A very tough and responsive practice sword for Type XIV and sword and buckler styles.
[ Linked Image ]
More photos here:
http://www.albion-swords.com/swords/albion/ma...ce-I33.htm
We've already started shipping these to the first customers, so let us know what you think!
Mike and Harlan will have at least one of these at the Atlanta Blade Show next week as well.
Best,
Howy
I really like it. I think I know how I will be spending my bonus money this summer... on lots of Albions!
That is a good looking sword. I will be very interested to hear how it holds up to the rigors of reenactment/stage combat.
I was just looking at the concept page the other day, wondering when it would be out!
M.
M.
I just got to play with one of these today... one word: NICE.
This is going to be a very popular trainer for anyone doing medieval single-hander work!
This is going to be a very popular trainer for anyone doing medieval single-hander work!
I'm so glad that I'm going to the Atlanta Blade Show. So many new nice Albion Goodies. Perfect timing.
I received my pair this evening. My first impressions are that these were worth the wait. Compared to my other Albions, handling is perhaps most similar to the Laird, and not too far off the Squire Line 13th Century knightly. Flexibility is good, just enough not to be overly dangerous in sparring with appropriate light armour, but not unrealistically whippy. It looks like Albion has used the long development time on these to get them right. I'll provide more impressions after I've had time to do more than just solo forms work.
Well, I'd been thinking about getting a new suit... I guess not. I really like the way this one turned out.
-Grey
-Grey
According to the Albion page, these swords are suitable substitutes for Albion's Type XIVs. I'm wondering how suitable they are as practice swords for earlier blade types? And, is there any plans to add a practice sword that's more along the lines of these earlier types?
| Craig Peters wrote: |
| According to the Albion page, these swords are suitable substitutes for Albion's Type XIVs. I'm wondering how suitable they are as practice swords for earlier blade types? And, is there any plans to add a practice sword that's more along the lines of these earlier types? |
Craig,
The I.33 handles very much like the Albion Type XII swords in my collection, and is a bit less blade-weighted than what I recall the Norman Xa being, although that's from memory. I don't own and haven't handled any of the type XIVs, so I can't offer any comparison there. I think that if you wanted a Type XII training blade, the I.33 would be a very good choice.
Jeff
| Jeff Ross wrote: | ||
Craig, The I.33 handles very much like the Albion Type XII swords in my collection, and is a bit less blade-weighted than what I recall the Norman Xa being, although that's from memory. I don't own and haven't handled any of the type XIVs, so I can't offer any comparison there. I think that if you wanted a Type XII training blade, the I.33 would be a very good choice. Jeff |
Jeff,
Sorry, I had read your post, and I didn't mean to imply that you were mistaken about it's handling. I just wanted to hear the specific opinions of some of the people at Albion on the issue.
Craig
| Craig Peters wrote: |
| According to the Albion page, these swords are suitable substitutes for Albion's Type XIVs. I'm wondering how suitable they are as practice swords for earlier blade types? And, is there any plans to add a practice sword that's more along the lines of these earlier types? |
The nature of blunt trainingswords will invariably mean they are more generic than sharp swords. Blade profile is an almost an immaterial question and the three things that matters most is dynamic balance, physical size (length and weight) and safety. Variations in blade shape and blade type that has an impact on cutting and thrusting is obviously not of interest for a safe training sword. The real interest in the design of a training sword is how the sword moves and follows your intention.
This means that the 1:33 can be a good training alternative for most high medieval swords of this size, meaning medium sized swords of type XII, XIIIb, XIV and XIV. If you close your eyes and is given two well preserved original swords of different type, you will most probably be impressed by their responsiveness and agility. It will howverev be difficult for you to tell what Oakeshott type they are untill you open your eyes.
Imagine the 1:33 representing the feeling of holding a well preserved original with closed eyes. They style and shape of the blade does not matter so much as the feel and dynamic balance.
More dedicated thrusters like type XVIII and XV are always going to pose a problem because the originals are are nothing if not stiff and pointy. This does not lend itself well to duplicate in a safe training weapon, unless you are specifically adjusting your trining methods to use such weapons. Some do prefer that kind of training weapon, but that is another issue.
The Maestro line will over time expand into other types of training swords as there is quite a massive interest.
A viking blunt is a given: that simply has to be done. Development is under way.
A medieval fullered sword with longer blade might also be a good idea. However, the 1:33 can be used to train earlier styles of swords and shield as well, so that is less urgent.
I can see that there might be a need to simulate medieval single hand swords with longer blades. Perhaps the interest for such a training weapon is great eough to warrant another model? We shall see.
The Maestro line will not be a showcase of the Oakeshott typology. That is not a meaningful way to approach trainingswords. You need safe swords that mimics the handling of a sharp weapon. This is the mission of the Maestro line.
To do this you need to shape the blade fundamentally different from the sharp counterpart. By this the charactersitics of a typology is lost.
Stylistic shaping of the hilt furniture is also less an issue with training swords, but still possible I guess.
If you put a tea cosy and a straight guard on the 1:33 it would be a gesture for another time and type, but still not changing the function of the sword to any great extent. In some cases I can see a reason to do this, but how the Maestro line expands further down the road is still to be seen. This is just the beginning.
The possibilities for trainingswords is vast and expanding with the growing interest for WMA.
| Peter Johnsson wrote: |
| [...A fascinating explanation...] |
Wow. This post alone would deserve a spotlight :eek:
That's everything I ever thought a good practice weapon design should aim at... At least, I'm sure now of where my money must go for a medieval sword ;)
And all that makes me wish all the more that something like pivot points were included in sword's specifications on Albion's pages. If I understand correctly, the COP is not so relevant for those practice weapons, since the blade geometry is altered to make them safer while keeping the dynamics. Given that the COP depends most heavily on the blade stiffness and geometry...
Anyway, it's great to see such designs coming up!
duplicate post deleted-
Jeff
Jeff
Last edited by Jeff Ross on Mon 04 Jun, 2007 6:04 am; edited 1 time in total
| Peter Johnsson wrote: | ||
The nature of blunt trainingswords will invariably mean they are more generic than sharp swords. Blade profile is an almost an immaterial question and the three things that matters most is dynamic balance, physical size (length and weight) and safety. Variations in blade shape and blade type that has an impact on cutting and thrusting is obviously not of interest for a safe training sword. The real interest in the design of a training sword is how the sword moves and follows your intention. This means that the 1:33 can be a good training alternative for most high medieval swords of this size, meaning medium sized swords of type XII, XIIIb, XIV and XIV. If you close your eyes and is given two well preserved original swords of different type, you will most probably be impressed by their responsiveness and agility. It will howverev be difficult for you to tell what Oakeshott type they are untill you open your eyes. Imagine the 1:33 representing the feeling of holding a well preserved original with closed eyes. They style and shape of the blade does not matter so much as the feel and dynamic balance. More dedicated thrusters like type XVIII and XV are always going to pose a problem because the originals are are nothing if not stiff and pointy. This does not lend itself well to duplicate in a safe training weapon, unless you are specifically adjusting your trining methods to use such weapons. Some do prefer that kind of training weapon, but that is another issue. The Maestro line will over time expand into other types of training swords as there is quite a massive interest. A viking blunt is a given: that simply has to be done. Development is under way. A medieval fullered sword with longer blade might also be a good idea. However, the 1:33 can be used to train earlier styles of swords and shield as well, so that is less urgent. I can see that there might be a need to simulate medieval single hand swords with longer blades. Perhaps the interest for such a training weapon is great eough to warrant another model? We shall see. The Maestro line will not be a showcase of the Oakeshott typology. That is not a meaningful way to approach trainingswords. You need safe swords that mimics the handling of a sharp weapon. This is the mission of the Maestro line. To do this you need to shape the blade fundamentally different from the sharp counterpart. By this the charactersitics of a typology is lost. Stylistic shaping of the hilt furniture is also less an issue with training swords, but still possible I guess. If you put a tea cosy and a straight guard on the 1:33 it would be a gesture for another time and type, but still not changing the function of the sword to any great extent. In some cases I can see a reason to do this, but how the Maestro line expands further down the road is still to be seen. This is just the beginning. The possibilities for trainingswords is vast and expanding with the growing interest for WMA. |
Peter,
What you've written here about training swords not following the Oakeshott Typology makes sense to me. I just didn't want to place an order for the I.33 to suddenly learn that it wasn't a very appropriate training weapon for something other than an XIV.
I'm not too concerned about hilt furnishings for training swords because they're intended specifically to be training weapons, rather than recreations of specific types of sharp medieval and renaissance swords. I like variety in my Next Gens because they represent a broad range of swords and it's nice to have different styles. With a more utilitarian, (at least, from our modern perspective), training sword, this becomes less important.
Craig Peters wrote: I'm not too concerned about hilt furnishings for training swords because they're intended specifically to be training weapons, rather than recreations of specific types of sharp medieval and renaissance swords. I like variety in my Next Gens because they represent a broad range of swords and it's nice to have different styles. With a more utilitarian, (at least, from our modern perspective), training sword, this becomes less important.
As someone who will use the Maestros as stage combat swords I am concerned with hilt furniture. I want something that, at least at a distance, looks like the real thing. The hilt of the I.33, though it has a somewhat stripped down appearance, looks real both close up and far away.
As someone who will use the Maestros as stage combat swords I am concerned with hilt furniture. I want something that, at least at a distance, looks like the real thing. The hilt of the I.33, though it has a somewhat stripped down appearance, looks real both close up and far away.
| Roger Hooper wrote: |
|
As someone who will use the Maestros as stage combat swords I am concerned with hilt furniture. I want something that, at least at a distance, looks like the real thing. The hilt of the I.33, though it has a somewhat stripped down appearance, looks real both close up and far away. |
Roger,
I think you're misunderstanding what I meant here. Peter Johnsson specifically mentioned "[i]f you put a tea cosy and a straight guard on the 1:33 it would be a gesture for another time and type, but still not changing the function of the sword to any great extent," because he knows I have a thing for tea cosy pommels. My comment here was not at all about not caring if the hilt furniture looks historically accurate or not. It's still very important to me that it does, even if it is a training sword. What isn't so important is whether or not it has a brazil nut pommel, or disk pommel, or a Type I guard, or Type II guard, etc.
I got mine yesterday and I am as impressed with it as I was when I handled the prototype in Las Vegas earlier this year. This is a really nice training blunt, while I have only flourished with mine at this point, I can't wait to get together with Stewart Feil and engage in some serious I:33 blade on blade engagement. I have been using a blunt from a different manufacturer and the difference in feel is like night and day. This tool will give a lot of control over your actions which will allow for safer bouting with steel. After I have actually used it in a bout I will post further observations. As for the hilt furniture, while it is plain compared to some of Albion's higher end sharps, it is still much nicer than a lot of the stuff I see on weapons from other makers. The grip is cord wrapped and provides a very non slip grip that will hold up nicely to the abuse that a blunt takes. The one thing I would change on a personal note is I like a slightly wider grip that the one on the sword. The one on the sword is about 1.22 inches at it's widest point and I have a personal preference for one about 1.375 inches wide because I have large hands. This is not a flaw with the sword just a slight difference from a personal preference. I think most people will prefer the grip size as it is.
Thanks for a great training tool.
Brian Hunt
ARMA member
GFS
www.paulushectormair.com
Thanks for a great training tool.
Brian Hunt
ARMA member
GFS
www.paulushectormair.com
Page 1 of 1
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