|
|
Post by Tiers1 on Jun 18, 2020 23:57:41 GMT
I was within an inch of buying an LK Chen until I saw the vid Skallagrim posted today. His thru-tempered white arc jian took a set (and a pretty good one at that) from cutting branches. Yes it is a thin sword but from what I understand thinness does not make a blade more likely to take a set. Skallagrim also wrote the damage off quickly and said that there is a 'pretty likely' chance any thin blade will take a set when torqued in a target...which I found a bit strange...
I do think LK Chen is doing their best but this again for me is the issue with any lower priced Chinese made swords. You may get a gem and you may not. With the wages these guys are paid and their quotas there just isn't enough general caring going around to ensure everything was done right. What a shame I wanted to buy an LK Chen.
|
|
|
|
Post by randomnobody on Jun 19, 2020 1:28:09 GMT
Haven't seen the video, but a thin blade setting from torque imparted from cutting into a tree branch is every what I expect.
Skall's incredibly hard on his swords and pushedy a dangerous ideology to his fan base, that one should be able to do these things with their swords and any failure is the sword's fault.
Swords are not for cutting trees. They will be damaged.
|
|
|
|
Post by pellius on Jun 19, 2020 2:07:22 GMT
I don’t know anything about the sword or company, but they report the sword stats (in part) as follows:
Blade only weight: 600g (1 lb. 5.16 oz)
Sword only weight: approx. 810g (1 lb. 12.5 oz)
Blade length: 95 cm (37.5") Tang length: 16.5 cm (6.5")
Total length: 111.5 cm, (44")
Smooth tapering
Width at hand guard: 30 mm, Width at tip: 17 mm
Thickness: 7 mm - 2.5 mm at the tip
POB: approx. 20 cm (8") from hand guard
Blade Profile: diamond 4 surfaces
I’m no expert, but a 44” one-hand jian seems a bit long to me. Those sound like a rapier stats.
Regardless, with a blade that’s over 3’ long and only 1.2” wide it its widest and an overall sword weight of only 1 lb 12.5 oz, chopping wood would certainly seem likely to bend the blade. Even an exceptional spring temper on such a blade might be insufficient to overcome that level of localized stress.
Just thinking out loud.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tiers1 on Jun 19, 2020 2:23:43 GMT
Respectfully, I have seen swords deal with wood and worse without taking a permanent set on many occassions. Wood is not what they are designed for, for but wood is not beyond the capabilities of modern steel and heat treatment; incidentally Skall cut fairly slim branches and not trees. Also respectfully, Jason Woodard,Matthew Jensen, Zombie tools etc. are hard on their swords...not Skallagrim so much from what I have seen. And yes many of the swords those guys test are overbuilt- but they smack them against steel rods and granite, bicycle frames, whatever. This video was tree branches.
I don't mean to knock LK Chen, but I have been collecting, reading, testing, and watching for too long to agree that a sword can't deal with some branches without damage, even if it is thin. Another odd thing from the review...Skallagrim says something to the effect of this- "and it has excellent edge retention...well, where it cut alot the edge is dulled...it just bites the paper a bit...but down here where it didn't cut anything its still sharp, very impressive"...weird.
|
|
stormmaster
Member
I like viking/migration era swords
Posts: 7,714
|
Post by stormmaster on Jun 19, 2020 2:40:19 GMT
skallagrim does say due to how thin the blade is he does not recommend it for hard cutting
|
|
|
|
Post by pellius on Jun 19, 2020 2:47:29 GMT
Tiers1 - I have not seen the video. I have straight-up chopped wood with a couple of different swords where the blades later cleaned up and showed no damage at all. But they were designed with a blade geometry that had heavy/abusive cutting in mind (TFW, ZT, J&L, LWF, and Warpath Forge).
I will readily admit I’ve never cut anything at all with this type of blade, though. Dunno - maybe the design is tougher than it looks. I have a Hanwei/Rodell “cutting jian” that is shorter and slightly broader, and is specifically marketed to be for cutting. So you may well be right.
I’m certainly not advocating for LK Chen. I have no experience with them at all. Their prices put them up against a number of mid-tier makers with long-standing reputations. I would wholeheartedly agree with your skepticism, and maybe consider alternative makers.
Whatever you choose, I hope you will share your impressions and results with the forum.
|
|
Zen_Hydra
Moderator
Born with a heart full of neutrality
Posts: 2,659 
|
Post by Zen_Hydra on Jun 19, 2020 2:59:24 GMT
All steel will take a set if pushed beyond it's capacity, and Skallagrim does abusive testing.
|
|
|
|
Post by randomnobody on Jun 19, 2020 4:02:32 GMT
Respectfully, LK Chen swords are made in exact replica of period historic swords and are designed for martial arts use, not brush clearing.
Respectfully, branches are parts of trees.
Respectfully, the other folks you mentioned, and skall alike, all state their testing is deliberately "destructive" in most cases. Especially Matthew Jensen. Their tests should not be considered normal use for any sword, ever.
Blah blah, there's a difference between a "sword" and a sword that too many fail to comprehend. Just because some "swords" can survive some things, doesn't make doing so the mark of a good sword.
Blah blah blah stats/measurements/f=ma/technique/torque.
Everything is fine. This is a sword.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tiers1 on Jun 19, 2020 5:15:49 GMT
So are period correct parameters for martial weapons in use hundreds of years ago prior to advances is metallurgy and heat-treatment protocols are all we should shoot for? we should judge based upon a time when fabricators had difficulty getting repeatable results due to lack of steel purity and measurement equipment? when someone was considered to have near-mystical powers because they had a sword of wootz, since it was both hard and tough? I suppose then there was no need for the wootz trade because there is really no need to get more hardness and toughness out of a martial weapon so long as it was good enough and the weight and balance were correct. Historically they did everything they could to get a better sword...why is it somehow wrong to ask more of modern recreations of swords that are constructed with several hundred additional years of know-how? I think that makes us no different from our forebears that actually used the things. Do you think Chinese man at arms would feel I somehow disrespected the martial and material heritage of his weapon if I offered him a blade made of modern tool steel and expertly heat-treated? I don't think he would. I think he would be quite happy with the sword. And I'll bet if I told him it could clear brush without edge deformation or taking a set, he wouldn't mind that either. I do know the difference between a sword and a sword, and high levels of performance and appropriate geometry and weight are not mutually exclusive. Quite frankly though I am going beyond my scope...I am not making an argument for super-steels and heat-treatments or what-have-you, I am making an argument that it is likely within reasonable parameters that this sword, despite its geometry, wouldn't bend from tree branches and a bad tatami cut.
There is a big difference between a tree and a branch, despite the fact that branches are parts of trees. Yes they state that their testing is destructive but what they actually do is apples and oranges. Unless someone has the absolute purest definition of what sword use is (swords should only ever make contact with skin or perhaps a gambeson) I stand by, and of course it is just my personal opinion, but I stand by that what Skallagrim did to that Jian is not destructive.
And most importantly by far. When I said respectfully, I actually meant it. I meant to speak with respect to everyone here, because I know how sensitive people can be and wanted to avoid any negativity. When you said respectfully (along with the blah blahs blahs for variety I suppose), I am pretty sure it was meant to be obnoxious; on some level you decided I deserved a response which was rude. I don't come here much anymore but I think I remember this was the forum where people tended to be kind to each-other, or at least kept things civil. Well most of you guys were and thanks for that. I am tired of anonymous mud-slinging but likely don't have the self-control to not respond to whatever rude response this individual will cook up for me next so I will leave the thread. Please take my word for it that I am not trying to be thin-skinned, I am just so tired of this sort of thing. You can always choose the be rude/condescending option and then argue that the recipient not be thin-skinned....or you can just choose to not be rude and condescending. Have a lovely night.
|
|
|
|
Post by leviathansteak on Jun 19, 2020 6:04:10 GMT
Having just seen the video myself, im not of the opinion that what skall did was abusive. You would probably expect hard contacts like that in a fight, should your sword contact armour, shields or opposing weapons.
I think, simply put, the blade was too thin. Look at how it flexes against the log, even if it was a sparring weapon that seems a bit too flexible for my liking.
|
|
|
|
Post by randomnobody on Jun 19, 2020 7:22:43 GMT
Yeah, that's a lot of words I don't have time for right now, but a quick perusal yields: Yes.
A couple of guys in a small shop, using methods not different to those from thousands of years ago, working to create exact replicas of existing antiques, and then selling them for a few hundred US dollars should not be expected to yield Absolute Perfection in Steelcraft.
That's for the guys with top-of-the-line scientific equipment, using very specific, often proprietary alloy blends, who charge thousands or tens of thousands for each individual sword.
We often underestimate the swords and sword makers of old. These guys were dedicated to their craft, it wasn't just their own livelihood, but anybody who carried one of their swords. They used the best they had to make the best they could. Most swords today use the cheapest they can get and the minimal effort they can get away with. LK Chen at least looks to be trying to change this, and I respect that. They've done their research, they know their stuff, and the product their putting out is exactly what they want to make.
Call Angel Swords. Tell them you want to trim your tree with a $300 sword. It won't end well.
Yeah, I'm cranky. Someone who uses "respectfully" at the beginning of every new point they're trying to make isn't looking for verification or even correction, they only want validation.
Yes, a $300 sword, made in exact form and fashion to antique originals, should be perfectly capable of cutting tree branches, a very unpredictable substance, with no damage. You're absolutely right. I'm gonna go over there now.
|
|
AndiTheBarvarian
Member
"Lord of the Memes"
Bavarianbarbarian - Semper Semprini
Posts: 10,308
|
Post by AndiTheBarvarian on Jun 19, 2020 8:07:22 GMT
I think they did a great job with making such long and thin blades that can cut through mat rolls and one can't expect more.
I doubt that the antique blades were able to do this in general.
So you see modern metallurgy and craftsmanship.
If any target is tough enough to stop the swing just for a moment such a blade will bend.
|
|
stormmaster
Member
I like viking/migration era swords
Posts: 7,714
|
Post by stormmaster on Jun 19, 2020 8:36:58 GMT
every sword, regardless of how well made, if used on a hard target might or might not get damaged, historically swords get damaged all the time in all kinds of situations, especially with this particular piece being made to og specs with a really thin and long blade, 1 bad cut can easily cause it to take a set, so honestly im not surprised
|
|
pgandy
Moderator
Senior Forumite
Posts: 10,296
|
Post by pgandy on Jun 19, 2020 13:22:20 GMT
LK Chen is making swords close as possible to surviving historical swords. Who is to say that the original in its day would not have bent under similar conditions? I like what the company is doing and hope to have one of their swords some day. As for Skall, many people take his work as gospel, unfortunately. Who is to say that possibly in that case he didn’t get his edge alignment off just enough... If you want something historically correct, or close to it, get something by LK Chen. If you want a sword for cutting timber or whatever then get sword or whatever tool for the job. I know of no sword that recommended for cutting into trees. The rule of thumb is if you can’t cut through it don’t cut it. I’ve watched Japanese practitioners bend their katanas with such frequency there would be an onsite smith to repair them. I dare say these practitioners were using katanas far above the $500 range.
|
|
pgandy
Moderator
Senior Forumite
Posts: 10,296
|
Post by pgandy on Jun 19, 2020 13:35:26 GMT
Here is a post by Rufus that sums it up well. sbg-sword-forum.forums.net/thread/61217/why-people-cut-stuff?page=1&scrollTo=824641“Swords are meat cutter, that is what they were designed to do. There is no debate on that. However, tatami, bamboo, leather wrapped grass, etc. were designed to be ANALOGS to the meat mechs that swords were designed to kill. In that respect, they are legitimate targets and were, and are, used to test blades after manufacturing and for training purposes. Any sword that fails during a legitimate test on one of these targets is not a good blade. I would add soda bottles to this list, even though they aren't "historic" targets, they have been proven to be safe through tens of thousands of successful tests. "Abuse" is using the sword on a target that does not make a good analog of a meat mech. Targets such as these are tree limbs, steel barrels, glass, 2x4's, ice, bricks, anvils, hot gun barrels, and so forth. These targets do not simulate the density and composition of a meat mech, and therefore they can do serious damage to a sword. If the sword is broken or chipped, it proves nothing other than abuse, and anything can break if it is abused. But with that said, it sure seems to be a hard-wired human need to see just how far we can push something before it breaks. We have some sort of cosmic need to go faster, hit harder, jump higher, or otherwise push the limits. I can't explain it other than to say it's just how we are. Especially dudes. I hope that clears it up a bit.” |
|
Zen_Hydra
Moderator
Born with a heart full of neutrality
Posts: 2,659
|
Post by Zen_Hydra on Jun 19, 2020 17:53:11 GMT
Skallagrim managed to damage an Albion Principe doing the same sort of branch cutting.
Are we going to suggest that Albion is making insufficiently constructed blades because of it?
If you want to do stupid things with sword, you either must accept that you are going to damage them, or you buy sharpened crowbars which can take the abuse.
|
|
|
|
Post by Aeliascent on Jun 19, 2020 19:02:57 GMT
I just saw the review of the Albion Principe that Zen Hydra mentioned. In the review, Skallagrim addressed the edge deformation on the sword: "if you... shape it to optimize [cutting power], it's not going to be quite as strong because it's so thin... it's a price you have to pay for such cutting power."
As we know, the White Arc is a very long and thin sword, and it's known for it's cutting power. A long straight sword capable of powerful cuts? Seems like it performs as we should reasonably expect.
|
|
|
|
Post by howler on Jun 19, 2020 20:12:30 GMT
Here is a post by Rufus that sums it up well. sbg-sword-forum.forums.net/thread/61217/why-people-cut-stuff?page=1&scrollTo=824641“Swords are meat cutter, that is what they were designed to do. There is no debate on that. However, tatami, bamboo, leather wrapped grass, etc. were designed to be ANALOGS to the meat mechs that swords were designed to kill. In that respect, they are legitimate targets and were, and are, used to test blades after manufacturing and for training purposes. Any sword that fails during a legitimate test on one of these targets is not a good blade. I would add soda bottles to this list, even though they aren't "historic" targets, they have been proven to be safe through tens of thousands of successful tests. "Abuse" is using the sword on a target that does not make a good analog of a meat mech. Targets such as these are tree limbs, steel barrels, glass, 2x4's, ice, bricks, anvils, hot gun barrels, and so forth. These targets do not simulate the density and composition of a meat mech, and therefore they can do serious damage to a sword. If the sword is broken or chipped, it proves nothing other than abuse, and anything can break if it is abused. But with that said, it sure seems to be a hard-wired human need to see just how far we can push something before it breaks. We have some sort of cosmic need to go faster, hit harder, jump higher, or otherwise push the limits. I can't explain it other than to say it's just how we are. Especially dudes. I hope that clears it up a bit.” I can see people getting confused because they compare certain machete type utility blades (from all cultures worldwide) which can and have been used defensively with dedicated swords designed to function in a narrow fighting spectrum against flesh and cloth. Hacking at trees with katana, longsword, smallsword, spadroon, rapier, etc...is foolish, but I suppose there are SOME dedicated sword types (maybe shorter cutlass shape) that can do a minimal job of EDC tasks in a pinch, but you still aren't going to cut a tree down this it. Beyond tree limbs & 2x4's you will certainly have to move on to light saber for the steel barrels, glass, bricks, anvils, gun barrels...but oh what I would give for such a fantastic thing. |
|
LeMal
Member
Posts: 1,159
|
Post by LeMal on Jun 20, 2020 0:11:43 GMT
And let's all keep in mind one of the biggest reasons machetes can cut wood despite being thin: they're SHORT.
The longer the blade, the more that optimizing thinness for cutting (even if just in the foible with good distal taper) makes it vulnerable with harder targets.
Like, exponentially so as length increases.
It's just a trade-off one considers, then either accepts or doesn't.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 20, 2020 0:33:11 GMT
I really dislike how the abuse of these swords has become normalized.
|
|
