Opinions on hanwei's federschwert for WMA training/sparring?
Hello all,
Does anyone have any expieriance or opinions on Hanwei's federschwert for use in WMA training/light contact sparring? Does it handle like a schalger? How is it in the bind and thrust? See link for picture. http://therionarms.com/reenact/therionarms_c1003.html

Thanks,
Michael
I like them. I haven't handled a schlager so I can't compare.

Understand that they are still steel swords - appropriate control and safety gear are still a must.

I think they handle well in the bind. Their flexibility in the foible versus the forte means that doing things poorly in the bind can be worse for you but good technique still works well.

There may be an issue with consistency of their flexibility with some being substantially more flexible than others. :mad:

Conclusion: worth the money.
One point worth making, based upon the photos: the thickening of the distal taper near the point is the exact opposite of what I observed on the one antique feder that I saw in Germany. This probably won't matter to you, but it's worth pointing out. On the antique feder, the point was the thinnest section of the entire blade.
Steven H wrote:

Conclusion: worth the money.


At $130! , probably at least 2 lbs of "tempered carbon steel", it is practically a give away. Even if you already had your own shop, and considered your time free, the fuel and raw materials would cost you around half the price being asked.

I would say a little fine sanding on the corners in some areas like the tip would be a good idea, but well worth it at that price.
I think they're pretty decent for the price. Certainly they're a step in the right direction: Affordable trainers that are functional.

I think the blades are far more flexible than necessary. Actually, that's not entirely true: I think they're far too flexible over the entire blade than necessary. If the strong half were completely stiff, and the weak half very still just as flexible, I'd be much happier with them. But truthfully, they aren't bad at all, particularly for the price.

I don't think they'd be a good investment if they were the *only* thing you trained with. I think you'd be better off doing most of your drills with a more realistic sword. But these swords work quite nicely for free play, provided you 1) have the proper training, and 2) have the proper safety gear.

Though I *hate* that they're called "federschwerts". The name is completely non-historical... but that's just my own pet peeve. :)
Craig Peters wrote:
One point worth making, based upon the photos: the thickening of the distal taper near the point is the exact opposite of what I observed on the one antique feder that I saw in Germany. This probably won't matter to you, but it's worth pointing out. On the antique feder, the point was the thinnest section of the entire blade.


There seems to be quite a variety on these swords. I've seen one that was of a simliar taper to the one you describe, but I've seen another that is similar to how the Hanwei tapers. I've also seen one that looks more-or-less like a modern foil blade on a longsword hilt. From my understanding, the Hanwei piece tapers similarly to an antique that is in Zurich, according to some of the Ochs guys.
Thanks for the information.
anecdotal only ... did hear of one snapping at the narrowed part of the blade forward of the ricasso. not sure how hard it was being used but it was only in use a few weeks.
It think the blade is ugly. I might get over that if the sword had side-rings. I really like side-ring protection. You might say they are not necessary, but I still like the extra security. You never know when someone is not going to be paying attention.

I am guessing that the reason for the reverse tapper is because they made the sword some damn light that they wanted to add some blade presence.
George Davidson wrote:
anecdotal only ... did hear of one snapping at the narrowed part of the blade forward of the ricasso. not sure how hard it was being used but it was only in use a few weeks.


I did hear this, and it had concerned me originally. That was with the first production, from what a representative from CAS has told me. I've been testing out four within my group, and so far, so good... your mileage may vary.

Vassilis Tsafatinos wrote:
It think the blade is ugly.


It's based on original practice swords. Many of which weren't intended to be attractive (though some are more ornate than others).

Quote:
I am guessing that the reason for the reverse tapper is because they made the sword some damn light that they wanted to add some blade presence.


Its because that's how some of the originals were in order to have a thick enough point for safety while still maintaining flexibility for thrusting.
I understand there are several different versions of this weapon, some of the ones floating around on Ebay etc. are older types which aren't very good, I have seen the newer type which I thought looked quite good and relatively safe for freeplay with suitible safety gear, something like what they call a 'feathersword' or a longsword foil. I plan to get one myself.

J
The Feder is OK, but you have to grind and soften the really sharp edges to avoid chipping.
We had a case of a snapped off tip in a German fencing school, too - resulting in a very sharp point. Fortunately some guys noted the clatter of the falling tip before anything seriously dangerous could happen.
But nevertheless - I think it's still worth the money - you just have to be carefull with it - which spoils the fun a bit...

Torsten.
Torsten Titel wrote:
- which spoils the fun a bit...


...and what is that worth?

Reading this thread the conclusion is that it is too flxible to pratice and as well plus a safety 'risk' for serious fun.

The price may be low and thus cheap for a sword BUT: in this case it is a sword that in MEANT to be USED. A product that fails the requirements of use is not value for money at any price i.m.o.

You can look at it from an economic angle too. How many hours are you practising on technique and what is your total outlay? What then is it worth to have a sword that is too flexible and a bit iffy?!

WHAT ' value' do you expect for your money?

peter
Peter Bosman wrote:
The price may be low and thus cheap for a sword BUT: in this case it is a sword that in MEANT to be USED. A product that fails the requirements of use is not value for money at any price i.m.o.


But I've used mine, as have students, quite a bit. My point was that it shouldn't be your main tool for doing drills. Free-play, on the other hand, is a different story... but then again, free-play shouldn't be your main method of training. So these are pretty good for the money, and are useful tools for what they are designed for, so long as you don't kid yourself that they can be the only tool you use.

Page 1 of 1

Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum




All contents © Copyright 2003-2006 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Full-featured Version of the forum