Seeking opinions on the Paul Chen Lowlander Greatsword -- myArmoury.com

John H

Hi,

I am in the market for a true two-hander and this sword looks like a candidate. My only complaint after looking at its stats is the fact that it is 7 pounds which strikes me as a bit heavy. Has anyone had a chance to handle/inspect one of these?

Thanks in advance.

Chad Arnow · myArmoury Team

You can try these threads for more info:

http://www.myArmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t=1566

http://www.myArmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t=7900

John H · Posted: Tue 30 Jan, 2007 7:34 pm Post subject: Thanks!

Sorry to make you drudge up those threads.

Randall Moffett · Posted: Tue 30 Jan, 2007 11:56 pm Post subject:

to elaborate on my past post.

it is not a full rat tail. THe tang after the shoulder tapers in and the last inch and a half is a screw. I have contemplated shortening the sword and peening the rat tail over but am not sure how it would affect the swords handling. I also thought of replacing the pommel (which is hollow but over 1/4 inch thich) with a solid one, perhaps countering the tang loss with some added weight.

All in all a good sword. I love it. I think having handled scores or original true two handed swords the handling is actually the same if not better than some historic ones.

Cheers,

RPM

Bartek Strojek · Posted: Fri 22 May, 2009 2:41 pm Post subject:

I believe that this guy here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zklHbW_50jA

is playing with this sword, or at least similar version.

Looks that it cuts nicely, at least.

Nathan Robinson · myArmoury Admin

I have this sword. For what it is and at its price point, I like it. It's not a rat-tail tang. The tang on mine is fairly substantial

I didn't like the sword as much when I bought it. I felt it was awkward (as I mentioned in the post linked above), but after a few years, I guess it's grown on me. I didn't spend very much on it and that absolutely factors into the "likable" equation. As I say, for the price, I like it.

Nathan Robinson · myArmoury Admin

Here is a photo of the tang... not as substantial as I remembered... but not terrible.

Remember, the hilt is very long. The tang extends 20" from shoulder to end. The narrowest part is .25" wide. It changes from a rectangular to roughly round cross-section a couple inches from the end. There appears to be no welded section, and so it's not a rat-tail.

Terry Crain · Posted: Sat 23 May, 2009 7:53 am Post subject:

Hi Nathan,

I like your sword as well. There is a appealing look to it and it is not commonly replicated (maybe Hanwei is the only one right now?)

How flexible is the blade? With that long of a handle and blade, I was wondering it was on the "whippy" side. I ask because I recently picked up an older A&A two handed "Claymore" and was surprised at how flexible the blade is. I like the look of yours and was wondering if the blade is more on the stiffer side with the rectangular ricasso section.

Thanks much.

Best regards,

Terry

Dan Dickinson · Industry Professional

Nathan Robinson · myArmoury Admin

the A&A Claymore and the CASI "lowlander" are completely different swords and aren't really intended to be used the same way. Historically, claymores are large hand-and-a-half swords (or could be looked at as shorter two-handed swords). The "lowlander" is fully a two-hander. They're very different and I'd caution anybody wanting to compare.

I've never tried to flex the CASI Lowlander's blade. It's fairly stiff. These things are more like polearms than they are like smaller swords. You can't use them in the way you would use a smaller sword like the A&A Claymore.