[Lance K.]

I am looking into a one hander for practice use to compliment my Viceroy, and the primary criterion for my purchase is handling. Since it seems a majority of opinions indicate the NG Knight has some of the best handling characteristics of any sword, it seems this is the ideal I am shooting for in my purchase.

Since I'm not interested in appearance, rather handling characteristics, I would like to know how the squire knightly handles compared to its big brother. I wonder because it has been said the knightly has a thicker blade due to the blunt edge. I'm hoping to hear from those who have handled both.

Due to the thicker edge I'm wondering if it’s as agile and responsive as the knight. If it is, or comes close, it may be what I want, otherwise I may have to save up for the Knight. The thing is the squire knightly may suite my needs better, since I plan to practice with it, and being I am not currently skilled in sword use, its unsharpened edge would reduce my chances of injury. But I don't want to sacrifice handling when the Knight can be blunted. Though since this will just be practice sword there is really no need to spend twice as much unless there is a noticeable difference in handling, but I guess what is noticeable to a skilled swordsman probably will not be noticeable to a novice like my self.

Well anyway that’s my situation, hopefully you guys who have more experince and have handle these can advise me, since the only real sword I have ever seen is my own viceroy.

Thanks,
Lance

[Craig Peters]

[Lance K.]

[Aaron Schnatterly]

[Patrick Kelly]

In my opinion the only way to gain respect for a sharp is to practice handling a sharp. A dull edge may increase the safety margin but it may also increase the handlers complacency. Lately we've discussed the concerns of safe handling and safety equipment, but I feel that we can also take that a bit too far. We're handling swords, and they can be dangerous, but life in itself is dangerous just by living it. We need to learn to deal with it or sit in the rear with the faint of heart.

If having a blunted training tool is a primary concern you'd be well served by buying a wooden waster for that purpose, and going with the Knight. The only Squire Line sword I've handled is the viking, and I was favorably impressed by it's handling qualities when compared to other swords in it's price range. I can't comment on the SL knightly sword since I haven't handled one. If you want a companion for your Viceroy I think you need a sword as equally impressive, and the Knight is one of the most impressive Albions to date.

[Jörg W.]

discussing the subject of handling characteristics id like to pose a question too.

what are the indices for a responsive, agile sword with good point control and fast recovery on one hand and power and blade presence on the other?

e.g. studying the specifications of 3 single hand swords from Albion and reading through myArmoury reviews of Knight, Prince and Squire i wasnt able to get the facts as straight as i hoped.

taken from here:
http://www.myArmoury.com/review_alb_princesquire.html
http://www.myArmoury.com/review_alb_knight.html

Measurements and Specifications for the Prince:
Weight: 2 pounds, 7 ounces (1106 g)
Overall length: 38 5/8 inches (98,12 cm)
Blade length: 31 13/16 inches (80,80 cm)
Blade width: 2 3/16 inches at base, tapering to 1/2 inch (5,56 cm, 1,27 cm)
Grip length: 3 3/4 inches (9,52 cm)
Guard width: 7 9/16 inches (19,21 cm)
Point of Balance: 4 3/4 inches from guard (12,06 cm)
Center of Percussion: ~21 1/2 inches from guard (~54,61 cm)

Measurements and Specifications for the Squire:
Weight: 2 pounds, 8 ounces (1134 g)
Overall length: 38 5/8 inches (98,12 cm)
Blade length: 32 1/16 inches (81,44 cm)
Blade width: 2 3/16 inches at base, tapering to 1/2 inch (5,56 cm, 1,27 cm)
Grip length: 4 1/8 inches (10,38 cm)
Guard width: 7 11/16 inches (19,53 cm)
Point of Balance: 4 7/8 inches from guard (12,38 cm)
Center of Percussion: ~22 1/2 inches from guard (~57,15 cm)

Measurements and Specifications of the Knight:
Weight: 2 pounds, 10 ounces (1191 g)
Overall length: 38 1/8 inches (96,84 cm)
Blade length: 31 3/8 inches (79,69 cm)
Blade width: 2 inches at base (5,08 cm)
Blade thickness: .192 inches (0,49 cm)
Grip length: 4 1/4 inches (10,79 cm)
Guard width: 6 1/2 inches (16,51 cm)
*Point of Balance: 3 1/2 inches from guard (8,89 cm) ->> 4 1/2 inch (11,43 cm)
Center of Percussion: ~21 inches from guard (~53,34 cm)

*the stats differ from these at Albion. i guess it is a typo at myArmoury.

Squire and Prince are both of type XVI. that means they should be quicker cut and trust sword,
while the Knight is of XII which are swords of greater blade presence and better cutter than former mentioned sword type.
imagining a sword gripped close to guard i thought its easiest to compare PoBs (point of balance, aka CoG center of gravity) to get an idea about what the main purpose of a sword is.
here now we have the XII with closer PoB, while weight is only slightly higher and overall length even smaller compared to the XVIs. with the theory i had the XII would be the sword with better response, which shouldnt be the case.
actually the difference between the PoB of the Knight (XII) and that of the XVIs is bigger than the difference between the XVIs (Squire and Prince). but even a small difference should be sensible as the review reads: "The farther PoB of the Squire lends a little extra blade presence to that sword..".
so how can i get an idea (even the slightest) of a sword's feel in my hand by looking at its specifications?

i hope i made my point clear enough.
any thoughts appreciated.


regards Jörg

[Patrick Kelly]

It may be a typo but it isn't at myArmoury. Please don't assume that.

[Chad Arnow]

[Jörg W.]

Thanks for your replies.

Too bad.
Since I haven’t the possibility to handle good replicas as some of you, I have to rely on reviews and specifications. Reviews of course can give good info, but are subjective. So (as a scientist) I prefer numbers when possible. Reading a lot about handling and harmonics (though there is much more) I agree that it’s a very difficult subject. still I wonder why PoB and CoP are used that often if they doesn’t mean Anything alone.

I agree that the specifications may differ slightly due to hand-crafting. But if swords of same type (like 2 NG Regents) differ that much (given the producer didn’t intended a change), it seems to make little sense to compare swords handling. Or is the handling of these swords still almost equal?

How do designers of swords get their facts? I can’t believe its all trial and error and. There must be some kind of scheme (mass, length, mass distribution, tapering.. for a specific type). Or is it just adding some weight here and grinding some more there until eventually the beast gets to feel as you want? And even then they need to know what to do to get closer to desired result.

My English isn’t the best, but maybe it would help me if you could use more/more precise words to transport your experiences. (easy to say – hard to accomplish, Im sure)
Some reviews (Handling Characteristics) sound to similar in my ears to get a clear distinction that obviously should exist.
So please take some swords of your collections and handle them. What adjectives come to your mind (excluding ‘well’, ‘great’, ‘outstanding’ ) Directly comparing more than 2 swords same time might be good.

[Patrick Kelly]

[Lance K.]

Aaron and Patrick, thanks for your responses, you both make excellent points and have given me some ideas I had not considered.

Lance

[Doug Gardner]

Jorg,

From a scientific point of view, you might want to think about the problem as one encompassing many more dimensions than the simple static property of center of mass (generally referred to as center of balance) and the harmonic property frequently associated with the center of percussion. I think of particular interest in the handling of a sword are the inertial properties. Rotational inertia on an object such as a sword is relatively complex. Frankly, I'm not familiar enough with the design of the modern sword to know how the axes are commonly assigned, but let's assume that the X axis is longitudinal, down the length of the sword, Y is width, across the guard, and Z is depth or thickness. So, translating that into rotational moments, you could make up some words to define:
1. around the X axis- twist inertia
2. Around the Y axis - swing inertia
3. around the Z axis - well, I don't really know what to call it, but it will resist shifting the plane of your cut, if you understand what I'm talking about.

OK, now the issue with the dynamics as I've described them is that this description really isn't sufficient. There are actually many axes or fulcra that are relevant for swing. One is the grip, another is the wrist, a third is the elbow, and a fourth is the shoulder. For simple swinging from the wrist, elbow, or shoulder, what will matter most is the mass and the CoG in relation to the grip. However, for finer pointing what is important is not the imaginary CoG, but the distribution of the mass along these axes. Imagine you have 2 objects. One object is a 10 kilo iron ball. Another object consists of 2, 4 kilo balls connected by a 1 meter long 2 kilo steel rod. Both objects weigh 10 kilos, and but the ball will be much easier to spin and the contraption with the rod will be easier to twist.

This distribution of mass is what makes profile taper so critical in determining the handling properties of a sword.

Reading over this post, I have no idea if I helped or hurt. My point is simply this: there are a lot of principles from physics which apply here. CoG, by itself, can be very misleading. That is why you so often read things like "I never would have believed this was a 4 pound sword!" (probably relatively little of the mass is in the tip of the blade) or "This sword has surprising blade presence" (probably a lot of its mass is far out on the blade)

My guess is that most of the people in this community aren't comfortable discussing inertial tensors (ummm... including myself! ) and even fewer are set up to measure them with any precision. However, like any large community, I'd predict that there are a few mechanical engineers or physics professors out there who are quite able to correct the mistakes in my description.

--Doug

[Patrick Kelly]

Thanks for posting that Doug!

I think that may be more in line with what Jorg is looking for.

[Craig Peters]

[Lance K.]

[Edward Hitchens]

Patrick and Aaron are correct on the issue of safety when handling sharps. I have quite a few sharps that I test cut with routinely and have had no 'incidents' while handling them. Safety is a bit less concerning if handling dulls or blunts, however, don't get too used to this wider margin of error too much; you'll end up picking up a sharp and accidentally get bit.

I've been struck with my non-sharps before that did little or no trauma -- had a sharp done the same thing, a visit to the ER would've been the result. IMHO, dry-handling or test-cutting with a sharp should not be a grave concern to someone who is good at exercising common sense, regardless of how experienced you are. It's quite likely that in this hobby, you will get cut. It may be small enough that a Band-aid will do, or so bad that the trauma surgeons have to amputate. Just my thoughts; sorry if I'm getting too off-topic. -Ted

[Jonathan Harton]

I am thinking of picking up a SL Knightly sword sharpend to have for living history purposes, some test cutting, and as a supliment to my WMA training to actually have a sharp blade to work with. What are the thoughts of anyone who owens one of these on how they handle? I know they are of great quality for the price, Albions always are, I just cant afford to drop anymore than $300 or so and be able to finish up a crusader LH kit as well.

This sword will NOT be used for any LH fighting or sparing. My LH group just likes all of its members to have a weapon of sharpend and, dare I say, "battle ready" nature for presentation purposes.

Thanks for any help,
Jonathan.