dispelling Myths about medieval Combat

[Talon]

From what I understand the general consensus is Cold Steel use 1055 or 1060 .Euro style swords are made in India and the Japanese style swords are made in china ( Longquan most likely). This makes sense when their entire advertising is hyped towards extreme toughness. A 1060 blade will be a lot less inclined to chip compared to 1095 due to the lower carbon content,and it can take a beating.

I've never heard of Cold Steel using o1 for swords .It doesn't make sense to me when 1060 is cheaper and freely available (not to mention much better suited as a sword steel). o1 makes an excellent knife steel but it becomes brittle when taken up to sword length.The Chinese do use T10 tool steel,it takes a very hard edge and it can show a visible hamon but it can be prone to chipping (lots of katana are made in T10).

Now i'm not a fan of Cold Steel as I can't stand their aggressive marketing techniques, and I think Llyn Thompson is a bit of a tit to be honest, but I'd be amazed if they're using o1.
As for their adverts,yes i'm sure that they use a few swords to do their testing,with a lot of takes in between.Then I believe they edit the vid's to try and fool people into thinking it's one sword they used.

[Tartar Horde]

[Timelord]

I have just been perusing the Cold Steel site and there is some nice looking stuff on there. I particularly liked the "Spike Hawk". While reading this and then looking at the European sword published specs, I suddenly remembered that I have one of those "Viking Swords" from Cold Steel. While it is a beautiful superb looking and to handle blade and is just right for the correct balance and weight, there is one major MAJOR flaw with the sword and that is why it is consigned to a "wall hanger" only. The tang terminates through the pommel with a welded on piece of screw thread bar and a closed polished cylindrical cap nut affair to secure it all together. Now this is a most serious manufacturing error. It is good for mass production when your primary concern is the money, but it is bad bad bad for the real deal. No sword should ever be constructed this way. It is liable to break off with any real world use. ( and has done on numerous occasions) I guess they do not expect customers to actually seriously give their swords some stick to find out. Maybe that is where the utube vids arise from? This screw thread tang construction has been done elsewhere by mass producing companies, farming out the production in the East. It is a legacy of the American more recent knife making tradition and for knives, it is probably ok. It does call into question the validity of the companies claims about authenticity and real battle ready weapons in the modern age! Also the wood for the handle was some type of cheap soft wood and the fit was very poor, with large voids within the construction. basically it is just loose fitted, mass produced and drop slotted together. Then the handle sandwiched between the not very sharply finished & plated curved guards by screwing up tight the polished cylindrical nut on the end of the tang.
I have considered re-cutting the handle further down the blade and so by shortening the overall blade length. This is feasible but is starting to become a bit of a compromise and what originally appeared to be an awesome sword. Also after finding this quality of construction hidden beneath the surface, I now can not trust the advertising blurb about the spec of steel or tempering process. Therefore I am not altering the sword, as any weapon I own has to be the real thing and not to let me down when it is in use. For that reason it was deemed a wall hanger - a very expensive one at that! Thank goodness I did not pay for it as it was a gift or I would have been hammering on the front door of Cold Steel to resolve the complaint. I would say that this manufacturing construction method results in this NOT being a real battle ready sword. That would be an advertising issue for Cold Steel if it ever came to court & a credibility issue in to the bargain.
I have supplied this info in good faith and so to make aware any other preppers from potentially being undermined. Regards, TL.

(This type of issue is not restricted to only one company or type of product.. Think hard & do your research..)

[Talon]

A screw thread on the end of the tang is fine if it's part of the tang and the end of the tang is keyed to sit in the pommel.The A Trim swords are made this way,with a nut that screws down on a recess in the tang.It makes for a strong mechanical fix that allows you to strip the sword down for maintenance though not historical (until we get into Renaissance swords) it's totally fine. Though it's not a hot peen it does hold up to extensive cutting

A welded on threaded section where the pommel isn't keyed (like the Cold Steel viking,and the Gross Messer that i stripped) is a very poor way of attaching the pommel.Also the Cold Steel viking's grip is too long.It's more of a hand and a half length than a historical viking design.

Cold steel do make some useful things,their hawks are generally well received and good value for the money.Their swords are extremely overpriced (especially in the UK) and of poorer quality than a lot of swords that are out there.
A Hanwei ht t Tinker line viking is a much better/cheaper alternative (though the HT grip is still a little on the long side) It does have a keyed pommel that has been peened and the blade is made from 5160 with a good heat treat and temper.
Other decent viking styles would be something from Valiant Armoury/Kris cutlery,or even Windlass,but anyone wanting an affordable functional sword should steer away from Cold Steel,the exception being the 1796 sabre.
With Cold Steel you get a little sword for a lot of money.

Like TM said researching before you buy is paramount.

[Tartar Horde]

I like to be able to take apart my main sword and so like threaded Tangs, as long as the threaded portion is part of the Tang and not welded onto it as you point out TL. My VA Savoy has the same setup and it never loosens even under hard cutting. I do like this "modern" way of securing hilts as it allows me to take the sword apart at regular intervals to clean under the hilt and cross guard, it also allows easier customisation as you don't have to grind the peen off to change hilts. Although Albion Swords are considered as industry leaders in the Field I would like the choice of having the swords disassemble, and this always puts me off buying one even though they are rock solid.

[Timelord]

"stress raisers"!! Not usually done in history for good reason. Ease of disassembly and swapping hilts is not the primary function. Check out the museums for construction reference. I repeat - "stress raisers"...

When a blow is struck with a sword, the force is transferred as a shockwave, travelling down along the blade towards the tang. While a well fitted and correct materials grip acts as a shock absorber, it can only do so much. Likewise a large pommel acts as an energy sink to some extent. Even so, the shockwave travels along the narrowing, tapering hilt inside the handle and is focused into the end of the tang in the same way a tsunami rises up in the shallows. This results in a focused shockwave reaching the limit of the tang and its method of fastener. Any cracks, flaws, cuts, sharp corners, grooves, etc etc can act to redirect some of this shockwave into a sharp angled flaw/groove of some kind and so the shockwave in turn can crack the steel crystalline structure at this point. While this may not happen with every sword, it is a distinctly poor manufacturing technique - suited to mass production and easy assembly. I have personally known and seen numerous swords that have failed at the tang due to this flaw. I am not alone and it is or should be common knowledge among traditional hand made sword makers about this subject.
I will leave it at that and hope your sword arm or what it holds never fails. Sincere regards, TL. (thankyou for the interesting discussion)

---

Renaissance swords of the more "thrusting" type would be fine for screw thread tangs. Heavier cutting swords will always have the "stress raiser" issue.

[Talon]

The most critical are for the sword when it comes to shock absorption is the tang.Though the pommel plays it's part it's not the primary area of stress,the shoulders of the tang are.
The best way to prevent failure is to make sure the shoulders of the tang where it meets the blade are radiused,rounding the shoulders of the tang helps to relieve this highly stressed point.Also the tang should be softer than the blade to help absorb the shock of impact.
As long as the pommel is keyed to the tang it doesn't matter if it's secured by a mechanical fix like a recessed nut,or a hot peen,their main job is there to just stop the pommel from falling off.
If the pommel is just held on by a small threaded bolt then yes there is a greater risk of the pommel snapping.If it's keyed to the tang (where a portion of the tang actually sits in the pommel) it will prevent the pommel from wanting to twist and be a much stronger fix.
I've cut a lot with a mechanical hex nut fitting (as well as hot peened) and it's more than sturdy enough.The only disadvantage is it's not historical for medieval swords,though it's really handy for experimenting with different styles of pommel/cross or grip as it's easy to take apart.

[Tartar Horde]

I have to respectfuly dissagree with you Timelord as modern Hex nut assembly is every bit as secure as Historical peening. The reason they didn't use threaded tangs is that "threading" wasn't invented in the Middle ages. If you want a sword that is accurate with medieval methods then Peening is the way to go, but it makes no difference at all in the performance of a sword if peened or Threaded.

[Timelord]

Threading was around in the medieval period. It was used on some suits of armour for fixing ablative plates and it has cropped up in other mechanical devices. It was not used for securing sword tangs wielded by the same guys in armour in this period.
I am not in disagreement about keyed on pommels or a pommels limited ability in soaking up part of a shockwave or that the tang should be softer or the radiused shoulders. That is all basic stuff. What I am saying is that the screw threads cut into the end of the tang act as stress raisers at the point of the tang that is subject to the most focus of the shockwave. I have seen tangs shear at this point and the pommels then drop off. Why would you cut an angular grove across the focal point of the tang? Maybe in your experience the modern "super steels" counter this flawed construction method fairly well and that is how you (& some modern manufacturers) can get away with it, but it is still building in a potential structural failure and should not be advised as ok across the board.
What steels are you using for these swords? Does the steel work harden like spring steel or a high carbon steel? as that would be more likely to show up the problem.
It is not about whether a hex nut is as secure as a historical peen. It is about the shockwaves entering an artificially introduced flaw in the metal structure and so then overstressing the crystalline structure at this weak point.
Also having a softer tang (as you should) does not really help to absorb the shockwave as you suggest. The purpose of softening the tang is threefold. 1) So that it is not brittle in the area the shockwaves focus into after travelling down the length of the blade. 2) as most historical swords were made out of steels that would "work harden", then the tang started off soft when the sword was new. this does not alleviate reason 1).
3) So that the peen was soft & "peenable". Otherwise if just softening the immediate area of the peen, then the area immediately in front of the peen would be tempered hard & brittle. Therefore the whole mass of the tang down to and just in front of the shoulders had to be softened. This does not alleviate reasons 1) & 2).
Swords that have seen much use or any from a steel that can work harden (many) are advised to be occasionally "dismounted" and the tangs re-annealed - as many modern swords used in martial arts by enthusiastic participants are subjected to far more and frequent use than their historical counterparts. Regards, TL

[Talon]

Ok i'll break down your points Timelord.You state that softening the tang does not really help absorb shock,then explain very nicely why this is so.
Yes the force is concentrated in the tang,and as you rightly said.

"1Also having a softer tang (as you should) does not really help to absorb the shockwave as you suggest. The purpose of softening the tang is threefold. 1) So that it is not brittle in the area the shockwaves focus into after travelling down the length of the blade."

Well yes if the tang wasn't ductile enough to absorb all of that percussive shock then it is a focal point for the sword to fail.As you stated "So that it is not brittle in the area the shockwaves focus into"


"2 as most historical swords were made out of steels that would "work harden", then the tang started off soft when the sword was new. this does not alleviate reason 1)"

Yes work hardening is a possibility(a very unlikely one to my mind),but it would take a lot of repeated forceful blows over an extended period of time,sword's aren't designed for that kind of impact though.
To me that would mean a lot of edge on edge strikes,or edge on armour strikes for that to even be a likely reason for faliure.The sword would be destroyed long before that due to micro fractures in the blade.
If you're parrying you would always try and use the flat of the blade (as you're well aware) to deflect a strike rather than using the sword to absorb it. Though edge on edge strikes did happen it was something to be avoided.

Even so the tang wasn't made softer to take into account work hardening,it was made softer because if it wasn't the sword would very likely fail and snap. As you stated in reason 1.


"3) So that the peen was soft & "peenable". Otherwise if just softening the immediate area of the peen, then the area immediately in front of the peen would be tempered hard & brittle. Therefore the whole mass of the tang down to and just in front of the shoulders had to be softened. This does not alleviate reasons 1) & 2)."


It wouldn't matter with regard to peening if the entire tang was hardened and tempered. As soon as you heat the end of the tang up to forging temperature it would be soft enough to peen anyway,regardless of the hardness of the rest of the tang,unless you mean cold peening which is inferior to a hot peen.

And the tang/or blade for that matter would only be brittle if the sword wasn't tempered correctly.As you know the sword is hardened,then it is tempered to alleviate the brittleness yet still leave it capable of holding a cutting edge.The tang is still left softer than the blade to help absorb the shock (it would bend rather than fracture)

As far as i'm concerned if the pommel is keyed to the tang (IE a nice snug fit on the tang without any play) then a keyed pommel with a recessed nut is more than strong enough for the purpose.
If this isn't the case (as with cheaper manufactured swords) Or if the pommel is held on with a normal nut (as apposed to a broached extended nut that has a tight tolerance in the pommel) then yes it's a bad mechanical fix and could likely cause problems.

I'm not disagreeing with the hot peen assembly being the superior,i'm just saying that a correctly made mechanical fix will certainly stand up to the use that a sword would be expected to do.Any lateral stress would be concentrated on the portion of the tang that is keyed into the pommel,and not concentrated on the threads.

At least it's been that way in my experience and I've done a fair amount of cutting with both hot peen and correctly done mechanical peens,the most I've had to do is give the nut a tweak after a heavy cutting session. A minor thing and offset by the easy of customization on this type of assembly.


I welcome your comments Time lord as this is a fascinating discussion