[Jean Thibodeau]

I' m slowly putting an edge on my MRL Anelace dagger and I notices that the steel seems much harder than my recently acquired MRL chopper.

The blade of the chopper was easily sharpened using a file to get the bevels close to sharp and finishing with diamond and ceramic hones: I would estimate the harness to be close to a typical axe or machete.

The Anelace blade is much harder: The same file that would cut into the chopper like it was butter barely cuts into the blade, not quite the feel of trying to cut glass but close.

So now I have the fun of hand sharpening with a diamond hone: On the negative side, it's taking forever ! But on the plus side when I do get it sharp the effort should be worth it.

Luckily the, as it came blunt edges, seems like only a couple of millimetres thick ! And I am very patient about doing this the slow way: A few evenings of 5 to 6 hours of non stop honing should do it.

The Anelace seems worth it for the price and very much so if one plans to do a bit of aging of blade: I used my Lemon juice and patterned toilet paper method to etch the blade with a faux patterned steel look. If you put a lemon juice saturated strip of this toilet paper the paper stick to the surface on the majority of the surface but random places were the paper pulls away from the surface combined with the pattern of the paper leave a damascus looking surface. I repeat this process at least twice to fill in areas that didn't pattern as much as the rest of the blade.

Oh, about 12 hours produces more than just rust but actual 3D patterns. After this I polish the blade bringing out the relief and removing all the rust. This is followed by gun blue. Using steel wool gives a bright but darkened finish with darker areas were the steel has been eaten away. I think it ends up looking old but still well maintained and still in use in period.

The original MRL antique brass finish seems much too even for me but a light buffing with steel wool brings out some highlights. The blade bevels could be sharper and the lacquer finish was just annoying as I intended to age this one anyway. Happy supprise: The scabbard actually has a nice snug fit ! This is something I have often read as usually not so good with Windlass scabbards: Maybe they are listening and improving things?

Sorry for no pictures as I still haven't purchased a digital camera.

The only negative is that I have no idea about how wide or thick is the tang: Since the handle near the guard is very narrow I don't think that the tang can be much wider than 1/4". ( May be similar to the tang on their Coustille that seems made in one piece and minimally strong enough even if it looks very narrow. There was a topic on this: Search Coustille. )

I've seen some pictures of original Cinquedea that must also have very narrow tangs !? Any opinion on how strong a narrow tang, if of sound construction, can be and still do the job. ( Minimum strength. )

[Jean Thibodeau]

The Cinquedea looks interesting as I just got the Anelace: As I asked in my own topic, I wonder how strong are the tangs on these. I don't want to take mine apart to find out and maybe I would rather not know if it's really skinny.

The blade hardness it very high as sharpening it is very very slow with a diamond hone ( File hardly bites into the steel).
So MRL / Windlass seems to be heatreating to a high harness / good edge holding at least on some of their knives and swords. )

As a general question: Can a light tang 1/4" or 3/16" wide and maybe 3/32" thick be considered strong enough for a 17" inch long dagger with a 2.5" wide blade ?

I'm assuming it's one piece with the blade, heat treated not too hard or soft, and no stupid design flaws like stress risers or stubby construction with a doubtful quality welded to a very thin rod.

( Tang at least as good as their Coustille dagger ? )

In any case my recent topic thread goes into more general detail and I don't want to repeat it all here. ( But I would really like to know. )
http://www.myArmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t=4897

[G. Scott H.]

[Chad Arnow]

Jean,
Since your post really wasn't related so much to new MRL items as it was to your original thread, I've moved that stuff here.

[J. Padgett]

Hi Jean. I saw your post in the new MRL stuff thread, and thought you would like to know I own two MRL swords I have recently dismounted to replace the hilts. I'll post pictures of the tangs later today. They are not rat tails, but aren't quite as substantial as my Atrim. I'm not sure how their sword tangs compare to their daggers though I can't imagine they would be too different.

[J. Padgett]

To save the site some bandwidth I'm just going to post links to where I have the pictures posted elsewhere.

http://img323.imageshack.us/img323/3481/schwerttang4zv.jpg Tang on the MRL Schwert.

http://img202.imageshack.us/img202/4325/battleswordtang6hz.jpg Tang of the MRL Battle Sword. It is slightly less substantial, but I believe the Battle Sword is an older model than the Schwert.

http://img202.imageshack.us/img202/47/mrlvsatrim7no.jpg Battle sword tang compared to my Atrim longsword tang. The MRL is the bottom one.

http://img317.imageshack.us/img317/8185/schwertandbattle28mq.jpg The two swords in question before I dismounted them. Both had grips of 4 1/2 inches. The thickness of both tangs is 1/8 of an inch.

[Jean Thibodeau]

Chad;

No problem with moving my post: I wasn't sure about bumping my topic back up or making a comment on the new topic dealing with the new MRL stuff.

J.;

Thanks for the pictures of those tangs: They look solid in most cases except maybe the one with radiused corners on the tang that looks as if the tang is welded on. Oh, I'm assuming that it came that way ? It is possible that you added the radiusing or welded a new tang yourself or had it done. ( Just a guess as it looks different from the other tangs with more squarish corners. )

A welded tang can ether be better or worse depending on the quality of the weld. ( I guess ??? )

G.;

I agree that with a dagger the tang would have to endure less stress than with a sword and can be a bit less robust and still do the job.

In any case MRL seems to be improving the look and the quality of assembly of their product.
Also at the price they do seem worth it. They also seem to be getting closer to good handling qualities that make them a notch or two higher than wallhangers.

Maybe a new topic about tangs, good / bad / dangerously flawed if intended for use might be worth starting: Comments from industry makers would be interesting !? What is the minimum acceptable tang ?

[J. Padgett]

Actually I think the one you're refering to as having radiused corners is the Atrim. The tang isn't welded on, but the the way it was ground out is more rounded.

I would say MRL has improved because I believe the Schwert is a more recent model than the Battle Sword, and it's tang is much larger in relation to the blade. The Schwert has much more solid hilt components, and is balanced more nicely as well.

[Jean Thibodeau]

J.;

Ha ! That explains it: I didn't notice any info about it being an ATrim, it did look different !

The way it is radiused would be my preference if I was having a custom sword made.

There does seem to be a little grinding at the point the tang joins the main blade that seems in the picture to have reduced the thickness at that point by a small amount: This is something I think should be avoided in theory as it it the last place you would want any " relative weakening of the tang. ( Naturally my perception of the photo could be wrong and there is no weakening there. And, this may be purely theoretical and the sword is perfectly sound. )

In any case MRL seems to be listening to previous criticism and improving the desirability of their offerings ! ( Always a good thing for all. )

[G. Scott H.]

[J. Padgett]

[G. Scott H.]

[J. Padgett]

Maybe they make them from 3/16" stock, but once all is said, and done they are on 1/8"? After all it is only a difference of 1/16".

I'm really impressed with the Schwert considering it was only $85. It is nicely balanced too. I'm just replacing the ugly (to me at least) grip, and pommel.

[G. Scott H.]