|
Post by ShooterMike on Feb 3, 2009 16:00:02 GMT
Seth,
Your description in the original post translates to me like you want a 30-32 inch blade, with about 60-70% distal taper, weighing from 2.25 to 2.75 lbs, with a 4 to 4.5 inch grip. PoB can be anywhere from 4 to 6 inches. But blade dynamics is very important. It should have a decent thrusting tip, but be optomized for the cut.
Nothing on the list above meets that description. They are all either too short or too broad in the tip. If you overlook the thrusting capabilities, the Ulfberht fills the bill IMO.
But from what you've described, the "tuned" VA Practical Arming Sword sounds closest to what you desire. I know where a new one is that's for sale (not mine). PM me if you are interested and I will provide details.
Otherwise, there might be several swords on Relics' sale list that would fit the bill to some degree.
|
|
|
Post by shadowhowler on Feb 3, 2009 17:48:37 GMT
It is a good light cutter but it is not what a viking sword should feel like. Weight is perfect, about 2.5lb, but too much weight is in the hilt and the blade is too thin and light. But this is only my opinion. I kinda agree with Luka here. My Ulfberht is a awesome cutter... light, well balanced, quick... but it is a thin blade... wide, but thin. It's a GREAT sword... but it does not have the stout, solid strong feeling I think of when I think Viking sword. I'm not a historical expect... so for all I know, the Viking swords of history were exactly like the Ulfberht... quick, light cutting blades. I just know my impression of what a viking sword should be is stouter... probably more like that the Castile feels like.
|
|
|
Post by kidcasanova on Feb 3, 2009 18:00:29 GMT
Well Type X's generally were broad, flat (thin) blades, because it lent more easily to the cut. So that would be within historical plausibility.
|
|
|
Post by shadowhowler on Feb 3, 2009 18:06:21 GMT
Well Type X's generally were broad, flat (thin) blades, because it lent more easily to the cut. So that would be within historical plausibility. Yeah... I have read that a couple of times from people I KNOW have more knowledge on the subject then myself. There seems to be some misunderstanding in blade stiffness... where people (I myself am guilty of this) think blades should be stiffer, when in fact they should not. From what I have been able to gather... a dedicated cutting blade should have more flex... even to the point of what some might call 'whippy', what windlass catches so much flack for. While a sword designed more for thrusting... or to thrust effectively as well as cut, should be more stiff. So like I said... I was surprised when I got my Ulfberht how fexable it was... and it did not give me the stout feeling I had, at that point, thought of when I thought of Viking weapons. However, from what I have been able to learn since, it may be that my expecations were what was off, not the sword itself.
|
|
|
Post by ShooterMike on Feb 3, 2009 18:28:26 GMT
|
|
|
Post by kidcasanova on Feb 3, 2009 18:45:23 GMT
I dunno, I still think there's a huge difference between whippy and flexible. Granted, later blade types were much more stiff on account of the thrust becoming dominant, which would make earlier blades look whippy by comparison. But some of Windlass' blades (I'm looking at the Swedish Viking on this one) are like a wet noodle, to the point of affecting performance. I think Mike's Arbedo speaks volumes for noodle-y blades, and I think the Swedish is even more flexible...
Edit: Mike, posted while I was finishing my tax returns! Good post. I'll read those articles shortly.
|
|
|
Post by ShooterMike on Feb 3, 2009 18:51:07 GMT
I totally agree. Flexible and whippy are two very different things. I was just comparing the two swords I own that are most identical in form and function. One is the Windlass Ulfberht, the other is the Albion Reeve. Their measurements are practically identical. Strangely, the Reeve is almost a full lb lighter, but the blade is significantly more rigid. It all has to do with mass distribution. And yes, I wholeheartedly agree about the Arbedo. That blade reminds me of how you can flex a handsaw and play "flappy music" on it by wobbling the blade back and forth.
|
|
|
Post by musicalpoo on Feb 3, 2009 19:47:40 GMT
well, Seth. The DSA Saxon IS on sale right now, with the money going to SBG (Paul) and the WWF. www.darksword-armory.com/demoswords.htmlThere are actually 2 on that page, the only difference is the grip...i think
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 3, 2009 19:48:02 GMT
I wouldn't say Ulfberht should be much stiffer. Historical blades that thin were probably quite flexible. But I don't feel authority that I think should be felt. 2lb sword can have more than enough authority and blade presence and because of the low overall weight still be very maneuverable. Original on which Albion Valkyrja is based has a hollow pommel with quite thin walls. It is because of that light sword overall but sure have enough blade presence. Ulfberht I think just doesn't have that presence. I would say nothing against the blade if the hilt was lighter. Hollow pommel, like on many viking swords, or just smaller, thiner pommel, without being hollow, and thiner cross.
|
|
|
Post by genocideseth on Feb 3, 2009 23:17:42 GMT
Thanks guys! I have narrowed it down to 2 swords. The Ulfberht Sword and the VA Practical Arming. ShooterMike, how would you rate the Ulfbehrt's durability? Also, another sword that appears to fit the bill somewhat is the Darksword Saxon sword. Based on Jason's review it appears to be an OK thruster and a pretty good Chopper. It is my desired length and such, but my only concern is the weight. But the point of balance and structural integrity of the blade appear to make up for this. If someone else has a different opinion, please elaborate. You guy's opinions are valued and much appreciated. Thrusting isn't so much of a must, it is more of a bonus. But ya... If I am being confusing when it comes to handling, here is a bit of an overview of what I hope for in handling... If it is lighter I want more blade presence. If it is heavier I would prefer less blade presence. Maybe with a POB of 4.5" I am assuming. I know I never mentioned this before, but I have been doing some serious thinking.
|
|
|
Post by genocideseth on Feb 4, 2009 1:40:01 GMT
well, Seth. The DSA Saxon IS on sale right now, with the money going to SBG (Paul) and the WWF. www.darksword-armory.com/demoswords.htmlThere are actually 2 on that page, the only difference is the grip...i think I would like to purchase one of them, but I doubt I will have enough cash by then. But only the future will tell...
|
|
|
Post by shadowhowler on Feb 4, 2009 14:51:50 GMT
Seth: Well, if you go with the DSA... it will be heavier then the VA Practical Arming Sword or the Windless Ulfberht for sure... it will also be a lot more stiff. I currently own one and have handled two other DSA blades... and they are all very stiff. DSA steel is HARD... this is part of what makes them so durable and also tough to sharpen. My DSA sword, when I tap it, makes a loud ring like a bell... and it makes a simlar sound when I cut with it. Beautifull sound. ;D The DSA will be, I think, more durable then the VA or Windlass. Next in toughness I would guess might be the VA (only a guess, I don't have one) followed by the Windlass. My Ulfberht is NOT fragle or weak in any way... but it is a lighter sword with a thinner blade so, by physics, will be more damagable. I think you would have to hit the wrong kinda target to hurt it tho... something HARD. The blade has good flex which protects it well from a flubbed cut... and it cuts light targets VERY well. I have only cut bottles with it... but I've seen ShooterMikes video of it destroying mats, and from my own experince I have no doubt mine could do so also. However it doesn't feel SUPER tough... so I would not take it to branches and whatnot as you likely could with the DSA. Of course, I don't take ANY of my swords to branches... I don't have the heart. Paul Southren I'm not.
|
|
|
Post by musicalpoo on Feb 4, 2009 15:16:54 GMT
aaaaah, I love that ring I hate when u hit a wall hanger sword and the guard and blade crash together and sound like a terrible bell, bleh! Anyways, Jason Woodard said that the Saxon is a heavy sword indeed, but also excellently balanced.
|
|
|
Post by genocideseth on Feb 4, 2009 18:01:39 GMT
Wow... I have so many options it feels... And it feels great! I may be getting a custom sword, the DSA Saxon, VA practical arming or even an Ulfberht! I feel lucky just from that!
|
|
|
Post by shadowhowler on Feb 4, 2009 18:40:08 GMT
Wow... I have so many options it feels... And it feels great! I may be getting a custom sword, the DSA Saxon, VA practical arming or even an Ulfberht! I feel lucky just from that! See... thats part of the problem... the wonderfull, wonderfull problem... ;D There are so many beautifull sharp pointy things out there... so many shiny stabing slashing peices of joy filled steel... that once you get the itch, you want MORE. ;D
|
|
|
Post by musicalpoo on Feb 4, 2009 20:23:18 GMT
I know! in the last month I have gone from getting the witch-king, to getting anduril, to getting the kriegschwert, to getting the guardian...I think I like the guardian the best though
|
|
|
Post by shadowhowler on Feb 4, 2009 20:51:54 GMT
I know! in the last month I have gone from getting the witch-king, to getting anduril, to getting the kriegschwert, to getting the guardian...I think I like the guardian the best though Well... I actualy ment once you BUY one, you start buying more and more and then your broke... you are flip-floping on what TO buy... Like I said before tho... for you, I'd go with the Guardian.
|
|
|
Post by genocideseth on Feb 4, 2009 23:58:28 GMT
You know what I hate but love? Having second thoughts...
I am wondering weather to go with a viking sword or an arming sword... Blah!! I like them both!
|
|
|
Post by shadowhowler on Feb 5, 2009 0:47:09 GMT
You know what I hate but love? Having second thoughts... I am wondering weather to go with a viking sword or an arming sword... Blah!! I like them both! Think of it THIS way... if you are anything like me (and most of us) eventualy, you will buy BOTH. So rather then 'which one should I get?' your true question is 'which one should I get NOW?' Heh.
|
|
|
Post by musicalpoo on Feb 5, 2009 0:49:36 GMT
that is true...I was flip flopping last year whether to get the Guardian or the Goth, but I got the goth...and in May I'm most likely getting the Guardian
|
|