[W. Knight]

[Nathan Robinson]

[Glen A Cleeton]

I was one that did mention that a few pictures might go a long way to dispell not forging in Canada/in house and a few months later in discussion Eyal mentioned.

[Joe Fults]

No horse in this race but I will observe that when you acknowledge a question as valid, then commit to posting a response by a specific time, and then fail to do so, you're likely to have people in the peanut gallery fill in the space you leave open. This might be poor sportsmanship but it is the way of things.

[Torsten F.H. Wilke]

An Open Letter To Those Involved:


My apologies in opening, but in all good conscience I simply cannot keep quiet about this anymore. I am starting to dislike the attitudes displayed as of late towards Mr. Azerad of Darksword Armory here on these forums. In no way am I staunch supporter of him or any purported practices associated with him, since I don't even qualify as a true sword enthusiast as many of you very capably do. But in Eyal's defence, I am starting to notice a negative shift towards what could be mistaken for condescending commentary or even snide personal attacks, especially when under the guise of reputable, constructive discussion. It seems to be transgressing right past the boundaries of normal civilized behavior, apparently enhanced by a bit of internet bravado.

Now, has anybody given any real thought to the implications of all this negativity? How will it end up reflecting upon the site as a whole? And what of the general membership? Will they start viewing myArmoury.com unfavorably? I am certainly inclined to think that no good will come of this type of behavior. So, if you truely have issues of merit to discuss please do so in a better manner, one more becoming of Gentlemen.


Regards, Torsten

PS: Please don't drag a reputable website down with your pittances...

.

[Paul B.G]

[Joe Fults]

Perhaps prior community experience is not completely fair when considering who they are and what they do, especially in the context of this very moment in time. Their track record over the years has seemed uneven to me. Because of this I think that what you perceive as bias might reasonably be seen as prescience from a different frame of reference. Still, perception and perspective is something that all of us should consider, and some posts might have been better constructed, which is what I think you are both suggesting.

[Chad Arnow]

It's not a stretch to say that discussing Darksword can bring out the worst in this community. They are a polarizing company with ardent supporters and ardent detractors. Their product line seems to be improving by accounts from those who've bought recently.

However, the company's history is hard to ignore and some find it impossible to set it aside. While it may not be entirely fair to criticize today for the actions of previous years, there are still current issues. For me, I feel these need to be addressed before I can begin to come around. Here are some of them:

Clean up the incorrect material on the website. There are a number of things on there that could be construed as misleading. We can debate whether the copy is meant to be misleading or whether it's just sloppy editing or something, but cleaning it up would begin to give more credence to claims of integrity and professionalism. To be taken seriously, I'd urge DSA to be much more serious about the accuracy of info on their website. Citing specific museum examples raises expectations and shouldn't be done haphazardly or sloppily. Here's an incomplete list of issues with the website:

Sword 1368: It's not based on a sword in the Royal Ontario Museum. The original they reference and used to picture is in Paris. The furniture on the Paris sword is gilt iron or steel, not brass.

Sword 1325 (Henry V): The original sword is housed in Westminster, not the Tower Collection.

1302 Dark Age sword: There is no original of this form in the Tower. The closest thing to it seems to be a modern design.

There are a number of items of medieval form that they claim are based on examples in the Tower of London. Much of the Tower collection is now of much later vintage. Much of the earlier stuff is now at Leeds. They should check to see if those items are/were part of HM collection and see whether they are in the tower or at Leeds.

Sword 1350: This is not based on a historical design, but one submitted by a SBG member. It shouldn't be listed as based on something in Zurich.

Regarding historical accuracy, I doubt I'll we'll share the same interpretation of that term and that's fine. There's room for a wide variety of interpretation in the marketplace. I think they could stand to back down from some claims and use terminology that I feel better fits the product line, but that's personal opinion and I don't expect agreement on the issue.

Another step in the right direction would be to have them stop relying so heavily on reviews posted on their vendor's websites. Those reviews, fairly or not, will always be viewed with some skepticism because of the financial involvement the reviewer has.

As members of this community, we have the choice of whether or not to behave like gentlemen; we don't always make the right choice and that does indeed reflect poorly on us. We can also choose as individuals whether to pile on or not in these situations; again, we don't always make the right choice. People tend to feel strongly about things they feel are misleading. But perhaps we can and should find a way to better uphold our community values than what tends to happen in these threads.

[J. Hargis]

I can reply with first hand experience based upon a Darksword Norman that I received just two days ago. I also have a Darksword Parrying Dagger enroute, expected delivery date is tomorrow. So I can only speak on The Norman.

The Norman was scraped and scratched almost from head to toe.

After a lengthy and cautious steel wool & wiping down session using various grades, I did manage to remove much of what I regard as going far beyond the little imperfections that are often found, if not expected in almost any handmade sword. However, there are deeper scratches on the guard and the blade which would simply involve too much metal removal to alleviate. While my efforts resulted in a much better appearance by far, I'm still left with a flawed Darksword Norman sword.

What I also find discomforting is the fact that Darksword, prior to building and preparing my Norman for shipment, had announced a new, revised Norman. How nice I thought, good timing. However, I was sent the older version, and this version even lacked Darksword's maker's mark.

I have sent an email to Darksword about all of this. Cutting to the chase, I asked if I could return The Norman I had received, and asked if they would send me the new version. I also asked for a better examination before shipment. I have not yet received a reply, it is the weekend, but I am hopeful of a favorable response.

I realize that at their prices one cannot not expect Albion-like quality, it just won't happen. But I do expect Darksword, or any maker for that matter, to deliver a product which is inspected for such obvious flaws before they are shipped. The maker should deliver the piece as advertised and as displayed.

In my communications with Eyal, emails, phone calls, he always comes across as a gentleman. In no way do I want to appear mean spirited here. But the facts are the facts.

Thanks, Jon

[J. Hargis]

Hello all.
Here is some information, much of which I also posted at the SFI Forum in a thread concerning Darksword Armory's quality. It's obvious that I have now reached a certain level of, well, frustration with Darksword Armory. While not a complete novice or rookie in collecting, I do have some things to learn. My recent interaction with Darksword products has been illuminating. I hope my language is not too strong for the moderators here.

As I stated in my previous post concerning The Norman sword from Darksword, I was expecting delivery of their Parrying Dagger 1812, their version of a main-guache, see: http://www.darksword-armory.com/medieval-daggers/. It has arrived and this is what I can tell you. I'll try to upload some pictures later.

- There are multiple rusted areas; at the end where the wire wrapping meets the guard, on both sides of the upper blade / ricasso, and in multiple areas where major scratches have occurred. One could almost get the impression by the rust contrast that the knife is chrome plated, I'm not claiming it is, but these blemishes do jump out.

- The wood grip underneath the wire wrap is blatantly visible where the wire wrap meets the guard / quillons. The wire wrap appears incomplete, in fact it is incomplete. Perhaps a turkshead or some sort of collar would have been helpful.

- And the worst part. The ring (which is perhaps too thin) is soldered to the guard, well, very poorly. Solder is smeared broadly all over the areas of attachment and there are large lumps of solder on both sides of the attachment points, there was no post soldering clean-up. And again, rust is clearly visible at both of the ring's connecting points

- The included scabbard, while not unattractive, isn't close to fitting the dagger. It's about 1/4 inch too wide, and a good 1 1/2 inch too long. The dagger simply flops around inside the scabbard.

- Most of the blade isn't bad, there are some scratches which I could remove as I did with partial success on their Norman sword. The dagger design is attractive, I generally like the main-guache variety of dagger, especially this dagger as shown in the photo displayed at DSA's website. This dagger does feel sturdy, nothing rattles or wobbles. It's the poor execution of assembly and the general lack of quality control that is obvious.

All in all, to this collector, Darksword Armory has proven to be very disappointing and I cannot recommended them until some very obvious quality control problems are addressed.

There will be additional discussion points in another email to Darksword.

Thanks, Jon

[Bruno Giordan]

[Raymond Deancona]

Mr. Hargis, I'm curious if a reply or satisfactory conclusion was reached about the Norman sword? Did you buy direct from DSA or through a distributor? (KoA as an example, I know they inspect before shipping.) But what I find curious is the seeming acceptance that inexpensive swords are going to arrive with flaws, blemishes, rust or other unacceptable "dings" that the purchaser is going to fix themselves! Just because a hobbyist is "only" spending $200 dollars (or less than $500) is no excuse for shoddy production. Kris Cutlery is an excellent example of a good quality, inexpensive sword. I've owned (and still own) several of their swords and knives, and none ever arrived with rust or scratches. The only modifications I ever felt the need to do were handle re-wrap and a better quality sheath. Hanwei is another good example of economy and quality. As hobbyists we need to stop accepting poor production, and get our money back... The market will take care of itself at that point.

[T.F. McCraken]

Well, as a potential customer of DSA, I'd have to say I'd have reservations after reading this thread. The observations seem genuine and the makers responses have been almost deflective.
Interesting thread, indeed. Eye-opening.

Murphy

[Matthew Stagmer]

[J. Hargis]

Raymond Deancona,

I have yet to hear from Darksword.

In addition to my request to exchange The Norman that I received for the newer edition (with some guarantee of pre-shipping inspection), I sent a request for a full refund on the 1812 Parrying Dagger. Given the situation, I felt this to be more than fair. Though a part of me just wants to chuck it all and get a total refund on both. While I did improve The Norman substantially, the dagger I left alone in disgust. Frankly, I was embarrassed and still am.

I ordered these directly from Darksword via telephone with Eyal.

As I said, I realized that DSA was not Albion or Arms & Armor, and I do have some fine, higher end items in my collection and want to built upon it with a nice variety of swords, daggers, & knives. I had read some favorable reviews of DSA and some much older, negative reviews which were addressed by Eyal in an interview. The photos and descriptions on their website looked relatively impressive. And given the price points, about $310.00 for The Norman, $160.00 for the parrying dagger (+ the usual shipping charges), & scabbards, being made in Canada, and I did realize they produce larger quantities, I thought I'd give them a shot.

It's the assembly and whatever happens after the assembly (in the case of The Norman, though the parts could have been beat up prior to assembly) that is the problem. Their seems to be little to no quality control in place. It's probably just luck that someone gets one as shown & described. As you said, there are other high volume companies which deliver well assembled and blemish free products. I have held new Hanweis and Albions, and of course there is a difference, but both were well built, blemish free and obviously inspected before going out of their respective shops.

I'm not sure how this will be resolved, but it has been educational.

T.F. McCraken,

Yes, they look good on their website, prices are low, the descriptions are alluring, but until there is a better quality control system in place I would go elsewhere. Or you might just get lucky. The Norman is a bit 'whippy', and not refined, but for the bucks and if it was delivered in good order, you would have relatively decent sword to fool around with. That's a big IF. Not once, but twice I got nailed.

Regards, Jon

[F. Portman]

I've been following the recent addition to this thread and I'm very interested to learn how it turns out. It's true that this board has tended to be a bit snarky when it comes to DSA and it appears that the DSA people decided to check out of the discussions here some time ago, figuring they can't win. That's understandable, perhaps, on a personal level, though possibly not smart as a business/PR strategy. This kind of silence (if I'm reading it right) to an actual dissatisfied customer is startling, though, especially given that the flaws were so great. And I'm with Raymond Deancona: if I'd spent $400 on an item that required major repairs right out of the box, I'd be irate. If that's really what happened, it's appalling.

[J. Hargis]

F. Portman:

Thanks for your interest in this amazing purchase.

[Roger Hooper]

[F. Portman]

Glad to hear you're bouncing back, J. And I'm also interested in the details of your commissions if you'd care to share them.

As to the DSA order, though, it isn't clear to me from your posts exactly what, if any, response you've gotten from them. Did they respond, and if so, what did they say? Or has it all come from your end so far?

[J. Hargis]

Roger Hooper and F. Portman:

I would be going off the topic of this thread to describe my outstanding orders, I will PM both of you later with that information. Thanks for your interest. I mentioned them here to bring up something positive.

As for DSA, I did receive a phone call from Eyal.

I called him prior to sending him the email which I quoted in my last post and left a message with essentially the same information. In his return call, which he left to my voicemail, he agreed to my arrangement and very politely apologized. He also made it clear that the responsible employee would "get an earful". Good to know. And I do enjoy his Canadian accent.

So it. appears that the issue is resolved, even though I must go through the hassle of re-packing and mailing the dagger per his specific instructions. And that does bring up another point which I feel is crucial to good service and the protection of swords and cutlery in general while they are in transit. No doubt there is a thread here somewhere which discusses the critical point of postal shipment packaging.

I brought up the issue of Darksword's packaging methods with Eyal in an email exchange last night. Let it be said that I consider their packaging methods to be sub-standard. I will quote what I said about both the Norman sword and the parrying dagger packaging: