Hardness of modern swords, historical swords, other choppers?

O

olpappy

Joined
Dec 6, 2004
Messages
1,241
Just wondering what is the typical hardness range of modern swords, and how this compares with typical hardness for something like a golok, machete, kukri, or axe. At what point does a blade become too brittle to make a good sword?

Also interested if anyone has information about the hardness range of different historical swords, eg. Japanese swords, European swords .... what are the differences between construction of a slashing weapon like a saber vs. a stabbing weapon like a fencer's foil or them things in the 3 Musketeers movies?

How hard were the earlier bronze swords compared to iron and steel?

How hard would the steel in hard outer edge layers of a katana be?
 
Last edited:
olpappy said:
How hard would the steel in hard outer edge layers of a katana be?
Click to expand...

The cutting edge of the katana was always made to be a lot harder than the back part of the blade so that the sword could absorb the shock of the impact and bend on a bad cut instead of breaking. As a consequence though, it did make the edge just slightly more brittle because it was harder and the overall blade itself was not as resilient.
 
European swords .... what are the differences between construction of a slashing weapon like a saber vs. a stabbing weapon like a fencer's foil or them things in the 3 Musketeers movies?
The saber i studied from 1895 (british/canadian officers sword) had no cutting edge. bevels, but no indication that it had ever been sharp. Same with a Spanish sword from the same time period. Both were straight bladed weapons, unlike sabers from earlier dates.I am told that at this time they were used more for thrusting from horseback like a lance then for cutting or slicing.
The rapiers I studied from the 1600-1700 were roughly 1/4" thick at the guard tapering to 1/8' thick at the tip. Either diamond cross section or flattened diamond. Historical accounts of duels tell of fingers being sliced off from grabbing the blade, so i figure they were sharp for their entire length.
balance point was roughly 4-6" in front of the guard.
In some of the historical accounts of duels, it also tells that the losers sword was bent or broken and returned to him, so it would appear that hardness would vary from maker to maker.
 
Last edited:
olpappy said:
Just wondering what is the typical hardness range of modern swords, and how this compares with typical hardness for something like a golok, machete, kukri, or axe. At what point does a blade become too brittle to make a good sword?

Also interested if anyone has information about the hardness range of different historical swords, eg. Japanese swords, European swords .... what are the differences between construction of a slashing weapon like a saber vs. a stabbing weapon like a fencer's foil or them things in the 3 Musketeers movies?

How hard were the earlier bronze swords compared to iron and steel?

How hard would the steel in hard outer edge layers of a katana be?
Click to expand...

I can't speak to katana but medieval western swords seem to be in the 40 to 55 RC range. One should keep in mind that since heat treating wasn't exactly a science back then the range varies pretty considerably. 60 RC seems to be a bit to brittle for sword blades.
 
What got me curious about this topic was this article by Verhoeven

http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/9809/Verhoeven-9809.html

where they tested some wootz blades from antique collections and found HRC in the 20s and 30s, which just seems quite low to me. If damascus steel had a reputation for outperforming European blades, how could they be that soft, or did I read something incorrectly in that article?

I realize that steel technology has evolved through innumerable processes over the ages, but wouldn't a simple village blacksmith forging plain steel be able to achieve a hardness greater than that?
 
olpappy said:
What got me curious about this topic was this article by Verhoeven

http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/9809/Verhoeven-9809.html

where they tested some wootz blades from antique collections and found HRC in the 20s and 30s, which just seems quite low to me. If damascus steel had a reputation for outperforming European blades, how could they be that soft, or did I read something incorrectly in that article?

I realize that steel technology has evolved through innumerable processes over the ages, but wouldn't a simple village blacksmith forging plain steel be able to achieve a hardness greater than that?
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what to say about that article. It's a given that Verhoeven and Pendray know of what they speak. As you say however those RC values are far too low, even when compared with contemporary pieces as far as I know. What we really need in this thread is Kevin Cashen. I'll see if I can ping him... maybe he will tell us I'm wrong about what I think are hardnesses for European blades.
 
From what I can gather from their analysis, the majority of the wootz blades' matrix is pearlite. In another article he mentions that the hardenability of the wootz blades is low, an oil quench produces martensite in not more than 1.5mm of blade thickness.

http://www.springerlink.com/content/n073320t72863736/fulltext.pdf

This is all quite interesting, but it certainly leaves me wondering how such blades would have gotten such a fabled reputation as compared to European swords.

Addendum:

I found passage from a different article which is addresses this topic:

"The reputation of Damascus steel blades being superior to European blades was probably established prior to the 17th century when European blades were still being made by forge welding of carburized iron. It is hard to avoid embrittlement of such blades due to imperfect welding during the forging process as well as difficulty with the carburizing process."

J.D. Verhoeven, Genuine Damascus Steel: A type of banded microstructure in hypereutectoid steels, Steels Research,73, 347-55 (2002).

The same article describes bending tests by Zschokke on wootz blades from the collection of H. Moser, the wootz blades broke more easily than pattern welded and cast steel blades, despite having lower Brinell hardess (between 193 and 248). from hardness charts, Brinell 248 = HRC 24.2

While the tips of modern woodworking chisels can be as hard as RC59-60, the shank portion of chisels is typically in the 20-30s range.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top