|
Post by airborne on Mar 28, 2020 18:19:58 GMT
Hello All I have a small collection of knives and other bladed weapons (mainly Khukuris) , to add to my collection I would now like to purchase a reasonable quality reproduction Cavalry Sabre / Sword , and have been looking at 1822 French Officers type sabre , 1840 Heavy Cavalry Sabre and 1860 Light Cavalry sabre (as long as they have that curved blade ) . I would also consider other models if anyone can recomend to me ? The problem being is that by reading various articles about these style of swords it is apparent to me that not many of them are manufactured with the correct type of distal taper ! I know how important this is in most styles of knives and swords to get the right weight and balance etc . With this in mind , can any member please offer advice on what is on offer at present from the various companies ? Also any advice on the various companies in India and quality (or lack of) of their models would be appreciated . As I live in the UK ,it is easier for me to buy from UK , Europe or India or indeed any private sellers within Europe or UK . Thanks
|
|
pgandy
Moderator
Senior Forumite
Posts: 10,296
|
Post by pgandy on Mar 28, 2020 22:18:30 GMT
I have two repros and will briefly give my opinion of each. Overall I don’t really like cavalry sabres as they are longer and a bit heavier than I’d like being on foot. Mounted and used as intended I can see it. I have several designed for the dismounted man that I like much more.
The first is Windlasses copy of an Officers M1860. I was like you trying to make up my mind when ACC offered this at $90 and I bit. The grip is my biggest objection, it is neither historically correct (an issue that I find with repros) nor conducive to good handling. I modified the grip to fit my hand and that made a world of difference. The blade is an inch or so shorter than the original which doesn’t bother me in the least. It’s an excellent cutter, I had it out this morning with satisfying results. The sharpened length of the blade is 16½” due to the etching which I don’t care to get into, this may bother some but I not me. The steel scabbard will dull a sharp edge, but this by no means is singular to this sword but that type of scabbard. I override the problem by applying masking tape to the edge before returning.
The other is Universal’s Princes of Wales. On a whole I like the finish Universal puts on their swords and they did an exceptional job on this one but do not like their EN9 steel, perhaps it’s their tempering process. I have one of their newer 1065 steel sabres that I like much more. The PoW sword has a great feel of being solid and gives confidence. I’ve never sharpened it and dry handle only due to the EN9 steel. Actually the M1860 feels better in my hand after modifying the grip, although a bit toy like compared to the PoW. I love the scabbard as it’s a leather wrapped wood core that wouldn’t dull the blade with a skeleton steel cover over that for strength. The statistics of both that I have are very similar and except for the grip I’d have a hard time telling the difference so when I feel like cutting I’m satisfied with the M1860 and not using the PoW.
I said two and was thinking two sabres but I have a third. The US Army erroneously calls it a sabre but it’s a sword and that is Windlass’ version of the M1913 Patton Sword. That’s in a class by itself. Again intended for cavalry use it’s best suited for the mounted man. It’s not nimble so not suited for an on foot one on one combat. That one impresses me. This one is solid as a rock giving confidence, outstanding hand protection, and is the only one of the lot that will give decent point.
|
|
AndiTheBarvarian
Member
Bavarianbarbarian - Semper Semprini
Posts: 9,757
Member is Online
|
Post by AndiTheBarvarian on Mar 29, 2020 2:45:13 GMT
The best cavalry saber repro I have is the Windlass 1906. It's discontinued by Windlass/MRL/ACC but still in production and available at least in Europe (I guess Marto), but out of stock in the moment afaik. Still a cavalry saber but handles close to a more agile infantry saber due to a very good mass distribution, distal taper and deeper fullers.
My Cold Steel 1860 (indeed a 1840 repro) isn't bad but simply bigger and therefore more heavy and slower, but also very impressive.
My 1860 Union Officers saber is a sharpened crowbar compared to them. Too blade heavy combined with a bad, too thin grip, a thick blade with not much distal taper and flat fullers, I assume due to the stamped in etching method. It looks nice and maybe a good cutter, like an axe is.
I don't have a 1860 trooper model but from what I've read the 1906 is better.
|
|
|
Post by pellius on Mar 29, 2020 13:06:36 GMT
If you are looking specifically for the model 1822/1840/1860 cavalry style with the Montmorency blade, there aren’t a lot of repro options that I’m aware of.
That style is my absolute favorite. It, and it’s predecessor, the unobtainable AN XI/XIII, are just gorgeous to my eye. Mmm, those serious proportions and sultry curves... Wups, sorry, I got carried away.
As far as I know, there are no repro’s with a distal taper that is even close to the originals. None are nearly thick enough at the forte, and they tend to be too linear, making the foible too thick.
I know it’s not what you asked, but finding an actual antique in good working order may be your best option. It’s the option I ended up pursuing. The 3rd generation 1822’s, Solingen-made 1840’s, and 1860’s are not all that expensive, and still pretty easy to find. For example, Dave Kelly has/had a nice Solingen-made 1840 for sale for 350 or so (I would’ve bought it, but I already have an 1840, and I’m saving up for an AN XI/XIII).
On another note, I bought a used US PoW a while back. It was a nice sword, with more of an infantry feel to it. It had nice handling. Mine was sharp, but I never cut with it. It had decent non-linear distal taper, but was not really thick enough at the hilt. My only real gripe was that, in this Florida climate, all the nooks and crannies of the mild steel hilt and scabbard were hard to keep polished and oiled. The rust goblin positively salivated for that thing. Anyway, I sold it to make room for other things, but it was a nice sword.
|
|
pgandy
Moderator
Senior Forumite
Posts: 10,296
|
Post by pgandy on Mar 29, 2020 14:03:01 GMT
You state cavalry sabre and I think every collection should have at least one. But you will enjoy an infantry sabre/sword more, they handle better. There are more cavalry sabres to choose from, being the weapon of officers and troopers alike, lancers also carried them. The officer’s models will have blade decorations that I could well do without as I’m reluctant to sharpen in that area reducing the length of the cutting portion although this has no adverse affect with me and my shortest I believe is 9½”. Only infantry offices and NCOs are authorized swords limiting the field a bit.
|
|
|
Post by pellius on Mar 29, 2020 14:06:22 GMT
I agree with pgandy. Artillery swords are worth a look, too. Some come with pretty nice curves themselves.
|
|
|
Post by airborne on Mar 29, 2020 15:36:27 GMT
Hello All , Thank you for all your advice and information as it is much needed . After reading what you say I am now also considering antique sabres (at the right price). I am also thinking about what youre saying regarding Artillery sabres (any reccomendations for type and / or manufacturers ?) . I will not be using the sabre for cutting purposes and mainly for handling and display , but I still prefer a sharpened blade . So once again any advice will be appreciated . Thanks
|
|
|
Post by airborne on Mar 29, 2020 16:34:28 GMT
Just as a possible , are there any reproduction companies selling M1829 Artillery Sabre ?
|
|
|
Post by Sir Thorfinn on Mar 29, 2020 16:44:54 GMT
A thought...years ago, I was asking the same question. !0+ sabers later, I should have gone with the advice of Dave Kelly. 1898 Argentine Cavalry Saber. HANDS DOWN the best I've felt, and they are affordable. Not crazy long, it would make a decent foot weapon. I have 2, one in very nice shape, ran about 260.00 The other was a rust covered old one I am slowly restoring. Cost... 100.00 So cheap REAL antiques are out there...
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Mar 29, 2020 16:54:09 GMT
If you are looking specifically for the model 1822/1840/1860 cavalry style with the Montmorency blade, there aren’t a lot of repro options that I’m aware of. That style is my absolute favorite. It, and it’s immediate predecessor, the unobtainable AN XI/XIII, are just gorgeous to my eye. Technically the direct predecessor of the 1822 line is the 1816, which was a pipeback.
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Mar 29, 2020 16:55:07 GMT
Just as a possible , are there any reproduction companies selling M1829 Artillery Sabre ? Deepeeka, so basically no lol. Windlass makes an 1840 artillery which is supposed to be decent.
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Mar 29, 2020 17:03:49 GMT
In terms of nice handling antiques for cutting, feel free to PM me if you want some links from my own list.
|
|
|
Post by pellius on Mar 29, 2020 17:20:21 GMT
If you are looking specifically for the model 1822/1840/1860 cavalry style with the Montmorency blade, there aren’t a lot of repro options that I’m aware of. That style is my absolute favorite. It, and it’s immediate predecessor, the unobtainable AN XI/XIII, are just gorgeous to my eye. Technically the direct predecessor of the 1822 line is the 1816, which was a pipeback. I was speaking generally but incorrectly. Thank you for the clarification/correction. It is always appreciated.
|
|
|
Post by airborne on Mar 29, 2020 20:59:21 GMT
Hello all , Thanks again for all your info and advice . Jordan , I did look at windlass 1840 model but the thickness of the blade at handle is only just over 4mm which in my opinion just doesnt fit the original dimensions and for a sword of that length is too thin .I did take some advice regarding an antique French 1829 Mounted Artillery sabre and after doing a bit research it seems to fit the bill , only thing is at present I am not sure regarding affordability ? I will look at dealers in the UK and Europe unless any of the members on the forum (from UK or Europe) are selling and I have messaged in the classified .Worst case scenario is that I will have to save a little , maybe staying at home during the corona virus will help !! Thanks again for all your help.
|
|
pgandy
Moderator
Senior Forumite
Posts: 10,296
|
Post by pgandy on Mar 29, 2020 21:24:37 GMT
Hello all , Thanks again for all your info and advice . Jordan , I did look at windlass 1840 model but the thickness of the blade at handle is only just over 4mm which in my opinion just doesnt fit the original dimensions and for a sword of that length is too thin . I’m not trying to sell you on a Windlass and something around 4 mm at the guard is historically thin, but keep in mind that by thickening the blade weight goes up and the PoB also grows.
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Mar 29, 2020 22:01:15 GMT
Hello all , Thanks again for all your info and advice . Jordan , I did look at windlass 1840 model but the thickness of the blade at handle is only just over 4mm which in my opinion just doesnt fit the original dimensions and for a sword of that length is too thin . I’m not trying to sell you on a Windlass and something around 4 mm at the guard is historically thin, but keep in mind that by thickening the blade weight goes up and the PoB also grows. On the obverse, both are kept in line with advanced distal tapering and are geometry. For example the windlass 1860 Cavalry officer weighs the same as the original 1860 trooper, despite the trooper having a thicker blade, larger grip and hilt parts, etc. This is the to the windlass starting out thin at the forte, but retaining this thickness through most of the blade combined with poor fullering.
|
|
AndiTheBarvarian
Member
Bavarianbarbarian - Semper Semprini
Posts: 9,757
Member is Online
|
Post by AndiTheBarvarian on Mar 29, 2020 22:26:01 GMT
Yeah, that's what I see when I compare my Windlass 1906 with my 1860 Officers. The 1906 starts with 8 mm = more mass near the handle. It doesn't taper extremely, just to 4 mm, but deeper fullers reduce the mass in the foible. The 1860 starts with 6 mm and tapers also to 4 mm, but with very flat fullers and much more mass in the foible. The whole mass distribution makes the 1906 a better saber by far. I didn't handle an antique saber yet but I can imagine to go further this way.
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Mar 29, 2020 23:16:02 GMT
Yeah, that's what I see when I compare my Windlass 1906 with my 1860 Officers. The 1906 starts with 8 mm = more mass near the handle. It doesn't taper extremely, just to 4 mm, but deeper fullers reduce the mass in the foible. The 1860 starts with 6 mm and tapers also to 4 mm, but with very flat fullers and much more mass in the foible. The whole mass distribution makes the 1906 a better saber by far. I didn't handle an antique saber yet but I can imagine to go further this way. Are there museums near you that allow handling or antique shops? Handle some originals and you may well throw the repros away. It is as if one is moving a stick through a sea of butter when compared.
|
|
pgandy
Moderator
Senior Forumite
Posts: 10,296
|
Post by pgandy on Mar 30, 2020 0:58:41 GMT
Ooopps. I didn’t mean that across the board just something to beware of, obviously it can be done just look at what they did in the 19th. However when dealing with repros don’t count on them getting it right and repros were what I was thinking of. A correct distal taper seems to be an ongoing issue with most especially with the lower end swords. Sometimes they get it close and a straight line tape is the best one can hope for. My Universal PoW is 7-4.6 mm while my M1860 is 6.1-2.6 mm thick (after working the foilble down). The PoW is 1 oz heavier with equal blade lengths and1/8” difference in PoB. They handle the same for all practical purposes. However the PoW has much deeper and better defined fullers throwing the weight distribution in its favour. The M1860 has the typical washed out shallow fuller. Some repros have a pronounced PoB of 8” or more.
|
|
|
Post by pellius on Mar 30, 2020 2:10:56 GMT
The m1829 Art’y is a nice choice.
|
|