[Anton de Vries]

I ran into this by coïncidence. Made in Pakistan. Steel. Looks like it's hand made as it's slightly irregular and has visible hammer marks. $20 bucks or so IIRC. Not really sharp (yet) but no doubt extremely dangerous anyway, especially for innocent bystanders.

Chakram (From Wikipedia)
The chakram is a throwing weapon that was used by the ancient Indians; it is basically a flat metal ring with a sharp outer edge from 5 to 12 inches in diameter.
The word comes from Sanskrit and means round, circle, or wheel. Earliest references come from Ramayana and Mahabharata epics (here chakram is the weapon of the god Indra). It was used by Indian armies, mostly by Sikhs.
Effective range 40 to 50 meters. Because of its aerodynamic shape (similar to an aeroplane wing) it is not easily deflected by wind.

I really look forward to testing it. I doubt I can hit something but I'm going to have tons of fun.

No Warrior Princess jokes please.

[Aaron Schnatterly]

[Johan S. Moen]

May I suggest either using a non-sharp substitute, or finding yourself a rather large quiet field if you are going to use that thing? Cool thing though. Any idea what kind of steel it is?

Johan Schubert Moen

[Anton de Vries]

[Daniel Parry]

Just make sure you check in the instructions that it isn't designed to come back to the owner like a boomerang !! We don't want a special UPDATE on myArmoury.com entitled 'Anton de Vries RIP, ' He didn't read the small-print''

Have fun with it anyway. Didn't the Sikhs used to use those things ? Oh, you mentioned that above !

Daniel

[Robert W. Betten]

until i see one of those in use at an effective range for it to be worth the effort of making one....I'll take the stance that they're a poor design for a weapon, its severrely limited to how much it can do.

[G. Scott H.]

A similar item from Atlanta Cutlery. The AC version looks a bit wider than the one pictured above (a bit more to grip, perphaps?). http://www.atlantacutlery.com/webstore/showpr...osition=13
They make a smaller version as well.

P.S. Wasn't there a bad guy in a James Bond movie that had something like this built into the brim of his hat?

[Elling Polden]

[M. Taylor]

[G. Scott H.]

[Anton de Vries]

Test results and some thoughts:

Range is (estimate) slightly better than a javelin but, possibly because I lack practice, much harder to aim.
Trajectory can either be straight or curved, but because of the weight it doesn't work nearly as well as a frisbee.

The big surprise came when I threw it (repeatedly) into the side of a sandy hill: It disappeared completely.
This is a *much* more powerful weapon than I thought it would be: When sharpened, a hit will cause very serious wounds/amputation/death.
I used to think of it as a shuriken-without-points, but it's more like a sword-with-a-circular-blade.

Aaron's 'lethal frisbee' made me laugh, but it's actually spot on. Hit an unarmored person with it, and chances seem pretty good that it will kill.
Well-padded armor will defeat it though.

This one's pretty sturdy: I hit rocks with it a couple of times, and the result were superficial dents in the edge. It didn't break or bend.

Pros:
Powerful
Reasonably good range
Light and small, and therefore very easy to carry
Cons:
Difficult to master
Can only be used as a projectile
Limited armor-piercing capability

This is a strange weapon. I thought it would hardly work, if at all.
I feel different about it now.
I can understand why people used and liked it, apart from possible religious motives.
On the other hand, I can also understand why people would prefer the javelin.

This is not a toy: If you get one, be extremely careful with it. Even unsharpened it will easily kill. Don't let kids handle it.

[Aaron Schnatterly]

Thanks for the rundown, Anton!

I figured it would take some significant practice to become proficient - not unlike a sword, longbow, or even a sling. Still, though, I can't imagine what a volley (would that be the proper term here?) of these would do to a line of the lesser-armoured. I know longbows weren't cheap, but I wonder how this would compare in cost? With the bow, you get a bunch of shots - this, only one. Probably not a fair comparison, but still a fair question. Likewise, a thrown spear, pavise, or javelin would be a one-time deal, too...

I am even more intrigued at this point, and I may eventually get one to play with (respectfully, of course...) if I can find an appropriate area to do so.

[Anton de Vries]

The way I see it archers should be considered artillery. Everyone knows they're cowards and lousy swordsmen and therefore worthless in a real fight.
The javelin and for that matter the chakram, are infantry weapons, i.e. carried by infantry to be employed right before the hand-to-hand starts.
That's why I didn't compare the chakram to bow/arrow.

I have been wondering about chakram vs javelin production cost too, but I just lack the knowledge to make a more or less educated guess.


***Disclaimer***
Hey I was only kidding about those archers and practice archery myself. Don't shoot me.

[Aaron Schnatterly]

I suppose I was over-generalizing with the longbow/chakram comparison. I was looking at it as a "missile weapon" category vs. tightening it to close vs. long distance. You have a good point, though - don't really need to be looked at as a comparison.