Quote:
|
Originally Posted by M21Sniper
"Oh it might look like one, but I think you have been had, conned and suckered.
A hand and a half would weigh in at 4.5 lbs or less."
What you think is really rather irrelevant friend. I've had the hilt off. It has a 1" steel tang running the length of the hilt.
It's real alright.
It is so heavy beacause of the sheer mass of the blade. The blade is at least three times wider than those pictured in Stuarts post(the blade is 40"x6". I challenge you to find a piece of 40x6 steel bar stock that weighs 5lbs...lol). Almost the entire weight of a sword is in the blade. Triple the width of the blade...you're obviously going to roughly triple the weight of the weapon.
If my damned digital camera hadn't broke i'd take some pictures of it with the hilt off. It's as real as a sword gets.
PS: Considering that i paid exactly nothing for the blade, i'd say it would be quite hard for me to have been 'conned, had, or suckered'.
|
I see, perhaps I phrased myself poorly. I am sure your sword is real, in that it looks like what is ment to be, but that does not mean it is a genuine combat sword. A genuine combat sword does not weigh 23 ibs let alone 30. That you seem to think that your 'weapon' is an accurate reflection of medieval bastrd swords tells me that you have indeed been 'conned, had and suckered'
But dont take my word for it, lets see what the current curator of European edged weapons, Robert C. Woosnam-Savage has to say shall we?
Quote:
"The fighting two-handed sword, weighed (on average) between 5-7 lbs. I give the following three examples, randomly chosen from our own collections, which I hope are adequate to make the point:
Two-handed sword, German, c.1550 (IX.926). Weight: 7 lb 6oz.
Two-handed sword, German, dated 1529 (IX.991). Weight: 5 lb 1oz.
Two-handed sword, Scottish, mid 16th century, (IX.926). Weight: 5 lb 10o
|
found here, +
http://www.thearma.org/essays/2HGS.html .
My concern in this thread is that you dont have you facts correct about what 'knights' were capable of, and have come to a grossly unimformed conclution in this thread as a result.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by M21Sniper
Finally, i do not believe that a European knight would be able to land many blows against a lightly encumbered Japanese Samurai. I own several authentic European ancient weapons, they all have one thing in common. They are all heavy, and they are all slow to recover after a miss. The bastard sword is the epitome of those problems. What a stupid weapon.
|
Here you show no evidence to back up your claim whatsoever, and demonstrate beyoned a shadow of a doubt that you do not own any authentic medieval European combat weapons at all. How can you come to any kind conclution with respect of Samurai vs Knight when you havent a clue about the actual capabilities of one of the combatants?