|
Post by Jordan Williams on Oct 22, 2018 4:38:36 GMT
This is a re – write of my older review of the American model 1860 cavalry sabre. The new thoughts reflect a Mansfield and Lamb made sabre, whereas the original review may have been of a spuriously remarked import, or a very well made fake. Thus, I felt the need to redo my review at least where handling is concerned.
Growing up, like many Americans I was enamored by our Civil War. The tales of bravery and butchery captured me and made me find a passion in learning American history, and I was always spending time looking at paintings and prints in books that captured the American cavalry as they charged into battle, gallantly waving sabres into fire, lead, and steel. Without further ado, or romanticization, here's my review of the American M1860.
The U.S. M1860 Sabre is possibly one of the most iconic swords in American history, media, and television, being the mainstay sword of Cowboys and Indians, ACW Films and lasting from 1858 to 1913, being used from the Civil War, Indian Wars, and the Spanish American War and is also my favorite cavalry sword.
Issued near the start of the American Civil War, the sabre was thrown directly into a four - year conflict and was proven to successful enough to not be replaced until the theory of military swords dictated that straight, thrust - centric swords were to be issued in place of traditional curved cut and thrust sabres.
NEW SECTION The grip is a wood core coated nicely in a deep brown leather, has a nicely worked wire that helps your hand find grip without being abrasive, and is set deeply into the grip, just barely rising above the grip. The wiring is tightly turned, feeling smooth to the touch. It is a little fatter than I would prefer to have, but I have short fingers. It is nicely shaped and allows for an easy transition from hammer to open grip. It is long enough to fit a closed fist and two more fingers under said fist, and in this it allows for the thumb up grip to be executed fairly without worry of the tip of the thumb being jammed into the guard plate. The guard appears underbuilt when compared directly to its larger French influencer, however in isolation it appears well proportioned. The pommel cap cants towards the edge and has a smooth ridge near the end so as to allow for support in the heel of the hand. The fuller is deeply cast, and there is a very shallow secondary fuller near the spine. The main fuller ends 7 inches before the tip and transitions into a thin, flat, and nicely formed foible that in turn transitions very nicely into a Montmorency style tip. I enjoy the handling of this sword quite a lot. It feels more nose heavy than the French 1822, but also feels less neutral and much snappier in the cut. It is not the nimblest sword but will perform its duty well in regard to hacking and slashing through a melee, or pointing into a charge. The French 1822 can move quicker in the moulinet, but the 1860 may actually give you more power in the cut and thrust despite its slimmer blade. The hilt leaves wanting in terms or protection, compared to its contemporaries it is perfectly adequate. New photos coming tomorrow.
|
|
|
Post by Afoo on Oct 23, 2018 0:48:29 GMT
Hmm. I have an 1906 sabre, and had a similar impression. I like the 1822 and its a respectable sword. The 1906 definitely does not live up to it, but the overall package is better than what you would expect when considering each element of design individually.
I still like the 1822 more :P T
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Oct 25, 2018 0:55:42 GMT
Hmm. I have an 1906 sabre, and had a similar impression. I like the 1822 and its a respectable sword. The 1906 definitely does not live up to it, but the overall package is better than what you would expect when considering each element of design individually. I still like the 1822 more T Yeah, the 1822 is broader and still feels lighter. Not faster, but easier to use I think. I also like the grip more. The 1860 feels ambiguous, but the 1822 feels great in either grip. I haven't handled a 1906, but I think the brass guard of the 1860 will counterbalance the blade better.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2018 1:30:13 GMT
The difference in weight between the steel and brass is a quite negligible at that mass. www.coyotesteel.com/assets/img/PDFs/weightspercubicfoot.pdfI own neither but aren't the biggest differences in mass distribution and handling between the US light cavalry and French 1822 light mostly differences in distal taper and profile curve? What are the differences in weights? (please don't refer me to charts, just post the two weights and distal numbers). Isn't the US m1840 what the French 1822 represented in the trials? S&K to produce the French 1822 as the US m1840? Isn't the US light more like the slightly more svelt various French 1822 officer's sabres with the hump in the grip? In the prelude to this appendix, you refer to an entirely different sword than your Mansfield&Lamb. I think you would be better served in simply creating a new review for your current sword. The mis-marked reproduction a testament to understanding the sword but I'd just not go there in the current comparisons between your current swords.
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Oct 25, 2018 1:52:53 GMT
I don't have a scale, but I think the difference in mass between the 1860 and 1822 comes mainly from the blades, fuller depth and edge grind I think. The 1822 has very finely defined crisp fullers, with a deep second fuller. The 1860 has a slightly thicker edge grind, a shallower main fuller, and of course a much much shallower secondary fuller. A destructive, useless experiment would be to cut the blades of both off at the hilt and weight them seperately. The 1860 is thinner throughout, and has a longer foible. But I think the foible also is very slightly thicker, but interestingly tapers to the edge on both sides. I have a suspicion the pommel cap on the 1860 U.S. made lighter. I have seen a few examples on eBay listings with a dent in the side, always on the side.
Sometime I will rewrite the foremost section. But my feelings towards the sword have not changed so much.
|
|
|
Post by bluetrain on Oct 25, 2018 11:14:50 GMT
This may not be the place to ask but was the French M1822 produced without noticeable change in its service life? It was still on issue in 1940, which is not to say it was used in 1940.
|
|
|
Post by Sir Thorfinn on Oct 25, 2018 12:56:27 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Svadilfari on Oct 26, 2018 5:58:50 GMT
Could the longevity of this sabre be due more to simple economics ? During the Civil War..it was found to be an "adequate" weapon and issued in fairly large numbers. Post Civil War..military tactics and weapons were changing rapidly towards a more "modern" type of army. I think the powers that be in the military establishment decided to spend more of the relatively limited budget in equipping soldiers with more up-to-date firearms, rather than bother creating a "newer" sword, which many felt was probably already largely obsolete. Plus, given the post Civil War reduction in the size of the Army, there were still large stocks of un-issued Civil War swords to be used up ?
|
|
|
Post by bluetrain on Oct 26, 2018 13:35:23 GMT
I doubt that. While it may not have been a perfect sword, the 1860 cavalry saber was more than adequate. I do not know that large stocks of unissued swords were on hand at the end of the war. In any case, it was only after the war that U.S. cavalry regiments numbered 7 and upwards were formed, which might mean that more swords were required. It is true that more modern breech-loading firearms were standardized and issued post-war, some of which were modified muskets that had been used in the war. Only in the 1890s were really different firearms issued, being the Krag and the double action Colt revolver. Things didn't really change dramatically until the beginning of WWI.
Nevertheless, the sword as a weapon was the subject of some controversy after 1900 but so was the bayonet.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 27, 2018 16:04:51 GMT
Custer had the swords packed and sent back to the fort. Disembarking from the boats and preparing for the expedition, Custer's remark was that pistols and muskets would suffice.
Teddy's Rough Riders encounters were rifle and pistol battles.
Pershing fielded seven regiments of cavalry and some photos show saddle mounted sabers and Pattons. I have seen the Patton mounted either behind the rider on the left, or in front of the rider on the right. Likewise I have seen carbine scabbards affixed to either side. The sabers that were saddle mounted generally riding under the left leg.
Even during the American Civil War, a majority of the cavalry units on both sides were regarded as mounted infantry. I'll dig up some numbers but we are looking at some hundreds of thousands of swords imported for that conflict and US federal production nearly matching that.
Francis Bannerman scooped up a lot of surplus and remarkably and in spite of WWII drives, cache of swords from state local basements and other buildings continue to yield unused stored of swords.
Jordan's Mansfield&Lamb probably one of them. There had been some barrels of swords found in a library basement and iirc, about five hundred Mansfield&Lamb in one of those similar instances in this century. There was a flock of crispys circulating about a decade ago. New old stock.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 27, 2018 16:11:24 GMT
American Civil War (1861-1865) U.S. Goverment Cavalry Saber Contracts
Ames Mfg. Co 1858-1865 Model 1860 Quantity: 79,500
Mansfield & Lamb 1861-1865 Model 1860 Quantity: 37,458
C. Roby & Co 1863-1864 Model 1860 Quantity: 32,200
Emerson & Silver 1862-1865 Model 1860 Quantity: 27,060
P.S. Justice 1861-1862 Model 1860 Quantity: 13,685
D.J. Millard 1861-1862 Model 1860 Quantity: 10,031
Providence Tool Co 1862-1863 Model 1860 Quantity: 10,434
State of Massachusetts date unknown Model 1860 Quantity 108
State of New York date unknown Model 1860 Quantity 316
35 Dealers
Imported Swords (most from Solingen, Germany) Model 1860 and Model 1840 Quantity: 179,165
Total quantity cavalry saber contracts by U.S. Goverment during the Civil War: 389,957 ~~~~~~~~~~
So, those just the contract numbers. Among the most desirable are the Providence Tool sabers and surprisingly scarce compared to the contracted numbers.
|
|
|
Post by bluetrain on Oct 28, 2018 10:56:56 GMT
I remember the Bannerman advertisements in gun magazines in the 1950s.
|
|
pgandy
Moderator
Senior Forumite
Posts: 10,296
|
Post by pgandy on Oct 28, 2018 12:50:34 GMT
I remember the Bannerman advertisements in gun magazines in the 1950s. The same here.
|
|
|
Post by bluetrain on Oct 28, 2018 16:00:23 GMT
In the February 1960 issue of Guns Magazine, Potomac Arms was advertising genuine Solingen steel swords ("very rare" for $14.95 for a Naval Officer sword and $9.95 for an NCO cutlass, both scabbards and both misidentified. The magazine itself was fifty cents. The only Bannerman ad I saw, in the November 1959 issue, listed bayonets but no swords. Lots of Civil War and .45-70 army surplus, though.
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Oct 28, 2018 23:45:32 GMT
In the February 1960 issue of Guns Magazine, Potomac Arms was advertising genuine Solingen steel swords ("very rare" for $14.95 for a Naval Officer sword and $9.95 for an NCO cutlass, both scabbards and both misidentified. The magazine itself was fifty cents. The only Bannerman ad I saw, in the November 1959 issue, listed bayonets but no swords. Lots of Civil War and .45-70 army surplus, though. 84.86 in today's tender for the cutlass.
|
|
|
Post by bluetrain on Nov 1, 2018 14:18:08 GMT
Potomac Arms only closed their doors for good just a few years ago. For a long time, they even had a few artillery pieces on the premises, mostly outside where they got wet every time the Potomac River overflowed. There were one or two French 25mm anti-tank guns. I happened to notice that one was inscribed with the date of manufacture in that flowing script that was sometimes used on guns before the war. I thought it would be a nice thing to make a rubbing of and decided to bring some paper and pencils with me the next time I visited. But in those few weeks, someone had bought all their cannons. I liked the German 75mm infantry gun the best. It still had a working breech.
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Nov 26, 2018 3:42:37 GMT
Hmm. I have an 1906 sabre, and had a similar impression. I like the 1822 and its a respectable sword. The 1906 definitely does not live up to it, but the overall package is better than what you would expect when considering each element of design individually. I still like the 1822 more T Been handling the 1860 and 1822 a bit since this review, and have to correct myself. The impression of the 1860 being heavier comes from the nose weight. Picking up either sabre, one should notice the 1860 being noticeably lighter, but more cutting oriented. The 1822 heavier but easier to manipulate the point with. The 1822, when compared with the 1822 feels ambiguous in the cut, but remains perfectly competent doing so, while it is confident in the point. . The opposite is true for the 1860, feeling ambiguous in the thrust, but remains perfectly competent doing so, while it is confident in the cut. The 1822 is heavier than the 1860, but more focused on point work with the 1860 being lighter but focused on edge work.
|
|