Should "sharp" swords actually be sharp?

Thank you; this affirms what I have heard from others...and when you put it like that (as far as campaigning goes) it makes a lot of sense to me. I just heard a new term, well, new to me referencing 'apple seed' edges. I'll try searching for that here.

Explaining yet another sword to the wife would probably result in a Snowtown incident (ba-dum-pum-pum for the Adelaide people).

Nope, but the KIs are coming in as a group, so I will then. The original plan was to have a barbie, but I dunno if we've got the numbers anymore...

No the razor sharp edge IS weak. The metal BEHIND the edge might be strong...but a razor sharp edge won't last long at all because at the edge, it's as thin as a razor still (and it has to be to be razor sharp). This still is a bad thing since your edge will wear unevenly on longer blades if you try to contantly keep that razor sharp edge. Yeah for knives, not such a big deal, but for swords, it's just not a good idea...ever. Most of my knives are kept at razor sharp edges BTW...but none of my swords are.

Looks like a case of "miscommunication through the use of a common language."

ColdNapalm, I think you are referring to a razor-like edge geometry? I think that's a different thing than "razor sharp" to most people. The razor edge geometry would be a "razor-like" edge.

I have several European medieval swords that have convex "appleseed" edge geometry. They will cleanly shave hair off my arm. I guess people would describe them as "razor sharp" swords. I refer to them by the term "scary sharp." And I have never seen any maker of medieval swords deliver a blade anywhere near that sharp. Barely able to slice paper is about the sharpest I have ever seen in a Euro-med sword.

As far as how sharp a sword should come from the manufacturer... It's kind of a cop-out, but I feel that the sword should come appropriately sharp for that sword's design's intended purpose.

For instance, Viking or early medieval swords that are designed to cut unarmoured or lightly armoured opponents should be sharp enough to slice paper reasonably well. SOME later medieval designs that were primarily intended for piercing and half-swording probably shouldn't be that sharp and should have much steeper edges. SOME later medieval swords that were intended to cut and thrust equally well should probably slice paper as well.

And that's my WAAY more than 2 cents worth... though the value may be overly inflated.

Some mean sharp enough to shave hair when they say "razor sharp", but some mean hollow ground like a razor when they say razor sharp.

A proper razor sharp edge, as in, one that is sharp enough to shave your face with, NO MATTER WHAT GRIND IT IS PUT ON APPLESEED, FLAT OR HOLLOW, is a fragile edge. If you ever expected a sword OR knife to be able to shave the face, then cut ANYTHING ELSE then still shave your face you are sorely mistaken and probably have a sore face . It is a very VERY fragile edge, it has nothing to do with geometry. A face shaving edge can be put on a convex, flat and hollow grind, it is just that the hollow grind allows the area BEHIND THE EDGE to be thinner and thus get to a sharper angle which is why it is most handy for a straight razor.

On the other hand, you can sharpen just about any grind be it appleseed, flat or hollow to shaving sharp that will shave arm or leg or belly hair. I can do that at 400 grit alone. it is a somewhat tougher edge and if it is a good sword or knife it will keep doing so for a good while. There is a HUGE difference between the hair on your arms/legs and the hair on your face though.

Commonly, the term "razor sharp" is used to express a sword or knife edge that is just VERY SHARP. In literal terms though unless it is sharp enough to shave your face it really isn't so but that is being linguistically anal. I prefer "hair popping sharp" instead of "razor sharp" if it will shave the legs/arms but not the face. If the geometry is hollow ground like a straight razor, then say hollow ground not razor sharp.

To take a bit of a side-trip here:
I know several people who are convinced that the Vikings would have used DULL swords.

Now apart from the fact that a sharp sword does what a sword is supposed to do more effectively than a dull sword, there is evidence from the Viking sagas of the sharpness of swords, from at least one passage where magic is used to take away a sword's "bite" and another in which someone reaches into a box full of unsheathed swords and cuts his hand.

Enough with the foolishness!

Well windlass and del tin have very good reason for having their 1mm edge. They HAVE to. By law of their respective countries. Having to resort to after market sharpening in those cases is pretty much necessary...however the quaility of some of those after market sharpening service is questionable. And they seem insistant on doing a flat bevel when using a slack belt sander doesn't take any more time really or extra cost...so I have no idea why they are doing that...which is the point of this gripe in the first place.

Very good thread.

I'm a bit frustrated by this situation. I'll be honest here - I have very low "handyman" skills. If I get a sword that is poorly sharpened, it's going to stay that way unless someone else gives me a hand.

I've been pondering what sharp to buy for a while now, and I would have made my choice already if it wasn't for this issue.

Ancalagon

I want a decent quality sword that's suitable for one handed or two handed work. A good cutter, but with some trusting ability.

I was looking at Angus trim, but with the exchange rate not being so good anymore, and without a scabbard coming with it, shipping, it's getting pretty expensive.

I had strongly been considering the Hanwei hand and a half - it's known to be a good sword and I have the practical version... but Hanwei's European swords aren't very sharp! The tinker designed ones are apparently even worse as far as sharpness goes.