|
Post by Tom K. (ianflaer) on Sept 26, 2008 2:55:27 GMT
My understanding is that the CT versions came back from the forge too heavy and too thick. then Angus took them and made them right. so what does that mean? well from what I've heard the original version doesn't have much in the way of distal taper, while I can plainly see the distal taper on the CT I own. I don't have calipers so I can't give you exact measurements but if I look at the cutting edge through a hole in my belt I can see lots of light around the blade when I'm near the tip and as I slide the blade across the hole I can see it get thicker very smoothly until it is almost half again as wide as the hole right above the crossguard. I think the normal ones don't have that much taper. this also should improve the handling and harmonics of the blade. I can tell you the sweet spot is not just one small spot but actually quite long. seriously there's like a three inch long section that doesn't vibrate. this is SOOO much better than my Cold Steel sword it isn't funny. I also believe the fact that Mr. Trim trimmed ( ) them to his personal spex that they will be more consistant.
|
|
|
Post by kidcasanova on Sept 26, 2008 3:28:47 GMT
Ian you are also correct. VA sent all the overweight ones to Gus for the "treatment."
And I got around to weighing mine: 2 lbs 10 oz. Oddly, same as yours. I can't decide if it's coincidence or if Gus did that good of a job making them consistent. My Windlass Fantasy Viking weighed 3 lbs 9 oz, which was why I thought this sword was so much closer to 2 lbs. It feels so light and nimble!
Mike, can you tell us what your tuned Arming sword weighs?
|
|
|
Post by Tom K. (ianflaer) on Sept 26, 2008 4:07:48 GMT
3 lbs 9 oz!!! good GOD man do you use that thing to cut or hammer? no need to go to the gym after using that one I'd think.
My money is on Pretty darn consitant, what odds will you give me?
Doesn't Mike have one of each? he could do a side-by-side (with music)
I'd also like to know how the CT holds up to the comparison with a similar Maker's Mark series. MIKE?
|
|
|
Post by kidcasanova on Sept 26, 2008 4:23:00 GMT
Mike's experience and the fact that he's handled the swords in question makes his opinion rather tantamount in this topic. The Windlass doesnt feel as heavy as it is. I thought it was half a pound lighter, to be honest. It's nicely balanced enough that it's not a clunker to move. But after handling the tuned AT303, I think I'm relegating the Windlass to "pretty eye candy" detail. And it exceeds brilliantly at it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 26, 2008 12:13:01 GMT
so basically the CTs tend to have a better geometry and weight, sounds good, thanks.
|
|
|
Post by ShooterMike on Sept 26, 2008 14:58:19 GMT
Let me see if I can clear up a bit of confusion. Here's what I know, as told to me by either Gus Trim and/or Sonny Suttles: The prototypes for the Valiant Armoury Practical Line (all 4, two sharps and two blunts) were built by Gus Trim. Sonny Suttles (owner of Valiant Armoury) negotiated with a Chinese forge for replication. They were loosely based on existing models in the ATrim line. The prototypes were all of lenticular cross section and roughly equate to Oakeshott Type X/XII and XIII hybrids. These are what Gus refers to as 'tweeners since they kind of fit between types in the Oakshott typology, as many original artifacts do. Basically, they were simplified versions of existing high-performance ATrim swords. The forge in China erroneously built them without the proper distal taper and with flattened diamond cross sections from the end of fuller to the tip. They erroneously used welded rod construction in the tang. That wasn't supposed to happen, but since the welding was done prior to heat treatment, it has worked well in all be a very few cases. The swords were quite varied in thickness and degree of taper (or not). This resulted in swords with more mass at the tip than they were designed to have. Some were worse than others. The partucularly bad ones were sorted out and set aside. The rest were sold. The unaltered ones folks have are the best of the original bunch. A bit later, Sonny and Gus negotiated for Gus to "repair" the ones that were too heavy or out-of-spec. While the "custom tuned" ones started out as too thick and thus too heavy, the end results are swords that are thicker at the guard (a very good thing) and distal taper much more toward the tip (a better thing). Also, the blade geometry has been ground into the originally specified lenticular cross section (or in some a slight hexagonal version). IMO these are much superior swords to the originals. I "had" an original sharp longsword. When I handled the first "tuned" one I liked it so well that I talked gus into giving the same treatment to my original. DRASTIC upgrade IMO, and well worth the investment. I have a "tuned" arming sword like ianflaer's due to arrive any day. I can't wait to try it out on bottles and tatami, albeit left handed. As for comparisons to actual Angus Trim-built swords, I would rate the VA Practicals at about 80% as good. And the 20% difference is very noticeable. When comparing like models, anyone who handles swords (and would be reading this page) can easily tell the difference by just doing a little cutting with them. And the Maker's Mark swords are some of the best of the ATrim offerings, though some of them are "light cutters" made for unarmoured combat, and thus not as robust as the VA Practical models were designed to be. Bottom Line IMO: The first VA Practicals sold are good swords, especially for the money. The "tuned" versions are quite a bit better swords, especially for the money. Actually ATrim swords are noticeably better than either, but are close to double the price. As stated above, this information is all based on what Sonny and Gus told me. I may have garbled some of it in my (ever-worsening) memory. But I hope it helps shed a little light on what has happend to get us where we are today.
|
|
|
Post by enkidu on Sept 26, 2008 16:16:27 GMT
I have a VA Practical longsword original version at home ( it's very well made, and even if it doesnt have a flat section it doesnt feel too tip heavy ) and a Maker's mark triple fullers coming soon, i'll post my impressions as soon i get it. But from the review Mike did on the triple fullers i highly doubt that the VA practical could be favorably compared to it even if its a very well done blade ( without speaking of the custom work Brian did on mine ). Keep in mind that they are in a different price range. One thing's certain, the VA's arming and longsword are both incredibly good choices and an unbelieavable value for the price even more if you consider the improvements made to the line. Great review by the way Ianflaer !
|
|
|
Post by Tom K. (ianflaer) on Sept 26, 2008 19:56:43 GMT
ok so my question now is this: am I right to say that once the custom tuned swords are gone it's a done deal? or will there be others?
I really like the thick blade at the cross that tapers out to a well balanced blade. Mike, you said not all the makers mark are built heavy like that, which ones would be, or how do I find out myself? I mean I guess I could just ask Mr. Trim, but I'm not sure I'll be buying another Atrim real soon (saving for that albion and buying tatami to cut with this one) so I'd rather not waste his time. but still I could be persuaded perhaps.
|
|
|
Post by ShooterMike on Sept 26, 2008 20:57:55 GMT
I don't know if Sonny will do another run with the new forge or not. I suppose it probably depends partly on how much demand there is. But if he makes more, I bet they will all be closer to the "tuned" version. You can get a rough estimate, to tell how an ATrim is built and will basically handle by looking at the width of the blade at the cross, length of the blade, length of the hilt, total weight, and the PoB. This doesn't tell it all. But it gives a decent clue when comparing swords from Gus. Though this method is not reliable when comparing swords from different makers. All Gus' swords start out with either 0.250" or 0.262" stock for the normal ones, or 0.360" stock for the LPM models. So they are about that thickness at the guard. The big difference comes from how much distal and profile taper he puts into the blade. For instance, I have two Maker's Mark longswords. One is the triple-fuller Type XIII I reviewed here. It has a 31-inch blade, 7-inch grip and weighs 2 lbs 10 ozs, with a PoB of just past 4.5 inches. At first glance, that looks like it would be a solid, anchor-like sword. If it were 1.5 inches wide at the guard it would be. But a look at the pictures shows a sword that has a very wide blade. It's almost 2.5 inches wide at the guard and it doesn't have a lot of profile taper since it's a Type XIII. So what you end up with for those numbers is a very light-feeling hand-n-a-half that's really a single-hander with an additional 3 inches of grip. To get down to that weight it has radical distal taper to the point that the middle of the blade is probably only 0.160-0.180" thick. That's thinner than the point on a lot of swords. And it makes for a great cutter that handles super-fast. But it has a lot of flex and wouldn't be popular with folks who like their swords "built like a tank." On the other hand, I also have a Maker's Mark Type XIII Flared Shoulders that has almost a 33-inch blade, 8-inch grip and weighs 3 lbs 4 ozs, with a PoB of only 4 inches. Looking at the stats and the pictures you can see a slightly wider blade that's only 2 inches longer, but the sword weights 10 ozs more. This sword would obviously have much less distal taper which gives it more mass near the tip. Thus it isn't nearly as fast in the area of handling. But it hits MUCH harder and is a massive cutter. Adam and Tsafa cut tatami with this sweet beast while they were here. Adam pronounced it the best cutting sword he had ever seen, and that includes some nihonto as well as a few purpose-built goza cutters. A third Maker's Mark I have handled is the Type XII Accent Fullered single hander. The blade is just shy of 31 inches, the weight is 2 lbs 6 ozs and the PoB is out at 5.5 inches. That seems like a sword that would handle quickly and have authority in the cut. However, I found it to be very difficult to cut with as it has a lot of distal taper in a linear fashion. And in my experience, swords that taper linearly all the way to the tip just don't cut well for me. So while the PoB is fairly far out on this one, it only worked well for me as a thrusting sword. But then, I might have just been having a bad day as the sword felt like a dream in dry handling. I guess the bottom line is, look at the numbers and you can get a rudimentary idea of how something will handle. But a small change in one number can have a drastic effect on handling. Also, two swords with similar numbers can handle totally differently. So, the only way to really know is to try it yourself or ask someone who knows. Heh, heh... I guess that's about as confusing as I can make it huh?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 28, 2008 21:48:03 GMT
"They erroneously used welded rod construction "
Excuse me if this sounds like a stupid question, but does the above statement mean that all of the atrims, even the custom repaired models, have welded on tangs? I don't really know a whole lot about swords yet I suppose, but from what I've read isn't this a really really bad thing? Or did that only happen to a certain batch that didn't make it into circulation or something? I just ordered one of the regular arming swords (NOT the custom tuned) out of curiosity, but I'm thinking of canceling....
|
|
|
Post by YlliwCir on Sept 28, 2008 22:47:46 GMT
Logan, your concern is understandable. The VA Practicals were supposed to be like the regular Atrims in that the tang was all of a piece with the very end threaded. What happened was that the forge made them with a decent tang and then welded a threaded rod to the very end. Not an ideal thing in my opinon tho, I've had no issues with it. In the one case I know of a failure, it was the rod itself that broke and not the weld. The reliabilty of this method of manufacture is mentioned in this review and discussed in the thread at SFI I supplied in the link therein; /index.cgi?board=swordreviews&action=display&thread=4340
This type of tang is not to be confused with a "rat tail" where the threaded rod is welded directly to the shoulders of the blade which is indeed very bad.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 3, 2008 11:24:07 GMT
I received mine yesterday. It is very nice, except for the nut on the pommel.
The nut is slightly mangled. The nut has screwdriver slots, and probably the screwdriver slipped a few times during tightening and did the damage. The nut does not fit flush, but protrouds out a distance about equal to the width of a quarter on one side, and slightly more on the opposite side, so it is noticeable.
My wife, who opened the box, thought something was broken. It was the first thing she pointed out when I got home.
I will contact the seller to see if a replacement is available or if there are other alternatives.
Otherwise, the sword is a beauty, expecially the blade.
|
|
|
Post by Tom K. (ianflaer) on Oct 3, 2008 12:21:32 GMT
oooo sorry to hear that. my nut sticks out about a quarter-width but is in good shape and sits level. sounds like yours might be cross-threaded which probably caused it to seize and thus the damage to the nut. have you tried to unscrew it? I bet it's jamed on there and hard to remove. this may sound good but it worries me. as the threads could strip out and let go. I hope everything works out for you.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 3, 2008 15:05:53 GMT
I think that ianflaer is correct -- it probably is cross-threaded. After reading Ianflaer's comments, I looked at the nut through a magnifying glass and it is really messed up. I won't try to unscrew it because that might do more damage.
I called the seller who was quite courteous. He will check to see if there are others available (he doesn't have any more in stock ); if he will be getting more, I will send it back and exchange it for another one (it is otherwise a really nice sword); if there aren't any more, I will return it under the store's 45 day return policy.
This is now interesting from a retailer-customer standpoint, and I will let people know how the return or exchange goes. At this point, it looks good-- judging from the statements made by the store owner and from the liberal return policy stated on the website.
|
|
|
Post by Tom K. (ianflaer) on Oct 3, 2008 15:56:59 GMT
did you get it from Kult of Athena? I they were the last place I knew of that had them in stock.
|
|