Albion sword edge damage

[Bill Welch]

"For the record, the original sword on which Albion's Brescia Spadona is based is not really a war sword, per se.

I agree with you: it is absolutely reasonable to expect a replica sword, war sword or not, to perform as a historical sword of the same type would have. And that is the point to the whole discussion, in my opinion. "

His may not have been, where as Mine was. And I would not have expected a war sword to become damaged by cutting the lower leg of a deer (the equivalent of two fingers side-by-side).

"Personally, I care about how historic swords react compared to new swords on the same materials. I think the people on the topic need to learn about historical swords and talk to people at museums, handle real swords and see the damage, read text about metallurgical details, listen to the 10 swordsmiths and what they have to say, talk to authors, etc. etc. The data is overwhelmingly telling us that using a historical sword on hard materials requires maintenance and/or repair. It seems to me to be common sense that a various swords are intended for various purposes. Further, it seems obvious to me that any sword is going to react different than other tools: cleavers, machetes, etc. All of these things are completely reasonable expectations of swords in my opinion."

Once again I agree and disagree, I have talked to sword makers, from what I understand there are historical swords and there are historical swords. Sword can be made that perform, do function like a sword that they are paterned after, and are not damaged on Hard targets(like a deer leg?). But yes if I cut thru a thigh bone of a man or the fore-arm bones of a man, and it slightly damaged the blade I think that would be different, but I dont know in a war sword context.

"I just happen to disagree with many of you about what to expect from historical swords and how they react to targets. I don't think it's reasonable to expect a sword, antique or replica, to show no damage or deformation of the edge upon hitting a hard target. A sword *can* be made to take no damage, but then it won't have the proper blade or edge geometry that replicates a historical sword of the same type. In these cases, is it still a sword? Perhaps. Is a crowbar a sword? How about a cleaver? How about a Machete? I don't think so. It's a game of compromises: these things cannot be made to do all things in all situations. Good luck with Liechtenauer while using a sword sufficiently built up to withstand this use without showing signs of damage. Good luck cutting into fabric and slicing skin with such swords. Good luck having the same mechanical properties of such a sword when it's been changed in such a ways. To think that these multiple variables don't all add up and change the end-result is simply not a reasonable expectation, in my opinion."

I dont know ask Angus, or Tinker if his swords can cut fabric, skin, or bone, and not show much damage to the blade. I believe that there was an article in the Blade mag. doing a test cutting, where they cut completely thru a whole deer, and the blade was not damaged. I dont know but I dont think Caspers Lutel was damaged when he cut thru the deer in his test cutting. And all these swords can be used in the Liechtenauer style.

Now I have nothing against Albion, and I have contacted them, and have made arrangments for my perticular problem, and all in all I dont think there is a problem with there product at all. If there was a problem with my particular blade then there was, and it is taken care of.

" In reply to:
And as far as Lance being given a hard time, I would not assume to speak for him, but to me several of the posts were aimed in his direction but not to him by name. So to me infering that he was what-ever was kind of chicken.



Chicken? I don't think it's needed to put somebody's name in there since the posts are responding to him, and often quoting him. I'm not adding your name in here, but I think it's pretty clear who I'm typing to right now. Further, I don't think there's an inference, but if that's the way it's taken, I can certainly step it up a notch for the sake of clarity. "

Well apparently, I was not the only person to think that Flaming of Lance had taken place, if YOU read the whole post. I also think that it is disrepectful and arrogent to talk about someone, and infer oppinions about them that are unfounded.

"There's no room for an exchange of information if one is then going to cry foul when somebody disagrees with another's position. We must be more adult and open-minded about this free-flow of information."

I also agree, as long as people take time to listen and not just rattle off, what they heard from someone with an oppinion that they agree with.


And yes Shane, I always try to conduct myself in a Gentlmanly fashion. <img src="/forum/images/icons/grin.gif" alt="" />

[david welch]

To say that Albions swords aren't designed to cut is demonstrably not true in the absolute sense to my mind.

You are right. I was wrong for making that statement and I retract it.

However, I am still left with the fact that the war sword broke when cutting the leg of a juvanile deer, and my $5 machete cut though aged cow leg bone with no damage.

I have no problem with changing my comment to:

Yes, not only do I understand, that was my point. My machete was designed, however haphazardly they "design" a $5 machete, to cut with. The sword, it seems, either wasn't as well designed for cutting, as well made for cutting, or a combination of both, as my $5 machette.

To put into other words, I have yet to have explained to me why the historical smithes were not able to make a sword perform at the level as a big knife with questionable metal, heat treatment, and a 17 degree edge.


On a completely different note, I am not sure I like the direction I see some of this, and other posts on the internet in relation to this, where "it breaks when you use it, just like the old ones did" is being touted as a product feature by the manufacturers and their spokesmen.

[david welch]

In the interest of keeping the debate fair, here is an email I recieved this morning:

Hey David!



I tried to respond to your post on ARMA, but even though I have a registered account, it was telling me that my “ISP is not valid…”



I would appreciate it, if you would, posting this for me:



"On a completely different note, I am not sure I like the direction I see some of this, and other posts on the internet in relation to this, where "it breaks when you use it, just like the old ones did" is being touted as a product feature by the manufacturers and their spokesmen. "



If this is the impression you are getting, this distresses me.



I believe that what people on various forums have tried to say is:

It has been our stated goal at Albion to produce swords that meet the same standard as swords made in period. Surviving period swords show the same sort of damage or repair of damage as has been seen in these two examples.



What this comes down to more than anything else is the limitations of the materials used, more than the design. We chose to use a "simple" steel (in this case 1075) which is not a "through-hardening" steel. It is the closest modern equivalent to the steels used in the period. As a result, the blades may be more likely to suffer damage than, say, a modern piece (even a cheap machete) made from a high alloy spring steel like a truck leaf spring.



That was a trade-off decision we made, in order to bring you swords that would feel and behave like period originals. A through-hardened high-alloy blade will not "feel" the same, even with the same period-accurate design, as a sword made with simpler steels. The high alloy blade will feel stiffer and not as lively.



We heat treat our own blades (unlike most other makers who have theirs commercially heat treated) and test everything pretty rigorously. Granted, when you make over a thousand swords a year, however, you will occasionally make a mistake.



When it comes to edge geometry and design, a 'knife edge" on a sword may stand up better than a blade with a lenticular section ending in a sharp edge -- there is more material behind the knife edge to support it. A knife edge, however, is not found on surviving period examples. Many modern makers put a knife edge on their swords and then "blend the corner" to make it look like an appleseed edge. That still leaves more material to support the edge, but is not a true sword edge as found on period originals.



Albion has, and always will, guarantee our pieces against defects in materials and workmanship for life -- the only contention comes in when trying to determine if it is a defect in the piece or a mistake made by the owner. However, in our 6+ year history, we have a firm reputation for erring on the side of our customers.



I am not saying, however, that we never make mistakes either in the making or customer service, or that any of these things should be "blown off."



Bill's sword is being replaced, Lance's sword is being replaced. (The only thing that makes me wonder about Lance's tests was that the first videotaped session showed him cutting through bone with no problem, but the second session showed damage from cutting bone -- what was different from one session to the other?) We get testimonials from customers every day, telling us about their experiences with cutting with our swords -- from tatami mats to saplings. These two instances of damage, though widely discussed, are the only ones I am personally aware of since we started manufacturing swords.



To me, the end result of these various discussions seems to be that the current market is not willing to accept the potentially less forgiving nature of materials that have historic corollaries and that we should go back to using modern steels. Your thoughts on this would be appreciated.



Best regards,



Howy of Albion

[Lance Chan]

I would like to chime in since Howy mentioned me.

In the first test cutting, there was no edge "damage" but edge dulling significantly. The reason could very well be that in the first test cutting, the pork arm was naked and either hung on a rope or a box, which both provided a lot more give than striking a real person in non-evading motion would. So the blade just got dulled and not damaged.

In the second test cutting when the pork arm was wrapped up by leather piece, put on the box, the edge started to show more damage because the leather must have made the whole impact "less forgiving". The edge started to fail to hold up by showing mini-saw.

Then again it seemed that the theory was proved true in the last test when I cut an "incoming" airborne pork arm. In this test, it simulates where I intercept an enemy's oberhau by cutting his forearm and see the result. The result was devastating, both for the target and for the sword. The impact force was the largest on this test because the pork was actually flying toward the edge. There was the least give in this test.

Result? A 5mm long and 0.5 mm deep nick.

Howy, these are the differences. Hope I make things clear enough. I understand your position and thanks for your replacement. I understand the method of historical accuracy and the cost of it. The misunderstand occured before I bought the spadona that I just didn't expect for the sake of historical accurate, the end result as a sword could be weaker than the swords I've used before, despite the huge price difference (my last sword was 499.99 USD from bladeart). That was quite different from the impression I've acquired from Peter Johnsson's email exchange 3 years ago, where he believed his sword performed just as well or better than period swords. There was also no pittings on the sword for myarmoury review. So I didn't expect pittings either.

I'm eagerly awaiting for the replacement and this time I'll treat it with proper expectation.

[david welch]

Hi, Howy!

First, if nothing else, kudos to you for getting down in the mud yourself. A lot of people would have used someone else to do it for them.

And, I meant that sincerely. <img src="/forum/images/icons/smile.gif" alt="" />

To me, the end result of these various discussions seems to be that the current market is not willing to accept the potentially less forgiving nature of materials that have historic corollaries and that we should go back to using modern steels. Your thoughts on this would be appreciated

Just some thoughts I had on this.

First, 1075.

I agree with you using a low alloy steel to simulate historical metals. And, 1075 is used to make cutting tools and springs... both things you would think of when you think of a sword.

However, 1075 requires very careful heat treatment to avoid being too brittle, if that can be avoided at all. That is the nature of cutting steel.

I noticed in a post somewhere that somebody tested the hardness (I think it was Lance) and found a hardness of about RC 45-47. Are you are trying to shoot for the intersection of the impact strength and hardness curve for this metal? Maybe you just need to move higher on the impact strength curve? Swords, it seem to me are more an impact weapon that cuts that a cutting weapon that impacts. Maybe consideration is needed for moving to a low alloy impact steel (something like SIS 2550 maybe?)altogether?

And I realize in the whole "balancing act" of making a product, the manufacturing process also has to be considered otherwise the product price becomes so high that you might as well not bother making them at all... but 1075 is so hard to work with anyway I don't see changing steel that big a deal. I openly admit you might have manufacturing considerations I don't understand though.

I guess to summarize this point... are you sure that 1075 is the right substitute for historical steel?



My second thought is that I read that the model for the Brescia at least was found in a "resharpened" condition.

Is it possible that in your attempt to recreate the original, you are making the "as new" edge too fine? A brittle steel with an edge without enough meat behind it sounds like a recipe for breakage.

Third, I guess how about just putting an up front disclaimer that says:

"In an attempt to recreate this blade we used what we feel is an approximation of the original steel. Be advises this might not hold up as well during use as you would find if made with a modern steel."?

Just some thoughts I had on this.

[Lance Chan]

Some update on the HRC reading and to be fair (as always). Since the disclosure of the initial data I've done extensive tests on many pieces sent to me and my skill to test the hardness has refined. The Brescia scored 55 to 50 HRC along the edge line within 0.25" from the exact edge line. Once it passed that region the HRC dropped to what you mentioned. This is a repeating the result on another Albion sword I've tested.

[leam hall]

So for a person thinking of getting his first sword, would the Albion Squire line be better for test cutting and pell work on a tree than one of the more expensive models?

Would it be better to wait for the fall line of Maestro blades?

[Patrick Kelly]

The one key factor that everyone in this discussion seems to be missing is that Lance did not receive a "standard issue" Brescia Spadona from Albion.

The folks at Albion have admitted that they put a keener edge on Lance's sword than is standard. They knew Lance would be doing some serious cutting so they assumed that he wanted as keen an edge as possible on his sword. They've admitted that this was a mistake on their part and I agree with them. It's impossible to work to a standard as a manufacturer when you change that standard on an individual basis. It's also impossible for a customer to form an expectation when there's no standard.

I was pretty vocal on this issue with the guys at Albion when we were all in Atlanta. I've been one of their most vocal suporters since their begining but I've also been one of the ones who hasn't hesitated to point out when they make a mistake. I still believe that Albion is making the best european replicas on the production market, but they make their mistakes like everyone else.

They realize that making these assumptions was less than wise and it's been a learning experience for everyone involved. I also think that everyone in our community who is willing to put aside their own preconceived ideas for the sake of objectivity has learned something from this experience.

The bottom line is that Lance's sword cannot be used as a yardstick of severity for an entire product line since it is an atypical example. That isn't an excuse or a defense, it's a simple fact of the situation.

No one at myArmoury.com has been harsh on Lance. Some have disagreed with his findings but that's it. Disagreement is simply one facet of the learning process, it's not an offensive manuver designed to engender conflict. Hopefully most of us learn this before we leave the playground so we can engage in mature discussion. No one has infered anything. Inference is for whimps and degenerates.

I've disagreed with Lance on several of his points because I think his expectations are a bit unrealistic. Lance has had issues with every sword he's owned that he's bothered to post about. I don't take this as an attitude or agenda on his part, but simply as a facet of his learning process. Like any weapon a sword is a finite tool with a limited lifespan. Different swords will react differently to different situations, but they will all show signs of wear if used.

If I had been in Albion's position I would not have replaced the sword. I would have refunded his money and wished him well, because I think his expectations are unrealistic. Consequently he probably won't be happy with the replacement, and as a maker I wouldn't want the grief. That's not a slam on Lance because I actually admire his motivation and drive to learn. It's simply a disagreement of opinion.

[Alfred Wong]

Dear Patrick,

I believe Lance had realised the approach of the Albion and had adjusted his expectation, just read the post by him in this thread. Before coming to that, though, he expected his sword would be a sword that would perform as well as, or even better than other "modern-made" swords, but it ends up that it didn't.


The approach of Albion respects much of the history, the value of the authenticity is priceless. However, as a result, the sword failed to perform as well as the "modern made" swords. Is it unrealistic to expect an Albion, a modern-made sword to perform as well as other modern-made swords?

It then went into the very center of a lot of arguments : What's one expecting?

Performance or Authenticity ?

When Authenticity includes flaws, defects and such. And Authenticity degrade the Performance , what shall we choose?

If I am a collector and I would like to have a good replica, I would choose Authenticity . But as a Martial Artist, Performance would be more important.

Then, is Authenticity oppose to Performance ? I believe not.

I always believe that we can have a sword to perform as well as a "performance modern-made" sword, with positive "authentic" aspects.

Curious enough, other modern-made swords performed well against the reasonable targets. While only the Authentic Albion Brescia cannot. Because it's sharper than the original BS. And even more curious, the sharpness of the Sunflower katana is sharper than the Albion Brescia, and it has not problem facing the reasonable targets. And so and so curious, even some cheap China pieces have no prblem. The expectation is hence not unrealistic. But the facts are somehow too realistic to be accepted.

Too authentic. I just repeated what I have said before and before. I was in awe of the Svante and had saved for it. But now, I switched and asked a custom smith to make the sword that can performance as well as Lance's Tinker custom. Because I want performance. This is my expectation.

It happens lots. When discussing things academic, it always goes to what we believe and what we pursuit. Simply it's the road we must pass in learning.

Best regards,
Alfred <img src="/forum/images/icons/smile.gif" alt="" />

[Patrick Kelly]

Alfred,

Is it unrealistic to expect an Albion, a modern-made sword to perform as well as other modern-made swords?

If you are expecting every replica sword to perform in exactly the same manner against all types of targets regardless of their design philosophy than yes, that is unrealistic.

When Authenticity includes flaws, defects and such. And Authenticity degrade the Performance , what shall we choose?

Choose whichever approach meets your needs.

If I am a collector and I would like to have a good replica, I would choose Authenticity . But as a Martial Artist, Performance would be more important.

If that is the case you should pick the right tool for the job. Choose a modern made sword that places performance against modern cutting mediums as a priority.

I always believe that we can have a sword to perform as well as a "performance modern-made" sword, with positive "authentic" aspects.

I agree, this is quite possible, but in order to achieve this you must define your own expectations and wisely choose a maker that will meet them, not choose a maker who's philosophy is cleary stated and then be upset when that philosophy doesn't meet your preconceived expectations.

Curious enough, other modern-made swords performed well against the reasonable targets. While only the Authentic Albion Brescia cannot. Because it's sharper than the original BS. And even more curious, the sharpness of the Sunflower katana is sharper than the Albion Brescia, and it has not problem facing the reasonable targets. And so and so curious, even some cheap China pieces have no prblem. The expectation is hence not unrealistic. But the facts are somehow too realistic to be accepted.

I did read Lance's post, but I think you need to read mine again. As stated, any comparison of Lance's BS towards those other swords cannot be used as a gauge of the manufacturers quality since his BS is a non-standard product. Even if it was I can't accurately discuss those particular swords since I haven't seen them. I did see several of the katana made by Martial Arts Sword (?) at the recent Atlanta Blade Show. They may be adequate for chopping pork digits but otherwise I really wasn't that impressed with them as a representation of what a sword can be.

Too authentic. I just repeated what I have said before and before. I was in awe of the Svante and had saved for it. But now, I switched and asked a custom smith to make the sword that can performance as well as Lance's Tinker custom. Because I want performance. This is my expectation.

I think that's a wise choice based upon the parameters you've set for you expectations.

[jennifer welch]

Hey There, this is my first post, so I'll try to "say" what I mean <img src="/forum/images/icons/wink.gif" alt="" /> . I don't think that people realized "that" info from the git go (what Howie said about the metal). I know I have alot to learn about metals and classifications of them. However, when I was personally "looking" I was not clear as to what "authentic" meant either.
I am still looking for a sword that will do what I "want", also.
I believe that I will get one of the MRL hand-and-a half swords to cut with first, just so that if I'm unhappy I haven't lost much money.
Also, if curiousity about what others "think" on the same subject, is going to be responded to so "vehemenently" on one side or the other,( let me say, this is not posed toward anybody, in particular) then maybe we need to clarify what we mean when we post. Maybe even to what end we would like to see happen?
I saw "both" posts clearly asking for, opinions, or what to do, or maybe if expectations were too high.
I personally feel that to enter these two questions with the assumptions that they were looking to slander or be negative, is not accurate.
In keeping up with this "thread" I feel that these two guys apparrently really enjoyed, and had enough confidence in "Albion", to think, that their swords were the best to purchase, whatever amount they paid.
The point of all of this to me, is that some have "pre-concieved" notions and some just want to "help" others in big $ decisions. Not that either one of these two guys had either approach.
So now, I will stop blathering you to death.


P.S. I must say in my opinion they had every right to tell and ask what they did to a seemingly schooled (in this subject of swords and fighting) "assembly of minds". were

[Sean_Gallaty]

This whole topic is an immense can of worms to me.

Is the goal to recreate an anachronistic martial art? If it's not, then in the evolution of redeveloping it, will our technological and metallurgical advances change the tools that the style can use, and thus change the style?

I guess the other real pickle of a question is, are our modern metallurgical practices able to produce 'better' weapons, or is it simply labor-saving?

Is it safe to presume that because we are 'modern' and more advanced technologically in general that we can make 'better' swords than we could 500 years ago? I guess there's a whole sheaf of topics on what is 'better' as well.

What is 'better' really means what is better for the application, and that's a complicated and intricate statement. I presume that a sword performs in many, many ways and the ways the sword needs to perform is based on how the sword is used. That seems to suggest to me that sword styles might not only adapt to armor, society and martial factors but also adapt to whatever weapons were being produced to fight with. I can't help but wonder what the masters would have done with the weapons being produced today, or what they would have asked of our current weaponsmiths.

For me, this is a intense and engrossing subject because the more questions I ask myself, the more questions it seems to open up. Maybe one of the problems is that I don't feel there's a baseline. Without anyone qualified as a master with antique weapons, we lack comparative insight.

- nox

[Jaron Bernstein]

Hi all,

We did some test cutting today. We used an unfrozen big (about 12" thick) ham from Krogers with the bone inside.

My Albion Sempach on a scheitelhau went through thick exposed bone and the rest of the ham (about 6" of additional meat) with no problem at all and no edge damage at all. It also pierced straight through on 2 thrusts like the ham wasn't even there.

Jeff Gentry's Windlass steelcrafts broke cleanly at the hilt and went flying through the air with the same cut. A scary moment.

Keith's Del Tin cut fine with no edge damage.

[GaryGrzybek]

Hi Leam,

The Squire line is designed more towards the beginner Swordsman. They are unsharpened but still posess an edge that is thinner than your average Del Tin. They can be sharpened and will probably cut just fine. Keep in mind that they will have a secondary bevel and not the historical edge that the Next Gens have. If your on a tight budget this is the way to go and you can at least do some light partner drills and solo work with steel. My study partner Bruce Magee has the bastard sword and it's holding up very well against my Armor Class and Mike Eging's Del Tin. As a matter of fact, the Del Tin and the Armor Class lost their ring but the Albion remains rock solid.

I would recommend that you do not use any steel swords for pell work since the continued shock will eventually damage it. Wasters are much cheaper <img src="/forum/images/icons/grin.gif" alt="" />

This issue with the Albion Next Gen's should not be viewed as an example of their quality. With hundreds of swords out there it's probable that a few isolated problems will spring up. The least we can do is allow Albion to make things right with the individual owners and I'm sure they will.

[leam hall]

I think the title "beginner" fits me well. <img src="/forum/images/icons/smile.gif" alt="" />

I don't have anyont to do freeplay with, and to be honest I'm not at a point where I'd feel comfortable with steel and another body. I would like to start on some cutting though.

Maybe Albion should ensure they have sets--the blunt for practice and the sharp for real stuff, and the Squire for those of us still trying to talk ourselves (and spouses) into a nice blade. <img src="/forum/images/icons/tongue.gif" alt="" />