| Author |
Message |
Thomas McDonald
myArmoury Alumni
|
 Posted: Fri 12 Sep, 2003 6:16 pm Post subject: Pending review .....Gus's "Moonbrand" , Type XIV |
 |
|
'Ol Mac willl be putting this wonderful Dirty Dog model thru it's paces very soon,
and a report will be forthcoming .....
Stay tuned kiddies , Mac
* Photos : Copyright Lee Reeves Armoury
* Photo : Copyright Lee Reeves Armoury
Photo : 20th Park Lane Arms Fair catalogue , D.A. Oliver.
P.S. A little bird told me that a Gus Trim baskethilt model is in the works ( so you know who will be leading the Hieland charge *g* )
'Gott Bewahr Die Oprechte Schotten'
XX ANDRIA XX FARARA XX
Mac's PictureTrail
Last edited by Thomas McDonald on Thu 02 Oct, 2003 2:50 pm; edited 1 time in total
|
|
   |
 |
|
Eric Bergeron
|
| Posted: Fri 12 Sep, 2003 8:31 pm Post subject: Re: Pending review .....Gus's "Moonbrand" , Type X |
|
|
| Thomas McDonald wrote: | | P.S. A little bird told me that a Gus Trim baskethilt model is in the works ( so you know who will be leading the Hieland charge *g* ) |
Thats great to hear Mac, i'm getting my first atrim in about a month its the at1542 model at all saints blades. I've always liked that moonbrand sword but can't figure out exactly why I like it so much though. You guys ever have that feeling when you look at a sword you like it so much but when you ask yourself or someone asks you why you can't really think of a real good answer besides I really like it 
|
|
|
|
|
Nathan Robinson
myArmoury Admin
|
|
 |
|
|
Angus Trim
|
| Posted: Sat 13 Sep, 2003 1:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Nathan Robinson wrote: | | Gus will have to come here to confirm, but I'm curious to ask him if I saw a prototype of this sword at the Schola St. George event in June. |
Hi Nathan
Yeah, you saw the prototype at Benicia this year. My taking that to the event started a comedy of errors getting the sword to Mac.
Initially I was supposed to send it to Mac in May. But the event was coming down on us real quick, and I made the decision that I kinda wanted to take it with me, and see what some of the more medieval types thought of its handling and feel.
By the time I got back, the comedy of errors began. The sword got misplaced, and by the time it was found, Mac's infamous move had started....*g* So the sword didn't actually get to him until roughly a week ago.
The sword model actually came into being, because Lee Reeves sent me a photo of a DT copy of Moonbrand, and asked me if I could do something like that.
I recognized what the original was of course. I told Lee that I couldn't copy some other modern's work, but I could use the copy as inspiration to learn more about the original, and use that as inspiration to make the sword. Since the specs of the original is more or less public knowledge amongst swordmakers, I could even copy it.
I gave Lee a three month time frame...... A year later he was still patiently waiting for me. By the time Lee got them, I'd learned a lot more, and made better swords than I would have a year earlier.
But the swords are only loosely based on the original. My swords do not spec out like the original. The original is only an inspiration..... though I'll grant you that my version does distal taper a lot, such as it gets fairly thin in crossection out by the cutting part of the blade, somewhat similar to the original.
I think of this sword as one of those breakthru points many of us have. The four fullers were different than I'd done before. The distal taper was greater..... and the harmonics are done differently that what I had done in the past.
And the production pieces that Lee got, at the time he got them, aesthetically were a step up from what I've done before. I think that the last three months has seen some more improvement, but I'm still not really satisfied, and hopefully never will be {that's my key to continue to improve, not quite being satisfied}.
swords are fun
|
|
|
|
|
Nathan Robinson
myArmoury Admin
|
| Posted: Sat 13 Sep, 2003 1:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Angus Trim wrote: | | Yeah, you saw the prototype at Benicia this year. |
Well, not that anyone is asking or it's ever held me back, I'll give my own feedback on the prototype..
I liked this sword quite a bit. I didn't do much handling at that event, other than holding pieces and doing a few swings and maneuvers (when nobody was looking!), but really felt that this sword did a whole hell of a lot of things right. Overall, it felt beefy and substantial, while being quick and easy to handle. I imagine this to be a fairly devastating combination.
I didn't care for the dark/ rough fullers on the prototype, but the pommel was a major improvement over some of your previous pommels in terms of the subtleties present in authentic ones. The photos, above, from Lee's finished sword go further to improve the aesthetics and show the progress from the prototype.
I'm eager to read Mac's observations on your take of this truly enigmatic sword.
.:. Visit my Collection Gallery :: View my Reading List :: View my Wish List :: See Pages I Like :: Find me on Facebook .:.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Patrick Kelly
|
| Posted: Sat 13 Sep, 2003 1:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Gus,
As I think I stated when you debuted this one, this is one of your more promising designs thus far. This one has real possibilities for customization.
|
|
 |
|
|
Geoff Wood
|
| Posted: Sat 13 Sep, 2003 1:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
The original and the reproduction both appear less pointed than some other type XIVs. On the surviving original, would this have been the case from the start, with the sword designed to be a cutter/slasher rather than a cut and thruster, or would it have got that way after use and regrinding, as has been suggested for some, similarly unpointy, viking swords?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Patrick Kelly
|
| Posted: Sat 13 Sep, 2003 1:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Geoff Wood wrote: | | The original and the reproduction both appear less pointed than some other type XIVs. On the surviving original, would this have been the case from the start, with the sword designed to be a cutter/slasher rather than a cut and thruster, or would it have got that way after use and regrinding, as has been suggested for some, similarly unpointy, viking swords? |
We have to be very careful when we use any typology, Oakeshotts or any other. They should be used only as a broad guideline not as an absolute. Remember, the ancients didn't know what a type XIV was. Typologies are very useful in determining the general development of a cultures weapons. On the other hand, we shouldn't fall into the habit of taking them as an absolute and thereby fixating on minor details of design. By doing that we loose sight of the big picture.
An examination of the original shows a rather large nick in the tip of the blade. The sword obviously saw a bit of use. It may have been originally made with the point in that fashion, or it may have occurred through use. It's impossible to say.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Geoff Wood
|
| Posted: Sat 13 Sep, 2003 2:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Patrick Kelly wrote: | | The sword obviously saw a bit of use. It may have been originally made with the point in that fashion, or it may have occurred through use. It's impossible to say. |
I nearly said 'point taken' on the typing/categorisation issue, but then thought better of it. Reading back what Mr Trim said about the thin cross section, I suppose it may have been intentionally more of a cutter. Aren't thrusters more inclined to stay thicker near the point for stiffness? Whatever, it is definitely a looker.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Angus Trim
|
| Posted: Sat 13 Sep, 2003 3:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Geoff Wood wrote: |
I nearly said 'point taken' on the typing/categorisation issue, but then thought better of it. Reading back what Mr Trim said about the thin cross section, I suppose it may have been intentionally more of a cutter. Aren't thrusters more inclined to stay thicker near the point for stiffness? Whatever, it is definitely a looker. |
Hi Geoff
The original's current specs are a real eye opener for someone with my background. The thickness at the base of the blade starts at .125 inch {slightly larger than 3mm} and distal tapers rapidly until just the other side of the fullers, where it levels out some. At the spot on the blade called "where it curves to the point", the sword is approx .06 thick {1.5mm}.
Real thin in crossection. Great for cutting. Not real great for thrusting thru any real resistance, and this isn't a sword I'd take to a helmet if it at all could be helped.
I flatly did not have the courage to make a sword that thin in crossection for the 21st century sword consumer.
swords are fun
|
|
|
|
|
Thomas McDonald
myArmoury Alumni
|
| Posted: Sat 13 Sep, 2003 4:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Lee's site has the stats for this sword ..... but I'll add a few that I see just for the record ! Mac
Component Weights & Measures
Pommel - 11 1/4 oz.
Guard - 3 1/2 oz.
Grip - 1oz.
Nut - 1/4 oz.
Blade - 1lb. 11 3/4 oz. ( bare blade balences at 9 3/4" out from shoulder)
Tang Length - 7"
Tang Width - 3/4" tapering to 1/2" , than to a 3/16" rod, 1 7/8" long .
BW - 2 5/16"
BL - 30 5/16"
4 Fullers 10 1/2" long x 1/8" approx.
*Photo: Copyright Lee Reeves Armoury
'Gott Bewahr Die Oprechte Schotten'
XX ANDRIA XX FARARA XX
Mac's PictureTrail
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ben Sweet
|
| Posted: Sat 13 Sep, 2003 8:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Hey Mac, I'll be looking forward to your review!
|
|
|
|
|
Thomas McDonald
myArmoury Alumni
|
| Posted: Thu 02 Oct, 2003 2:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Sorry for the delay with this review ..... lots of distractions have kept me from my duty, of the fun kind !
I did manage to take some pic's , and do about hour of cutting various targets etc. ( performed quite nicely )
So here are a few pic's to keep the XIV crowd smiling ;-)
I'll piece a review together soon , promise ! Mac
A few comparison shots with 2 of my Vince Evans Scottish swords !
'Gott Bewahr Die Oprechte Schotten'
XX ANDRIA XX FARARA XX
Mac's PictureTrail
|
|
|
|
|
|
Geoff Wood
|
| Posted: Thu 02 Oct, 2003 2:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Mr McDonald
Was the different cross your preference or just the way it came?
|
|
|
|
|
Thomas McDonald
myArmoury Alumni
|
| Posted: Thu 02 Oct, 2003 4:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hi Geoff
This piece was sent to me for testing, so it just came with it ...... I tend to prefer the downturned crosses *g* Mac
| Geoff Wood wrote: | Mr McDonald
Was the different cross your preference or just the way it came? |
'Gott Bewahr Die Oprechte Schotten'
XX ANDRIA XX FARARA XX
Mac's PictureTrail
|
|
|
|
|
|
Patrick Kelly
|
| Posted: Thu 02 Oct, 2003 6:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Those pics bring one word to mind: Meat!
|
|
|
|
|
Ken Jay
Location: Portland Oregon Joined: 23 Aug 2003
Posts: 141
|
| Posted: Fri 03 Oct, 2003 2:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
 Just this week I received my DD1404 from Lee. Haven't had the time play much with her but she's attractive and promises to be a great cutter. The multi-fullers are very nice. I'll be interested in hearing the review and comparing notes. 
|
|
|
|
|
Jay Barron
|
| Posted: Fri 03 Oct, 2003 2:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Didn't Michael Pierce make a custom version of Moonbrand for one of the moderators on netsword?
Constant and true.
|
|
|
|
|
Thomas McDonald
myArmoury Alumni
|
| Posted: Fri 03 Oct, 2003 3:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Jay Barron wrote: | | Didn't Michael Pierce make a custom version of Moonbrand for one of the moderators on netsword? |
Hi Jay
Yes, Michael made a nice version of Moonbrand for Stan, AKA Kataphilos !
Mac
'Gott Bewahr Die Oprechte Schotten'
XX ANDRIA XX FARARA XX
Mac's PictureTrail
|
|
|
|
|
Thomas McDonald
myArmoury Alumni
|
| Posted: Fri 03 Oct, 2003 4:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ken Jay wrote: | | Just this week I received my DD1404 from Lee. Haven't had the time play much with her but she's attractive and promises to be a great cutter. The multi-fullers are very nice. I'll be interested in hearing the review and comparing notes. |
Hi Ken
Let me know your findings ..... perhaps we can do a collaborative type of review !
Afterall, two heads are better than one *g* Mac
'Gott Bewahr Die Oprechte Schotten'
XX ANDRIA XX FARARA XX
Mac's PictureTrail
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is a standard topic