|
Post by Afoo on Oct 19, 2015 5:25:39 GMT
Nasal in that it feels like someone blowing their nose into a microphone set to 11?
|
|
|
Post by Afoo on Oct 19, 2015 5:00:42 GMT
Except for Quebec French - that sounds like a fistful of sandpaper in your ear.
|
|
|
Post by Afoo on Oct 19, 2015 0:53:40 GMT
No, not obvious. I do not speak Innuit. Well, that is all you get to eat over there init. Whats with sailing around on big giant doughnuts? Nunchaku: native martial art primative weapon based on the grain threshing implement. two sticks chained together to beat the rice and separate the grains. Doughnut sailing: One of several native canadian winter suicide rituals. ( see also, hockey, ice sailing and Bigfoot baiting ). Don't forget the polar bear dip!
|
|
|
Post by Afoo on Oct 17, 2015 19:46:45 GMT
Guessing a presentation sword for an individual or organization?
|
|
|
Post by Afoo on Oct 17, 2015 19:46:30 GMT
How ornate was the hilt - was there a lot of detail, or very plain? Was the blade smaller than the 1796 in terms of length, or thickness (ie: long and thin, or short and stumpy)?
I dunno. No negotiating, and no pictures. Does not seem very friendly
|
|
|
Post by Afoo on Oct 16, 2015 18:39:34 GMT
Let me begin with thanking you guys for the nice comments. The ,,why don't they turn out a decent blade'' discussion has been going on for ages. For us, outside the industry, it just seems logical. For them it means a total reconfiguration of a production process that worked for a long time, turning out product that is satisfactory for the majority of their costumers in a niche marked and kept paying the salaries of all involved. Because of the mahem that may be caused internally by turning the production process upside down, I am thinking Windlass here, where you would have to tell Mr. Jawal, who has been turning out the same blades for 30 years, that said Mr. Jawal has done it all wrong for all that time, combined with the risk of loosing clients through raised prices and many other factors we do not have an incling about, I can see that satisfying the needs of a minority is not high on the agenda, most certainly in an economically difficult period. To quote Mr. Guinhut again: I am not risking having to shut down the shop because a mere 5% of the clients want better blades. And his blades are way better than most of the other makers can produce. So, what we see right now is a slight move, very slowly, by certain producers to introduce a thicker blade here and there. They still do not get it right, but the fact is, the message is getting through and that is a win for us. Give it time. One can see this process at work with Mr. Guinhut, who started out with some sabres from Universal or Weapon Edge or whatever. After a couple of years he turned to another firm for better blades, flexible, much lighter. That was step one. Then he tought about bluing and gilding, there must have been sone influence from his clients here. It took him 2 years to get the project from the ground. This involved great risk and all the while he had to do his day to day business too. No wonder he is pissed off when some oink from the notorious 5% tells him to get his act together and start real blade making pronto or else. You see, it is not that straightforward as taking the grinder to the steel. Good points all around. While I do not disagree, I do feel the need to play devil's advocate here. If we look at the car market, say for a Honda civic or another run of the mill car. Of those buying it, 95% are out for a affordable method of transportation to and from work. Maybe 5% are actually looking at the handling and performance of the car itself, much like the sword buying community. Despite that, Honda has managed to improve their car year after year. Sure, many of the features are oriented towards the everyday drivers, but a lot of effort is still dedicated towards those speed heads - the independent suspension, the re-tuned steering, more horsepower, improved chassis dynamics. They know most drivers will not notice these changes, but they still do it anyways Why this different in approach between the two markets, I do not know. Maybe the increased cash flow lets them play with more technology and enables them to support a greater RnD division, maybe in a field that's full of so many similar competitors, every advantage matters. Don't get me wrong, I agree with you, and I do applaud all the current manufacturers for their efforts to enhance the field of sword collecting, both in terms of quality and accessibility. Just a thought
|
|
|
Post by Afoo on Oct 16, 2015 3:11:13 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Afoo on Oct 15, 2015 23:41:54 GMT
Great review. At least its better than the 4mm stock Windlass uses on some of its stuff. I think that the dynamic shortcomings can be overlooked when you consider the build quality and aesthetics...and the fact you have a blued and gilded blade. Very impressive. Besides, on a light sword like this, "bad" is a very relative term.
|
|
|
Post by Afoo on Oct 15, 2015 4:18:42 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Afoo on Oct 15, 2015 4:01:15 GMT
Yeah - I asked him for pics of the tip yesterday, but no response. I would have gotten it if everything checked out. Without better pics though, couldn't tell if the tip was dented or if it has been damaged and then ground down. Better to see it go cheap than take a complete gamble on it, especially with an unresponsive seller. 1907's are relatively common - I got mine for less than $200 USD in good shape. The coles notes is as follows: Sabres come in two forms, infantry sabres and cavalry sabres. Infantry sabres are meant for use on foot, and they tend to be smaller and lighter, though sharing the same basic aesthetic. Examples would include the British 1822 Artillery Officer's Sword and the 1897 British Officer Sword I have the 1897, as well as what I presume is the infantry version of the M1852 Prussian Sword. Again, both are light and maneuverable. All of these are good examples. You will see a lot of 1822p issued to artillery and riffle officers. Cold Steel makes a decent replica of the M1852. Other good examples would be the French 1845. All of these are decently common, being issued to relatively large numbers of officers over a long service life. Replicas do exist for all of these though - a quick study of the Universal Swords replicas on KoA compared to originals will tell the difference. For the British swords, the differences tend to lie in the grip material (aquatic animal vs leather), the etching on the blade (crisp vs gross), and the crest - the 1897 has a royal cypher on it for the reigning monarch. The replicase all have a VRI cypher (Victoria, Empress of India), and a poor one at that. The cypher also tells you about the date of the weapon - a GRVII for example would put it during WWII, whereas an ERVIII would make it super valuable. Also beware that most British infantry swords has a "piquette" weight version - that is a scaled down version for formal occasions. These can be hard to tell apart form pictures, especially if there is no scale reference. In general, the full sized version should have a blade that is at least as wide as the grip (1' for the 1897). Best bet is to ask the seller flat out for the dimensions of the blade, and match it to the pattern. The cavalry troopers swords tend to be a bit larger and heavier, and a bit more expensive due to their desirability. I have a British p1885, a Swiss 1867, an Argentine 1889. Bfoo has the Italian M1871 an the 1907. All of these are good examples, but then again I did buy them, so I may be biased. Dave Kelly likes the Swiss 1867, and it does look like the stereotypical cavalry sword. It is huge, but surprisingly light, with good taper. The 1885p does feel more solid, but it is also heavier. The 1867 also has the advantage of being cheaper, since it does not have the same military heritage as the 1885 did it British hands. The Argentine 1889 and Italian 1871 are pipe backs, and Kelly has a great article on them here. The fact that they come from more obscure countries makes them easier to get I find. The 1871 is Bfoo's, so I do not have much experience with it. The 1889 is unique - I like it. In terms of replicas, both the WIndlass 1906 and Universl Swords Princess of Wales saber are excellent - the 1906 is historically accurate, though the original versions were a bit heavy and unwieldy even by cavalry sword standards. The Princess of Wales is a lot better dynamically IMO - better grips and lighter overall. First: 1883p. Second: Swiss 1867 next to a Japanese Type 32 Both inf and cav swords come in either slash-y or poke-y forms. Which you prefer depends on your style. From the first set of pictures, you can see the difference between the slash-y 1822 and the poke-y 1897. The Spanish 1907 you saw is a great poke-y sword. Very easy to point and control. The Windlass 1913 is a good replica of the poke-y cavalry sword, though I find it heavier and lesss comfortable than the 1907. Slash-y infantry swords also include the Prussian M1873 sword (a cut-down version of the 1822 Blucher saber), while poke-y models include the French 1882 (one of which I am selling here), and the US 1840 NCO sword, a replica of which someone else is selling here. The 1840 is also a good sword - it has a very stiff blade. However, the guard is a bit lightweight and its hard to find an un-damaged original example Well, thats a quick run-down from me :P Choose your poison EDIT: Matt Easton's videos are a good starting place for British swords at least. Maybe not in terms of where to but them, but in terms of what patterns are out there, some information about their history and their design etc. Good place to find what you are looking for. I am not a huge fan of his attitude sometimes TBH, but his information is pretty good, and he presents a nice synthesis of material from a wide range of sources into a concise, cohesive story
|
|
|
Post by Afoo on Oct 14, 2015 14:34:51 GMT
there is a Spanish 1907 going for cheap (less than 50 cdn, or 40-ish USD) with 17h left if you are interested in that. I have one - its a thrust centric sword, but very light in the hand, especially when compared to its 1913/1908 brethren from the states and the UK Do you have a link? Had a bit of a look but couldn't find it. www.ebay.ca/itm/252113254115?_trksid=p2060353.m1431.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AITIts a Canadian seller though, so shipping may be more expensive for you. Its got 5h left and its at 33 usd... - Alex
|
|
|
Post by Afoo on Oct 14, 2015 4:33:36 GMT
Both are bad news for those who stand to defy the glory of the British Empire and her Commonwealth!! You too could enjoy this glory had you kept that tea out of the harbour :P
|
|
|
Post by Afoo on Oct 14, 2015 2:17:16 GMT
there is a Spanish 1907 going for cheap (less than 50 cdn, or 40-ish USD) with 17h left if you are interested in that. I have one - its a thrust centric sword, but very light in the hand, especially when compared to its 1913/1908 brethren from the states and the UK
|
|
|
Post by Afoo on Oct 13, 2015 4:55:53 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Afoo on Oct 13, 2015 1:42:32 GMT
The 1853 is still by Universal Swords. If you are going with them, why not the Princess of Wales? :P
Sorry, I really like the Princess of Wales :P Especially if you are already paying upwards of 170 already
|
|
|
Post by Afoo on Oct 12, 2015 20:49:05 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Afoo on Oct 9, 2015 22:12:33 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Afoo on Oct 7, 2015 16:56:13 GMT
How does one test hrc? I can take a look at the Princess of Wales I have.
The Prussian CS is nice handling, though I can't say much about its cutting ability. The CS 1860 looks very close to historical specs, though the historical sword wasn't terribly good either. The CS 1830 sword is a bit heavy - definitely not historical, but it is usable. I would put it a bit above the 1860 actually.
|
|
|
Post by Afoo on Oct 6, 2015 16:13:41 GMT
I know it's not European, but does anyone have any experience with the Japanese type 32 cavalry saber? They seem ambidextrous, and relatively inexpensive, and not terrible uncommon. I looked at the stats of mine. The blade is 6mm at the base, and tapers to 4mm 1' from the tip. The blade is 32.5 inches, with a PoB of 8 inches. Despite being a "cavalry" sword, it is extremely small - here it is next to my 1867 Swiss. Despite the size difference, the Swiss is much easier to handle. I did not take measurements of my particular example, but Dave Kelly's numbers shows that it tapers form 7.8mm to 2.5mm, with a PoB of 5.25 inches despite the longer blade. On the plus side, the grip is small, but cozy. The checkered pattern gives good traction, and the back strap does not fall away until the every end, giving good support. It does cutting very well, but at the expense of fine handling. I do not have a scale. However, I would say that the Type 32 is around 2lb - similarto the Swiss. The blade is a thing of beauty - precisely machined and flawless View of the grip, showing the checkered pattern and the heel support.
|
|
|
Post by Afoo on Oct 5, 2015 2:19:27 GMT
Weak weekend sale ><
|
|