hasn’t loosened, as well as a few milk crates. There’s no movement in the knuckle bow where it joins the pommel cap, (an ailment of the 1850 foot officers series) and from what I can tell very little gap in between the guard and tang, however there is the usual windlass epoxy. Still though, to my eye there is very little gap.
Conclusion
Is it worth the asking price of 149 USD from ACC and MRL? (10 percent off will negate whatever discount KoA offers over them) Well, that’s for you and your wallet to decide. Do you want a backyard cutter that’s a nice handling sabre and still on a sort of budget? It’s a fair price for it, sure. If you want a display item? Go ahead, as far as I know the only other M1860 officers sabre on the market is the Universal Swords replica, which is around 225 if I remember correctly. They look similar enough to my eye but I’ve never owned, seen, or handled that one.
To sum up, it’s a nice replica of a great sword, and will look nice hanging on your wall or on your belt as a cutter. It’s miles more accurate than their 1860 troopers, both in blade and guard profile. I don’t own an M1860 Cav officers and likely never will but can say it handles closely to the M1860 troopers.
I’d say it’s worth the asking price, but only if you don’t expect too much from the Indian sabre market. It would be greatly improved by a more accurate grip. At this point, second to the 1840 Cav and 1906 Cav, it’s my favorite piece from Windlass.
And now, for the pictures.
Original and Windlass.
Rest of pictures in the spoiler tabs.
Things have changed!