What explains this longsword-vs-katana test video?

[Ed Rybak]

What accounts for the clearly better performance of the Japanese sword ("katana") over the European longsword in the testing below?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EDkoj932 ... re=related

Both swords do well against cabbages and coconuts. But the katana beats the longsword in cleaving a block of ice; it alone slices a leather-armored dummy; and it appears to put more hurt on a steel breastplate.

I've seen several general "longsword vs katana"-type discussions in these forums (forgive me if this video has already been discussed and I missed it), and I'm aware of the general ideas and debunkings that have been put forth. I'm squarely in the camp that sees any differences in weapon performance as due to specific factors of physics, material properties, technique, etc., and never by "this one's just kewler, dude".

So without going into an impossibly broad discussion of all swords and all circumstances, and putting aside some of the silliness in the video (like the insinuation that non-katana fighting is "about bashing swords together"), I'm wondering what likely accounts for the visibly better results of the katana in this particular video.

Are the testers using the longsword wrongly in some way? (The sword swinger uses two different angles in the leather armor test, which seems a poor testing method…)

Is this particular katana possibly sharper than this particular longsword, or stiffer, or different in some other way that's significant for these particular tests?

Or is the longsword somehow hampered by harmonic vibrations from the narrator's obnoxious shouting? : )

Any thoughts?

[Ben Neeley]

I am by know means an expert but i do know that the handling of a longsword is different than that of a katana. The outcome of a cut has many variables such as the sharpness of the blade, the force behind the cut, skill of the user ect. The most effective cutting part of the blade on a longsword is the weak (last 3 to 4 inches) of the blade. Depending on the sharpness and if somone that was skilled had made the cut I have little doubt that it would have failed to penetrate the leather armor. As i said before i am no expert and this is merely my opinion.

[John Farthing]

Mr. Rybak,
You will likely find the following articles useful:
http://www.thearma.org/essays/longsword-and-katana.html
http://www.thearma.org/essays/knightvs.htm

[Ed Rybak]

You will likely find the following articles useful:
http://www.thearma.org/essays/longsword-and-katana.html
http://www.thearma.org/essays/knightvs.htm

Thanks! I have seen those articles in the past, but they're worth a second look.

The first article does mention the "exceptionally hard and sharp edge" of a katana, which, if that does represent a difference between the two particular swords in the video, might explain the differing results. In which case I would also guess that if the longsword were made just as hard and sharp, it would have performed much better in the video's test.

Guesses are just guesses, though. There's no way we can check out the swords used, and the brief seconds of video were set up for TV viewers' entertainment, not for technique analysis, so there's likely not much that can be said about that either…

Maybe the only cure for the puzzle here is to do my own testing some day. : )

[Kevin Reicks]

Yes, the longsword is being handled improperly. Gunny was cutting with different parts of the sword compared to the katana.
Also, I have fair speculation that the longsword might have been dull, a bad sword, or even a practice sword.
The last test is right out eronius, that isn't real plate armor and the longsword looked like it was way too flexible which is why it didn't penetrate as much.

Summerizing a little of the links John gave, the advantages of a longsword are more subtle. Yes, the katana is a better chopper. Never known anybody who understood blades to say otherwise, it is the nature of a curved sword. However, there are more defensive abilities, more angles of attack to get at an opponent. The longsword abilities are more subtle.


Check this video out too. http://www.thearma.org/Videos/NTCvids/C ... ts2011.m4v

The katana does nothing against maille, but some of the stabs of longswords do penetrate. A very cool, fun, video overall

[Kody Tench]

I'm sorry but this video is so bad any idiot can see that funny isn't trying to be fair. I've often gone to this video under the name volarion to try and explain WHY its a total piece if crap. He uses obviosly stronger techniques with the katana the longsword appears to be blunt, you can't cut ice it breaks and there's already a large dent in the ice when he uses the katana. They use costume props when testing cutting and there aren't even any real martial artists in the video.

Honestly I hate this because every anime loving katana humping weeboo on the planet points to it as proof of the power of the almighty invincible cut anything best sword ever katana.

Sorry mini rant over.

[Kevin Reicks]

I'm sorry but this video is so bad any idiot can see that funny isn't trying to be fair.

Go easy on the Gunny! He is a guns guy at the mercy of directors and producers. I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt until I learn otherwise.

[Greg Faulk]

Here's the German version of the contest.. If you watch the video you can get the overall message..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qpEC38sL3iU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Hy_A9vjp_s

[Jonathan Hill]

I like the german one!

I must ask though, when you put up a sword designed to be cut with vs a cut and thrust sword that was designed to thrust with almost, if not more than it was to cut. Take them both and put them through a cutting contest, which do you with will win?

Sure the Katana dented the armor more on a thrust, but let's try out chain...