Rayskin vs Wood which makes a better handle?

[oolong dao]

Which one is better rayskin or bare wood? does rayskin fall apart easily? do i need to take care of it more? what are some issues i would run into using it on a european sword which cant be taken apart as opposed to a nihonto?

What about wood? will it swell from use or break down from coming into contact with rough gloves? is it more work?

i need answers.

 

[Timo Nieminen]

Neither is better in an absolute sense. Depending on what the user wants, one might be better than the other.

Rayskin provides more grip. Rayskin can be rough on ungloved hands. Wood is gentler on bare hands, but can be slippery.

Wood wrapped in rayskin is stronger than wood alone. If the wood is reinforced by things like ferrules or similar, there is less need for something like rayskin. Rayskin panels don't reinforce the grip; they only make it grippier. Wood + ferrule is often good enough. If it isn't, better wrap the wood with rayskin, or wire, or cord, or leather.

One problem with a traditional rayskin covered grip is that the glue might not be waterproof. A plain wood grip can also be easier to replace, especially if the sword has a glued-in stick tang. Carve a new grip, put the old ferrule on, and glue the blade in.

Some people think rayskin is pretty. Some people think the right wood is prettier.

 

[Rich S]

Timo -

Japanese swords have used a wooden core covered with rayskin (same') for a thousand years or more. The rayskin is applied wet and wrapped in place over the core until it dries. Then it is sanded to smooth off the sharp/rough nodules. It makes an excellent, gripible (sp?), long lasting handle. I've rebuilt several of them.

Rich

 

[Timo Nieminen]

Hi Rich, a question about Japanese use of rayskin recently occurred to me, and you might be able to help:

The extra grippiness of rayskin of a Japanese tsuka (grip) is useful because it holds the ito (wrapping) in place. Japanese (or Chinese) style wrapping straight on wood slides on the grip more easily. So the common modern style of rayskin panels (rather than a full wrap) is still functionally useful. But it doesn't reinforce the hilt like a full wrap (but the ito wrapping reinforces the hilt).

I've seen old Japanese hilts with panels; it isn't just something seen on modern Chinese-made swords. When did they start doing rayskin as panels?

Rayskin wraps are common enough on European, SE Asian, Tibetan, Chinese, and Korean swords. Probably others too; those are places I've seen many examples from. Usually, fully-wrapped hilts. Maybe European swords with a backstrap can have a partial wrap. Japanese swords are the only place where I've seen panels on grips.

 

[Rich S]

Timo -

Yes the rayskin acts to secure the ito on Japanese swords, but there are many sword hilts done in just rayskin lacking any ito. Personally I doubt they would be as gripible as those with ito and are most likely presentation swords. I don't know when they started doing paneled rayskin, but I've Muromachi period swords (late 15th-early16th C) done with just panels. Of course swords were commonly remounted several times during the life of the blade both due to Shogunal regulations and changes in style. Most of those that I've rewrapped I have always done in a full rayskin wrap because as you said, it does add strength to the handle. I have done a few panels, but just because the wood core was already grooved for them and the core was still in good shape.

Rich

 

[Timo Nieminen]

Yes the rayskin acts to secure the ito on Japanese swords, but there are many sword hilts done in just rayskin lacking any ito. Personally I doubt they would be as gripible as those with ito and are most likely presentation swords.

In my experience, bare rayskin is very grippy, perhaps more so than with ito. This is rayskin left rough, rather than sanded smooth. Not Japanese-made hilts, but antique dha hilts, and TIbetan and Chinese swords, and modern Chinese-made replicas.

 

[Rich S]

Timo -

Actually, to me bare, unsanded rayskin is like gripping a cactus. I don't sand mine totally smooth, just enough to take down the
sharp points - that's for handles with ito. I've never done a bare rayskin handle.

Timo - just curious are you on the NMB? The name sounds familar.

Rich

 

[Timo Nieminen]

Actually, to me bare, unsanded rayskin is like gripping a cactus. I don't sand mine totally smooth, just enough to take down the
sharp points - that's for handles with ito. I've never done a bare rayskin handle.

Unsanded would be too much. The roughest (and grippiest) I've met was only sanded a little; under magnification it's easy to see that just the very points were taken off. It's the roughest grip I'd cope with (without gloves).

I have a (modern, Chinese-made) tanto, bare rayskin, that's sanded down somewhat more, but still provides a very grippy grip. For a katana, I think it would be too grippy (sanded down more would be OK, I think). Far, far too much for a working blade that's a tool/weapon hybrid - for that kind of thing, the smoothness of wood is better (and such swords often have grips with flared or hooked integral pommels, so you don't risk losing the blade even if the grip is smooth). More grip isn't always a good thing.

Timo - just curious are you on the NMB? The name sounds familar.

Not me. Common enough name. You might be thinking of Timo Qvintus.