Looking forward to seeing them!

I know considering the "history", that my coming out in support of an Albion position is going to look funny, but once you read my personal experience here, maybe it won't look so funny.

Recently I was at a local rapier fight practice, and I had a rapier simulator handed to me........ Looking at it closely, I was somewhat taken aback at how close it resembled my 40 inch rapier simulator. The profile taper was similar, the tang was similar, the ricasso was similar, even the pommel nut was similar.........

"What's wrong with my rapier" I was asked.....

I handed him the one I had brought to rapier practice and asked "What do you think?"

I won't go into his expressions except to say he got profane, and he wound up buying the one I brought on the spot......

He did though, ask more than once, what was wrong with the other..... my response was guarded, it was too heavy, the distribution of mass was wrong, and the distal taper was a little off...........

The long and short of it is, that one of my simulators was handed to a local smith who had aspirations of becoming the next great sword smith....... Visually, he came very close, but he missed some of the key elements even having one of mine to use as a model........ And he discovered how hard it is to make something like that for a reasonable price. Probably the saving grace of this, this time.......

Freaky though.... and I wasn't thrilled..........

In the case of the new Albion/ Peter Johnsson stuff, it just makes some sense that they want to protect the few things that will make their stuff special and unique. As the person that has stated several times, that I'm the most copied guy in the industry, I think they kinda need to be close to the vest to start with....... Because lets face it, the copy kats are about to start copying their "Success" to probably a greater degree than I've been copied in the past.......

So, I definitly support Peter in what may be viewed as his "secretiveness", and Nathan and Patrick in supporting Peter and Albion in this.

If one wants to have a good review afterwards, and discuss some specs, I see no real problem there..... But to help make sure that most of the world's "Kopy Kats" can't immediately take advantage of PJ's long and painstaking research, then I would use the way that Bjorn spec'd out the three originals that he shared with us on the Weapons Discussion forum {or whatever its called}.... in other words, go ahead and be fairly detailed, but don't get to exact on the distal taper......... or the main bevel angles, or....... well......*g*

There are people out there that can copy this stuff fairly close, besides me.....*g*... But they'd have to have more to go on. So far, looking at the "reproductions", and or modern interpretations of medieval swords, there's only the better custom guys that have consistently gotten distal taper, etc right, and Arms and Armor and myself as mid-range and low priced manufacturers..... Everyone else I've seen, even some of the "better" repros, is missing something on how the distal tapering is done...... and though I talk a lot about distal tapering, and harmonic balance, I've intentionally left key elements out of my discussions that would help a manufacturer the last two years........

Now we have the PJ Museum stuff, and the "Next Gen" stuff coming out, and it would be a crying shame to see PJ's research get copied to a real close degree too soon........ Its going to happen someday, the whole industry has been improving over the last four years, and much of that has to do with the freely given info on the internet.......... But, let the world's Kopy Kats either do their own research, their own research and development, or actually go out and buy a few of the PJ repros........ In otherwords, let them pay something to gain their improvements that little bit more.

I wish PJ and the Albion the best on this venture. And they are right, they're about to be the most copied in the industry for the foreseeable future, probably blatantly so...........

Auld Dawg

I think that the incredible attention to detail given to these swords speaks for their quality, and justifies the cost of those wonderful pieces; a .75 mm difference was enough to call for a redo of the fittings, and for me, that says a lot more than any set of measurements when it comes to making a decision about whether to purchase one or not. For now, though, that will probably be the best reason, until the swords are actually released. I can certainly understand Peter's reluctance to release the entirety of his information prior to the release, and I support it, for what it's worth. I will definitely be on the lookout for that book; and if you haven't already done so Peter, may I suggest Chivalry Bookshelf as a potential publisher? I think you will find a welcome reception, from both the publishers and their buyers.

While I too would welcome a book by Peter I would actually rather see him devote his time to the making of swords, not writing about them :D

Having personally studied several dozen of Peter's full-scale drawings of actual historic swords, I can attest to the extreme detail of study that goes into his work. Each piece amounts to a highly detailed, accurate schematic blueprint of the piece in question. Fine details are noted, minute measurements taken, and observations of wear and tear are not only cataloged, but analyzed for traces of the original form of the sword.

Here are some photos of Peter taking measurements and preparing a drawing for a sword recently:

[ Linked Image ]

[ Linked Image ]

[ Linked Image ]