Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
Ahhhh good question. I just assume you have see all the cutting test done.
A good tv show I recommend is Deadliest Warrior. It show some of the best science of demonstrate warriors such as Spartan vs. Samurai or a Knight vs. a Pirate or Genghis Khan vs. Hannibal. It is a cool show and fun to watch. High production quality. I know it is only a show, but the weapon testing in the show is dead on.
the clip that I am posting of Deadliest warrior is Samurai vs. Viking.
http://clips.team-andro.com/watch/e5ee2f3b311fe4f145ae/deadliest-warrior-viking-vs.-samurai You will enjoy this show. Check out the Katana blade test. at about 8 min mark. A Katana slice 2 and a quarter pig.
BTW , this show has done many many test to all weapons and Katana is one of the best at slicing. However, vs. armor... katana is almost useless.
I forgot who won in this fight, but the weapon study is the key to this show. Enjoy.
A good tip: you aren't going to learn anything useful from Seadliest Warrior. The outcomes of the 'battles' are hearsay, the tests are worthless and the history usually hyped.
Its ok as light entertainment, but its useless as supporting evidence.
The only matchups that would make sense are those which are historically comperable and would explain why from a historical footing.
For example early Roman legionary vs Macedonian era pike would work as a show, and historical evidence could be used from Cynoscephalae, explaining how the swordman could get within the reach of the pike formations.
However fantasy lineups should remain fantasy, because the weapons and fighting styles are not really at test, the culture shock is largely the deciding factor. We know this is true because well armed individual warriors often fared poorly against less well armed warriors who were better adapted. So early clashes of the first crusade and in reversal the initial Mongol raids into Europe were not determined by equipment or training but adaptability. Deadliest Warrior never takes this into account.
n'oublie jamais - It appears I now have to highlight this again.
It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. By the juice of the brew my thoughts aquire speed, my mind becomes strained, the strain becomes a warning. It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion.
Deadliest warrior.All credibility you had is gone.the little you had left anyway....
Kote!
Kandosii sa ka'rte, vode an.
Coruscanta a'den mhi, vode an.
Bal kote,Darasuum kote,
Jorso'ran kando a tome.
Sa kyr'am nau tracyn kad vode an.
Bal...
Motir ca'tra nau tracinya.
Gra'tua cuun hett su dralshy'a.
Aruetyc talyc runi'la trattok'a.
Sa kyr'am nau tracyn kad, vode an!
Ahhhh good question. I just assume you have see all the cutting test done.
A good tv show I recommend is Deadliest Warrior. It show some of the best science of demonstrate warriors such as Spartan vs. Samurai or a Knight vs. a Pirate or Genghis Khan vs. Hannibal. It is a cool show and fun to watch. High production quality. I know it is only a show, but the weapon testing in the show is dead on.
You will enjoy this show. Check out the Katana blade test. at about 8 min mark. A Katana slice 2 and a quarter pig.
BTW , this show has done many many test to all weapons and Katana is one of the best at slicing. However, vs. armor... katana is almost useless.
I forgot who won in this fight, but the weapon study is the key to this show. Enjoy.
I'm afraid I can't accept that show as evidence. There's simply too much room for error with regards to the gentlemen who manually swing the blades, the angles the blades impact at, and more. If they trialled it fifty times, that would help erase some small amount of the doubt due to numerical statistics, but one test which is completely subject to several biases and errors simply cannot be regarded as conclusive proof of anything. And even if they did do it fifty times, the sharpness of the blade is not in evidence here, simply the amount of force that the weapon is capable of.
Really? The pig test is the standard test for cutting weapon. This is just one show. You can research this over youtube to death about the pig test. Katana almost always can cut pigs dead clean. Most double edge sword do not get the same consistency. I encourage you to check out other PIG cutting test of the Katana.
Back to my point, you do not agree that Katana is not sharp? Yes many swords can cut too, but Katana is in the top marks and IMHO, one of the best.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Da krimson barun wrote: Deadliest warrior.All credibility you had is gone.the little you had left anyway....
It is so funny how you take away my deadiest warrior example of the weapons PSI test and discount that. I am not talking about which warrior wins. The study of the PIS weapons test is the key to understand and judge the impact damage and armor protection.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/02/08 15:25:24
This sort of thing is just as bad as Orlanth was just now. Keep it factual, polite, and friendly gentlemen, or just step away and don't engage. We're all fans of toy soldiers, and discussing hypothetical 'WHO'S DA BESTEST!' scenarios about old weaponry. Nerds in arms, or some such. There's no need for the slightly more vitriolic back and forth this thread keeps veering towards.
Really? The pig test is the standard test for cutting weapon. This is just one show. You can research this over youtube to death about the pig test. Katana almost always can cut pigs dead clean. Most double edge sword do not get the same consistency. I encourage you to check out other PIG cutting test of the Katana.
Back to my point, you do not agree that Katana is not sharp? Yes many swords can cut too, but Katana is in the top marks and IMHO, one of the best.
I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm educated well enough to state when I don't know enough. All I am saying is that the evidence is unconvincing.
For one thing, there's a man swinging the sword. That means that the results of the test are subject to whatever force/strength he puts into it, as well as the angle at which he is hitting with. Secondly, we have no idea how much the blade was sharpened. It is possible it could be sharpened more than it is there, and the same for other weapons. We have no idea of the chemical composition of the weapon used, and whether that same one was used in the period. And finally, there are no real comparisons to other blades.
In short, it's fun to watch, but no use whatsoever in proving that 'Katanas are the best swords at cutting unarmoured targets due to their sharpness'.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2015/02/08 15:35:59
Man ... you are being clueless here or what? A Katana is a side arm. Not a main weapon. This ignorance is wasting my time. In war, Samurai bring pole arm or Odachi to have greater armor penetration and to kill full armor opponent. YOU DON'T USE A KATANA TO CRACK ARMOR. You kill armored opponent with Odachi (great Katana), Naginata (pole arm) or Great big ass Japanese War club Kanabo.
Just because you have a mod batting for you now and don't have to be polite while I do, doesn't mean I have to put up with intellectual garbage.
My comments, if you bothered to once quote them correctly are about your hyped assumption that the Katana is uber because its the sharpest.
I dug up some scientific evidence, involving metallurgy and molecular physics that proves you don't know what you are talking about.
Everything you have been going on in the last two pages was your niche assertion the Katana had its superiority factor over other swords on grounds of control and quality of edge. This however just isn't true. Damascus sterel was mentioned since page two I believe.
Now you are assuming I am talking about armour. We are through with that half of the conversation already, you even admitted that the Katana is sub-par against armour, and that is established in the thread, but plenty of swords are not:
The longsword wasn't, there is historical evidence for that, the zwerch certainly wasn't, in fact it was used specifically as a linebreaker to cut upon formations of heavy infantry. The field rapier is good for 'criticals' being as thrusting weapon, as was the gladius.
If you like we can gather the historical evidence, again, for presentation, but it would save us all time if you just admitted that the katana is not a special snowflake.
n'oublie jamais - It appears I now have to highlight this again.
It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. By the juice of the brew my thoughts aquire speed, my mind becomes strained, the strain becomes a warning. It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion.
This sort of thing is just as bad as Orlanth was just now. Keep it factual, polite, and friendly gentlemen, or just step away and don't engage. We're all fans of toy soldiers, and discussing hypothetical 'WHO'S DA BESTEST!' scenarios about old weaponry. Nerds in arms, or some such. There's no need for the slightly more vitriolic back and forth this thread keeps veering towards.
Really? The pig test is the standard test for cutting weapon. This is just one show. You can research this over youtube to death about the pig test. Katana almost always can cut pigs dead clean. Most double edge sword do not get the same consistency. I encourage you to check out other PIG cutting test of the Katana.
Back to my point, you do not agree that Katana is not sharp? Yes many swords can cut too, but Katana is in the top marks and IMHO, one of the best.
I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm educated well enough to state when I don't know enough. All I am saying is that the evidence is unconvincing.
For one thing, there's a man swinging the sword. That means that the results of the test are subject to whatever force/strength he puts into it, as well as the angle at which he is hitting with. Secondly, we have no idea how much the blade was sharpened. It is possible it could be sharpened more than it is there, and the same for other weapons. We have no idea of the chemical composition of the weapon used, and whether that same one was used in the period. And finally, there are no real comparisons to other blades.
In short, it's fun to watch, but no use whatsoever in proving that 'Katanas are the best swords at cutting unarmoured targets due to their sharpness'.
I see what you are saying. Well the common acceptance in weapons study and pig test and PSI test shows that Katana has the constancy cuts. The fact that European and most swords are not razor sharp is fact and Katana is razor is also fact. I think we can agree to this. From what we can agree, we can come to a conclusion that I would think a Katana can have better cuts. Please understand that a Long Sword cut will kill and you do not need to kill two men(pig test) in one swing...
I'm not sure about this. I am guessing here. Today most weapons are just cheap stainless steel and sharpen to razor edge because it will not see combat, can this razor edge be maintained?
What I find interesting is, I would like to know in our modern technology, what kind of sword edge and strength can they make now? Can they make long sword razor sharp and still functional as a battle sword?
In other words, with today technology... can we make the best blade and if by using time travel send it back to it's period and be consider a much more superior quality?
A good tv show I recommend is Deadliest Warrior. It show some of the best science of demonstrate warriors such as Spartan vs. Samurai or a Knight vs. a Pirate or Genghis Khan vs. Hannibal. It is a cool show and fun to watch. High production quality. I know it is only a show, but the weapon testing in the show is dead on.
I just deleted another long post I was about to write. Read this and I guess it's safe to say that you do't know anything about weapons and in general have no idea what you're talking of. You are a katana fanboy who maybe saw it in a movie and then kept fantasizing about its capabilities, losing each and every link to reality.
Later.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/02/08 15:57:40
I see what you are saying. Well the common acceptance in weapons study and pig test and PSI test shows that Katana has the constancy cuts.
Can I ask where else you are sourcing this from? I'm assuming you have a different source to 'Deadliest Warrior' to support your view.
The fact that European and most swords are not razor sharp is fact and Katana is razor is also fact.
The reason most European blades weren't sharpened especially is because they fight with men in armour, making it pointless to even bother. But just because they didn't do it does not mean that they could not. Any edge on any piece of metal can be sharpened. What that comes down to however, is the metal composition of the blade, and it would stand to reason that a sharpened blade made of superior steel (aka, european) would be superior to that made of inferior steel (aka, japanese).
I'm not sure about this. I am guessing here. Today most weapons are just cheap stainless steel and sharpen to razor edge because it will not see combat, can this razor edge be maintained?
I'll be honest with you, if you have a sword fight with one of those cheap mass produced chinese katanas, it'll snap off the hilt at the first impact. Most of them don't even have a partial tang, let alone a full tang. The metal itself would shatter if hit with something made of quality material.
What I find interesting is, I would like to know in our modern technology, what kind of sword edge and strength can they make now? Can they make long sword razor sharp and still functional as a battle sword?
In other words, with today technology... can we make the best blade and if by using time travel send it back to it's period and be consider a much more superior quality?
Now this is something interesting to talk about. How durable a blade could we make today? Comments, gentlemen.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/02/08 16:01:44
Man ... you are being clueless here or what? A Katana is a side arm. Not a main weapon. This ignorance is wasting my time. In war, Samurai bring pole arm or Odachi to have greater armor penetration and to kill full armor opponent. YOU DON'T USE A KATANA TO CRACK ARMOR. You kill armored opponent with Odachi (great Katana), Naginata (pole arm) or Great big ass Japanese War club Kanabo.
Just because you have a mod batting for you now and don't have to be polite while I do, doesn't mean I have to put up with intellectual garbage.
My comments, if you bothered to once quote them correctly are about your hyped assumption that the Katana is uber because its the sharpest.
I dug up some scientific evidence, involving metallurgy and molecular physics that proves you don't know what you are talking about.
Everything you have been going on in the last two pages was your niche assertion the Katana had its superiority factor over other swords on grounds of control and quality of edge. This however just isn't true. Damascus sterel was mentioned since page two I believe.
Now you are assuming I am talking about armour. We are through with that half of the conversation already, you even admitted that the Katana is sub-par against armour, and that is established in the thread, but plenty of swords are not:
The longsword wasn't, there is historical evidence for that, the zwerch certainly wasn't, in fact it was used specifically as a linebreaker to cut upon formations of heavy infantry. The field rapier is good for 'criticals' being as thrusting weapon, as was the gladius.
If you like we can gather the historical evidence, again, for presentation, but it would save us all time if you just admitted that the katana is not a special snowflake.
OK, what do you want to talk about? I've already shown you and tell you what I know. You don't believe me .
Fact: Katana is razor sharp.
Fact: Razor sharp will cut better than a none razor sharp weapon. THE CONS IS the sharpness will not last. European swords were design to fight none armor and also can (at disadvantage) fight armor opponent. So they do not wish to have sharper edge because it will have more cons and risk of breakage of weapon. Katana choose the risk breakage or dull the blade in prolong fights because it was not design to fight vs. metal armor. The forging helps Katana to retain durable lasting razor edge compare to other method of forging. WHAT MORE are we going to talk about.
You keep going on and on about this straw man argument that long sword can fight better vs. armor and blah blah blah....THE WORD YOU KEEP USING IS FIGHT. You have I made this post to take about XYZ and you keep bringing in XYZ + WTF and I am not even wish or talking about WTF.
THE BEST CUTTING BLADE is where I stand by the claim of Katana is best. I also mentioned that the great control of the blade can allows masters to make crazy cuts like beheading with the neck skin on which shows great control of the weapon. This control of the Katana is superior over other swords... and you never attempt to debate this part.
Just out of curiosity, are you arguing that Japanese forging methods would make an inferior metal better suited for cutting than a superior metal? Because the 'katana' is ultimately just the shape that the sword was forged in. It could have been forged straighter or bendier using the exact same methods. The level of sharpness of a blade is down to two things, how much you sharpen it, and the chemical composition of the blade. And since a European blade can easily be sharpened just like a katana (as could any piece of metal with an edge), it would seem to me that you are asserting that Japanese forging methods turned inferior metals into superior ones.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2015/02/08 16:14:35
Back to my point, you do not agree that Katana is not sharp? Yes many swords can cut too, but Katana is in the top marks and IMHO, one of the best.
Evidence of carbon nanotubes in Damascuas steel > pig test.
Your standard is unfair, no one is going to use a pig test on a 2000 year old cultural relic. However the modern scientific evidence supports the eye witness evidence that Damascus steel could split rocks without blunting. With carbon nanotubes actually detected this is actually credible.
Da krimson barun wrote: Deadliest warrior.All credibility you had is gone.the little you had left anyway....
It is so funny how you take away my deadiest warrior example of the weapons PSI test and discount that. I am not talking about which warrior wins. The study of the PIS weapons test is the key to understand and judge the impact damage and armor protection.
Da krimsun baron is right to do so. These tests are made for TV remember, actual scientific protocol takes longer than the TV show or viable budget would allow, and is less fun to film.
Its fun to see swords chop at breastplates or pig carcasses, proper analysis takes time.
Let me give a separate example, admittedly the show on the longbow by Jon Snow (who knows nothing) was even worse than Deadliest Warrior.
I remember a very bad show on the longbow, but TV presenter Jon Snow for Chanel 4 in the UK. Its is about as much scientific value as an episode of the Simpsons.
Now while this is a digression the show matched firepower of longbows by propelling arrows from a gas gun under the exact pressure to match a modern heavy bows draw weight. Sounds ok, and the gas gun was borrowed from a weapons testing lab and competently operated. The test showed a lethal range for the longbow at 10 yards against full plate armour, it did penetrate though. However a modern war bow was about 130lbs draw weight, and that poundage was used for the test, however the war bows dredged up with the Mary Rose, the only actual medieval bows still in existence, are estimated at up to 300lbs draw weight, and most were well over 200lbs.
Many historians baulked at that, and there are no longer any archers in England or Wales who can draw a proper replica. To make it worse when the 'recreation' tried to emulate bowfire they dredged up who they could from archery clubs, and the line of archers was I kid you not - 80% mums and kids from local archery clubs. From this data the producers gave an idea of rate of fire and range of trained mercanary longbowmen..
This gave a range of about 100 yards, a piss poor rater fo fir to which was added the pepetrative range of 10 yards to add potency to the toy bows used by the mums and kiddies. Yet eye witness accounts gave a rate of fire of six to twelve arrows a minute and a killing range of over 300 yards, and evidence at digs at Crecy back up the eyewitnesses.
Real medieval longbowmen earned 12p a day, a common footman was worth 2p a day and a knight was worth 10p and those prices were standardised in western Europe. . That ought ot say something when peasant soldiers earn more than a knight's fee The longbowmen dug up from Towton at a grave site were shown to have mishaped limbs due to what looked similar to excess bodybuilding. The average bowman was likely ripped like Armie.
The longbow doesn't have the same PR as the katana but potentially could be the ultimate weapon before the use of firearms, and arguebly well into that time period. The longbow however has a number of disadvantages comtempory and in modern culture. It doesn't look as cool is very hard and tiresome to train and required the entire peasant culture to be enveloped around it to produce anything like the number of archers required to fill an army. Wellesley wanted to raise longbowmen but found that in real terms he could not, England had long run out of freaks of that nature.
Anyway the point remains, some medieval and ancient weapons simply cant be replicated by modern hobbyist users, or even most 'experts', they don't simply have the ten or twenty years of dedication. I would apply that also to any of the knightly or samurai weapons, including the katana.
It doesn't help that the foremost known practitioner of Japanese swordcraft became so adept he fought all his later duels with bokken to make a point (sic).
The real moral of the story of above is that eye witness testimony passed down through history is often of geater relevance than modern testimony that assumes the old texts are actually just hype and try to set modern standards and lightweight 'experts' to mimic what is in effect the lifeskill of someone whose entire reason for being and making a living was dependent on skill at the weapojn concerned.
If the old texts say longbowmen killed knights from fields away, but modern rercreation disagrees, I will go with the eyewitness accounts most of the time. The bones of longbowmen and dredged up bows support the fact that they were feakishly strong, then the fact that modern men cant simulate that strength doesn't mean it cant happen.
I believe that master Japanese swordsmen performed arrow cutting, but also believe they struggled with penetrating armour if using their swords, because a consistent run of historical written evidence tells us they did.
Dopplersoldner however were known for cutting up plate armoured troops with their zwerch swords, and English longswordsmen were known to be lethal against armoured French infantry. I believe those also. If your TV show cant show a longsword 'killing' a pig carcass in plate armour then the TV show is doing it wrong somewhere. The French knew otherwise, and learned the hard way.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/02/08 16:25:57
n'oublie jamais - It appears I now have to highlight this again.
It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. By the juice of the brew my thoughts aquire speed, my mind becomes strained, the strain becomes a warning. It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion.
A katana is not a cutting weapon. No sword is. Machetes and axes are cutting weapons. Swords are for slashing and stabbing. A katana does not have superior control, swords with control do not exist. It is a user who has control, not the sword (unless it were possessed lol). In general, arguments over which kind of sword is better than others is kinda silly, as all swords are just sharp pieces of iron with rather insignificant differences. Much more depends on the user than on the sword. Also I don't get why some people see a katana as something special. It is just a regular curved sword like so many others in the world.
Back to my point, you do not agree that Katana is not sharp? Yes many swords can cut too, but Katana is in the top marks and IMHO, one of the best.
Evidence of carbon nanotubes in Damascuas steel > pig test.
Your standard is unfair, no one is going to use a pig test on a 2000 year old cultural relic. However the modern scientific evidence supports the eye witness evidence that Damascus steel could split rocks without blunting. With carbon nanotubes actually detected this is actually credible.
Swords cutting rocks? Show me! I have to see that to believe it .
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/02/08 16:21:35
I see what you are saying. Well the common acceptance in weapons study and pig test and PSI test shows that Katana has the constancy cuts.
Can I ask where else you are sourcing this from? I'm assuming you have a different source to 'Deadliest Warrior' to support your view.
The fact that European and most swords are not razor sharp is fact and Katana is razor is also fact.
The reason most European blades weren't sharpened especially is because they fight with men in armour, making it pointless to even bother. But just because they didn't do it does not mean that they could not. Any edge on any piece of metal can be sharpened. What that comes down to however, is the metal composition of the blade, and it would stand to reason that a sharpened blade made of superior steel (aka, european) would be superior to that made of inferior steel (aka, japanese).
I'm not sure about this. I am guessing here. Today most weapons are just cheap stainless steel and sharpen to razor edge because it will not see combat, can this razor edge be maintained?
I'll be honest with you, if you have a sword fight with one of those cheap mass produced chinese katanas, it'll snap off the hilt at the first impact. Most of them don't even have a partial tang, let alone a full tang. The metal itself would shatter if hit with something made of quality material.
What I find interesting is, I would like to know in our modern technology, what kind of sword edge and strength can they make now? Can they make long sword razor sharp and still functional as a battle sword?
In other words, with today technology... can we make the best blade and if by using time travel send it back to it's period and be consider a much more superior quality?
Now this is something interesting to talk about. How durable a blade could we make today? Comments, gentlemen.
I would have to look up about this PSI and other pig test outside of Deadliest warrior. But seriously what would you consider a TV test fair? I think people have mentioned Deadliest Warrior, History channel, Myth buster, Cold Steel work shop, etc...
I mean.. there will never be a "test by the us army". It will always be based on TV shows. So yeah, I think all the test that I have witness top of my head are TV documentary and some personal test on the internet. But one consistency of all the documentary testing of Katana sharpness is the 2 pigs test is true.
Please look at it from science point of view. You design me a cutting tool that can cut the most pigs body stack up and still is a function sword.
NO double edge blade can be sharper than single edge because of the design of the blade allows a longer and stronger sharper edge. A double edge will break if both side of the blade were this razor sharp.
The curve design for maximum cutting power, a strait blade will land and not slice as much as a curve up on impact.
Based on single edge and curve blade... it already a better design for a cutting blade vs. double edge strait blade.
So I already know that the winning cutting blade must have single edge and curve blade. This part is key in design and function.
Just as in what weapon can bash armor effectively? Well the weapon must not be balance in weight like a sword, it must be top heavy for maximum force on impact. This is why all impact weapon will have top heavy like, mace, hammer, and axes.
Yeah I know about the cheap katana. I'm talking about the expensive weapons in general from Cold Steel or any "battle weapons" you buy... are they really battle weapon ready? Are they superior than the original balck smith made in the old days? I have lots of fencing weapons but they are for practice and I don't have any real battle weapon. Yes my war hammer can kill you, but I'm not sure if I can take it back 500 years ago and it can stand the full impact when I smash it at full plate knights.
I guess, unlike guns where you know it is battle and killy ready. Weapons that claim battle ready.. is you taking their words for it. Not an expert in this... I'm sure somebody would know here.
david choe wrote: I would have to look up about this PSI and other pig test outside of Deadliest warrior.
There is no pig test. That's just something Deadliest Warrior did, and now anyone with access to a pig carcass and a camera puts their own up on YouTube, cause everyone knows pigs are the best substitute for people (which even that I am skeptical of simply because it seems to be one of those things that people repeat after hearing someone else repeat it).
Researchers at Cornell have better things to do than play with swords. Like curing cancer. Though they'd probably be funner to be around if they did play with swords.
But seriously what would you consider a TV test fair?
Factors that matter that are never made clear by Deadliest Warrior;
Weight of the carcass (they didn't even use a full carcass on their episode with the Katana, just a pig leg, many later episodes like the Kilij used a full carcass).
Type of pig (because for all I know it matters )
Level of prepardness for the blade prior to cutting, materials in its construction, the authenticity of manufacture
Factors that the show just entirely ignores
The person swinging the sword (size, muscle strength, skill)
It's not a reliable test. It's not even scientific. It's "how cool would it be if we got a bunch of old weapons and wacked stuff with them?"
Please look at it from science point of view.
Please do. Most of your posts are anecdotal or based on YouTube videos.
NO double edge blade can be sharper than single edge because of the design of the blade allows a longer and stronger sharper edge. A double edge will break if both side of the blade were this razor sharp.
Again, this doesn't make any sense. Whether or not a blade had two edges is irrelevant to the sharpness of the edges.
Just out of curiosity, are you arguing that Japanese forging methods would make an inferior metal better suited for cutting than a superior metal? Because the 'katana' is ultimately just the shape that the sword was forged in. It could have been forged straighter or bendier using the exact same methods. The level of sharpness of a blade is down to two things, how much you sharpen it, and the chemical composition of the blade. And since a European blade can easily be sharpened just like a katana (as could any piece of metal with an edge), it would seem to me that you are asserting that Japanese forging methods turned inferior metals into superior ones.
I am talking about the functionality of why Katana can be razor and serve as a sword and have less chance of breakage.
From what I understand, the inferior metal is not a problem in making razor edge. The key to why it works is the craftsmanship by combining the soft "inferior" metal body and use the "superior" small amount to the edges and tip. This make the sword durable to retain the razor sharpness.
To explain better. You get a Long Sword and make it razor sharp. Yes, it can be done. Then after a few fights.. the razor will chip and when this chipping happens, the sword will break.
The Katana has soft body core and only hard edges. When the edge start to chip, the sword will not break because the body is soft. The worst is the chipping part will cause the sword to bend more and more and can be fix. The Long Sword is not practical for this. Also because the Katana is a single edge blade, the back side is soft metal and allows the blade to not break as easily. Another point is the Katana single edge and thicker body makes the body "harder" and long sword will "bounce bend" because the body is thiner. Example, you get a long sword and thrust at a wood shield.. the long sword blade will start to bend... you lean on a long sword with your body.. the blade will bend and when you let go... it bounce back. A Katana not bend and bounce back at all it will retain the shape. This cause the thrust penetration damage to be much more. However, the risk of Katana thrust is that if it does bend, it will NOT bounce back like a long sword... the Katana is bend and very very bad.
Again, this is what I understand. Also the Viking were doing something like this to their weapons long before the Japanese. This made their weapons very sharp.
By your standards then, an Indian Tulwar is better than a Katana.
It has the curved blade, it has the razor sharp edge, it has better edge geometry, as it's thinner at the spine, and it's made of better (wootz) steel.
Have I missed anything?
Another thing, Katanas are very brittle due to the internal stresses in the blade.
If you've ever seen one being quenched, you'll understand why...
If the thought of something makes me giggle for longer than 15 seconds, I am to assume that I am not allowed to do it. item 87, skippys list
DC:70S+++G+++M+++B+++I++Pw40k86/f#-D+++++A++++/cWD86R+++++T(D)DM++
I would have to look up about this PSI and other pig test outside of Deadliest warrior. But seriously what would you consider a TV test fair?
If you could show me a television program that has a mechanically propelled version of the weapons hitting at a identical angle at a uniform speed, that would be accepetable. It wouldn't be hard or complicated to set up, you don't need scientists to do it. The katana doesn't have to be slicing as hard as possible after all, it just has to slicing at exactly the same force and angle as another weapon. If it cuts deeper, than that would prove the assertion.
I think you are mixing up two concepts here, and we need to evolve the hypothesis. It's no longer, 'A katana is the best cutting sword due to their sharpness'. Because we need to examine what makes the katana 'sharp'. It's not the virtue of being a katana. Any sword can have it's edge sharpened. Only now you've also said:
The curve design for maximum cutting power, a strait blade will land and not slice as much as a curve up on impact
So tell me, is the Katana the best sword for cutting because of it's sharpness, or because the of the edge? Because it is one thing to say:
1. Katana are the best cutting sword because the way the blade is angled makes penetration of an unarmoured target easier.
It is another to say:
2: Katana are the best cutting sword because the way the blade has been forged turns the metal from being inferior steel to being the most superior steel.
Yeah I know about the cheap katana. I'm talking about the expensive weapons in general from Cold Steel or any "battle weapons" you buy... are they really battle weapon ready? Are they superior than the original balck smith made in the old days? I have lots of fencing weapons but they are for practice and I don't have any real battle weapon. Yes my war hammer can kill you, but I'm not sure if I can take it back 500 years ago and it can stand the full impact when I smash it at full plate knights.
Hard to say.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2015/02/08 16:51:32
david choe wrote: The key to why it works is the craftsmanship by combining the soft "inferior" metal body and use the "superior" small amount to the edges and tip.
This is not accurate.
Wiki has had a good Infographic for some time;
There were several different methods used (as shown above) to make the blade but the most common by far was Maru, a single piece. The other methods took much more time and effort (i.e. more money) and were much rarer, though more of the higher quality blades have survived to today for obvious reasons. But this is not unique to Japan. The natural processes that manufacture steel produce multiple types of it which sword smiths from around the world utilized in various ways. A soft body with hardened edges was very common in European and Middle Eastern crafting. For more common than can be observed from traditionally Japanese forged blades. This is because of the need to fold Japanese Iron a lot to remove impurities. It left them with a lot less steel of the softer varieties.
the sword will break.
Long swords were extremely flexible. Breaking them was extremely uncommon. Europeans had been using the method you describe for centuries. Long before the rise of the long sword.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/02/08 16:58:12
david choe wrote: I would have to look up about this PSI and other pig test outside of Deadliest warrior.
There is no pig test. That's just something Deadliest Warrior did, and now anyone with access to a pig carcass and a camera puts their own up on YouTube, cause everyone knows pigs are the best substitute for people (which even that I am skeptical of simply because it seems to be one of those things that people repeat after hearing someone else repeat it).
Researchers at Cornell have better things to do than play with swords. Like curing cancer. Though they'd probably be funner to be around if they did play with swords.
But seriously what would you consider a TV test fair?
Factors that matter that are never made clear by Deadliest Warrior;
Weight of the carcass (they didn't even use a full carcass on their episode with the Katana, just a pig leg, many later episodes like the Kilij used a full carcass).
Type of pig (because for all I know it matters )
Level of prepardness for the blade prior to cutting, materials in its construction, the authenticity of manufacture
Factors that the show just entirely ignores
The person swinging the sword (size, muscle strength, skill)
It's not a reliable test. It's not even scientific. It's "how cool would it be if we got a bunch of old weapons and wacked stuff with them?"
Please look at it from science point of view.
Please do. Most of your posts are anecdotal or based on YouTube videos.
NO double edge blade can be sharper than single edge because of the design of the blade allows a longer and stronger sharper edge. A double edge will break if both side of the blade were this razor sharp.
Again, this doesn't make any sense. Whether or not a blade had two edges is irrelevant to the sharpness of the edges.
The test thing on TV. and why pigs are like human, if i were a betting man... I would think it was close enough. You have better solution than to use a Pig? I mean.. I take it as that. yeah... Pig is very close to human...I can see how a weapons being tested that did to the pig will do to a man.
The Katana test on DW actually shows that it sucks vs. Chain mail and the Viking Axe has better impact hit.
I am not saying DW show is the end all, but it has it usage and the test can at least give you a perspective. All I'm saying is that you ask for proof, I show proof of how Katana did in cutting test. I have yet to see a documentary or video that show a Katana is a not a myths at cutting. Every time I show something, you dispute as it is not good enough. But you never show me a test where the Katana failed what I am clamming. Show me a none bias video of a man using a Katana that won't cut a pig. You know what am saying. You keep saying that the man is too strong or the blade is not properly sharpen or the pig skin on that pig was too thin or too thick. I mean... this test is just for basic value. A katana will cut 1 to 3 pigs on average.
Next...The double edge vs single edge in sharpness. This is very important and scientific. All sharp blade start out from fat to thin right? Axe head. Pick. Sword edges. When you have fat part in the back and thin in the front... it cause the weight to press in more so the single edge would have a fat back side as weight to chuck the cut in deeper. This is the pros for single edge weapon. If you get two swords with equal sharpness, say a Katana and this long sword is equal in sharpness. You swing at something... the Katana will cut more because of the single edge.
Curve vs. Straight is also in the same boat.
You can disagree just about everything with me, but don't disagree about the pros and cons of single vs double and strait vs curve when it comes to cutting. Single and curve will always win.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
marv335 wrote: By your standards then, an Indian Tulwar is better than a Katana.
It has the curved blade, it has the razor sharp edge, it has better edge geometry, as it's thinner at the spine, and it's made of better (wootz) steel.
Have I missed anything?
Another thing, Katanas are very brittle due to the internal stresses in the blade.
If you've ever seen one being quenched, you'll understand why...
It could be. I don't know I have to see the pig test or something. But yes India blade were very famous as a cutter.
I don't have a problem with this. Do you?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/02/08 17:00:24
Swords cutting rocks? Show me! I have to see that to believe it .
Sorry I cannot, no one knows how to make Damascus steel anymore. They can make Toledo steel but Toledo steel didnt have the reputation of being able to cut rocks.
Surviving Damascus steel blades are relics and cant really be used for these tests. We can only make guesses due to the metallurgy.
However do know about the dynamics of carbon nanotubes, and if the edge is reinforced with those then its going to be a very special blade indeed. Did it cut rock? I cannot say, but there was witness to the effect, and not in heroic myth but in what can best be described as salesman's tests. The metallurgy certainly gives the claim enough backing that it shouldn't be laughed at.
n'oublie jamais - It appears I now have to highlight this again.
It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. By the juice of the brew my thoughts aquire speed, my mind becomes strained, the strain becomes a warning. It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion.
I would have to look up about this PSI and other pig test outside of Deadliest warrior. But seriously what would you consider a TV test fair?
If you could show me a television program that has a mechanically propelled version of the weapons hitting at a identical angle at a uniform speed, that would be accepetable. It wouldn't be hard or complicated to set up, you don't need scientists to do it. The katana doesn't have to be slicing as hard as possible after all, it just has to slicing at exactly the same force and angle as another weapon. If it cuts deeper, than that would prove the assertion.
I think you are mixing up two concepts here, and we need to evolve the hypothesis. It's no longer, 'A katana is the best cutting sword due to their sharpness'. Because we need to examine what makes the katana 'sharp'. It's not the virtue of being a katana. Any sword can have it's edge sharpened. Only now you've also said:
The curve design for maximum cutting power, a strait blade will land and not slice as much as a curve up on impact
So tell me, is the Katana the best sword for cutting because of it's sharpness, or because the of the edge? Because it is one thing to say:
1. Katana are the best cutting sword because the way the blade is angled makes penetration of an unarmoured target easier.
It is another to say:
2: Katana are the best cutting sword because the way the blade has been forged turns the metal from being inferior steel to being the most superior steel.
Yeah I know about the cheap katana. I'm talking about the expensive weapons in general from Cold Steel or any "battle weapons" you buy... are they really battle weapon ready? Are they superior than the original balck smith made in the old days? I have lots of fencing weapons but they are for practice and I don't have any real battle weapon. Yes my war hammer can kill you, but I'm not sure if I can take it back 500 years ago and it can stand the full impact when I smash it at full plate knights.
Hard to say.
Maybe you missed the points I made may time about the Katana shape, design and forging is what make this sword one of the best cutting weapon. Again, I really thought you knew that the single edge and curve blade is the standard design for the best cutting power. The double edge and strait is a better design for stabbing and thrusting than the curve single blade. Again, you know that two sharp edge going into a body will go deeper than something that is only sharp on one side.
Another key good design for the Katana is that the curve blade is only a small curve and not as much as say.. a Scimitar. So a Katana can thrust with almost full power of a long sword can.
But yeah Key to Katana is forge (for razor sharpness) and blade design of single and curve.
david choe wrote: The key to why it works is the craftsmanship by combining the soft "inferior" metal body and use the "superior" small amount to the edges and tip.
This is not accurate.
Wiki has had a good Infographic for some time;
There were several different methods used (as shown above) to make the blade but the most common by far was Maru, a single piece. The other methods took much more time and effort (i.e. more money) and were much rarer, though more of the higher quality blades have survived to today for obvious reasons. But this is not unique to Japan. The natural processes that manufacture steel produce multiple types of it which sword smiths from around the world utilized in various ways. A soft body with hardened edges was very common in European and Middle Eastern crafting. For more common than can be observed from traditionally Japanese forged blades. This is because of the need to fold Japanese Iron a lot to remove impurities. It left them with a lot less steel of the softer varieties.
the sword will break.
Long swords were extremely flexible. Breaking them was extremely uncommon. Europeans had been using the method you describe for centuries. Long before the rise of the long sword.
What are you talking about? That picture shows what I've been telling you. Soft body and strong edges? You always try to nit pick with me. If you go back and reread my post... I stated just that. Soft body and hard edges to make this sword. No, the european sword standard quality were just pour into a mold and then shape it. The folding steel and mixing of hardness is very difficult.. I do not think a standard castle black smith can do this.
Didn't I point this out about soft body and hard edges?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/02/08 17:16:04
Which granted, Deadliest Warrior used them time to time.
I honestly don't think the 'closeness to human flesh' matters. I think it's more important to ensure uniformity in the target and for that a dummy is superior to a carcass.
All I'm saying is that you ask for proof, I show proof of how Katana did in cutting test.
Yeah but there are lots of videos like that.
So obviously, Kilijs are the best cutters ever cause some youtube videos and a TV show says so.
It just doesn't mean much. It's showmanship and opinion. There is no science involved.
A katana will cut 1 to 3 pigs on average.
If you can cut through one soft target, cutting through 2 more ain't gonna be much difference.
All sharp blade start out from fat to thin right?
There are numerous ways to sharpen an edge and its more complicated than that.
When you have fat part in the back and thin in the front...
And? A sword having two edges doesn't prevent it from having a fat center for the stress to be focused down. What you're describing literally makes no physical sense.
it cause the weight to press in more so the single edge would have a fat back side as weight to chuck the cut in deeper.
Whether the back is fat doesn't change weight. You can made a single edge and double edge blade weigh the same amount.
You can disagree just about everything with me, but don't disagree about the pros and cons of single vs double and strait vs curve when it comes to cutting. Single and curve will always win.
I disagree with your conflation of these two factors into one. Single & double and curved & straight are two different factors that have limited barring on each other.
What are you talking about? That picture shows what I've been telling you. Soft body and strong edges?
I don't know what picture you're reading. There are nine different methods of making a Katana on that picture. It's not as simple as 'soft body strong edges.'
You always try to nit pick with me.
The devil is in the details.
Soft body and hard edges to make this sword.
It made lots of swords. The use of multiple 'hardness' steels was common in sword crafting.
No, the european sword standard quality were just pour into a mold and then shape it.
So you learned about swords from Conan the Barbarian?
No one made swords this way after the Bonze age. Literally. NO ONE. During the Bronze age, molds were used pretty much around the world and to a limited extent the early iron age. However once we start getting into the age of steel, no one used molds anymore because it just doesn't work. No one. Middle Eastern. European. Chinese. No one ever forged a combat weapon made of steel from a mold.
The folding steel and mixing of hardness is very difficult.
No it's not. Folding isn't even necessary if the steel is of a suitable quality. The purpose of folding is to purge carbon from a blade, something Japanese smiths absolutely had to do because iron on Japan has far too high a carbon content to make a sword from without folding it. Mixing hardness is also very easy. EDIT: in the sense that any of this is easy. Mixing hardness was such a simple practice that the idea only two cultures on earth would ever use it is laughable.
The thing that was really complicated about Japanese blades was the heat treating as different parts of the blade would be treated differently which is very uncommon. In most parts of the world, the blade was heat treated as one piece, but most parts of the world weren't using iron from Japan so it wasn't really necessary.
Didn't I point this out about soft body and hard edges?
Problem is that doesn't really mean much of anything. It's like saying a gun is all about a trigger and a barrel.
This message was edited 6 times. Last update was at 2015/02/08 17:31:17
Which granted, Deadliest Warrior used them time to time.
I honestly don't think the 'closeness to human flesh' matters. I think it's more important to ensure uniformity in the target and for that a dummy is superior to a carcass.
All I'm saying is that you ask for proof, I show proof of how Katana did in cutting test.
Yeah but there are lots of videos like that.
So obviously, Kilijs are the best cutters ever cause some youtube videos and a TV show says so.
It just doesn't mean much. It's showmanship and opinion. There is no science involved.
I have yet to see a documentary or video that show a Katana is a not a myths at cutting. Every time I show something, you dispute as it is not good enough. But you never show me a test where the Katana failed what I am clamming. Show me a none bias video of a man using a Katana that won't cut a pig. You know what am saying. You keep saying that the man is too strong or the blade is not properly sharpen or the pig skin on that pig was too thin or too thick. I mean... this test is just for basic value. A katana will cut 1 to 3 pigs on average.
All sharp blade start out from fat to thin right?
There are numerous ways to sharpen an edge and its more complicated than that.
When you have fat part in the back and thin in the front...
And? A sword having two edges doesn't prevent it from having a fat center for the stress to be focused down. What you're describing literally makes no physical sense.
it cause the weight to press in more so the single edge would have a fat back side as weight to chuck the cut in deeper.
Whether the back is fat doesn't change weight. You can made a single edge and double edge blade weigh the same amount.
You can disagree just about everything with me, but don't disagree about the pros and cons of single vs double and strait vs curve when it comes to cutting. Single and curve will always win.
I disagree with your conflation of these two factors into one. Single & double and curved & straight are two different factors that have limited barring on each other.
LOL, ok balistic dummy. And this is why sometime it is bit annoying with you. I thought you understand that DW did show BD, but I never stated.. they you go on and mentioned that it does use them on the show. So what other proof do you want, pig and ballistic dummy has been show.
The Kilijs is a contender. Might even cut deeper because of the weighted head tip. However, the draw back is control. This Kilijs weapon is design to use force and slice to make the cut and it is a one handed weapon. It will be difficult to behead somebody and live the skin on. A two handed Kilijs (if there is such a thing, not sure) might have more impact cut and hit than a Katana, but it will lack the control cuts. You can train any weapon to have that control cut, but the design of Katana is the most optimal.
You can disagree about the single vs. double... man.. I don't know what to tell you on that. The Kilijs has the classic best Cutting blade... that is a single curve blade. Just stop with the double vs. single. It is just not possible. Also, what long Sword is as thick as a Katana. If a double edge ever have a thickness center of a single edge.. the freaking sword will be double the weight. You are talking about a 6 lb long sword or a 12 lb claymore to have thick center like a Katana. Not even possible to be consider a function sword anymore. Maybe an execution weapon.
That is the pros and cons of single vs double.
The fat back is the key to the success of a single edge Katana. Look at your Kilijs... you see that fat ass head in the back.. it is the weight to give it more force on impact. The Katana is one of the most thick back sword in the world.
Dude, why do you think single edge sword exist? Because for fun? It sacrifice the disadvantage of double for maximum impact cut. If that was not the case... all swords would be double edge right?
You can search all day for the most powerful cutting weapon...All powerful cutting weapon will be curved and single edge.
Nit pick all you want about the soft body and hard edges... anybody who have read my post will know that David Choe has been screaming about this special forging all day. All the graphics shows that most Katana has the soft body and hard edge. Some where better than other and that is because there are over 300 years of history to this blade. You think on day one... the Katana was perfected as the 300 years later?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/02/08 17:46:39
Now to tell you the story of the three little pigs and the big bad Samurai.
The first little pig made his shield out of straw.....
n'oublie jamais - It appears I now have to highlight this again.
It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. By the juice of the brew my thoughts aquire speed, my mind becomes strained, the strain becomes a warning. It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion.
david choe wrote: And this is why sometime it is bit annoying with you.
I'm American. My life is empty if I'm not annoying someone from another continent.
That you keep making nonsense statements couldn't possibly be connected. Nope. Not at all
anybody who have read my post will know that David Choe has been screaming about this special forging all day.
Anyone who has ever read about sword smithing knows that it's not special. It's typical. Just like they know no one in the world casted a steel sword from a mold and that different hardness' were utilized by smiths around the world.
Some where better than other and that is because there are over 300 years of history to this blade
And?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/02/08 17:51:22
Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios
Why is it important to behead someone and leave the skin on? What does that even mean?
And again with the control thing, thats almost completely in the wielder. It has little to do with the weapon itself.
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
david choe wrote: And this is why sometime it is bit annoying with you.
I'm American. My life is empty if I'm not annoying someone from another continent.
That you keep making nonsense statements couldn't possibly be connected. Nope. Not at all
anybody who have read my post will know that David Choe has been screaming about this special forging all day.
Anyone who has ever read about sword smithing knows that it's not special. It's typical. Just like they know no one in the world casted a steel sword from a mold and that different hardness' were utilized by smiths around the world.
Some where better than other and that is because there are over 300 years of history to this blade
And?
.... I'm an american dude.
and some how I am embarrassed that I have this long discussion with you....
Don't act like this man...I didn't serve this country so you can act like this... wait.. I actually did so you can act like this. Enjoy it bro!
Your flag says Thailand. Now I have to go elsewhere to pursue my quota :( Brobama ain't gonna be happy about this.
and some how I am embarrassed that I have this long discussion with you....
Half the reason I even post in OT is to have conversation with people like you
Don't act like this man...
Like someone whose actually read a book about the subject matter at some point in time? Yeah I can see how that might inconvenience you
I didn't serve this country so you can act like this
That was your mistake! With all this freedom, I learned how to read, studied history, learned how swords were made, and can now tell people on the internet when they need to watch less TV!
I thank you sir for giving me such an opportunity!
Grey Templar wrote: Why is it important to behead someone and leave the skin on? What does that even mean?
And again with the control thing, thats almost completely in the wielder. It has little to do with the weapon itself.
If you would have ask me to explain this... it would have been easy for you to understand.
The Katana control is this... Most weapon are design as maximum on impact. You want to be able to cut as far as it can cut right?
I think we all can agree that a Katana is razor sharp and has great cutting ability (even if you don't think it is a great weapon).
A katana is two handed so you can swing and stop at the right speed and slice enough with that it can cut only so much and not all the way. This weapon is optimal for you to be able to do this. A long Sword is almost impossible to do this control cutting.
So the test of how you can make this control cut is to behead people and leave the front skin of the head left so the heads don't roll. A master Katana or Shogun executioner or other specialist executioner can do this and only with a Katana. You can I guess, in theory with long sword, but it will just be almost impossible and why do that, when you can just train with a Katana and get the more optimal cut.
As for why would you want to make this kind of execution? I think you heard of seppuku killing right? When a person gut his own guts as punishment. Well some high ranking samurai or lords who must commit seppuku in front of other high ranking lords or shogun would do this... and they usually have a executioner standing ready with a Katana ready to behead them after they have commit the act of seppuku. This is to show a bit of mercy because gutting is very painful. Now for a normal seppuku the beheading is cut and the head rolls is not a big deal. When a specialist like Shogun executioner is requested for the important death like a high ranking lords that must commit seppuku in front of many important guest like shogun, the rolling of the head is not very nice and polite at their present and also to let the dead have his head still part of his body. So this control is a must in the weapon... to cut the head and leave the skin on. Note, this is not a myth.
Show me! I have to see that to believe it .
)
