That is very nice, Tinker, very, very nice. Now, if only Hanwei will stay true to the course that you have set.

Thanks Hugh- If the work that they've done on the longswords is any indication I think that we have cause to be optimisitic!

Beautiful sword! How would this compare with the Practical Viking model preformance wise? I'm part of a living history group that does live steel fighting and we have broken two swords already this past year and are looking for something heartier.

see if you can get them to keep the two peice pommel as that is something that is more historical and something i dont like about the MRL. VERY NICE!!!! I cannot think of to many examples with such an accute point.
:D :D :D :lol: :lol:

[ Linked Image ]

Just like the 'Sharp' the 'Blunt' will be assembled with the tang peened over the pommel.

In other swords in this series the blunt has been made to weigh and handle as much like the 'sharp' version as possible, with appearance running a distant second to the desired performance. With this Viking sword I've departed from that theme for the blunt; in this case the blunt was designed primarily to meet the 'safety' requirements of re-enactment groups that we believe will be the primary market for the blunt version of this sword.

These requirements call for a 2mm rounded edge, a very rounded point and the best 'historical appearance' obtainable within these limits while still remaining in the weight and balance range for period swords of this type. As such the 'blunt' prototype is a full two ounces heavier- the only way to meet the design requirements without increasing weight was to shorten the blade to an unacceptable degree but at 2lbs10oz the sword is still well within the historic range. The other alteration was a change in the balance of the sword- the COG has been moved from 4-1/2 inches to 5-1/2 inches- less 'handy' but still well within the historic range. Careful distribution of the mass of the blade has allowed these changes without interfering with the Node Location, so even this altered version won't transmit unpleasant shocks to the user's hand.

I had to ship this right off, so I wasn't able to get precise dimensions for the 'blunt' blade, but the photo above gives a pretty clear idea of what it would look like mounted.

To clarify, a quick photoshop mock-up of the blunt:

[ Linked Image ]

Thanks Blake!

Hello
What are the tangs like on the Hanwei viking swords? I had a Cromwell,from them ,and the tang was very unsubstantial.
If the tangs are as hefty as your`s ,or an ATrim or Albion,I will definitly get one.They look great!

Thanks

The tangs of the new viking sword will be very substantial, much like the ones shown above only not tapered to a thread as the production swords will have a peened tang. There will be no welds on the tang and the tang will be hardened and then the temper will be drawn back to the 30's Rockwell for durability.

Hello
Is the CAS/Hanwei ,Trondhiem,one of your`s allso?

Thanks

No- So far I've done prototypes for a longsword, a bastardsword, a medieval single-hand sword and this Viking era sword. The production version of the longsword should be arriving next month or so, but none of the other swords have reached production yet.

Just an update to show off more photos, I will let them speak for themselves.

Sharp first;

[ Linked Image ]

[ Linked Image ]

[ Linked Image ]

[ Linked Image ]

[ Linked Image ]

And now the blunt / reenactor;

[ Linked Image ]

[ Linked Image ]

[ Linked Image ]

I just looked a bit through my Records of the medieval sword, and there are quite a few swords that have a fuller that begins below the cross, so it shouldn't be a big problem even if you don't change it...

It seems like the blunt could be a really fine stage combat sword - light, strong, and durable. It looks good close up, and more importantly, looks good from a distance.

Except from that fuller-not-ending-under-the-guard issue, both versions look really great. The proportions, details, etc, are all good. Better than similar offering from other companies in the same (expected) price range.

Simply for aesthetic reasons, I'd prefer the fuller to end under the guard but this isn't a necessity.

While not an expert on Viking blades I'm not sure where the idea came from that the fuller needs to end under the guard. I don't believe that the termination of the fuller at the hilt is even taken up in Geibig's classification system, nor can I tell from just looking at the photos from my copy of "Swords of the Viking Age" whether or not all of the fullers in the book do terminate under the guard. Some of the swords are so corroded it really is impossible to tell. Plus I'm sure the swords in Ian Peirce's book represent only a small sample of surviving Viking era swords. Just because we haven't seen it doesn't mean that it didn't happen or wasn't made that way. For instance Geibig type 1 blades " . . . often lack a fuller and have flat faces (p.21, SotVA)". All of the type 1 blades in Peirce's book have fullers.

Like I said, I too prefer a fuller to end under the guard but that isn't a make or break option for me. . . especially at this price level.