Tested it with the Albion instruction. The pivot point tested with the point downward test indeed show a pivot point at 1/3 of the blade length from the tip, much closer to the COP than the point upward test.

Nathan Robinson wrote:

Lancelot Chan wrote: Hhehehe learned it from the debatable ARMA article by George Turner. With the point downward it seems to yield different result... I've to test again to confirm. Thanks, Lance. I had forgotten that detail of that article.. so much to digest reading that piece. I'm afraid were I to test swords with the point upwards like that, I'd end up hurting myself or stabbing a couch or something. :\

Lance,

You seem to have some serious issues with your new sword. Have you considered contacting the maker for a refund? You can then put that money towards a sword from another maker that will meet your needs.

I've thought of it honestly. However, I've used the sword on test cutting and it had marks of characters on the blade and on the fittings. I'm not sure how the refund works in USA but in Hong Kong, for local sales, once something is "used" you may hardly get it to the shop for a refund. So an alternative way I came up with was to put it on sales on the classified later.

Maybe I should shoot Mike an email anyway. Thanks for the suggestion.

Patrick Kelly wrote:

Lance, You seem to have some serious issues with your new sword. Have you considered contacting the maker for a refund? You can then put that money towards a sword from another maker that will meet your needs.

IMO the pics don't show any damage worth speaking of. In many of them I can't see anything. I guess we'll see a real bargain in the classifieds soon, or what do you say?

Truthfully, this is the only time I can remember reading somebody commenting about small dents and dings after hitting metal against metal. A group of my swords are all piled up right now in a corner because I recently took them to a photoshoot as props. I'm sure they're dinged up a bit here and there, but I don't care because I don't look at them with macro photography and find concern with the tiny issues that arise.

In the case of swords used for sparring, these things are meant to be beat on things, so I certainly don't worry about a ding or nick here or there. I understand your point about the comparative response between swords, so we need not reiterate that. I get it. I am thinking that you're just posing these questions and trying to determine what your specific needs are.

Authentic swords have fittings of varying degrees of hardness and of varying materials. You can trust me when I tell you that many were of buttery-soft iron (slight exaggeration there) that would be, and repeatedly have been, affected by hitting other metal objects. Others are gilt iron, and are perhaps just as subject to such changes because of this. And others are steel and are much less hard than any mainstream modern maker. I wouldn't call any of these "fragile" but they certainly are not difficult to ding or scratch.

You may need to chalk this up to experience. Perhaps you've found that your needs as a collector and martial artist require hilt fittings harder than those found on many authentic examples from the historical record. Maybe your needs are more in line with some of the modern-made "performance" reproductions available with harder fittings, more robust shapes with more blended grinding and less "crispness" of detail that can be altered, or a more durable finish of some kind.

The Brescia has details that are very "crisp", having edges and bevels of fine detail. I'd expect this to be quite easily affected with contact on other hard metal objects. Your Tinker sword has much more blended shapes with more rounding on its edges and flat surfaces that are likely not to be affected as much. Combine the fact that the Tinker's fittings are likely harder and this starts to make some sense.

Nathan's made a good post and I echo his comments.

Given the way that the sword has been handled, I see nothing unreasonable about the wear it exhibits. However, you obviously do. Rather than posting photos everytime the sword receives a ding you might be better served in putting some thought into defining what your expectations of a sword are. What do you expect from it and how do you expect it to perform? This will help you find a sword that meets your needs.

Mr Trim:

When writing what I wrote I was tempted to make the exception in the case of the sword is constructed by holding everything by the riveted end of the tang or, as in your swords, a nut.
As far I know, many ancient swords (let´s not discuss which ones and when, we already know it) have their guards and pommels already fixed indepently of the wooden grip. Few european woods can hold a guard tight for long time. Its much safer if they are already secured to the tang. Personally I havent examined more than six (6) mediaeval swords but some of them look a lot like if the guards were fixed red hot very tightly. One I have seen was also bent over the shoulders in the manner of the guard of a takouba (forge welded in the zone of the quillons).
But besides the historical ways, where there are many persons here who know it better, we can fix the parts of a sword holding everything just by the end of the tang or also (not instead) by making guard and pommel secured to the tang indepently of the wood. Difficult to explain this in english for me but think in something like a viking styled hilt.
As you better know, if the wood is hard enough and the nut at the end of the tang can be re-adjusted then its obvious that there are not problems with the design (if you think I am questioning that) and you can make the guard of 65 rc M2 if you want it.
I make the guards in the forge (I even drill the hole with a chisel) and fix them with a good pressure before putting the wooden grip. In practice weapons (which people here tend to use more in the ancient sca style of edge to edge, etc) I am asked from time to time to make hardened guards to prevent chips (my solution is round 45-48 rc). They always loosen before the soft iron ones. If I would be putting a threaded nut instead of riveting in my practice swords they would need periodic readjusting. Yours don´t need it?

Nothing to do with harmonic balance or handling if you dont put things to the extreme. In my particular sword guard and pommel were 55 rc O1.... Chipping proof ;)
To keep it on topic: To prevent chipping in any significant way the best way is geometry. To the same shape the real diference starts in heat treated steel.

On the pivot point:
I use the point down and it gives me the same results than the pendulum test proposed by Burton. But is not more reasonable making it from the middle of the hand, some 3 cm from the guard? Who (turner doesnt count ) has established that the sword rotates in the guard ? and always?
I have my brain disconnected today but I believe there should not be any diference between point up or down. The problem may be the form you do it. Try the pendulum once just to see what you are doing. I have the feeling that that sword has its pivot point measured point down and from the guar very near the tip. 1/3 is more a saber result (pommel-less) or something with a very short grip.

Well, if I have to choose between the quillon bending or the hilt loosening I would choose the former. Better suffer a few dings and dents with a softer steel than having the structural integrity compromised.

This is my 2 cents reply as I cannot possibly compete with the knowledge of historical arms or types of steel of those who have replied above (particularly Mr Johnsson) but I would support Nathan and Patrick's comments above about the expectations of edged weapons. I collect antique small-swords and rapiers(for many years) and fence for a hobby but my knowledge of recreations of arms is limited. But I would say this about the originals. I spent a good day at the London International Antique Arms & Armour Fair last weekend looking at numerous (hundreds) European broadswords, rapiers, small-swords, Islamic swords and Japanese katana and tachi (which I also used to collect). When looking at the originals you can tell immediately which have been 'used' (i.e. in combat or rough practice) because of the damage. Even with Japanese katana (arguably one of the best steels made) and good quality damascus Persian or Indian blades, I saw fine quality weapons with nicks, gouges, scrapes, dents etc all over them. There were 6 good pre-1500 Japanese blades by good smiths I saw which had cheap prices because the tips were broken or they had so many dints and major nicks in the blade. That's what happens when swords are used or knocked against any hard target. Even with small-swords, which are not used edge to edge at all, you get dents in the guard, nicks and broken tips, possibly from what you would consider light contact. It is just what happens. The damage on your sword (though I don't want to get into any debate at all regarding your purchase) seems minor.

I bought a spanking new quality fencing epee made of modern steels and aluminium 2 weeks ago that you could see your face in it was so polished. After 7 bouts of 5-point epee it is scratched, the guard dented, the blade scratched, and bent at the point (re-staightened now). This epee is not made to the robustness of a rapier or medieval sword perhaps but it's just an indication of what naturally happens with even glancing contact between swords and other swords or even hard surfaces.

Daniel

Lancelot;

To chime in at the risk of making it seem like pilling it on: Maybe the problem is in buying a high end " Museum quality " and using it with the expectation that it will remain pristine. ( Or that high quality makes it more resistant to dings than any other well constructed sword. )

The cost of the thing just makes you much more aware of minor and normal dings that wouldn't bother you too much with a less expensive " Squire Line " sword for example.

Now, having chosen to use it as a real sword and not keep it under glass using cotten gloves each time you handle it, it would be good to just accept that it IS a using sword and that it will take some minor damage. :(

The best to me is to have two swords with identical handling: One to admire and baby and one to use, ( That doesn't cost as much :lol: )

Now, Peter seemed to think that using it as intended was / is very acceptable to him and probably pleased him that some of these will get some real use: Use not abuse obviously.

Now, being logical about this has it's limits since emotion is involved and if further damage is going to make you feel bad maybe selling is best before it looses too much value ? ( You may find that considering selling it may bring you to want to keep it if you REALLY start seeing it as using sword. )

Anyway, hope this helps you figure out what you really want to do, what you really feel about it and why. :D