Cavalry Sabers for fencing on foot, any recomendations? -- myArmoury.com

Mike West

I have a Cold STeel 1796 Light Cavalry Sabre and, find it to be a wicked cutter, but poor for fencing on foot.

Are there any other reproduction sabers that would be useful for fencing on foot? I've read a few good things about Ames Sword Company's 1862 Light Cavalry Saber, but nothing else.

Does anyone have any recomendations?

Sam Barris · Posted: Sat 19 May, 2007 2:44 am Post subject:

You might look into Patton's design. I think I remember seeing replicas of that one floating around somewhere.

Konstantin Tsvetkov · Posted: Sat 19 May, 2007 4:13 am Post subject:

Hello Mike,

Though I haven't handled the Cold Steel sabre, I tried back sword cutting exercises with both original Blucher sabre and french 1822 pattern cavalry saber. Both work really good and the Blucher works even better, because it is shorter, lighter and curved more then the french dragoon sabre.

Sam, I cannot agree with you about the Patton sword, it was designed mostly for thrusting attack on horseback. Again, I tried same exercise with Prussian cuirassier pallash - awful results, it is a thrusting weapon. Just my own experience.

Adam Simmonds · Posted: Sat 19 May, 2007 4:39 am Post subject:

hi there,

I would suggest a weapon like the agile 1821 british light cavalry sword- particularly with the shorter infantry blade or around 32 inches. though i have only handled one briefly - it felt as is it would make an admirable weapon for fighting on foot, and seems well designed for both cut and thrust.

cheers, adam

Steve Grisetti · Posted: Sat 19 May, 2007 7:46 am Post subject:

What about a British P1897 Infantry Officer's Sword? I am not a fencer, but I am very fond of this design. This pattern does have a bias toward the thrust, but not so much as the Patton, and could also be a decent cutter. The 32 inch blade has a stiff 'dumbbell' cross section from the shoulder about 1/2 way to the tip, so the forte can't be sharpened. However, the last 16 inches to the tip would be sharp, and there is also a 7-1/2 inch false edge that would be sharp.

Mike West · Posted: Sat 19 May, 2007 9:41 am Post subject: Good replicas

"........ and french 1822 pattern cavalry saber. Both work really good and the Blucher works even better, because it is shorter, lighter and curved more then the french dragoon sabre......

Thank you. Where can I find a good replica of the 1822 French Sabre? Over at the Military Heritage site( http://www.militaryheritage.com/swords1.htm ) , they sell a number of French sabres, but I couldn't find any that mentioned the year 1822. They do sell an 1822 British Light Calvary Sabre ( http://www.militaryheritage.com/swords2.htm ).

Cold Steel sells a 1830 Napolean Sabre, which may be good for foot fencing.

The Ames Sword COmpany states that their 1862 Light Calvary Saber is based on the French Light Cavalry Saber of 1822 ( http://www.amessword.com/special/body_special.html ).

Sean Scott · Posted: Sat 19 May, 2007 11:21 pm Post subject:

Is the M1913 saber design so different from that of a rapier that you can't use the same, or very similar, techniques?

Adam Simmonds · Posted: Sat 19 May, 2007 11:55 pm Post subject:

hey there,

the M1913 sabre is nothing like a rapier excepting that they are both dedicated thrusters. Very briefly, a rapier is designed to be used on foot with very fast foot, body and hand work using various angles and modes of attack. The M1913 sabre is designed to be held steady, lance-like towards the enemy as one sits bearing down on the enemy from horseback.

two entirely different weapons for entirely different situations.

cheers, adam s[/code]

Konstantin Tsvetkov · Posted: Sun 20 May, 2007 1:56 am Post subject:

...Where can I find a good replica of the 1822 French Sabre?

I am not sure if there are replicas of this sword, probably it is easier to buy a real thing.

The original looked like this:
http://www.fioredeiliberi.org/gallery2/main.p...temId=7148

...and there are many of so called "German export sabres" of the same pattern on the market, two of them you can find here http://www.medalsandmilitaria.co.uk/

But, Mike, what do you mean "fencing". As far as I remember all Cold Steel swords are sharp and if you will find a real military sword that was not sharpened (it is a usual thing, I have two antique swords which were never sharpened) the tip will be still very dangerous. I have only seen two military training swords, these were British, modified trooper's sabres, with dull edge, rounded tips and marked "DP" (drill purpose), but these are quite rare and even more expensive then usual swords. I am very sorry now that I didn't buy one when I encountered it.[/quote]

Mike West · Posted: Sun 20 May, 2007 10:22 am Post subject: What I mean....

G. Scott H. · Posted: Thu 24 May, 2007 7:09 pm Post subject:

Mike, just a side note that you may find useful: a guy on another forum purchased an 1862 from Ames and an 1860 from Windlass (Atlanta Cutlery), at the same time. Upon arrival, he found them indistinguishable. According to his description, they are absolutely identical. The reason I bring this up is that I, too, have a Windlass 1860 cav. saber, and while it is a very solid and handy little sword (one of the best made I've ever seen from Windlass, in fact), it is dimensionally quite different from original 1860 sabers. The main area of difference is in the blade's thickness. Originals were quite beefy at the hilt and exhibited quite a bit of distal taper along their length, so that they were fairly thin at the tip (much as original 1796's are described). The gentleman I mentioned above also has an original, vintage 1860 made by Boker in Germany, which has a blade that begins at roughly 1/3" thick at the hilt, tapering to around 1/16" at the tip. The Windlass (and Ames) version start s at 3/16" at the hilt and remains that thickness about 2/3 of the way down, before tapering down to a bit over 1/16" at the tip. Again, my Windlass handles quite nicely, and I enjoy it, but it doesn't really give an accurate representation of the handling of an original.