| Author |
Message |
Jonathan Blair
|
 Posted: Fri 16 Feb, 2007 9:34 am Post subject: |
 |
|
Although I am no expert when it comes to Viking era stuff, I'll give my $.01 worth.
The leather looks too shiny, but that could be the photography. The leather should be smooth and matte, not suede. The scabbard seems to have the same shiny leather on it. Great to see a wood core scabbard, which is so much better than the leather only sheaths so common in this price range. The chape and locket seem a little plain, but that may be a sacrifice for cost. The steel bits on the sword seem a bit too shiny (almost chrome plated shiny), but that could be the photography too.
"Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword." - The Lord Jesus Christ, from The Gospel According to Saint Matthew, chapter x, verse 34, Authorized Version of 1611
|
|
  |
 |
Steve Grisetti
|
| Posted: Fri 16 Feb, 2007 4:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Jonathan Blair wrote: | | ... Great to see a wood core scabbard, which is so much better than the leather only sheaths so common in this price range.... |
I second Jonathan's comment on the wood core scabbard! I originally had the impression that it was leather, until I saw his post, then went back to the Imperial Weapons site to verify it.
What kind of wood is used for the core?
"...dismount thy tuck, be yare in thy preparation, for thy assailant is quick, skilful, and deadly."
- Sir Toby Belch
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jeremy V. Krause
|
| Posted: Fri 16 Feb, 2007 5:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
If it is possible and not cost prohibitive I think that putting those fake revets on the underside of the pommel in order to simulate that the pommel is constructed in the usual two part method would be cool. Albion does this- or did this with their less expensive viking models- which are now sold out.
Jeremy
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clyde Hollis
Industry Professional
|
| Posted: Sat 17 Feb, 2007 6:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
Just a FYI for everyone on some chages/
I have forgotten That I did email our foundry about curving the bottom of the pommel and about the fuller going up into the guard.
Well I am proud to say that the changes we already done and the small order due in have the changes done.
I will just have to take new pictures.
On the shiny leather on the scabbard I will look into, but I have tried just plain black shoe polish on the scabbard and it toned it down allot.
|
|
 |
|
Jean Thibodeau
|
| Posted: Sat 17 Feb, 2007 7:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Clyde Hollis wrote: | Just a FYI for everyone on some chages/
I have forgotten That I did email our foundry about curving the bottom of the pommel and about the fuller going up into the guard.
Well I am proud to say that the changes we already done and the small order due in have the changes done.
I will just have to take new pictures.
On the shiny leather on the scabbard I will look into, but I have tried just plain black shoe polish on the scabbard and it toned it down allot. |
Looking forward to seeing the new version. 
Hopefully not too of topic but I noticed this falcata on the Kult of Athena site and it looks pretty good. Maybe you could start a new topic thread about it as a lot of people have some interest in this type of sword.
http://www.kultofathena.com/product~item~IP08...alcata.htm
Also there is already at least one long topic thread on falcatas here on myArmoury.
Specifically I would like to known more about the tangs' strength, blade thickness, distal taper if any and heat treat of the steel. Functional I do see these as giant Kukri. 
You can easily give up your freedom. You have to fight hard to get it back!
|
|
|
|
|
Thomas Hoogendam
|
| Posted: Sat 17 Feb, 2007 10:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'd say for the price this isn't half bad. The woodcore scabbard is a nice extra. I'd loose the steel band below the pommel myself, it doesn't add to the overal looks of the hilt. IMO, a dark brown leather would like a little nicer, but that's personal preferences. The curve on the bottom of the pommel could be a bit more.
I think I'm being a bit negative when I read this myself. Overall, this looks like a nice sword for those looking for an inexpensive vikingsword to add to their collection. If money permits, I might pick one up myself in the future.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clyde Hollis
Industry Professional
|
| Posted: Sat 24 Feb, 2007 9:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
Here are the pics for the updated River Witham Viking sword.
We rounded the bottom of the pommel. Made it thinner and added suede to the wrapping of the handle.
New stats are as follows:
Stats are as follows:
Blade length: 30 1/2"
Blade Width near hilt: 2 /12"
Blade Width near tip: 1 5/16"
Blade Thickness near hilt: 1/4"
Blade Thickness near tip: 3/32"
Handle/Hilt length: 6 3/4"
Grip Length: 3 7/8"
Overall: 37 1/4"
Balance Point: 4.5" Below Hilt
Weight: 3 lbs. 1.4 oz.
The thinner pommel did add to the balance point going out a little but man it still feel good in the hand.
I just took these pictures this morning. This new style is all we have, none of the old.
But we only have 8 of this first production run.
 Attachment: 90.77 KB
Attachment: 23.14 KB
|
|
|
|
|
Jean Thibodeau
|
| Posted: Sat 24 Feb, 2007 7:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It looks real nice in the angled shot because the inlays catch the light differently and are more visible in the pic than the flat on shot.
The fuller " almost " but not quite ending at the guard: This wouldn't bother me very much personally but I thought I would mention it before someone else is bound to. 
I haven't compared these pics to the earlier pics so I'm not sure how if the fuller is closer to the guard or not ?
Now getting the fuller to reach up into the guard might be a good thing but if it compromises strength at the junction of tang and the shoulders of the blade I would choose the most structurally sound option. ( A lot depends on the width of tang and width of fuller and how the geometry's intersect if the fuller crosses into the tang or very very close to the tang ).
I really like the pommel now as it does look more 3D than a flat pommel with slightly rounded edges.
Oh, if the fuller faded just a bit more at the top without a distinct edge ridge it wouldn' t really have to go much higher to work I think. 
You can easily give up your freedom. You have to fight hard to get it back!
|
|
|
|
|
Jonathan Blair
|
| Posted: Mon 26 Feb, 2007 4:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
Suede grip = bad idea
Suede is difficult to keep clean due to open pores, easy to damage if it gets wet, and not historically accurate. A smooth, non-shiny leather is better for the grip than the suede. Heck, even the shiny leather from before is better than suede.
The one and only suede-gripped sword I ever owned was a MRL Shrewsbury sword from 1992. The suede disintegrated only after several months. It was then I decided that if every I bought another sword and it came with a suede grip, I would return it and demand my money back.
"Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword." - The Lord Jesus Christ, from The Gospel According to Saint Matthew, chapter x, verse 34, Authorized Version of 1611
|
|
|
|
|
|
Patrick Kelly
|
| Posted: Mon 26 Feb, 2007 10:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
I agree. The changes so far have greatly improved the look of the sword, but loose the suede as it really degrades the look of the piece. I'd also recommend changing the color of the scabbard from black to brown. It would look far more authentic and not nearly as harsh. I'd also either totally element the metal locket at the scabbard mouth or at least make it about half that width. Either one would be an aesthetic improvement.
|
|
 |
|
|
Clyde Hollis
Industry Professional
|
| Posted: Mon 26 Feb, 2007 1:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Patrick Kelly wrote: | | I agree. The changes so far have greatly improved the look of the sword, but loose the suede as it really degrades the look of the piece. I'd also recommend changing the color of the scabbard from black to brown. It would look far more authentic and not nearly as harsh. I'd also either totally element the metal locket at the scabbard mouth or at least make it about half that width. Either one would be an aesthetic improvement. |
Patrick,
I see what you are saying. But we went with the suede for comfort. It does feel better in the hand and will not slip when your hand is sweaty.
Also with no surviving original pieces with leather handles still intact (that we know of. But, please if anyone has proof that I may have not read please let me know where to look), (there have been some survived with bone handles, or the solid bronze handles, etc.) it may be possible that some were could have been wrapped in suede.
Also we have done the handle in black instead of brown for one reason: Black sells better than brown (we have found that true on our end). That also since there have been no originals with leather handles that have survived it is hard to tell if they were all done in brown or black.
I really enjoyed reading all of your comments. It shows we are getting better.
Thanks always.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clyde Hollis
Industry Professional
|
| Posted: Mon 26 Feb, 2007 1:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I do think I need to post the reason why suede on the web site the more I read the write up.
People do need to know why we went with suede, to help clear up any confusion.
Thanks again,
|
|
|
|
|
Thomas Watt
|
| Posted: Mon 26 Feb, 2007 2:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Mmmm. Much nicer.
My appetite is whetted...
don't run out before I get my budget organized for this.
Honestly, I'm not too hot about the suede, either. In past experience, suede doesn't hold that soft fuzzy look under wear. But I also have no issues about making some changes to suit myself there... blades I can't do much about, but the other stuff I can play with.
Have 11 swords, 2 dirks, half a dozen tomahawks and 2 Jeeps - seem to be a magnet for more of all.
|
|
|
|
|
Bill Grandy
myArmoury Team
|
| Posted: Mon 26 Feb, 2007 4:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think there are definate improvements showing. I wasn't too crazy about the pommel on the first one, but looking at this revised version (particularly seeing the angled shot), I have to say it's showing some good promise.
| Clyde Hollis wrote: | | Also with no surviving original pieces with leather handles still intact (that we know of. But, please if anyone has proof that I may have not read please let me know where to look), (there have been some survived with bone handles, or the solid bronze handles, etc.) it may be possible that some were could have been wrapped in suede. |
The reason why suede is not accuate is because the technology to make suede did not exist at the time. Suede is made by a machine which cuts thick leather into thinner halves, and the inside of the leather is shown outward. To make a large enough sheet of suede to wrap a grip would have been very difficult to do with period tools, and would not have been ver practical, either. Plus, as Thomas mentioned, the suede will wear fairly quickly to the point where it will be almost identical to regular leather.
So I'm going to have to agree with everyone about the "no suede". I also would add that the metal band on the grip really detracts from the hisorical look. If you made a simple wood grip without the band, and wrapped it with vegetable tanned pigskin, this would probably be cheaper than what you currently have, and would certainly look more historical.
Otherwise I think you're definately on the right track in terms of tweaking the aesthetics.
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
|
|
|
|
|
Jared Smith
|
| Posted: Mon 26 Feb, 2007 10:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I am curious about the theoretical origins of the sword. "Viking" as a broad classification is understandable. But, there are swords of this style which are attributed to non-expiditionary groups such as Merovingians (the sword on the left which is considered 9th century Merovingian.)
http://www.arador.com/gallery/belg2.jpg
Some of those following other threads on heat treated armour may have picked up on Craig Johnson's article at the Oakeshott site that at least one of the earliest Ulfbert swords (8th century?) is contemplated as having been made from cruicible steel, possibly imported from the middle East. Some of the more premium "steel grade" examples appear to be Frankish work originating within central Germany.
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0039-3630%28...size=LARGE
I could be " all wet" on this one but am really searching and trying to find accurate information rather than common generalizations.
Absence of evidence is not necessarily evidence of absence!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clyde Hollis
Industry Professional
|
| Posted: Tue 27 Feb, 2007 6:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Jared Smith wrote: | I am curious about the theoretical origins of the sword. "Viking" as a broad classification is understandable. But, there are swords of this style which are attributed to non-expiditionary groups such as Merovingians (the sword on the left which is considered 9th century Merovingian.)
http://www.arador.com/gallery/belg2.jpg
Some of those following other threads on heat treated armour may have picked up on Craig Johnson's article at the Oakeshott site that at least one of the earliest Ulfbert swords (8th century?) is contemplated as having been made from cruicible steel, possibly imported from the middle East. Some of the more premium "steel grade" examples appear to be Frankish work originating within central Germany.
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0039-3630%28...size=LARGE
I could be " all wet" on this one but am really searching and trying to find accurate information rather than common generalizations. |
I am still learning on the early sword (Viking Era). But that picture of the Merovingian, that is a real nice looking sword.
But it sure has a beefy pommel and guard.
What book is that picture from might I ask?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jens A Butler
|
|
|
|
|
Jared Smith
|
| Posted: Wed 28 Feb, 2007 7:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Clyde Hollis wrote: |
I am still learning on the early sword (Viking Era). But that picture of the Merovingian, that is a real nice looking sword.
But it sure has a beefy pommel and guard.
What book is that picture from might I ask? |
I don't know if it is even in a book. That is a museum photo taken by one of the authors at the Arador Armoury site.
There are some other's I have seen that were also called Merovingian which is why I am starting to question the whole generalization of "viking." Anything in that era seems to end up being implied as "of viking origin." The style is actually consistent with at least a couple of premium grade artifacts attributed as being crafted well to the Southern and Eastern extents of Gaul and Slavick regions. Look at Patrick Barta's web site and read of the accepted origins of some of his "viking era" swords and you may see what I am getting at.
Absence of evidence is not necessarily evidence of absence!
|
|
|
|
|
Jean Thibodeau
|
|
|
|
|
Nathan Robinson
myArmoury Admin
|
| Posted: Sun 04 Mar, 2007 8:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Chad Arnow wrote: | Clyde,
From what I can see in the pics, the blade tip is not a diamond cross-section. That's good.  Is it hexagonal or is it a more proper flattened lenticular shape? I'm actually quite happy to not see a mid-rib in the tip section. |
Did Clyde ever answer your question?
Looking at the photos of this sword published on the Kult of Athena site, it's evident that the cross-section is a flattened diamond shape. That's really too bad.
.:. Visit my Collection Gallery :: View my Reading List :: View my Wish List :: See Pages I Like :: Find me on Facebook .:.
|
|
 |
|
|
|
This is a standard topic