'Ol Mac willl be putting this wonderful Dirty Dog model thru it's paces very soon,
and a report will be forthcoming .....
Stay tuned kiddies , Mac
[ Linked Image ]
* Photos : Copyright Lee Reeves Armoury
[ Linked Image ]
* Photo : Copyright Lee Reeves Armoury
[ Linked Image ]
Photo : 20th Park Lane Arms Fair catalogue , D.A. Oliver.
P.S. A little bird told me that a Gus Trim baskethilt model is in the works ( so you know who will be leading the Hieland charge *g* )
Last edited by Thomas McDonald on Thu 02 Oct, 2003 2:50 pm; edited 1 time in total
| Thomas McDonald wrote: |
| P.S. A little bird told me that a Gus Trim baskethilt model is in the works ( so you know who will be leading the Hieland charge *g* ) |
Thats great to hear Mac, i'm getting my first atrim in about a month its the at1542 model at all saints blades. I've always liked that moonbrand sword but can't figure out exactly why I like it so much though. You guys ever have that feeling when you look at a sword you like it so much but when you ask yourself or someone asks you why you can't really think of a real good answer besides I really like it :)
Gus will have to come here to confirm, but I'm curious to ask him if I saw a prototype of this sword at the Schola St. George event in June.
| Nathan Robinson wrote: |
| Gus will have to come here to confirm, but I'm curious to ask him if I saw a prototype of this sword at the Schola St. George event in June. |
Hi Nathan
Yeah, you saw the prototype at Benicia this year. My taking that to the event started a comedy of errors getting the sword to Mac.
Initially I was supposed to send it to Mac in May. But the event was coming down on us real quick, and I made the decision that I kinda wanted to take it with me, and see what some of the more medieval types thought of its handling and feel.
By the time I got back, the comedy of errors began. The sword got misplaced, and by the time it was found, Mac's infamous move had started....*g* So the sword didn't actually get to him until roughly a week ago.
The sword model actually came into being, because Lee Reeves sent me a photo of a DT copy of Moonbrand, and asked me if I could do something like that.
I recognized what the original was of course. I told Lee that I couldn't copy some other modern's work, but I could use the copy as inspiration to learn more about the original, and use that as inspiration to make the sword. Since the specs of the original is more or less public knowledge amongst swordmakers, I could even copy it.
I gave Lee a three month time frame...... A year later he was still patiently waiting for me. By the time Lee got them, I'd learned a lot more, and made better swords than I would have a year earlier.
But the swords are only loosely based on the original. My swords do not spec out like the original. The original is only an inspiration..... though I'll grant you that my version does distal taper a lot, such as it gets fairly thin in crossection out by the cutting part of the blade, somewhat similar to the original.
I think of this sword as one of those breakthru points many of us have. The four fullers were different than I'd done before. The distal taper was greater..... and the harmonics are done differently that what I had done in the past.
And the production pieces that Lee got, at the time he got them, aesthetically were a step up from what I've done before. I think that the last three months has seen some more improvement, but I'm still not really satisfied, and hopefully never will be {that's my key to continue to improve, not quite being satisfied}.
| Angus Trim wrote: |
| Yeah, you saw the prototype at Benicia this year. |
Well, not that anyone is asking or it's ever held me back, I'll give my own feedback on the prototype..
I liked this sword quite a bit. I didn't do much handling at that event, other than holding pieces and doing a few swings and maneuvers (when nobody was looking!), but really felt that this sword did a whole hell of a lot of things right. Overall, it felt beefy and substantial, while being quick and easy to handle. I imagine this to be a fairly devastating combination.
I didn't care for the dark/ rough fullers on the prototype, but the pommel was a major improvement over some of your previous pommels in terms of the subtleties present in authentic ones. The photos, above, from Lee's finished sword go further to improve the aesthetics and show the progress from the prototype.
I'm eager to read Mac's observations on your take of this truly enigmatic sword.
Gus,
As I think I stated when you debuted this one, this is one of your more promising designs thus far. This one has real possibilities for customization.
As I think I stated when you debuted this one, this is one of your more promising designs thus far. This one has real possibilities for customization.
The original and the reproduction both appear less pointed than some other type XIVs. On the surviving original, would this have been the case from the start, with the sword designed to be a cutter/slasher rather than a cut and thruster, or would it have got that way after use and regrinding, as has been suggested for some, similarly unpointy, viking swords?
| Geoff Wood wrote: |
| The original and the reproduction both appear less pointed than some other type XIVs. On the surviving original, would this have been the case from the start, with the sword designed to be a cutter/slasher rather than a cut and thruster, or would it have got that way after use and regrinding, as has been suggested for some, similarly unpointy, viking swords? |
We have to be very careful when we use any typology, Oakeshotts or any other. They should be used only as a broad guideline not as an absolute. Remember, the ancients didn't know what a type XIV was. Typologies are very useful in determining the general development of a cultures weapons. On the other hand, we shouldn't fall into the habit of taking them as an absolute and thereby fixating on minor details of design. By doing that we loose sight of the big picture.
An examination of the original shows a rather large nick in the tip of the blade. The sword obviously saw a bit of use. It may have been originally made with the point in that fashion, or it may have occurred through use. It's impossible to say.
| Patrick Kelly wrote: |
| The sword obviously saw a bit of use. It may have been originally made with the point in that fashion, or it may have occurred through use. It's impossible to say. |
I nearly said 'point taken' on the typing/categorisation issue, but then thought better of it. Reading back what Mr Trim said about the thin cross section, I suppose it may have been intentionally more of a cutter. Aren't thrusters more inclined to stay thicker near the point for stiffness? Whatever, it is definitely a looker.
| Geoff Wood wrote: |
|
I nearly said 'point taken' on the typing/categorisation issue, but then thought better of it. Reading back what Mr Trim said about the thin cross section, I suppose it may have been intentionally more of a cutter. Aren't thrusters more inclined to stay thicker near the point for stiffness? Whatever, it is definitely a looker. |
Hi Geoff
The original's current specs are a real eye opener for someone with my background. The thickness at the base of the blade starts at .125 inch {slightly larger than 3mm} and distal tapers rapidly until just the other side of the fullers, where it levels out some. At the spot on the blade called "where it curves to the point", the sword is approx .06 thick {1.5mm}.
Real thin in crossection. Great for cutting. Not real great for thrusting thru any real resistance, and this isn't a sword I'd take to a helmet if it at all could be helped.
I flatly did not have the courage to make a sword that thin in crossection for the 21st century sword consumer.
Lee's site has the stats for this sword ..... but I'll add a few that I see just for the record ! Mac
Component Weights & Measures
Pommel - 11 1/4 oz.
Guard - 3 1/2 oz.
Grip - 1oz.
Nut - 1/4 oz.
Blade - 1lb. 11 3/4 oz. ( bare blade balences at 9 3/4" out from shoulder)
Tang Length - 7"
Tang Width - 3/4" tapering to 1/2" , than to a 3/16" rod, 1 7/8" long .
BW - 2 5/16"
BL - 30 5/16"
4 Fullers 10 1/2" long x 1/8" approx.
[ Linked Image ]
*Photo: Copyright Lee Reeves Armoury
Component Weights & Measures
Pommel - 11 1/4 oz.
Guard - 3 1/2 oz.
Grip - 1oz.
Nut - 1/4 oz.
Blade - 1lb. 11 3/4 oz. ( bare blade balences at 9 3/4" out from shoulder)
Tang Length - 7"
Tang Width - 3/4" tapering to 1/2" , than to a 3/16" rod, 1 7/8" long .
BW - 2 5/16"
BL - 30 5/16"
4 Fullers 10 1/2" long x 1/8" approx.
[ Linked Image ]
*Photo: Copyright Lee Reeves Armoury
Hey Mac, I'll be looking forward to your review!
Sorry for the delay with this review ..... lots of distractions have kept me from my duty, of the fun kind !
I did manage to take some pic's , and do about hour of cutting various targets etc. ( performed quite nicely )
So here are a few pic's to keep the XIV crowd smiling ;-)
I'll piece a review together soon , promise ! Mac
[ Linked Image ]
[ Linked Image ]
[ Linked Image ]
A few comparison shots with 2 of my Vince Evans Scottish swords !
[ Linked Image ]
[ Linked Image ]
[ Linked Image ]
[ Linked Image ]
[ Linked Image ]
I did manage to take some pic's , and do about hour of cutting various targets etc. ( performed quite nicely )
So here are a few pic's to keep the XIV crowd smiling ;-)
I'll piece a review together soon , promise ! Mac
[ Linked Image ]
[ Linked Image ]
[ Linked Image ]
A few comparison shots with 2 of my Vince Evans Scottish swords !
[ Linked Image ]
[ Linked Image ]
[ Linked Image ]
[ Linked Image ]
[ Linked Image ]
Mr McDonald
Was the different cross your preference or just the way it came?
Was the different cross your preference or just the way it came?
Hi Geoff
This piece was sent to me for testing, so it just came with it ...... I tend to prefer the downturned crosses *g* Mac
This piece was sent to me for testing, so it just came with it ...... I tend to prefer the downturned crosses *g* Mac
| Geoff Wood wrote: |
| Mr McDonald
Was the different cross your preference or just the way it came? |
Those pics bring one word to mind: Meat!
:eek: Just this week I received my DD1404 from Lee. Haven't had the time play much with her but she's attractive and promises to be a great cutter. The multi-fullers are very nice. I'll be interested in hearing the review and comparing notes. :D
Didn't Michael Pierce make a custom version of Moonbrand for one of the moderators on netsword?
| Jay Barron wrote: |
| Didn't Michael Pierce make a custom version of Moonbrand for one of the moderators on netsword? |
Hi Jay
Yes, Michael made a nice version of Moonbrand for Stan, AKA Kataphilos !
Mac
| Ken Jay wrote: |
| :eek: Just this week I received my DD1404 from Lee. Haven't had the time play much with her but she's attractive and promises to be a great cutter. The multi-fullers are very nice. I'll be interested in hearing the review and comparing notes. :D |
Hi Ken
Let me know your findings ..... perhaps we can do a collaborative type of review !
Afterall, two heads are better than one *g* Mac
Page 1 of 2
You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
All contents © Copyright 2003-2006 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Full-featured Version of the forum
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Full-featured Version of the forum