Shane Smith's XIIIa's Damaged Edge

[Patrick Kelly]

John,

It's not illogical at all. Gus' swords are great at cutting targets such as plywood and matts, however, the edge geometery is too accute for a hard target like steels helmets. A close examination of the edge should reveal that there isn't enough material there to support a blow to a target like that. Some of Gus' earlier designs, withought such accute edge geometery, would probably have faired better in this respect. I tested many of those against some very hard targets and never experienced this kind of damage. I'm sure that Gus can design a sword for harder targets if that's what the customer wants.

Experimentation is great, that's what it's all about in my opinion. Just don't be suprised when these things happen with this kind of equipment.

[Patrick Kelly]

I'm not baiting at all Gus, I'll leave that to you. Why don't you take a prozac and read my post again. Some points were actually made in your defense. If you're taking a defensive posture it isn't my doing, or my desire.

In point of fact, I've done cutting tests with everything that you've ever sent me, except those last two XIIs. Just because I didn't cut with those swords doesn't mean that I couldn't look at the edge and determine that it was too accute for this kind of use, which those were.

It's all about design parameters Gus. You've admitted in this thread that you weren't designing swords with this kind of use in mind. I believe that most of my comments were made in defense of that position. If you'd quit being so defensive you'd realise that.

[John_Clements]

There where three hits on the helm made. Two close to the point which skipped off completely with no result, and the third, a horizontal strike made lower on the blade. All were cuts with the long or forward edge, no backswings. This is not an issue of cutting mechanics or target dynamics, only of edge performance.

JC

[Guest]

Hi Patrick

"Prozac" huh?

*g*

Ok, if you say you're purpose in this thread isn't stirring things up, who am I do deny it?

You're right, and you're wrong Patrick.... Let me explain....

A sword that is real good on plywood, isn't necessarily real good on tatami mats.

You do know there are different grades of tatami? That the toughest tatami to cut takes a good edge to cut with? And the easiest mats to cut with can be gone thru with a blunt with good technique?

And a good plywood cutter holds up better if the edge is thicker too. Plywood is abrasive, and begins to dull an edge if one cuts plywood alot. Scratches the blade a lot too. I used to make good plywood cutters.

When I started making tighter edges, I did this because of my desire to make great cutting swords on the one hand, and my experience with antiques which at the time was insufficient {two years ago}.

As a matter of fact, my first tatami experience was at Livermore just a bit over a year ago. I was shocked how easy the mat cut, my first cut had my blade go thru the mat and into the ground, because I felt no resistance, and had to much velocity up to stop.....

The swords were never designed to just cut mats, though they do well at that.....

You're right in that I can design edges that should cut well, and hold up well to a test like this one. Only, its not really design work, but borrowing from historical sources, ie antiques.

At WMAW last year, Peter Johnsson told me that I might come to grief with the heavier swords I was making, if the edge was too tight. Three months ago, I started making thicker edges, and intitial tests show I haven't lost any cutting performance. But the 55 gal barrel test shows the edges are stronger than they were.....

So, something I hadn't wanted to discuss publicly until after Shane and Gary got thru..... but I think that on selected swords, swords like the XIIIa, I'm going to offer different edge geometries.

1. A test cutting geometry, optimized for cutting.
2. A test cutting geometry, great for cutting, and will survive contact with armor.
3. An armor edge that will still cut.....
4. A WMA edge, 1mm thick for partner practice........

As of today, I don't offer any warranty. "No implied warranty" has been my way of doing business, though I have replaces several handles and about five blades in the last four years.

However, I've changed my viewpoint on some of these swords that will be made for potentially serious swordsmanship students. I'm going to put more work in them, charge just a little more for them, and warrant them for a given period.... swords are subject to metal fatigue, and so a lifetime warranty doesn't make sense. The warranteed swords are likely to be {2} and {3} above......

[John_Clements]

Patrick, if you're able by eye examination alone to determine what kind of result will ensue with a particular sword against what kind of target, I am sure our swordsmiths along with all of us would love to know the secret of this extraordinary skill you have. In my experience, it can’t be known how a sword of apparent quality will perform until it’s used. And even then, I would not expect any off the shelf commercial sword, especially those of reputed quality, to sustain the magnitude of edge damage this one did, which as I said, was out of the experience of everyone present, and I have every confidence in my own experience in these matters. So, yes, your statement is illogical to me.

Good swords striking plate armor or helms can dent as well as cause shallow cuts that result in the blade’s edge being slightly warped at the point of impact, but certainly not shattered as was this case. Sword expert Hank Reinhardt demonstrated this at the SSI event in Houston, May 2000, and again at the Atlanta Renaissance Martial Arts Expo 2002. Both times he presented the blade, a simple short arming sword from Windlass, for examination before and after cutting.

What our swordsmiths are saying, what’s consistent with both the historical record and surviving sword specimens, and what was born out by tests with the unsharpened Raven blade, is that a cutting sword with a sturdy edge is capable of facing both hard and soft targets with little edge trauma.

European swords were not made one way for test-cutting and then another for fighting. While there are differences between thrusting and cutting blades types mentioned, nowhere in the source manuals or period literature do we find statements about some swords being for cutting soft materials and others for cutting hard. Regardless of the design of a cutting blade, whether intended for armored or unarmored combat, cutting swords of the Middle Ages and Renaissance had to be sturdy and robust enough to resist breaking or bending under the stresses of use –uses which besides being bashed and battered by other blades also included striking at armors, whether able to penetrate them or not.

JC

[Guest]

"There where three hits on the helm made. Two close to the point which skipped off completely with no result, and the third, a horizontal strike made lower on the blade. All were cuts with the long or forward edge, no backswings. This is not an issue of cutting mechanics or target dynamics, only of edge performance."

Thank you John, for the clarification. My purpose posting here is mulitple. I want learn what happened, and you, Shane, and Stacey have been quite helpful there. And I want to use this experience to get better, if the changes I've incorporated haven't already gotten me there.

Since you and I have had a couple of significant run-ins in the last couple of years, I also want to express my appreciation for the professionalism you have shown me in this thread.

Thank you.......

Angus Trim

[Shane Smith]

I must respectfully disagree with one aspect of the discussion and facts as laid out thus far. The first cut DID leave two small nicks on the blades true edge.The blade was then flipped and the swords other edge made the last two cuts.I am positive of that as I saw the two small dings from the first cut up close right after the blow when John held it for examination by all present that were interested(These dings will be apparent when Gus examines the sword on the side OPPOSITE the heavy edge damage).

I know that I saw the sword up close after cuts #1 and #3 for sure,and I believe that I saw a new chip after cut#2 though my memory is not so clear on that one particular point.I believe the second cut did damage the edge a bit forward of the damage caused by the third and final cut which chipped almost 1 3/4" of the edge.I have had about two weeks to look at the weapon after the cutting and to examine the edge closely and take dimensions and make observations which were shared with Gus in the interest of furthering everyones understanding.These observations of the damage tend to support the "bit of damage on every cut" scenario that I am 99% positive that I recall accurately( I am DEAD Certain of the damage on cuts1 and 3 though). <img src="/forum/images/icons/wink.gif" alt="" />

[John_Clements]

Here's some more pics, Shane. You must be right. I don't recall more than the final blow which destroyed the edge so dramatically which everyone was inspecting, not any minor edge traumas from the first cuts. We only have pics of the damage from the final cut. We'll know for sure when we see the video. Are you positive though you're not confusing this blade with the other long sword pictured below at the bottom with the blue arrows? We don't know who this one that had some edge distortion belonged to.
JC

[Shane Smith]

Hi John,

Yes,I'm pretty darn sure.I think the reason the small dings aren't showing up in the pics is because the first cut was very near the cop.The damage in the photos is much nearer the mid-point of the blade as, if I recall correctly, you said you were demonstrating something Hank had taught you that involved cutting much farther in from the tip than is commonly done. The damage to the other edge is probably just out of frame.I am sure it's there though...As I said,I had alot of time to look upon the blade and lament after the event <img src="/forum/images/icons/confused.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/forum/images/icons/wink.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/forum/images/icons/grin.gif" alt="" />

[Guest]

The sword arrived safely enough, USPS did a fantastic job getting this sword across the continent in 2 days.

I took the time to inspect the whole sword this morning. The sword shows signs of a lot of care, its been oiled a lot, and here and there you can see signs of something like scotchbrite or steel wool, probably taking off some sneaky corrosion or removing a scratch. Here and there, there's still a scratch from some cutting in the past.

The edge as formed, is basically the two main bevels meeting at the edge. A very slight cosmetic "edge" had been ground for appearance sake. It doesn't look like the sword had been sharpened since leaving the shop nearly two years ago.

This sword is of the first batch that I did with the "tight edge" geometry. In this case, the included angle of the main bevel is the edge angle.....

On one edge we have three small dents. Small enough that they possibly didn't show up on the photos.

On the other side there is a long area with some noticeable damage. When I made the comment that it sounded like a burr had snapped off, I'd say that was fairly accurate. It almost looks like an "edge" still, at the bottom of the "damage".

Flipping the sword so that the body is facing me, it becomes apparent on inspection that the blade isn't perfectly symmetrical. The way the blade is roughed out on the machine, the fuller is dead center. The finished blade has the fuller offcenter by .03 inch. This led to a "tighter" edge on the one side than on the other. The tighter side failed, and the other did not.

I could find no evidence of cracks or any significant damage to the body of the blade.

I took the sword with me to Tinker's place last nite, so the two of us could go over it and compare notes. The sword as is, is still a very functional sword. A sword with some edge damage, but the damage is "inside" the cop, not really a factor in the function of the sword, as a sword.....

Its also easy to repair the damage. Not to make light of the damage, as it is definite, but from a mechanical point of view the damage is slight. Looking at the bottom of the damage, the "new" edge could be as "tight" as .015 inch if that's what I intended to do.

However, over the last three months, I've started doing edges on heavy swords like this, around .025 inch. This gives a lot more support to the edge and still makes for a fine cutting edge.

[Derek Wassom]

That is interesting Stewart, because of the Atrims I have handled, I always thought of them as being too light, though I didn't get a chance to handle Shane's. Was it too blade heavy, or too heavy all around?

[John_Clements]

"Not to make light of the damage, as it is definite, but from a mechanical point of view the damage is slight."

The damage slight???! The edge disintegrated on impact as everyone present saw!

…You know, I think you need to be very careful here. You’re in danger of unfortunately giving people the wrong impression of what you are really saying, I think. From your various posts it’s starting to sound like you’re trying to spin the facts and make excuses for the sword’s poor performance, and I’m sure you don’t want anyone to think that’s your intention here. Some people reading your comments might even start to get the feeling your trying to obfuscate the issue and mislead them somehow, and I’m sure you’d agree that wouldn’t help matters. I know you wouldn’t want to come across as appearing to be equivocating or evasive.

While your own website at present does indeed state:
"Angus Trim swords are the leader in the Western Martial Arts Performance Sword market...These swords are not copies of existing swords, but are made faithfully in the style of the originals…which provides excellent flexibility, shock resistance and edge retention….This…means better cutting ability and longevity of the sword. Careful attention is paid to the geometry of the edge as well. Taking into account the intended use of the sword for optimum strength and cutting ability. These are real, working swords."

Certainly few in ARMA, if indeed any of us, agree with these claims and so far have not been impressed by your swords as either historical representarions or martial arts tools. So, given prior reversals and disseminations involving failures of your earlier pieces, I advise trying to write more clearly and carefully here so as not to give readers out there reason to believe you’re trying to cloud the matter with tech talk or prevarications.

I’d take this opportunity, Angus, to show you can avoid past mistakes and deficiencies in your sword designs --all of which previously you swore by and stood behind at the time only to later admit criticisms were correct. After all, given past invectives toward a lot of people (myself include) who know far far more about real swords and their uses, combined with your past back tracking of earlier statements have caused you a deficit of credibility here that I’m certain you’d like to see amended. I am sure you don’t want to mishandle a valuable opportunity to repair it through ambiguous communication.

I think the best thing you can do now to reestablish your position more clearly is probably just again repeat for everyone that, yes, the edge failed due to a design flaw, thank everyone for their valuable feedback, and promise to continue improving future models.

Best wishes,

JC

[Guest]

Hi John

I thought that I was fairly clear. Let me try again....

"Its also easy to repair the damage. Not to make light of the damage, as it is definite, but from a mechanical point of view the damage is slight. Looking at the bottom of the damage, the "new" edge could be as "tight" as .015 inch if that's what I intended to do."

If you take the whole paragraph, and look at it like a machinist or mechanic, then from a "mechanic's point of view" the damage is slight. In point of fact, it'll take less than five minutes to form the new edge, on both sides.

Thank all for their professional demeanor in this thread. And thanks to all for their valuable input.

Angus Trim