| myArmoury.com is now completely member-supported. Please contribute to our efforts with a donation. Your donations will go towards updating our site, modernizing it, and keeping it viable long-term.
Last 10 Donors: Daniel Sullivan, Anonymous, Chad Arnow, Jonathan Dean, M. Oroszlany, Sam Arwas, Barry C. Hutchins, Dan Kary, Oskar Gessler, Dave Tonge (View All Donors) |
| Author |
Message |
|
Peter Johnsson
Industry Professional
|
 Posted: Wed 20 Apr, 2005 12:36 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Stephen A. Fisher wrote: |
Having the grip wrapped in black/red cord also helps identify it as an Albion product. Keeping the cost down is always a good thing.  |
Thank you Stephen.
What you propose is good advice: it is noted for further development.
A possible transitional small sword would have a diamond sectioned blade of a length about 90 cm or slightly shorter. It would be striaghter in profile (more like a rapier blade), not having the strong flairing at the base as will the 18th C small sword. Having the grip made longer than the 18th C small sword might actually allow for using the same pommel for both swords. Time will tell.
Thanks.
|
|
   |
 |
|
Peter Johnsson
Industry Professional
|
| Posted: Wed 20 Apr, 2005 6:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Lloyd Clark wrote: |
...One thing that I would ask for is to make the I:33 balanced to work for both the sword/buckler work and as a horseback sword. One of the big problems we have in doing sword-to-sword horseback shows/combat is the lack of a decently balanced and weighted sword.
....The blade should be relatively light, but rigid, as a "whippy" blade is dangerous to your mount. It should have sufficient length to attack combatants on the ground, while not being overly long and becoming unwielding when fighting one-handed against another mounted opponent.
I haven't handled the Squire, but it looks a slight bit too big (I may be wrong), however, Peter's drawings of the Poitiers looks like it might be a winner.
Just my two pence - but a kickbutt stage horseback sword would be high on my list of "must have" blades. |
Hey Lloyd,
The I:33 will be about the same length as the Poitiers (blade abbout 78 cm, or 30"). If it is long enough to reach opponents on the ground is hard for me to tell. I should think so. There are many historical ridingswords of this length or shorter.
The blade will be light weight but stiff. This is made possible from the use of a effective and deep fuller, allowing the blade to be pretty thick at the base.
The Squire and Poitiers can be ordered unsharpened, but I would not recommend using them for stage fighting. They are designed to be sharp weapons. You should try to get to handle the Squire. I think it would be ideal for sharp cutting demos from horse back if you are looking for something that is not among those really longbladed single handers. The narrow drawn out point makes it into a pretty quick sword but it still has enough momentum to deliver effective cuts.
...Or perhaps the Poitiers? Personally I would like to see that sword used from horseback as you see in so many 15th C illuminations: knights in full armour wielding rather short and pointy type XV swords: it would be interesting to see the effect in a cut or thrust.
For sparring or stage fighting, the I:33 would be the candidate. That is what it is designed for: light, sturdy and safe. I do not think you will feel it is wobbly. The fuller helps reduce the weight so effectively that the blade can be made stiff and still be light. As it will be made to be used for sword and buckler swordplay, it will be balanced to be quick and precise in the point. That must surely be a good thing when used from horse back?
|
|
|
|
|
Lloyd Clark
|
| Posted: Wed 20 Apr, 2005 8:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks, Peter, that was the info I was looking for.
I have planned on purchasing the Poitiers to use as our "horseback cutting/thrusting" sword (I hope one will be available at the Lanzefest - perhaps with a nice green grip wrap ) - but the I.33 sounds good if we can do sword-to-sword combat on horseback with them.
I am pretty tired of using Starfires, though Zac is a friend and I have copiously used the "you break it, you get a new one" policy over the years, they are just too heavy and all of them tend to look the same. Having a real choice in stage combat weapons is Goddess-sent - and I can't wait to get a few to use in both our Kings Champions shows and our Compainie of the Northerne Sterre living history reenactments/educational programs (shameless plug - still looking for new, enthusiastic, members!).
Many thanks for putting out these new swords!
Cheers,
Lloyd Clark
2000 World Jousting Champion
2004 World Jousting Bronze Medalist
Swordmaster
Super Proud Husband and Father!
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. Laine
|
| Posted: Wed 20 Apr, 2005 9:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Peter Johnsson wrote: | Thank you!
Duly noted. I stand corrected (I obviously need to read Silver more carefully!).
The blade for the 16th C cut and thrust (and I hink the same blade will be used for the "Silver") is to be around 90 cm long, perhaps a tad less. It should not be too short but still not so long as to make it unwieldly. |
Peter,
Neat! Though it'd be nice to have several different blade lengths for the Silver, since people's "perfect lengths" tend to vary a bit - a tall fellow might have a blade in the 37-38 inch range, while someone else's perfect length might be several inches shorter. As the man himself says: "The blade to be a yard and an inch for men of mean stature, and for men of tall statures, a yard and three or four inches, and no more." - Paradox 15. That's quite a bit longer than the average modern reproduction, which makes it rather hard for silverites to obtain suitable swords without using custom makers.
I don't know how practical offering different blade lengths would be, though - might be wishful thinking on my part...
Rabbe
|
|
|
|
|
|
Peter Johnsson
Industry Professional
|
| Posted: Thu 21 Apr, 2005 1:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Rabbe Jan-Olof Laine wrote: |
Neat! Though it'd be nice to have several different blade lengths for the Silver, since people's "perfect lengths" tend to vary a bit - a tall fellow might have a blade in the 37-38 inch range, while someone else's perfect length might be several inches shorter. As the man himself says: "The blade to be a yard and an inch for men of mean stature, and for men of tall statures, a yard and three or four inches, and no more." - Paradox 15. That's quite a bit longer than the average modern reproduction, which makes it rather hard for silverites to obtain suitable swords without using custom makers.
I don't know how practical offering different blade lengths would be, though - might be wishful thinking on my part...
Rabbe |
Varying blade lengths is a hard nut to crack. If blades are to be varied so much that it matters, you probably have to make one specific pommel for each blade length. That will increase price and my impression is that WMA practitioners are very price sensitive. It is possible to do, but it would cost.
I think the best thing to do is to present a good standard sword that would fit most users (perhaps at 93 cm) and see what reaction that is met with. In a pinch it would be possible to cut such a blade down to slightly less than 90 cm, if the fencer has too short arms for the full length. Such a shortening could be made by the customer himself and it is not so much that it will change the balance of the sword completly (slightly, but not critically for a practice weapon).
The task is to find the length that would fit most modern practitioners. I would have guessed at about 90 cm, although I think my sketch of the C&T has a blade of 93 cm.
If you follow Silvers length recommendations the longest blade would be about one meter in length with the shortest about 93 cm. That suggests a standard blade that is just shy of one meter for a good production version of a Silver blade.
When we have the blade prototype finished I can then see how much DIY margin that would be reasonable without changing the blalance in a way that would be detrimental. That info could then be presented to customers, so you know what the recommended maximum shortening is.
-This could perhaps be a workable solution?
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. Laine
|
| Posted: Thu 21 Apr, 2005 9:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Peter Johnsson wrote: |
-This could perhaps be a workable solution? |
I'd imagine. Back when I was still with a group, I used to do Silver with a sword quite a bit shorter than he recommends, since I didn't have access to one of "perfect length". Didn't present any real difficuilties - it's just that Silver seems to have deemed a sword as long as practical the best. An inch or two don't make an enormous difference, at least if in the shorter direction.
Too long can really be bad, though, since in the system you have to be able to quickly "uncross" from the bind without moving your feet backwards. It'd be best if those blades could be made a bit shorter initially, and then stretchable, but I guess that is something of a perfect-world scenario... 
Rabbe
Last edited by R. Laine on Fri 22 Apr, 2005 8:42 am; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
Roger Hooper
|
| Posted: Fri 22 Apr, 2005 8:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
What are the projected blade lengths for the Liechtenauer and the Epee de Guerre?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Peter Johnsson
Industry Professional
|
| Posted: Sun 24 Apr, 2005 7:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Roger Hooper wrote: | | What are the projected blade lengths for the Liechtenauer and the Epee de Guerre? |
Somewhere 93-95 cm.
I can give a more precise answer when I´ve done some testing on prototype blades.
|
|
|
|
|
Allen Johnson
|
| Posted: Tue 07 Jun, 2005 10:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
I really tried to look for an answer to this question but I didnt see it - so my appologies if its already been discussed. But I was wondering what was the reason for releasing all the longswords first and not doing perhaps on longsword, one of the complex hilts and either the messer or the I.33 blade? Im sure you guys have a reason ...just wondering. Thanks!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Peter Johnsson
Industry Professional
|
| Posted: Wed 08 Jun, 2005 1:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Allen Johnson wrote: | | I really tried to look for an answer to this question but I didnt see it - so my appologies if its already been discussed. But I was wondering what was the reason for releasing all the longswords first and not doing perhaps on longsword, one of the complex hilts and either the messer or the I.33 blade? Im sure you guys have a reason ...just wondering. Thanks! |
These trainingswords will be utilizing a few new methods in most all aspects regards heat treat, manufacturing, cutlery and mounting. I cannot go inot the details prematurely, sorry.
We decided to offer the most widely used types first as they also are the ones that are most straight forward in method of making.
The complex hilts demand another approach and we are experimanting with the right method to allow for an attractive price. This takes more development time.
Best
Peter
|
|
|
|
|
Allen Johnson
|
| Posted: Wed 08 Jun, 2005 4:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
makes sense- thanks 
|
|
|
|
|
Martin Wallgren
|
| Posted: Sat 02 Jul, 2005 8:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
Peter!
Some of us would be enormusly happy if you make one of the Maestroline blades as simillar as possible to a type XVa. Most of our fighting from the manuals of the later 15c and we need stiff blades. Hope to see you soon...
Thanks
Martin
Swordsman, Archer and Dad
|
|
 |
|
Craig Peters
|
| Posted: Sat 02 Jul, 2005 3:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Martin Wallgren wrote: | Peter!
Some of us would be enormusly happy if you make one of the Maestroline blades as simillar as possible to a type XVa. Most of our fighting from the manuals of the later 15c and we need stiff blades. Hope to see you soon...
Thanks
Martin |
I'll second this suggestion. I really like the type XVa blade because it's a wicked thrusting weapon with excellent cutting capacity as well. Something roughly along the lines of the Squire line bastard sword, or the Mercenary, or the Constable, would be nice.
|
|
|
|
|
Joachim Nilsson
|
| Posted: Sat 02 Jul, 2005 5:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Craig Peters wrote: | | Martin Wallgren wrote: | Peter!
Some of us would be enormusly happy if you make one of the Maestroline blades as simillar as possible to a type XVa. Most of our fighting from the manuals of the later 15c and we need stiff blades. Hope to see you soon...
Thanks
Martin |
I'll second this suggestion. I really like the type XVa blade because it's a wicked thrusting weapon with excellent cutting capacity as well. Something roughly along the lines of the Squire line bastard sword, or the Mercenary, or the Constable, would be nice. |
The XVa has got my vote too. perhaps the Maestro line equalient of say.... The Talhoffer?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Peter Johnsson
Industry Professional
|
| Posted: Sun 03 Jul, 2005 1:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Martin Wallgren wrote: | Peter!
Some of us would be enormusly happy if you make one of the Maestroline blades as simillar as possible to a type XVa. Most of our fighting from the manuals of the later 15c and we need stiff blades. Hope to see you soon...
Thanks
Martin |
Hey Martin,
I understand what you seek, but it is not as easy as that. You say that are you seek a very stiff sparring sword? Somehting that is so stiff you will break ribs if you do not pull your punches and pointy enough to be pretty lethal even if you cannot open a can of ravioli with it? (well you could do that even with a decently blunted blunt anyway...)
What I have in mind is that the training tool you want is something that has the nimbleness of a longsword, with a blade that is narrow enough to allow halfswording.
This blade will have a fuller to keep weight down. Remember this is a blade of rather generic type: a blade that will allow most long sword techniques and still be safe to use. A point section that is light and slim to make it quick and agile and allow for exact point manouvers.
If this blade looks rather like a XVIa.ish sort of blade, does not mean you cannot train techniques that would be executed wíth a sharp XVa.
Some moves are too dangerous to train in full speed with a blunt: Mortshlag, full force thrusts etc.
With these sparring swords you need to turn your mind away from the Oakeshott typology. Trainingswords cannot be classified according to that typology. As they are meant to be safe they are design fu8ndamentally different that a sharp blade. I have choosen not to follow a route to mimic the visual shape of the sharp weapons too much (a little, but only enough to keep it interesting). The sparring swors are built and designed to behave as closely as possible as a sharp longsword. Since you need to have blunt edges and blunt point, you need to do other compromises. That involes working with very effective fullers and making the blades slightly narrower than a sharp counterpart.
To my mind it is not really possible to make a clear distinction if the blunt training sword is a XVIa, a XVIIIa or a XVa. Sharp weapons will overlap in handling charactersitics. The blunt generic training sword can double for all these types. It will not look the same, but that has been made clear from the start I think: these training weapons are built with handling, safety and sturdiness as first priorities.
The reason you also need a sharp weapon in your training is to fine tune your technques in solo drills and cutting. Asharp sword will also have a subtly different feel however realistic you make the blunt sword. This is because one was made to be leathal and the other safe. This difference is small enough so it disappears in the generic nature of the sparring blade.
I don´t know if I say this very well?
You want a XVa blunt to train with: I say you can use the Liechtenauer blunt for training such techniques. It is close enough to be absolutely realistic in a safe bout. To really exploit the difference between the blunt generic blade and a sharp XVa you wuld have to go at it with sharp swords in earnest and I do not think you really want that.
So, the niche of a blunt XVa training sword is already seen to: it is the Liechtenauer of the Maestro line. It does not look like a XVa, but that is not the point. It looks longsword-ish and will feel very much like a sharp sword.
The type XVa itself has some inherent problems that make it less than ideal as the basis for a blunt training sword. To be safe you would have to make the point so blunt it does not have the outline of a XVa any more. Either you´d have to make the blunt quite a bit shorter that its sharp counterpart, or you would have to increase the mass of the point so it will loose its agility. That is the reason a Generic XVIa/XVIIIa-ish blade is the safe counterpart that will come closest to a sharp weapon.
If I would make a XVa training sword I would make it thinner and more narrow: the compromise being that I sacrifice stiffness, but gain the agility of a narrow blade. This would also not look like a sharp XVa, but it could perhaps have a point controll that comes close. A sparring sword like this would not be ideal for halfswording and would be rather wobbly. To me that is not really what you want in a good blunt trainier for longsword techniques.
You see, it is not just a case of making blunted blades that looks like the shapr ones. I´ve been trying to get this message across: you need to build a trainign sword along other lines than sharp swords. A blunt and a sharp cannot look the same if their handling characteristics are to be comparable. To make a blunt sword you need to make compromises and they should be chosen wisely: you compromise those aspects that cannot be exploited in safe sparring anyway. Some techniques you will never use in earnest against a freind, even with a very safe blunt. They are just too dangerous.
Therefore there is a white spot in the border between sharps and blunts: an area where they can never meet. This is the area that gives you margin to work with in creatin a blunt.
By asking me to make a blunt XVa, you really say that you want a safe sword that is pretty unseafe, or have other compromises built in that makes is something else than a true XVa even if it looks like one from a distance.
...Designing swords can be fun!
|
|
|
|
|
Joachim Nilsson
|
| Posted: Sun 03 Jul, 2005 8:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hi Peter,
I think -no, I know- that what Martin had in mind when he asked his question was a blunt blade that would be stiff enough to be used with a certain set of techniques that involves a loot of sweeping, hooking and trapping manuevers (while at the halfsword). I could show you a few of these techniques to better illustrate his point some time. I think he's worried that the current Maestro longswords might have "too much" flex in them. I know that's a very narrow request to make, but he and I don't generally think as swordsmiths -we think as swordsmen. But thanks for clearing up the issue with a very informative answer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Peter Johnsson
Industry Professional
|
| Posted: Sun 03 Jul, 2005 1:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Joachim Nilsson wrote: | Hi Peter,
I think -no, I know- that what Martin had in mind when he asked his question was a blunt blade that would be stiff enough to be used with a certain set of techniques that involves a loot of sweeping, hooking and trapping manuevers (while at the halfsword). I could show you a few of these techniques to better illustrate his point some time. I think he's worried that the current Maestro longswords might have "too much" flex in them. I know that's a very narrow request to make, but he and I don't generally think as swordsmiths -we think as swordsmen. But thanks for clearing up the issue with a very informative answer. |
I have still to decide just how flexible the point can be made on these training longswords. I will try to keep the outer half of the blade flexible, while making the forte sturdy. This can (in theory at least) combine flexibility and stiffness so that you get a sword that has the stiffness a longsword should have (not bouncing and wobbling in deflecting countercuts), while at the same time allowing for more safety in thrusting. I do not think it is possible to make the point as flexible as on the rapier and small sword blades and perhaps that is not really what you would want anyway.
It is too early to say just how flexible it is possible to make the point. I might have to make it so stiff you really need to wear heavy padding and also pull your punches when thrusting is involved. I cannot say yet as the blades are stil indevelopment.
What I can say is this: these sword sare not going to be wobbly, but stiff enough to do half swording and some hooking manouvers. Not as stiff as the stiffest XVa´s, but stiff enough I should think.
I would be happy to show you guys the prototypes when they get far enough in development. Just give me a call and we can set a day for you visiting the smithy.
Let me follow through the development of these prototypes first and then we can base further discussions on these.
How about that? These matters are as difficult to describe in words as the complex matter of edges and sharpness. It all tends to depend on your previous experience in sparring swords: what one person would think was stiff another would see as really quite flexible. It makes it rather difficult to describe what these blades are going to be and how they will behave.
|
|
|
|
|
Joachim Nilsson
|
| Posted: Sun 03 Jul, 2005 2:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Peter Johnsson wrote: | | Joachim Nilsson wrote: | Hi Peter,
I think -no, I know- that what Martin had in mind when he asked his question was a blunt blade that would be stiff enough to be used with a certain set of techniques that involves a loot of sweeping, hooking and trapping manuevers (while at the halfsword). I could show you a few of these techniques to better illustrate his point some time. I think he's worried that the current Maestro longswords might have "too much" flex in them. I know that's a very narrow request to make, but he and I don't generally think as swordsmiths -we think as swordsmen. But thanks for clearing up the issue with a very informative answer. |
I have still to decide just how flexible the point can be made on these training longswords. I will try to keep the outer half of the blade flexible, while making the forte sturdy. This can (in theory at least) combine flexibility and stiffness so that you get a sword that has the stiffness a longsword should have (not bouncing and wobbling in deflecting countercuts), while at the same time allowing for more safety in thrusting. I do not think it is possible to make the point as flexible as on the rapier and small sword blades and perhaps that is not really what you would want anyway.
It is too early to say just how flexible it is possible to make the point. I might have to make it so stiff you really need to wear heavy padding and also pull your punches when thrusting is involved. I cannot say yet as the blades are stil indevelopment.
What I can say is this: these sword sare not going to be wobbly, but stiff enough to do half swording and some hooking manouvers. Not as stiff as the stiffest XVa´s, but stiff enough I should think.
I would be happy to show you guys the prototypes when they get far enough in development. Just give me a call and we can set a day for you visiting the smithy.
Let me follow through the development of these prototypes first and then we can base further discussions on these.
How about that? These matters are as difficult to describe in words as the complex matter of edges and sharpness. It all tends to depend on your previous experience in sparring swords: what one person would think was stiff another would see as really quite flexible. It makes it rather difficult to describe what these blades are going to be and how they will behave. |
Sounds like a date. In fact: I'd much rather explain what Martin's looking for in person.
Regarding the stiffness: He was thinking stiffer than that Lutel.
|
|
|
|
|
Martin Wallgren
|
| Posted: Mon 04 Jul, 2005 1:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="Peter Johnsson"] | Joachim Nilsson wrote: |
How about that? These matters are as difficult to describe in words as the complex matter of edges and sharpness. It all tends to depend on your previous experience in sparring swords: what one person would think was stiff another would see as really quite flexible. It makes it rather difficult to describe what these blades are going to be and how they will behave. |
Thanks Peter for all the information! Fantastic it sounds like we got to get toghether soon and discus this over a coffie and a few prototypes. I have sent a PM a to you....
Yours...
Martin
Swordsman, Archer and Dad
|
|
|
|
|
Pamela Muir
|
| Posted: Mon 15 Aug, 2005 2:03 pm Post subject: feels like fall... |
|
|
I've spent the day doing back-to-school shopping and putting together PTA fliers. It sure feels like fall is coming up quickly.  Which has me thinking about all the other things I've been looking forward to this fall. Well, mostly one thing... So, please pardon my impatience, but I have to ask, any more news about the Sparring line? Specifically the Liechtenauer model? 
Pamela Muir
Founder/Lead Instructor
Academy of Chivalric Martial Arts
"I need a hero. I'm holding out for a hero 'til the end of the night. He's gotta be strong, And he's gotta be fast, And he's gotta be fresh from the fight." ~Steinman/Pitchford
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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 2003-2024 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Basic Low-bandwidth Version of the forum
|
This is a standard topic