Sword Quality Ranking

But I think Merek's right about the weakness of the hollow-ground edge. That it, it's not suited to cutting heavier targets.

Sorry not trying to be a prick... Just trying to be precise as that's how rumor gets started. "I just bought my trusty samurai2000 ninjatana cause some guys at bladeforums were talking about how modern swords are superior to ancient ones... "

OK, I understand that. If some kid bought a BUdK because of something I said, I'd have to kill myself.

Merek, alas! The JS khukri has been sold. This is good, though, because I probably would have bought it!

Will you wear your saber to Scarby? I should be there and I'd like to check out a Jody Samson sword.
 
Find me a job in my career field (graphic design/tech illustration) in my area (San Antonio) at say, $18+ per hour soon and I'll be happy to wear it to Scarby. (By the way listeners; I do freelance at reasonable prices 'small business packages' of busy cards/logos/letterheads/garage sale signs/flyers/promo items....) As things stand, TRF is more likely. Nor can I wander about with it unsheathed which adds a bit of time to the equation as I am certain Triton has a backlog. Tex Renfaire is realistic though I will be at Scarby as well as Excalibur (earlier than Scarby. Feb-March? near Austin). Hmmm... if I am not working....maybe I can swell sords ;) in trade for steel...
 
Well I don't guess you would go after a guy wearing a full suit of plate with it but that would be reasonably pointless pretty anyway with almost any sword type but the type XVII and even then I wonder...

There have been some interesting discussions of the benefits of different edge geometries over the years here's a post by Peter Johnsson in my opinion one of the top three makers of historically accurate swords in the world:

There are numerous things that can be varied in any design, obviously. Hollowgrinding as opposed to diamond or lenticular section is one of these.
As far as cutting goes, I´d guess that the shaping of the very sharpness of the edge and the overall distribution of mass and balance of the sword are more important factors in the performance of the weapon.
All cross sections have their strong points. There are reasons why you´d want to use any and all of them. I won´t go into all that, because this post would then become a very long one...

My take on this fascinating topic:
One benefit of hollowgrinding, apart from promoting a stark and crisp looking blade, is that it reduces mass to a bare minimum. All "dead meat" is taken away. The very edge (the last two milimeters or so) can still have the same strength and geometry as on a lenticular or diamond sectioned blade, but the sides are hollowed out which reduces weight dramatically. The raised midrib establishes a higher degree of stiffness with same amount of material as that of an equally broad blade that is thinner. Stiffer is better for cutting. The question of added friction is not a real issue as most targets that are meant to be cut by a sword are not very homogenous or dense to begin with.
Hollow ground cross section is almost always found on blades with prominent points. This section is good in combining good cutting and superior penetration performance.
Hollow grinding is good for making blades with relatively lighter points, that still are stiff and strong enough for efficient thrusting. This might be one of the hidden reasons why the extra work is a good idea: A light point helps pulling the pivot point forward! A sword with a light point area can have a pivot point that is located just behind the very point. This is good for at least two things. Frist, it helps keeping the point locked on target while "fencing". Secondly, it makes the point area of the sword becoming more efficient in cutting, as the corresponding pivot points in blade and grip are what creates shock dampening.
Finally, a light point takes little effort to accellerate; such a sword will be faster and more responsive.
...But then again, there are other ways to achieve that as welll...


It's been copied here without his permission but I thought it an interesting post... The emphasis was added by me.
 
The very edge (the last two milimeters or so) can still have the same strength and geometry as on a lenticular or diamond sectioned blade, but the sides are hollowed out which reduces weight dramatically.

It sounds like he's talking about some sort of deep and wide fuller rather than a true hollow grind. And he's talking about thrusting swords anyway, not cutting. I don't see how a hollow ground blade could not be thinner than a flat or appleseed ground at the edge. Here's a good article on edge geometry and cutting performance:

http://www.bugei.com/niku.html
 
A fuller runs down the middle of the blade, the hollow grind he's referencing is on the edges with a pronounced mid rib in the center rather then a fuller.

An interesting article, it's fascinating to me how different cultures solved the same problems in different ways.
 
A fuller runs down the middle of the blade, the hollow grind he's referencing is on the edges with a pronounced mid rib in the center rather then a fuller.

Yes, but a very wide filler could appear simillar to a hollow ground blade and still have the edges that Johnsson describes. I've seen some period smallswords that were done in this way.

Anyway, I'm sure Merek's sword will cut very well, and I look forward to seeing ths scabbard you will make for him!

:)
 
Hmm that's interesting I guess I had never thought about it that way... if it was a wide double fullered design... I guess we've about beaten this discussion to death but I've really enjoyed it! Thanks!
 
Any feller running down MY blade willl be in a heap o' trouble!

Ooops! :footinmou You said 'fuller'.

There. Now the thread has gone all silly and worthy of no further attention....
 
There. Now the thread has gone all silly and worthy of no further attention....

here's a photo of some LARPers to seal the deal:

P3090008.jpg
 
Back
Top