1 question about sword design, and 1 about swordplay

[humphreyscraig00]

1st the swordplay question.

Which is actually better for a powerful cut? 2 handed or one handed.

Because (I dont know if this is just me) but I cant move something (a replica sword I have actually) as fast 2 handed as I can one handed, and from my (rudimentary ) knowledge of physics speed is better for impact force than how much actual strength you can put behind the sword.

and the design question

Why were swords designed to have grips which continue along the same line as the blade?

Wouldnt a handle that is at a right angle to the blade (like you see on some shovels) be able to give a more powerful strike & thrust due to less wrist flexing?

[Randall Pleasant]

Your weak two hand cutting suggest that you are using incorrect cutting technique. Off hand I would guess that when you cut with two hands you are mostly just pulling the hilt down rather than torquing the hilt with good arm reach and good follow through. For better feedback, please provide as detail as possible description of the movement of you hands, arms, body, and feet during a cut.

[Jon Pellett]

I haven't tried it myself, but other people who have tried test-cutting comparing one- and two-handed cuts on the same medium have reported that the two-handed cut is somewhat more damaging.

The physics are a little tricky, and I don't claim to understand them, but there are a couple of things to keep in mind. First, swords are not bullets: the kinetic energy at impact of the blow does not do all the damage. Momentum, pressure applied after the initial impact, as well as the angle of incidence of the cut in relation to the type of target, etc, all have an effect. Second, while it is true that kinetic energy increases directly with the mass but with the square of the velocity, this does not mean that lighter, "faster" weapons are going to hit harder. Experience amply demonstrates that heavy, "slow" things hit harder. To make a sword move, fast or slow, you have to apply power with your body. It's going to have exactly as much energy as you put into it, and that is what will determine the velocity for a given mass. Many people get this backward.

It is actually quite common for a sword to have an angled hilt - many sabres have them, as do pistol-grip fencing weapons. There are also weapons like the falcata or kukhri with forward-curving blades, which gives the same effect.

[Will Adamson]

Isn't a two-handed cut going to be easier to get proper edge alignment?

I would also venture to guess that a two-handed technique is going to be likely to lose less of the energy "bouncing" back up the sword to the weilder's arms. This would be especially true on more difficult cutting media that would require longer "time on target."

Earlier today I was curious about the handle question, so I swung a shovel around that has a perpedicular grip. I came pretty close to hitting myself in the face a few times. I also didn't have nearly as supple of a grip.

One of the critiques of pistol grips in sport fencing that I have heard is that they encourage a death grip and thus lead to too much tension in the hand and arm, leading to loss of suppleness and fatigue. I would think this applies to real swords as well.

[humphreyscraig00]

Your weak two hand cutting suggest that you are using incorrect cutting technique. Off hand I would guess that when you cut with two hands you are mostly just pulling the hilt down rather than torquing the hilt with good arm reach and good follow through. For better feedback, please provide as detail as possible description of the movement of you hands, arms, body, and feet during a cut.

I push forwards and down with my hand closest to the handguard while putting my lower hand as low as I can on the grip and pulling towards me. I lean into it and step forwards while twisting at the waist in the direction of the pullling arm at the same time.

I also didn't have nearly as supple of a grip.

That was one of the advantages I would have thought as no force is lost through wrist flexing as I know when I hit something my wrosts absorb a fair bit of the force in flexing. Maybe thier overworked from all that erm... you know...

[Will Adamson]

What? Beer drinking?

[Corey Roberts]

I don't see how you could possibly produce a faster cut with one hand. It dosn't make sense to me. Two hands =more power + more torque= faster blade movement=more powerful cut=more powerful follow through etc. I simply can't see how it would work any other way.

[Jaron Bernstein]

I don't see how you could possibly produce a faster cut with one hand. It dosn't make sense to me. Two hands =more power + more torque= faster blade movement=more powerful cut=more powerful follow through etc. I simply can't see how it would work any other way.

I feel as if I hit harder, but with less control, with an arming sword than a 2 handed longsword grip. That could just be perception, of course.

[s_taillebois]

I feel as if I hit harder, but with less control, with an arming sword than a 2 handed longsword grip. That could just be perception, of course.[/quote]

M. Bernstein, your observation just hit on why a two handed grip works better, it's a matter of control. In edge alignment it's a factor; as has already been mentioned. But also in the ability to recover to a ward, after a thrust or strike. One handed, many do seem to overcarry their motions.
In my test cuttings with a bastard sword, the primary benefit does seem to be in control and recovery rather than in the any percievable difference between one or two hands as it relates to percieved 'damage'. Perhaps the aforementioned type of sword could tend be a factor here...being tapered and somewhat narrow to the tip (weak), perhaps this type of blade benefits less from that particular paradigm. But not having (nor desiring) something like a falchion, can't really comment too much more...