|
Post by ballenxj on Dec 10, 2019 1:18:45 GMT
I have noticed reference to this on most swords for sale on sites like KOA for example. Is it better to have the point of balance closer to the hilt? I would imagine so for better handling, but please correct any errors in my thought process.
|
|
stormmaster
Member
I like viking/migration era swords
Posts: 7,647
|
Post by stormmaster on Dec 10, 2019 1:27:03 GMT
well it is not exactly true, just because a sword can be balanced at the hilt does not automatically make it handle better and it depends on the sword and a whole bunch of things, more then just pob like point of percussion, how heavy the sword feels/ does not feel, taper, etc etc. Ofc tho you dont want a sword to be balanced really far out closer to the tip either
|
|
|
Post by ballenxj on Dec 10, 2019 1:36:38 GMT
well it is not exactly true, just because a sword can be balanced at the hilt does not automatically make it handle better and it depends on the sword and a whole bunch of things, more then just pob like point of percussion, how heavy the sword feels/ does not feel, taper, etc etc. Ofc tho you dont want a sword to be balanced really far out closer to the tip either I keep hearing (reading) things like 5 or 6 inches from the hilt. Just trying to get a grip on this.
|
|
|
Post by Brian Kunz on Dec 10, 2019 1:37:39 GMT
All things being equal, a point of balance works much like a hammer does. The farther out the POB is the heavier it will hit, but also requires more strength & endurance. The closer the POB is, the lighter it hits, has more control and requires less endurance. This also boils down to what you want the tool to do.
|
|
|
Post by ballenxj on Dec 10, 2019 1:47:15 GMT
All things being equal, a point of balance works much like a hammer does. The farther out the POB is the heavier it will hit, but also requires more strength & endurance. The closer the POB is, the lighter it hits, has more control and requires less endurance. This also boils down to what you want the tool to do. Interesting, Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by Timo Nieminen on Dec 10, 2019 2:47:41 GMT
Is it better to have the point of balance closer to the hilt? For many swords, it's more important to have the pivot point (i.e., the centre of percussion, in the science/engineering sense) where you want it. E.g., close to the tip for longswords, jian, and some others, or about 8" from the tip for many sabres. The point of balance affect how the sword feels when held stationary, but doesn't directly affect how the sword feels when you swing it, or how hard it is to swing. How hard it is to swing is determined by the moment of inertia of the sword, which depends on the mass distribution (and the total mass). It's possible to have two swords with the same mass and POB and quite different moments of inertia. For example, one sword can have a blade with no distal taper (and therefore a thick heavy tip) and a big heavy pommel to counterbalance that. Another sword can have a lot of distal taper and a light pommel, and have a blade that is quite thick at the base. If they have the same length, POB, and mass, the first sword will be a lot more sluggish to swing. (The second sword can also benefit from a much stiffer base of the blade, reducing vibration at the hilt.) But for a given mass, the POB is a clue about the mass distribution: if two swords are of the same type, the same length, and the same mass, and one has a POB of 9" and the other 4", the 9" inch one is more likely to be an impossibly sluggish brute. Some people say that you should have the POB right on the guard. This is usually a recipe for really poor handling. Too close is as bad, or worse, than too far. Which is why so many swords (rapiers, longswords, jians, katanas and many more) usually have a POB of 4"-6". If the sword is very light, the location of the POB matters less.
|
|
|
Post by ballenxj on Dec 21, 2019 21:41:05 GMT
Is it better to have the point of balance closer to the hilt? For many swords, it's more important to have the pivot point (i.e., the centre of percussion, in the science/engineering sense) where you want it. E.g., close to the tip for longswords, jian, and some others, or about 8" from the tip for many sabres. The point of balance affect how the sword feels when held stationary, but doesn't directly affect how the sword feels when you swing it, or how hard it is to swing. How hard it is to swing is determined by the moment of inertia of the sword, which depends on the mass distribution (and the total mass). It's possible to have two swords with the same mass and POB and quite different moments of inertia. For example, one sword can have a blade with no distal taper (and therefore a thick heavy tip) and a big heavy pommel to counterbalance that. Another sword can have a lot of distal taper and a light pommel, and have a blade that is quite thick at the base. If they have the same length, POB, and mass, the first sword will be a lot more sluggish to swing. (The second sword can also benefit from a much stiffer base of the blade, reducing vibration at the hilt.) But for a given mass, the POB is a clue about the mass distribution: if two swords are of the same type, the same length, and the same mass, and one has a POB of 9" and the other 4", the 9" inch one is more likely to be an impossibly sluggish brute. Some people say that you should have the POB right on the guard. This is usually a recipe for really poor handling. Too close is as bad, or worse, than too far. Which is why so many swords (rapiers, longswords, jians, katanas and many more) usually have a POB of 4"-6". If the sword is very light, the location of the POB matters less. Thanks, slowly trying to absorb everything.
|
|
|
Post by alexkjren on Jan 10, 2020 15:09:37 GMT
Lots of good answers so far and I just wanted to add it's important to consider sword type and intended use. The following are generalities and oversimplifications, as you'll discover yourself the more you learn. There are exceptions within type and also swords that don't fit into any typology.
-Type X, XI, XII, XIIa, XIII swords tend to be designed and suited to cutting rather than thrusting. So balance points ranging from 4.5 - 6.5 inches are appropriate for this type of sword. One outlier that comes to mind (I'm sure there are others) is one of the swords attributed to St. Maurice of Turin which is a single handed type XI (I think but could be a Xa) that has a very long blade and balance point is approx. 8-8.5 inches from the guard. I've never handled any of the reproductions but according to those who have it has a LOT of blade presence that makes it a very effective cutter but not very nimble. According to most who've studied the original and reproductions, they theorize it was intended for use from horseback to give a very powerful and devastating cut and that a quick recovery was unnecessary because the speed of the horse would carry you away from your opponent faster than you'd be able to recover for a 2nd strike anyway.
-Type XVI/XVIa, XV/XVa (broader examples), and most XVIIIs (except XVIIIb) tend to be designed as cut & thrust swords so they need to maintain enough blade presence to cut effectively (though often not as good as SOME but not all examples of the above). Balance points between 4-5 inches are usually appropriate to these types of swords.
-Type XVa (narrow examples), XVII, and XVIIIb swords tend to be designed more for thrusting though they often still retain some cutting ability. At least enough to do damage and seriously injure/disable an unarmored opponent long enough to follow-up. These are the most common swords types used for half-swording against armored opponents. Balance points between 3.5-4.5 inches are appropriate for this type.
Hopefully that made sense, Thanks! Alex
|
|
|
Post by AndiTheBarvarian on Jan 10, 2020 15:17:31 GMT
The PoB is only informative together with all the other specs of a sword. If you have all the other specs of a sword you don't need the PoB anymore.
|
|