|
Post by Jordan Williams on Nov 25, 2019 16:52:24 GMT
It's 3 times as thick as it should be in the foible and the blade etching looks like a toddler designed it. But I am a snob. Or am I because asking companies to charge 200+ dollars for something they can literally copy and paste doesn't seen that hard to ask, it's not even that much more time on a belt grinder.
Personally I would go for one of their swords that has better distal taper, or maybe complements their lack of distal taper better. The original "crooked sabres" of this period are light nimble and quick. Not clunky and "with great authority" that to me describes the quality of a table leg.
That said if you like it go for it. Just know that it's not going to handle well when compared to how it ought to. It does looks quite nice when you only examine it's looks alone.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 25, 2019 16:54:57 GMT
I think there are certainly lovely qualities to the sword, but the proportions are likely off base.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 25, 2019 17:04:05 GMT
|
|
pgandy
Moderator
Senior Forumite
Posts: 10,296
|
Post by pgandy on Nov 25, 2019 17:37:36 GMT
I’d say it depends on your intent. If you find beauty in the sword by all means. Universal normally makes fine show pieces. If you intend to do much cutting with it consider that EN9 steel is somewhat on the soft side, not that it will damage as such on the usual backyard targets but I find on my P1796 is not as sharp after a cutting session as before. No real problem as it’s easy to touch up the edge. It’s possibly a bit heavy, but that’s subjective as is the 7” PoB. Also, and just guessing, with that much curvature the sword may tend to torque if you strike near the apex of the curve, should be no problem using the distal end of the blade with slicing cuts. The foible is a bit on the thick side but not out of line with many repros. It may cut and handle better with a thinner foible. I find EN9 easy to work with and shouldn’t be much of a problem to thin the foible if that’s your desire. The scabbard is of brass and being softer than the steel blade should not dull a keen edge as fast as a steel scabbard. I have a couple of swords that I admire for their beauty such as their Prince of Wales and am satisfied dry handling.
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Nov 25, 2019 17:56:46 GMT
For reference it weighs more than my 36" blade 3 bar French 1822LCS.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 25, 2019 18:04:09 GMT
For reference it weighs more than my 36" blade 3 bar French 1822LCS. Yikes. These replicas need a lot of work, don't they? They're basically display pieces.
|
|
|
Post by pellius on Nov 25, 2019 18:45:32 GMT
For reference it weighs more than my 36" blade 3 bar French 1822LCS. Mmmmm. The m1822 family. My favorite! With the AN XI(II)’s getting all the love, the 1822’s are still relatively affordable, too. Maybe not quite as fancy, but still pretty nice.
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Nov 25, 2019 20:19:09 GMT
It's 3 times as thick as it should be in the foible and the blade etching looks like a toddler designed it. But I am a snob. Or am I because asking companies to charge 200+ dollars for something they can literally copy and paste doesn't seen that hard to ask, it's not even that much more time on a belt grinder. Personally I would go for one of their swords that has better distal taper, or maybe complements their lack of distal taper better. The original "crooked sabres" of this period are light nimble and quick. Not clunky and "with great authority" that to me describes the quality of a table leg. That said if you like it go for it. Just know that it's not going to handle well when compared to how it ought to. It does looks quite nice when you only examine it's looks alone. Would you be willing to grind it down for me? I could, but the issue lies in multiple areas, and the style of distal taper the India forges use, where most originals have very complex taper starting quite thick, the India sword starts thin and has a barely linear taper.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 26, 2019 16:32:15 GMT
Would you be willing to grind it down for me? I could, but the issue lies in multiple areas, and the style of distal taper the India forges use, where most originals have very complex taper starting quite thick, the India sword starts thin and has a barely linear taper. Some of these sabers can be as much as 8mm thick at the base, yes? Often tapering to 2mm or less?
|
|
|
Post by AndiTheBarvarian on Nov 26, 2019 16:40:05 GMT
My CS "1860"/1840 and my Windlass 1906 start with over 8 mm at the guard (1/3 in?). The 1906 tapers very fast to 4 mm. Much depends on the fullers too.
|
|
pgandy
Moderator
Senior Forumite
Posts: 10,296
|
Post by pgandy on Nov 26, 2019 17:45:19 GMT
My Windlass M1860 OM measures 6.1-3.5 mm. A very good cutter. Universal M1902; 6.4-3.9 mm. Is fast and nimble. Cutting? Still testing. Windlass M1840 NCO 4.7-3.2 mm. Fast, nimble and reasonably good cutter. Excellent at point work. Universal Princess of Wales 7.0-4.6 mm. Handles about like the Windlass M1860 OM.
|
|
|
Post by AndiTheBarvarian on Nov 26, 2019 18:14:19 GMT
My Windlass 1906 has a much better mass distribution and handling than my Windlass 1860 OM, strong fast distal taper and wide, deeper fullers. When I compare them I see what makes a good mass distribution, I assume many antiqies are better yet.
|
|
pgandy
Moderator
Senior Forumite
Posts: 10,296
|
Post by pgandy on Nov 26, 2019 20:50:20 GMT
I’m not surprised the M1906 handles better. They sold out before I ordered but will get one if another run. The M1860 OM does cut well.
|
|