[Peter Bosman]

In a different topic the link to a taichi oriented site was given. Test cutting and testing products is carried out in a structured maner and results can be compaired. The best blades of chinese replicas turn out to be quite good. It is interesting too to read that a san mai or folded steels in these blades do not have an effect in this area ('only' in balance and resilliance).
The results are what they are and only ' worthwhile' when compaired to other products.

The material of the blades in current steel production standard and thus likely to be the same in swords produced by western replica producers. Howver, the same base steel can end up with vastly differing properties in the blade at the end of the production process.
This is all about moders steels and modern producers. It is therefor silly to pit these TYPE of blades against eachother to arrive at a ' best' . What I would like to know however is how the RELATIVE PRODUCT QUALITY of the product as a product compairs to other of these products on the market. How a quality chinese reproduction compairs to a blade with the mainstream western products.

Again: this is NOT about samurai versus knighly but simply about the relative blade qualities of good chinese replicas and the ones listed in the reviews section as products per se.
Is the blade material on par? How it's heat treatment if any?
How about the geometry of the cutting edge?
I do not want to mention brand names without data but: how does the blade from sword x from chinese swordmaker X compair to blade y of western swordmaker Y?

Has the vast quantity of collectors/users produced compaireable data?

peter

[Vincent Le Chevalier]

Could you give the link in question again? I can't find it...

Given that I have not seen the link yet I can only give a general comment. I think devising a standard test for swords performance is pretty difficult. You have to choose standard target(s) and a set of techniques to test. There is also, in any cutting, the human factor...

It is easier to do when all the swords are intented for the same context, which might be the case for jians. But when you start comparing blades from different types I believe you start running into the context problem pretty fast. Michael Edelson's experiments with the jack and various types of swords is interesting in this regard.

Not to mention that there is more to a sword than raw cutting or thrusting performance. If the sword facilitates fencing moves that allow to hit the opponent more conveniently, hitting a bit less hard is not really a problem.

Without even entering the realm of test cutting, it should be noted that even the balance of swords (i.e. essentially mass distribution) is not commonly measured, and much less published, with any completeness. My personal opinion is that this would be a first, far easier step to take.

Regards

[Peter Bosman]

[Peter Bosman]

Let me put this into perspective.

Most of us have a wrist watch and sevral of us will have a nice wristwatch. Even for the most basic of those we will not accept is if it does not reliably indicate the time spot on. This is taken for granted as after all this is what it is assumed to do.
Why are FUNCTIONAL swords not looked at this same way?

What do you expect from an 800$ wristwatch?
I know this is completely bogus as a test but the case of my 150$ watch scratches the blade of a 150$ sword blade sold as functional; most expressedly positioned as suiteable for USE.
The watch is pretty good quality against whatever objective criterium for watches and the sword is crap against whatever objective criterium for functional blades.

At the moment I am looking to buy a good quality sword and half of the budget is a present by my positively interested wife. She cannot beleive the lack of information and poor quality. She defines, like I do, quality as the measure of meeting the specifications.

peter

[Vincent Le Chevalier]

[Peter Bosman]

[Peter Bosman]

[Steven Reich]

[Ken Speed]

Peter wrote:

"What I would like is simple realy:

Weight.
Total length.
Point of balance.

Length of blade.
Width and depth at guard.
Same at 50% of length.
Same where tip begins.
Specifics like profile and curvature.
Hardness, wether differential or not.

Tolerances of all the above. . ."

I don't necessarily disagree with you but I fail to see how you're going to get what you're asking for. Who would do the testing? Who would pay them? Why? Who would keep the testers honest? We, in the U.S. can't even get true gas mileage ratings when we go out to buy a new car! A friend of mine who was a gunsmith for a major manufacturer told me about a meeting he attended about a handgun that malfunctioned. The gun was made for police and self defense and yet one of the attendees asked, "How often are they going to use it, anyway?" Scary stuff indeed!

The consumer should be able to get objective criteria about virtually anything they buy but that is certainly not the case. I almost never eat hotdogs because I have no idea what is in them! I think I'm afraid to find out!

I'm not speaking from personal experience but from what I've read on this forum it seems that many of the reputable manufacturers are prepared to provide any information you want. I also get the impression that the products which were bad have greatly improved in the last few years. The custom builders are even more dedicated to their client than the manufacturers. As well, I think buying from a reputable dealer can make the purchasers life a lot easier too. Again from reading here, most of the product complaints that I have seen mentioned here have been addressed pretty quickly. I think this is as much a testament to the quality and management of this forum as it is to the manufacturers concern for their customers.

Which brings me to this site. My impression is that this site is very closely monitored by the manufacturers. Its very good business for them to see what their customers are saying. Also somebody reading here has owned/examined/tested/used an example of practically anything you can name that has a pointy end or a sharp edge and are more than willing to tell you all about it.

The reviews here seem superb. If I were to make a criticism it would be that it seems more high end products get reviewed than the more affordable items.

If it seems that I'm jumping on you, I'm not. I think this less structured, less industrial way of doing things is a lot more fun and seems to work pretty well. If everything was weighed and measured to the last jot and tittle what would we have to talk about?


Best,



Ken Speed

[Craig Johnson]

Dear Peter

I understand your desire for a consistent product to the item you are ordering. As someone who deals with this on a daily basis I can hopefully give you an insight into the challenges and rewards of this process for the modern sword maker.

You are interested in some specifics
Weight.
Total length.
Point of balance.

Length of blade.
Width and depth at guard.
Same at 50% of length.
Same where tip begins.
Specifics like profile and curvature.
Hardness, whether differential or not.

These are pretty straightforward and I do not know any maker that would not respond with this information, if asked. Why some of us do not list all the specs of things on the web is probably more a function of time and money for doing the web work than not wanting people to know something. While some would look at the above statement and say that’s crap, cause it is so easy to do and relatively cheap. I would suggest they might not understand the margins that a modern sword producer in the US is working under.

For us personally we have done our best to replicate the dynamics as well as the structure of a specific sword to the fullest extent of our talents. As we have a lot of hand labor in our items there are slight variations in each example. We strive to make these minimal but also purposely incorporate this idea in our crafting method so any variation would be similar to those one would see from a medieval shop producing the same sword design. Thus micro measurements might fluctuate some, hopefully not 5% though.

As far as the temper would be considered, I would suggest that the confidence in the maker to give you a good temper is what you are looking for. Hardness files will not help much with this (if interested in this subject I would suggest checking out this article Sword Hardness, caveat I wrote it). A differential hardening is not well understood by sword consumers in general and is often used as hype by some makers to make people think they are getting something special. Most hardening is differential by the constricts of physics. When the blade is quenched the hardnesses achieved vary by the thickness and dimension of the blade at the time of heat treat. The inner core of a blade will always be a bit softer than the outer skin and edges just because it is the core. The manipulations done to the blade after heat treatment will also affect this. There is also the depth of heat treat that can be controlled and altered by some heat treat methods. In comparison to the period methodologies the modern heat treatment of blades is vastly more consistent and controllable.

If you are looking for a certified hardness on a particular piece most makers can probably arrange for this to happen but I would expect to pay more such services. Those who use commercial heat treatment will have access to Rc testers that will give very specific results but the industry itself will usually allow one or two point ranges as being spec. So any given blade maybe slightly different. For those who do their own heat treatment having an RC tester on hand is pretty rare. They are expensive, prone to variation and only as good as the operator and controls allow. Most Rc testers can operate only in the vertical plan with right angles so trying to get a reading on a diamond cross section of any sort is probably not happening.

My personal opinion is the modern consumer puts to great an emphasis on the Rc hardness.

I think one of the commitments you need to look for when purchasing a sword is a maker who is willing to make you happy as a customer as opposed to just getting your money. We are all trying to make a living doing this but the production of these pieces is about making a good sword each time we do one as opposed to just meeting the specs for an individual set of parameters we are working towards. There is always a touch of variation. What is acceptable in that end is different for each maker and their style.

While I fear I have not answered your question really I hope I have increased your understanding of the challenges sword makers have in meeting the expectations of the modern mass market consumer in making a good quality sword.

Best Regards
Craig

[Peter Bosman]

All I am asking is BASIC product information. I accept all the variations in the end product, resilliance, balance, whatever.

I want the gross vehicle weight, horsepower/torque, payload of the vehicle which without the say the overal reduction of the total power train does not tell you all that much.
Even knowing the king pin inclination, track, wheelbase, suspension design the proof of the car is still in the riding.

What THIS community by and large is doing is buying the illustration.

It is all too easy to find examples of a 1000+ $ product tested to have a 40-45 cutting edge and although the vast majority of buyers will never find out if their sword is up to spec. the sample is worrying to say the least. Worrying ME that is. If it does not worry the market then the makers, of whom most will probably be bona fide, are not motivated to get their product more alike original blades.

Somehow I think that Beowulf would not have responded with ' well, its a craft so I will make do' if newly delivered his sword would have sounded with a dull thud instead of a ringing tone, but stuck the thing where the sun does not shine

I am no Beowulf and my dragonslayer is expected to chase off the odd feral dog only apart from me trying to wave it about 'elegantly' so my life will not depend on quality BUT: If this industry expects me to invest in a replica sword, I expect to know in WHAT and want to be able to trust I get THAT.

I would like to refer again to the remark that a newly made replica is safer than an original and repeat my doubting that if the industry as a whole does not provide basic data nor produce according to those.

'Quality' implies you can state pretty well defined what you make and then guarantee to make that . Wether you define low or high specs. is something else. Please note that the delivery process and after sales are part of the product!
At the moment I am confused by this industry as is seems that a quality replica as in term of definition does not seem to exist

Meanwhile I have been informed by a maker that for me and my skills a mono-steel would be better than the far more expensive laminates he also makes. This for me proves that the individual makers in majority are bona fide persons, yet this same maker is not producing with anywhere near an acceptable quality control and I choose not to throw that dice.

Peter

[Russ Ellis]

[Ken Speed]

Peter & Russ,

Russ said, " I suspect that Beowulf would have wandered into the smithy several times to check on his sword's progress... and could have asked for modifications if he didn't like something about it after the fact. " Nah, I think Beowulf did it the old fashioned way and snuck up behind a guy who had a sword and hit him over the head with a club.". Its a lot cheaper that way!

Peter, I certainly agree that we should be able to get reliable information about what we purchase. I think when a perspective buyer can't get the info from the manufacturer he should look to the dealer or buy something else. Let the market take care of it.

Best,

Ken Speed

[Jared Smith]

At one point, I felt pretty much the way Peter seems to be describing himself. I offered an extra $300 to have a sword nearing completion hardness tested prior to shipment. The better machines do cost several thousand dollars, require knowledgible calibration, and a block matching the blade contour so that the impinged surface would be perpendicular to the tester is going to be required for most testing services. As Craig pointed out, this will only give a surface indication, and does not really represent the overall performance of the blade structure. Regardless, the manufacturer declined my offer.

Basic specs in my mind are the materials used, style of heat treat (is it a salt bath that gives a good deep conditioning?), qualitative "fit and finish" as this forum subjectively assigns to various makers and models, and easily measured stats (weight, dimensions, points of balance, etc.)

Sitting here looking at my growing collection of tools gearing up towards making a blade myself, I can relate to how hard it is to give an accurate and meaningful tolerance on something as complex as a sword, particularly if produced in small numbers. How would they assign geometry tolerance to a "perfect" Flamberge?
Even with careful hand grinding and polishing, I have found some of my Albions to be something like 1/8 to 1/4 ounce different in weight than the published weight. I have good scales (can go down to tenths of a grain or 1/70000 of a pound in fact) and know that such variation is simply inevitable even if model X is accurate within a millimeter of an original.

I think that in the end you may have to trust subjective opinions of independent customers. Are the maker's blades visually perfect (need calipers to find problems), or are defects obvious. Do they have a reputation for consistency, or are some model X blades good while others are flawed?

[Peter Bosman]

[Jared Smith]

I actually share with Peter a similar desire for precision, repeatability, and accuracy in manufacturing. Frequently I engage in posts about possibilities for better statistics (CoP, where it is measured from...intended grip center or the guard, etc.) that more clearly convey in minute detail what one can expect from a sword model, even if they have never held it.

Peter,
Have you considered clearly spelling out your "wish list" for published statistics, aspects of the sword that belong in basic descriptions, acceptable tolerances, as well as specific methods by which "low budget" manufacturers should be able to achieve this consistent quality assurance? Also, what do you consider a reasonable price to pay for this (mainly your own prescription for tolerances) when perhaps less than 500 will be made over the course of a few years?

Take this one step further. Ask yourself a hypothetical question; "What if you were given a billion dollars to set up your own dream sword production company how would you do it?" Bear in mind, automotive makers and other modern mass producers often spend around 1/4 billion to set up and fine tune a good mass production program for something like one totally new engine. Even then, with robotic operations, tool checks, etc., they resort to CNC sorting and matching of parts requiring match-up precision (pistons, rings, block bores, rods, shafts, etc.) on the order of 0.005" to 0.010" because these high tech operations generally produce significant variations in parts (such that is not economical to insist on higher perfection even when selling billions of dollars worth of product ). Many precision parts I deal with are only produced once. These, if comparable in complexity to a sword, but held to aerospace standards, would cost around $25,000 minimum at many facilities that are ISO 900X qualified. If you are only going to make 100 of something, or you only expect to sell 500 at a gross price of ~$750,000, the fraction of sales price devoted to your quality assurance should be in line with what you could spend while still making a profit.