Hello there.

I have read the review on the german mace made by windlass.

I just have a few questions about it.

First off how durable you all think this is due to the weight being fairly low?. And I know the shaft is hollow but whats the thickness of the walls. If I end up buying this I dont want it to bend or break due to the shaft being to thin.
Any info would be appreciated.
Thanks
Christopher

That was my mace. I would guess--and it's only a guess--that the Windlass's relatively low weight is due to thinner haft walls. I'm not sure that original maces would necessarily have been significantly more durable, though. I would expect the welded modern construction to be stronger than historical brazed construction. While I would expect the Windlass mace to fail (bend) in the haft, I'd expect a medieval mace to fail (break) at the brazing of the flanges. Again, that's pure speculation on my part. Maybe our resident metallurgists can clarify that. IIRC, I have seen at least one original mace with a bent haft. Who knows how many bent mace hafts have been straightened in modern times?

Based on some contemporary artwork I saw recently, I think this mace, given its weight and length, might fit a bit better in the second quarter of the 15th c.

Bill Grandy owns this mace now. If he has used it he might be able to give us some idea how durable it feels to him when used against various targets.

I have to agree that a number of modern high performance things still utilize brazing. Several rocket engine nozzles for example. Once the brazing process is proven for a relatively similar geometry and application, repeatability is pretty good.

I'm not sure how this one compares in thickness to historical, but I've run across a number of historical specimens with hollow hafts. So that type of construction is historical, though the execution (ie thickness of the tube) could be less than so... :)

IIRC most original metal maces had hollow hafts-afaik a hollow shaft is more stable then a massive shaft-doesn´t bend that easily.