LK Chen sword takes set on Skallagrim test:/

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.

skallagrim does say due to how thin the blade is he does not recommend it for hard cutting

All steel will take a set if pushed beyond it's capacity, and Skallagrim does abusive testing.

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.

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.

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

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 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.

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.