|
Post by perignum on Mar 3, 2021 19:20:46 GMT
Hi guys.
Quick question: Should a cut and thrust sword have more blade flex than a rapier or are they of pretty equal rigidity?
|
|
|
Post by perignum on Mar 3, 2021 20:45:29 GMT
Hello Perignum. This is an extremely broad question, what exactly constitutes a cut and thrust sword in your comparison? Would the A&A Black Prince(OAKESHOTT TYPE XVA) be considered cut and thrust in your view? It's extremely stiff. In a general sense, a stereotypical rapier should have less flex in comparison to most, think of the design intention and blade geometry. Hey there, Bro' Nathaniel. Specifically, I'm referring to a swept hilt sword, 33mm wide at the guard, tapering to 20mm a foot off the point, blade is 92cm long. The point is spatulate. It's very wide-bladed to be considered a 'true' rapier and the blade would definitely cut properly, not just lacerate. The blade sags slightly when held horizontally but isn't at all 'whippy'. It's not mine and the owner has no idea who made it. He was wondering if it's a 'too-flexible rapier'. I suggested it might be considered a cut-and-thrust sword and was just wondering if a cut and thrust sword blade had a more flexible temper, through having to accommodate the stresses of cutting etc.
|
|
|
Post by Timo Nieminen on Mar 3, 2021 21:26:23 GMT
Quick question: Should a cut and thrust sword have more blade flex than a rapier or are they of pretty equal rigidity? They often will have more flex. A rapier blade is very long, which means it needs to be stiffer per unit length to have the same resistance to bending, and the base of the blade needs to be stiffer to prevent too much sagging. This demand for stiffness means that the blade needs to be fairly thick. To not be too heavy, the blade therefore needs to be fairly narrow. Thick and narrow is a recipe for a mediocre cutter, or worse. A cut-and-thrust sword should have a wider blade, and if it's still fairly narrow, it will need to be thin -> more flex. More generally, a cut-and-thrust sword can be quite stiff, as long as it can be thick enough without being too heavy. Generally, shorter cut-and-thrust swords can be quite stiff. Specifically, I'm referring to a swept hilt sword, 33mm wide at the guard, tapering to 20mm a foot off the point, blade is 92cm long. The point is spatulate. It's very wide-bladed to be considered a 'true' rapier and the blade would definitely cut properly, not just lacerate. The blade sags slightly when held horizontally but isn't at all 'whippy'. It's not mine and the owner has no idea who made it. He was wondering if it's a 'too-flexible rapier'. I suggested it might be considered a cut-and-thrust sword and was just wondering if a cut and thrust sword blade had a more flexible temper, through having to accommodate the stresses of cutting etc. The temper (and heat treatment, in general) doesn't affect how easily a blade flexes. It does affect how far it can flex without damage, and what happens if it flexes too far. Stiffness is mostly determined by the thickness of the blade (it's also affected by the details of the cross-section, and the width, and the overall flexibility is affected by the length).
|
|
|
Post by perignum on Mar 3, 2021 22:23:05 GMT
Quick question: Should a cut and thrust sword have more blade flex than a rapier or are they of pretty equal rigidity? They often will have more flex. A rapier blade is very long, which means it needs to be stiffer per unit length to have the same resistance to bending, and the base of the blade needs to be stiffer to prevent too much sagging. This demand for stiffness means that the blade needs to be fairly thick. To not be too heavy, the blade therefore needs to be fairly narrow. Thick and narrow is a recipe for a mediocre cutter, or worse. A cut-and-thrust sword should have a wider blade, and if it's still fairly narrow, it will need to be thin -> more flex. More generally, a cut-and-thrust sword can be quite stiff, as long as it can be thick enough without being too heavy. Generally, shorter cut-and-thrust swords can be quite stiff. Specifically, I'm referring to a swept hilt sword, 33mm wide at the guard, tapering to 20mm a foot off the point, blade is 92cm long. The point is spatulate. It's very wide-bladed to be considered a 'true' rapier and the blade would definitely cut properly, not just lacerate. The blade sags slightly when held horizontally but isn't at all 'whippy'. It's not mine and the owner has no idea who made it. He was wondering if it's a 'too-flexible rapier'. I suggested it might be considered a cut-and-thrust sword and was just wondering if a cut and thrust sword blade had a more flexible temper, through having to accommodate the stresses of cutting etc. The temper (and heat treatment, in general) doesn't affect how easily a blade flexes. It does affect how far it can flex without damage, and what happens if it flexes too far. Stiffness is mostly determined by the thickness of the blade (it's also affected by the details of the cross-section, and the width, and the overall flexibility is affected by the length). Thanks. That's very informative. So, the sword in question sounds like it was built as a swept hilt cut-and-thrust rather than a rapier. Is there an accepted cut-off point for the width of a cutting blade? I imagine the point of percussion for the sword in question is round about 30cm off the point, which would give a blade width of 20-25mm where it connects.
|
|
|
Post by Timo Nieminen on Mar 4, 2021 0:21:07 GMT
That's narrower than most, but OK. Double-edged cut-thrust blades are usually wider than that, often about 25-30mm where one expects to connect. But 20-25mm cut-thrust swords are out there. A narrower width like this is more common on single-edged swords, but there are plenty of examples of 1.5 edged swords (i.e., double-edged near the tip) with this width.
For a modern sword, it's hard to say for sure what was intended. It might be meant to be a rapier, but they put a short and relatively wide blade on it because they didn't know any better.
|
|