Info Favorites Register Log in
myArmoury.com Discussion Forums

Forum index Memberlist Usergroups Spotlight Topics Search
Forum Index > Historical Arms Talk > Lutel's two-handed swords. Any experience with them? Reply to topic
This is a standard topic Go to page 1, 2  Next 
Author Message
Emil Andersson




Location: Sweden
Joined: 17 Oct 2010

Posts: 136

PostPosted: Mon 19 Dec, 2011 11:47 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Alright, so I finally received the sword earlier today. I haven't had much time to look over it yet, but it appears to be quite well made, and it is an incredibly striking piece!

Here are some quick numbers for you to process. I've attached the catalogue image of the sword as reference. You'll have to excuse my metric measurements, although I'm sure it won't be a problem for you to convert them if you need to. Also, I'll describe the measurements from the viewpoint that the pommel is the bottom of the sword and the tip is the top of the sword.

Dimensions
Blade length from end of ricasso/just above flukes to tip: ~108cm
Hilt + pommel length: 45cm
Ricasso length (counting the entire leather-bound section): 25cm
Overall length: ~178cm

Cross width: 45cm
Side rings diameter perpendicular to the handle: 6cm
Side rings diameter at widest place (they're oval, you see): 11cm
Widthspan of flukes: 24cm
Blade width: 4.5cm just after ricasso and flukes, gently tapering to 2.5cm just before the point

Data
Weight: 3.5kg
Center of balance/gravity: ~16cm from the cross, just below the flukes on the ricasso
Center of percussion: ~58cm from the ricasso, which makes it about 73cm from the cross and 50cm from the tip

The blade exhibits an appropriate degree of flexibility (coming from one who's never held a sword close to this size before..) and it doesn't feel flimsy or wobbly at all. I ordered it unsharpened since I plan to use it in light drills with training partners, and it arrived with blunt edges and rounded-enough points.

I am quite happy with my purchase so far, although I will be pressed for time to find out anything in-depth about it at this point. Tomorrow I might get the chance to bring this beauty outside the cramped confines of my apartment. I'm looking forward to that. Cool



 Attachment: 179.17 KB
two_hander_16005A.jpg

View user's profile Send private message
Daniel Wallace




Location: Pennsylvania USA
Joined: 07 Aug 2011

Posts: 580

PostPosted: Fri 23 Dec, 2011 10:49 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

now that's a chopper, and you went with the flamberge styled blade fancy. Big Grin

i'm trying to think of the conversion of kg to lb. i can't reference anything in kg to give me an idea of it's weight. but i know the distribution of mass in these swords allows them to be really quick for their size. i'll still be looking forward to how you find the sword preforms next to what you've handled before.

Mad now i want one! actually i've been searching all over the net for a two hander but still didn't find one that was unique enough for myself. instead i'm working on plans for a custom/reproduction fechtschwert sword that seems to fit in the two hander category. once i get off this blasted night shift i hope to get the plans rolling again.
View user's profile Send private message
Greg Mele
Industry Professional



Location: Chicago, IL USA
Joined: 20 Mar 2006

Posts: 356

PostPosted: Fri 23 Dec, 2011 12:54 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

1 kg = 2.2 lbs. So this sword weighs about 7.7 lbs
Greg Mele
Chicago Swordplay Guild
www.chicagoswordplayguild.com

www.freelanceacademypress.com
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
William P




Location: Sydney, Australia
Joined: 11 Jul 2010

Posts: 1,487

PostPosted: Wed 18 Jan, 2012 12:44 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

so it seems the 3.5kg weight is fairly typical for these blades, interesting.
ill be keeping lutel in my sights in future.
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
William P




Location: Sydney, Australia
Joined: 11 Jul 2010

Posts: 1,487

PostPosted: Wed 18 Apr, 2012 11:39 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Emil Andersson wrote:
Alright, so I finally received the sword earlier today. I haven't had much time to look over it yet, but it appears to be quite well made, and it is an incredibly striking piece!

Here are some quick numbers for you to process. I've attached the catalogue image of the sword as reference. You'll have to excuse my metric measurements, although I'm sure it won't be a problem for you to convert them if you need to. Also, I'll describe the measurements from the viewpoint that the pommel is the bottom of the sword and the tip is the top of the sword.

Dimensions
Blade length from end of ricasso/just above flukes to tip: ~108cm
Hilt + pommel length: 45cm
Ricasso length (counting the entire leather-bound section): 25cm
Overall length: ~178cm

Cross width: 45cm
Side rings diameter perpendicular to the handle: 6cm
Side rings diameter at widest place (they're oval, you see): 11cm
Widthspan of flukes: 24cm
Blade width: 4.5cm just after ricasso and flukes, gently tapering to 2.5cm just before the point

Data
Weight: 3.5kg
Center of balance/gravity: ~16cm from the cross, just below the flukes on the ricasso
Center of percussion: ~58cm from the ricasso, which makes it about 73cm from the cross and 50cm from the tip

The blade exhibits an appropriate degree of flexibility (coming from one who's never held a sword close to this size before..) and it doesn't feel flimsy or wobbly at all. I ordered it unsharpened since I plan to use it in light drills with training partners, and it arrived with blunt edges and rounded-enough points.

I am quite happy with my purchase so far, although I will be pressed for time to find out anything in-depth about it at this point. Tomorrow I might get the chance to bring this beauty outside the cramped confines of my apartment. I'm looking forward to that. Cool

just bumping up the thread and asking how the sword handles out of curiosity, while my funds prohibit such a purchase.. im still very interested in their swords.
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Emil Andersson




Location: Sweden
Joined: 17 Oct 2010

Posts: 136

PostPosted: Thu 19 Apr, 2012 1:25 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Hello William,

I don't have any prior experience to compare it with, or any other weapon like it in my collection, but in my opinion the sword has good handling for its size. When you set in motion the dead weight becomes a lot less and you can flow through guards and strikes just like if it was a longsword. I think it's a great training tool. However, the steel is softer than I had anticipated. Lutel claims a hardness of 48 HRC, but it has received some damage from less-than-intense slow-fencing with a significantly smaller sword. My A&A training swords (claimed to range from 49-51 HRC) has been involved in much more blade contact with the same sword and others like it without sustaining anything more than small marks. I didn't have any plans for using the zweihander in bouting anyway, but the lesser hardness in the steel will make me shy away from partnered drills, too.
View user's profile Send private message
Aleksei Sosnovski





Joined: 04 Mar 2008

Posts: 313

PostPosted: Thu 19 Apr, 2012 11:10 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Keep in mind that a sword with a softer blade but thicker edge will receive less damage than a sword with a harder blade but thinner edge. I had a training "crowbar" with blade hardness of 45 HRC and it never got a deep nick despite a lot of edge-to-edge contact with considerably harder blades. It was because its edge was 6mm thick and edges of other swords were about3mm thick.
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Emil Andersson




Location: Sweden
Joined: 17 Oct 2010

Posts: 136

PostPosted: Mon 23 Apr, 2012 8:39 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Yes, that's true, the edge on the Lutel sword is only a couple of millimeters thick while the swords from A&A have much thicker edges. That still doesn't help to improve the current situation, though. I don't think the sword is very suitable for intense blade contact.

William, I have a short clip of myself performing a sequence with the sword on YouTube. You'll find it here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AqwloeFI9Ug

It's the second half of the video. It's not much, but I think it'll show you how the sword can move in spite of its great size.
View user's profile Send private message
Adam Bodorics
Industry Professional




Joined: 15 Apr 2005

Posts: 130

PostPosted: Mon 23 Apr, 2012 9:05 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Emil Andersson wrote:
I don't think the sword is very suitable for intense blade contact.

46-48 HrC is well within historic range, some being considerably softer. For such a long blade, a "softer" (to modern eyes at least) steel might mean the difference between snapping and taking a set if overstressed. I'm a bit reluctant to have my beater blades treated to be over 48 HrC for this very reason.
View user's profile Send private message
Emil Andersson




Location: Sweden
Joined: 17 Oct 2010

Posts: 136

PostPosted: Mon 23 Apr, 2012 9:25 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

You know, I have considered the pure length of the blade as a reason to keep it a bit more soft. Perhaps that softness will also let it absorb edge damage better than a harder blade would.
View user's profile Send private message
Daniel Wallace




Location: Pennsylvania USA
Joined: 07 Aug 2011

Posts: 580

PostPosted: Tue 24 Apr, 2012 10:13 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

theres another topic floating around there too that was describing the 'whippy' nature of these bigger swords. to absorb shock could be one factor another could also be the trade off of harder steel against softer. it's possible that softer steel is more forgiving to flex?
View user's profile Send private message
Bill Grandy
myArmoury Team


myArmoury Team

Location: Northern VA,USA
Joined: 25 Aug 2003
Reading list: 43 books

Spotlight topics: 2
Posts: 4,167

PostPosted: Tue 24 Apr, 2012 10:53 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Daniel Wallace wrote:
theres another topic floating around there too that was describing the 'whippy' nature of these bigger swords. to absorb shock could be one factor another could also be the trade off of harder steel against softer. it's possible that softer steel is more forgiving to flex?


Both soft and hard steel are going to flex exactly the same (at least to the visible eye). The "whippiness" of these swords is purely based on the fact that they are thin from being so large. To stiffen them, one needs more material in the cross section, which either means it has to be narrow in profile (like with an estoc, which is designed for thrusting and not cutting) or it needs to be much heavier.

I'm not sure where this idea of shock absorbtion that people keep talking about comes from, because you don't want to have extra shock absorbed and vibrating down into your arms.

HistoricalHandcrafts.com
-Inspired by History, Crafted by Hand


"For practice is better than artfulness. Your exercise can do well without artfulness, but artfulness is not much good without the exercise. -anonymous 15th century fencing master, MS 3227a
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Luke Kramer




Location: Wisconsin
Joined: 10 Dec 2011
Likes: 6 pages
Reading list: 11 books

Posts: 23

PostPosted: Tue 24 Apr, 2012 9:49 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

This might be the thread you were referencing: http://www.myArmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t=25739.

I handled the same blade as Scott did, and while it had a decent amount of flex, it certainly felt powerful and not necessarily "whippy".
View user's profile Send private message
Daniel Wallace




Location: Pennsylvania USA
Joined: 07 Aug 2011

Posts: 580

PostPosted: Wed 25 Apr, 2012 8:32 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

yeah same thread Luke.

i was under the impression that there might have been a trade off between having a harder steel and it's ability to be forgiving under the stresses of flexing. as Bill is pointing out the difference are minute. it comes down to the design of the blade and how it acts under stress and its intended use.
View user's profile Send private message


Display posts from previous:   
Forum Index > Historical Arms Talk > Lutel's two-handed swords. Any experience with them?
Page 1 of 2 Reply to topic
Go to page 1, 2  Next All times are GMT - 8 Hours

View previous topic :: View next topic
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You 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 2003-2021 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Basic Low-bandwidth Version of the forum