LeMal
Member
Posts: 1,103
|
Post by LeMal on Sept 3, 2012 7:29:40 GMT
The Lutel sounds very good, and Lord knows I'd hardly dissuade you given that I've had my eye on that one for a while and plans to get one some time soon. But might I also recommend--as I've done twice to great satisfaction--that you consider getting a Hanwei Dark Sentinel and rehilting it Swiss sabre style? There's a variety of ways to try that (and in fact I'm constantly resisting, at the price, buying yet another one to tinker with more variations of doing it! Draining away funds in hundred-dollar increments is insidiously tempting. )
|
|
LeMal
Member
Posts: 1,103
|
Post by LeMal on Aug 13, 2012 12:50:51 GMT
I happen to be a fan of their German Falchion too, thick blade spine and all. But yes, they have had a habit of discontinuing some of their best--which they seem to be finally be remedying despite other problems. I have a feeling they might keep the XIV, Ulfbehrt, Classic Medieval, Falchion and Longsword or Roven as workmanlike regulars for both entry-level buyers and those who want something basic, which they should. But general rule of thumb about Windlass hasn't changed for a long time. Their single-handers usually are far better, especially when single-edged; and they do better with pinned rather than peened hilts. (They'll have to pry my Horsehead Falcata from my cold, dead fingers. Now THAT is one they should bring back!) And know what? Same holds true for Hanwei and Cold Steel, these rules of thumb tend to apply to high-volume production makers in general. But know them, and there are some good ones to be had.
|
|
LeMal
Member
Posts: 1,103
|
Post by LeMal on Jul 23, 2012 13:37:27 GMT
Agree with sneakypete. I don't currently have an Albrecht, but I've long liked my practical blunt, built on the same model. The grip's a little chunky for my tastes but I'm not so particular as to worry about it, and the oversize pommel's never bothered me. I've considered the HT bare blades for projects but in my case I'd buy an Albrecht long before the HT longsword or bastard (and if Hanwei sold the Albrechy bare blade at a good discount I'd be all over it!).
|
|
LeMal
Member
Posts: 1,103
|
Post by LeMal on Jul 21, 2012 13:58:13 GMT
Very true. The drop off in velocity of a blackpowder ball between muzzle and 100 yards is nearly 50% and the drop off in kinetic energy about two-thirds. www.namlhunt.com/traditionalmldata1.htmlRemember, cavalry was specialized to suddenly exploit weakness in infantry in this period--meaning they had to be close enough to give a charge fast when the time was right, yet not be vulnerable. A buff coat makes perfect sense in this context.
|
|
LeMal
Member
Posts: 1,103
|
Post by LeMal on Jul 20, 2012 12:43:39 GMT
Do I not name my swords, because one one hand they're "just swords," and I won't fetishize inanimate objects?
Or do I not name my swords because, kind of like the Tetragrammaton isn't supposed to be pronounced, the way of Tao is beyond words, or satori is an embrace of emptiness, the most transcendent name is to have no name?
I won't say. :twisted:
|
|
LeMal
Member
Posts: 1,103
|
Post by LeMal on Jul 10, 2012 3:34:51 GMT
The absence or presence of a shield is one factor (and shield and buckler have differences, hence the I.33 having both types of wards). So is the relative focus on thrust or cut. Also whether you're fighting in a unit or singly.
But the biggest thing to remember, especially singly, is that wards/stances are not meant to be static positions, or even "resting" ones. When fighting in the round, as it were, they are simply transitional points that flow in various ways, one to the other, and constant motion is expected. Ergo, you have to have strikes or thrusts that are possible from each, and you usually don't want to stay in one type too long, making it, in many respects, a moot question.
|
|
LeMal
Member
Posts: 1,103
|
Post by LeMal on Jul 9, 2012 7:30:15 GMT
Well, "favorites" would've been a helpful word to stick in there then. Seriously though, "best" is difficult. Are we talking only about swords we've owned? Then that's a pretty limited database. Swords we've owned and handled? Bigger, but still problematic. No one here's handled the actual majority of what's out there. How am I supposed to know that, say, I wouldn't pick up a Hanwei Song Sword and go, "Holy shite, drop everything!" I just feel a little guilty calling my list the "best" as opposed to favorite.
|
|
LeMal
Member
Posts: 1,103
|
Post by LeMal on Jul 9, 2012 4:01:07 GMT
This is a question that I don't even think can be answered properly. There's probably well over a hundred production swords that perfectly marry function and aesthetics. Not only virtually the entire A&A, Albion and Atrim catalogs, but I argue notable ones from the "low enders" like Hanwei, Windlass and Cold Steel.
Now, I can tell you which ones I have been happy to hold on to and refuse to part with enough that my new purchases have become nearly nil.
Arms & Armor Cavalier Albion Sovereign (Atrim Thorpe-though haven't purchased one yet) Gen2 Henry V
...and--drum roll please--my unequivocal favorite is my "lowly" CS Shamshir, that cuts and handles so effortlessly but handles even hard targets with nary a whimper.
|
|
LeMal
Member
Posts: 1,103
|
Post by LeMal on Jul 9, 2012 3:37:39 GMT
Always had a soft spot for the Dresden, though when the time came for an A&A long ago I went with the Cavalier, albeit with never a regret.
Your surmise is, I believe, right on target. This is a well-balanced if "ponderous" sword by the standards of its day, but specifically for a mounting man in armor who wanted something hard-hitting, almost anachronistically so. Cut over thrust all the way.
But beautiful. No one, in my opinion, tops A&A on complex hilts. My own lament is that they've never made a dagger (preferably long) to go en suite with the Cavalier.
|
|
LeMal
Member
Posts: 1,103
|
Post by LeMal on Jul 5, 2012 13:22:38 GMT
Holy ridiculousness! Yeah, I got a copy in front of me right now too!
Good source? Sure. But nowadays--or ever--NO source is THAT good.
|
|
LeMal
Member
Posts: 1,103
|
Post by LeMal on Jul 4, 2012 23:12:26 GMT
Just noticing this thread now--and noticing a lot of discussion of Gen2--might I suggest you take a look at the Gen2 Henry V? Everybody seems to be talking more Viking-type swords lately, but you did mention you were looking for an "arming sword" at first. Shy of my Sovereign (and actually in a dead heat with it) my Henry V is my favorite Euro double-edged single-hander. (And btw, I presume you don't want to go to the trouble of rehilting your own sword, but if so, let me tell you the criticisms of Cold Steel can be absolute shite. I'm in total agreement with anyone here that the Euros are not recommended, but what sinks the deal can be summed up in two words: "nut pommel." And not Atrim style hex nut, they're fine. But CS non-Euros are good to great, & if I were in the mood for another d.e./s.h. Euro, as I have my own preferred method of rehilting these days, I'd take a CS Viking, Norman, or I especially have my eye on the Dynasty Forge Type XVI--nd DF is suspected by many as being the blade source for the CS Euros. Just keep in mind starting out, just because a sword may suck as a complete unit doesn't mean the blade itself is bad--and it's possible to fix the bad hilting of a great blade but not the reverse. The same is true for some Windlasses and Hanweis. If you get into rehilting you may find diamonds hidden in the feces-pile. )
|
|
LeMal
Member
Posts: 1,103
|
Post by LeMal on Jul 3, 2012 9:50:42 GMT
No, but these approximate what the intended purpose is, infinitely better than bottles or, yes, tatami. Like I said, I work in medical research. There's a reason certain animal models are accepted by the FDA, and for example a pig model is used to approximate all sorts of trauma analogous to human trauma. They are considered authentic. (Try running plastic bottles or tatami past the FDA!)
Which knives, axes, polearms, etc. were as well. So effectively, in fact, that they were used in many, if not most situations, in preference to the sword. Where you (as well as I admit most people in the "sword community," alas, as per its name) differ from me is I don't subscribe to the same level of romanticism about the sword. In fact, to be frank, while I like my swords and find them viable and respectable weapons, I find an over-romanticism about the sword prissy and elitist.
You know, though swords were certainly welcome among the armament when Europeans came to the New World (or into colonial Africa, for example), why weren't all the manifests brimming with "send us swords--they are the wonder weapon!"? Because they aren't a wonder weapon. Not even when firearms were single shot and slow to load and not wonder weapons yet either. Because other delivery systems for the cutting or piercing edge were just as effective hand to hand, or the bludgeoning edge just as effective, all in all.
Even when swords graduated from super-rare pieces only the extreme elite could afford to much more mass produced weapons, all the agonizing over the "intricacies" of making them, all the aspects of "harmonic balance" and "distal taper" and all the rest, continued to make an upscale weapon. A still comparably more expensive weapon. But a massively better weapon? Please. If that were true those with swords would have swept conquest of the non-sword world. Exactly as they did once actually superior weapons--like artillery and repeating firearms--were brought to bear. (Even then requiring the huge helping hand of disease, and stalling in places like Africa where natives were not decimated by it.)
OK, then, you might say, but we're not saying they are. We're into them for the "grace" and "fluidity" and sense of "honor" associated with them. And my reply is simple. I find all that talk pretentious. I find no such grace in the sword.
No, not because I'm simply all concerned with "cutting up people" and love to dwell on grotesque and sadistic, with no sense of or interest in philosophy. (Not any more than because I'm "cheap.") I do it for the same reason Musashi fought with his "crude" and "simple" suburito. To not succumb to romanticism, snobbery, elitism; the fetishization of inanimate objects, "idolatry."
So yes, I'm a pragmatist. A sword, to me, is just a sword. Not because I'm not philosophical. Because I am.
|
|
LeMal
Member
Posts: 1,103
|
Post by LeMal on Jul 3, 2012 8:51:57 GMT
Don't get me wrong-- I don't in any way think he's horsing the cut! I actually used to be in ARMA and am totally behind their training philosophy--including and especially the need to go full speed--and think his form is excellent here, for all the reasons you specify. Nevertheless I was anticipating that when many people in the sword community see cuts delivered with such power they, in my mind mistakenly, consider it "wrong." And since these vids were demonstrating the lethality of even a "blunt" sword, just didn't want anyone saying, "well, sure, but just because he's swinging too hard." (Which, even if it were true--which it's not--is irrelevant. It's freakin' lethal! )
|
|
LeMal
Member
Posts: 1,103
|
Post by LeMal on Jul 3, 2012 7:35:25 GMT
Here's a couple of the ARMA vids btw. Some people might argue that Clements is horsing the cut, but hey, still ... what do you think would happen if that contacted actual flesh and bone?
|
|
LeMal
Member
Posts: 1,103
|
Post by LeMal on Jul 3, 2012 7:27:50 GMT
Keep in mind, I'm not suggesting (unless you have the wherewithal and want to) cutting on meat all the time. If a few test cuts establish all you need to know, then just use light targets like milk and water jugs from then on. That's what I do. There was a time when I had a nearly unlimited amount of deer, as my neighbor worked for the Minnesota DNR picking up roadkill, but that was many years ago. And no, I don't eat enough meat to be able to afford to use it regularly either! It's just a worthwhile test if you need it, and you need never let it go to waste. If you hang it for cutting, wipe down your sword with alcohol to clean off oil and make sure it's dry beforehand, and put a clean tarp underneath--then have a nice barbeque!
|
|
LeMal
Member
Posts: 1,103
|
Post by LeMal on Jul 3, 2012 5:41:50 GMT
Well, it's also important to keep in mind a sword's intended purpose. It's not cutting bottles, or tatami. And plastic bottles can be notoriously fickle as a gauge of effectiveness. On one hand, the kind gallon water, milk or laundry detergent come in can be too easy, with even unsharpened rapiers working (and a butter knife would). But, though I know I sound like a broken record, 2L pop bottles, gatorade bottles, etc. can give false negatives; not false positives, every sword (or weapon) I've ever tried that can cut 2L bottles or tatami cuts meat/bone, but some that cut the latter perfectly don't work well on the former. A perfect example is the 2001 AT I just put up for sale that I hate to part with. Ironic but true, it's an early Atrim that first opened my eyes to the fact that mountains are being made out of molehills because of backyard cutting. All because I didn't just assume it was bad for batting 2L's and tested it on deer haunch and it cleaved right through effortlessly. Remember what swords are for. Sure, some swords won't go through a torso quite like a "razor" sharp katana, but perfect torso cuts aren't that common in a martial context; and the swords that don't cut "as well" but still cut as well as they would ever need to trade that off for great thrusting ability. (That was the first thing that had me not disparage the Atrim Swedish; if nothing else, I figured, I'd gotten one hell of a good "estoc." ) In a swordfight, the most likely cuts always would be to head, neck, or limbs. And there it's all distinction without a difference. The ability to go through two or three torsos is overkill when you already take off an arm either way. Not to mention that even a "dull" sword can do considerable damage. There are of course the cases of first Hank Reinhardt then the ARMA guys doing just fine on tatami with dull swords with even halfway decent blade geometry. Does it really matter if a head is cleanly severed or death is instantaneous from a half-severed and broken neck? Or if an arm is torn off at the elbow rather than "cut?" Or a skull caved in instead of sliced through? All of which I don't bring up intending to be gruesome. But we hobbyists, IMO, make distinctions that historical swordsmen would rarely have bothered with. That's why you don't see writings agonizing over the things we tend to agonize over. Some of us have pondered at times over the relative paucity of text talking about cutting practice. Why? Because, on actual historical targets--physiological ones--cutting isn't that hard with any decent sword. It's almost frighteningly easy. (And even a "bad" and "overbuilt" sword like some people think of with, say, a Darksword, would maim or kill on an unarmored body by way of blunt force trauma. Hey, I've spent almost thirty years going back and forth between medical research and being a physiology instructor--take it from me, there's no way in hell I'd ever stand in front of one climing it's not effective and let anyone hit me with it!) I just know that, if I have concerns over sharpness--on the rare occasions I have had that concern--I bother to test it on a cut or two of meat. If it cuts right through easily, as with the Atrim Swedish or Gen2, but bats certain kinds of bottles, I still don't mess with the sword. It's demonstrably lethal, so why? I just use the lighter bottles. Maybe for some of you the craftsmanlike exercise of going over the edge meticulously is enjoyable and relaxing. Hey, that's cool. It's just not for me. Choice I can appreciate, it just shouldn't be confused with necessity.
|
|
LeMal
Member
Posts: 1,103
|
Post by LeMal on Jul 3, 2012 4:46:54 GMT
Hey, man, as long as the arrows are properly spined for your bow weight and matched, with matched points, you'll be fine. "Consistency" is just what the word means: quality materials and matched. That's all. As for 100 vs 125gr, are you planning on hunting? That would give you your guidance: use the same weight field point as your broadheads. But if you're not a hunter, there is no magic to either; that's why they manufacture both! Just don't switch up too haphazardly--and don't mix both types in the same session, or you won't know if it's you or the differences in arrows if you're not grouping well. Over the course of time, while staying consistent in any given session, maybe you'll find occasion to try the other weight tip. And maybe you'll like it better, and maybe you won't. But concerns over either being "right" is hair-splitting at this stage and jumping the gun. Don't overthink your equipment at this stage. (Excess worry just throws you off! )
|
|
LeMal
Member
Posts: 1,103
|
Post by LeMal on Jul 3, 2012 4:36:34 GMT
No kidding! God, I recall their "Mongol" sword from 10-20 years ago--one of those rare types with a great blade shape with a yelman. For many years I contemplated getting on and rehilting it to my satisfaction, then "poof," one day they disappeared and haven't returned since.
Same for their Horsehead Falcata and Long (single-edged Qaddara style) Kindjal. Love both of mine. And the Horsehead is SOOOO much better than the brasshilt one that they've had forever. As good as any falcata/kopis I've ever handled, no matter how custom or expensive. But the brasshilt falcata never goes away and they never bring the Horsehead back? WTF? And no more Long Kindjals since '04? Had I known they'd disappear forever I would have doubled up.
(We won't even go into ones people liked, and even though I might not have doubled up somebody might have. Their Grosse Messer. The Dutch Cutlass. The "Dracula" sword. Hell, the list goes on and on.)
In any case--and despite me being a "minimalist" in philosophy--I see not issues with doubling up. If it's a known commodity and you love it, why not?
|
|
LeMal
Member
Posts: 1,103
|
Post by LeMal on Jul 2, 2012 14:33:41 GMT
This is a quick pic of that earlier Kriegs, for those who haven't seen it.
|
|
LeMal
Member
Posts: 1,103
|
Post by LeMal on Jul 2, 2012 5:48:23 GMT
Well, and that I'll probably continue to procrastinate on finishing fully. A perennial problem of mine; once they're in the functional stage I tend to get lazy about the finishing touches--and with a probable cross-country move in the near future my motivation on that's even worse than usual. :roll: Still, they demonstrate "proof of concept." First up is a project I just tried as a lark--and was astonished it worked so well! As a kid I always used to see hayknives in barns, garages and antique stores and pondered how it might be a good weapon with the excess material cut off. Last year I was looking at one again, and noticed it had a great edge and distal taper I had never before noticed. Plus, hey, don't the blades look all nice and flamberge-y? So I cut off the side handle and some other material, fashioned a handle of poplar scales, and attached them. What's amazing is what happened when I took it to some bottles to test. My God, can this thing cut! Seriously, it's a match for anything else in my collection or that I've ever owned. I really, really recommend anybody interested in the look of a weaponized hayknife make one. Next up, my modified Cold Steel 1796. I always liked it as it came, just so long as you keep in mind it's limitations. Yeah, a slight bit overbuilt-- slight--compared to historical examples. But not outside of earlier Polish-Hungarian and late medieval examples. (There's even a current MyArmoury thread related to this, after someone reviewed Winglass's Hungarian sabre.) So long as you think of it as a hard hitting cutter for either from horseback or with a shield the CS is just fine. Just fine, but odd-looking, out of period. So I figured I'd fashion a vaguely more medieval, cruciform hilt on mine instead. As with many of my rehilts, you can see that I don't do guards in the normal way. I fashion and attach the handle first, then the guard is in two pieces wrapped around it, and riveted on the ends. Which is what I did with the third example, a second Dark Sentinel I had bought and wanted to rehilt, but more lightly than my earlier "Kriegsmesser," which some of you might remember. Before I disassembled the hilting it came with, though, I was ruminating on how solid it already seemed--and came up with a new idea that wouldn't necessitate taking it apart. This guard is also in two pieces, wrapped around the blade just above the round guard that came on the DS, then the guard riveted on the ends. Plus I drilled a tiny hole and put a rivet in the ricasso section of the blade to also help hold the guard in place. The leather sections cover it up, and I'm planning on eventually tooling pieces of leather to go over the ones already in place. This was only all made possible by adding a "pommel" though. I originally cut the handle shorter, like Shooter Mike did, but found that totally threw off the original leverage and cutting ability of the DS. It needed counterweight. Of all things, I realized a plumbing pipe cap would work. I epoxied it over the butt of the handle, then wrapped rawhide around that and cheated it up the handle for a good grip, then covered all that with more epoxy. It's all solid as hell now and just needs to be sanded smooth and aesthetic. Not only does this give it a nice balance nearly at the guard and a wicked whip-around cutting ability, the pommel really is mace-like and could "pummel" and adversary beautifully. Finally, there's my poor man's falx. Not much fancy to say on this one. Just as I've done with turning some scythe blades into swords, I took a large cradle scythe blade and cut out enough of a section to make a two-handed handle. And yes, it cuts just as wickedly as you'd suspect. Well, those are what's been haunting my workbench lately. And given my habits, probably will continue to for a while.
|
|