What's the deal with old katanas? Are they better than modern day swords?
>>27786851
>are old swords made with less metallurgical knowledge and manufacturing process's far inferior to the present day better
no
They're better than Walmart katanas
>>27786866
this
it's neat that they were able to get that much out of shitty pig steel but modern metallurgy is literally space age in comparison
>>27786851
>>27786866
>are old katanas made by people who knew what they were doing better than stainless steel commercial shit shot out of every Asian country now?
I dunno man.
>16th century Katana
>8670 Tool Steel
One has vast knowledge of metallurgy through many decades of testing and research from men in the top of their field.
The other is made from slag iron hammered into ingots and doused in burnt rice stalks for carbon migration.
Short answer; Yes if comparing to shit budK shit. No if you're paying $10k for a traditional sword.
>8670 is $~1.75/lb.
>>27786910
shit that you pay 20 bucks for at the flea market is of course going to be craptacular.
>>27786851
Japanese swords made in the era before the Sengoku period are considered superior to later swords produced throughout the Edo Period as many of the old, cryptic methods that were passed down orally from smith to apprentice were lost in the Sengoku Era as the demand for weapons of all kinds caused the steel production for swords to be taken up by mills rather than by the smith himself. While, of course, modern metallurgy methods are able to now make stronger and purer steel than the tamahagne steel of the olden days, if you compare a Nambokucho blade of the 14th century to a shinsakuto sword made yesterday, the steel grain of the Nambokucho will appear to be much smoother and less coarse than the new blade likely because the nambo blade was manufactured with the superior forging techniques of the classical age of swordsmithing in Japan
>>27786851
>What's the deal with old katanas? Are they better than modern day swords?
Yeah man, they took the time to fold them over a 100 times.
They don't bother with that these days.
>Modern day swords
Nope. Japs had piss poor iron so they had to use that folding technique to make them somewhat worthwhile. But still the swords were very weak and unreliable compared to an European sword.
>>27787224
>I dunno how steel works: The post
>>27787293
I am 12 years old and know nothing the post.
>>27787373
So then tell me why one steel is better than the other.
>>27787389
you can't be serious.
>>27787413
Yep, go ahead, take your best shot.
Don't just say yuk yuk low quality iron sand, explain to me why it is inferior after refined and impurities are removed?
>>27787424
The impurities were not removed. Folding was to sodas the impurities evenly so the did not concentrate into a single weak spot in the blade
>>27787413
Why wont you answer, pussy?
>>27787454
>The impurities were not removed
Ah so you don't know anything about metalworking then?
>>27787224
I love how people think that this gif seems to prove that European swords are superior to japanese swords when this is probably the most improper way to use a Japanese sword. The construction of Japanese swords is a very hard tempered edge to hold its sharpness when cutting soft targets while the back of the blade is much softer and thicker to block sword strikes. Edge of edge contact was avoided unless absolutely neccesary in Japanese Swordsmanship.
>>27787466
Ancient metal working can not remove all the impurities, in fact it was impuritys like vanadium and such that gave certain mines a reputation for superior metal. Whach the full Heidi that goes to this gif, you will learn a lot. >>27787224
>>27787470
It still proves that they are inferior. A European blade can do the same thing AND survive this. Pay attention.
>>27787491
>Ancient metal working can not remove all the impurities
You're right, including those from batches in Europe. You think they just pulled a bunch of iron sand from the ground and started melting and folding it? Topfugginkek man.
>this gif
Oi boi, I'm going to smack a thicker piece of metal, being secured at two points, and see what happens!
What? It bent? Guess the steel is shit :DDD
Like, what even lol.
>>27787470
Also European sword is braced and fully supported by something solid so it won't move or bend. They should do a repeat test with Katana in the same situation if they wanted to be fair.
>>27787470
Edge to edge is avoided in almost every form though?
>>27787519
AND THE OTHER ONE DID NOT, YOUR AVOIDING THE POINT.
>>27787540
Because thicker material, secured at two points, what about this are you dense about?
Get it? Dense, yuk yuk yuk.
>>27787519
>>27787551
>Oi boi, I'm going to smack a thicker piece of metal,
European swords aren't thicker though.
>>27787537
They did, it snapped the katana. You can find the other gif floating about
>>27787558
So what you're saying is edge to edge that sword isn't thicker than the katana edge to spine? You artarded m8?
>>27787551
Watch the video, he makes and tests two blades the secured one is a stand in, he takes a German broadsword then hits the same secured blade, the secured blade breaks in two and the broadswd is slightly nicked. WACH THE FULL VIDEO!!!
>>27787510
Not neccesarily, if youre not using an object for its intended purpose, its hard to say it is inferior when you break it. The bottom line is that we have this thread almost every night and it really just comes down to what application the sword is being used for. If I was fighting a guy decked out in 16gauge plate armor, I would take a European bastard sword over a katana as the bastard sword will have a much greater shock resistance due to the wider surface of the blade and not being as heavily tempered as a Japanese blade. If I was fighting an unarmored or lightly armored opponent, I would choose a Japanese long sword for its lighter weight and manueverability.
>>27787575
That's width, not thickness tard.
>>27787586
You're right, one sword is better for killing peasants and committing war crimes in China than the other.
>>27787603
You got me there, still more material through the structure relative to the impact point. This goes for >>27787579 to.
>>27787586
Okay, I am calming my rage, this makes sense. As long as you don't go on about katana superiority I am okay.
>super sperg samefagging
>>27787624
Not sure about that. Katanas generally weigh the same, yet are shorter. Gotta be roughly the same amount of material then, just less effectively used.
Course I have no idea what the weights and sizes are for those swords in particular though.
>>27787630
>As long as you don't go on about katana superiority I am okay.
Not him, the other dude, I really don't think either of us are going for mystical katana nippon steel folding bullshit, and it IS bullshit. But the backlash that the European sword is just leaps and bounds better is also bullshit, different swords, different places, different purposes. Not even the nips used katana as primary weapons, polearms and bows, just like in Europe.
>>27787650
That's why I hate TV tests, they're largely unscientific because if people get bored during listening to weights, states the steel are in, design advantages etc, they'd stop watching.
>>27787579
The broadsword wasn't "slightly knicked," it would have needed reforging if you wanted to continue using it.
>>27787586
Katana are actually of similar weight to even hand and a half swords. Lacking a pommel and many lacking distal taper means that they were actually much slower swords.
>>27787586
>lighter weight
They generally weighed the same as European longswords, despite being shorter.
With a longsword you get more reach, which is fucking everything, a better point, the ability to halfsword and stab a bitch or mordhau and smash a bitch with your pommel or guard. Further I don't really agree with the bit about armor. A European sword isn't designed to go through armor any more than a katana is. That's just not what swords are good at. Later European longswords were even blunted oftentimes, because the only part useful to have sharp was the tip.
>>27787647
There are at least 4 spergs here at the moment.
>>27787673
>That's why I hate TV tests, they're largely unscientific because if people get bored during listening to weights, states the steel are in, design advantages etc, they'd stop watching.
Yep, it's really unfortunate.
>>27787613
Yes, a sword designed for use against unarmored opponents is only useful for killing civillians. Nevermind the warm, humid climate that no motherfucker is going to be walking around in armor in unless going into a large scale battle. In which case, the katana would not even be used as it was rarely ever a primary weapon in japanese warfare.
>>27787711
>With a longsword you get more reach, which is fucking everything
I would still say it depends. Reach is an advantage so long as your strikes are in that sweet spot, inside your guard things change up. A dagger inside your guard is going to mess you up bad if you got a sword, and this is why lots and lots of dudes carry smaller knives even to this day.
>>27787715
>only useful for killing civillians
Or you know, assassins, ninja (not even shitting) that wear plain clothes because they don't want to draw attention to themselves. It has legitimate purpose.
>>27787715
>Nevermind the warm, humid climate that no motherfucker is going to be walking around in armor in
Clearly you don't know anything about what you're talking about.
Japan had plenty of armor. And it was quite heavy. O-Yoroi weighed around 60 lbs. Armor was incredibly fucking important because they were tards who didn't use shields.
Further, you're pretty wrong on the weather, Japan's climate is temperate.
>no motherfucker is going to be walking around in armor in unless going into a large scale battle
When else would you be wearing armor, goddamn. You think those motherfuckers just put on 60lbs of iron for fun?
>>27787767
Ninjas were literally peasants who hung out at bars to eavesdrop or put explosives in a Porta potty you fucking autist
>>27787630
as far as i know Japanese swordsmanship was mostly practice for nobles. Samurai tended to go to war with spears or bows/arrows. swords were for personal protection and enforcing the status quo similar to what >>27787613 said.
now this is just my uneducated view, but I like to think of swords being the social equivalent to handguns, while spears are similar to rifles for line infantry. Not that swords had no role in warfare.
>>27787711
I just weighed my Bizen Osafuna Sukesada dated to 1542. Cutting edge is pretty standard length for a Katana at 26.5 inches It came out at 2.32lbs in the scabbard. I also weighed my Cold Steel Italian Longsword at it came out at 47.9 ounces without the scabbard.
>>27787809
>cold steel
>>27787791
>what is reading comprehension
>>27787794
>iknownothingaboutjapanesehistory.weeabo
>>27787797
>now this is just my uneducated view, but I like to think of swords being the social equivalent to handguns, while spears are similar to rifles for line infantry.
You're essentially right, the sword was actually a sidearm in most cases.
>>27787809
>dated to 1542
Plz pics
>>27787825
Not really sure what I should be comprehending since you didn't make any points, just said a lot of stuff that demonstrated you were wrong. Like a good autist I had to point it out to you.
>>27787791
>Further, you're pretty wrong on the weather, Japan's climate is temperate.
Japan is humid as fuck though.
>>27787538
No it really isn't. Swords are tools, some damage to the edge is largely irrelevant if it keeps you alive.
>>27787854
Yeah I'll give you that.
>>27787849
>anon: No one is going to be walking around wearing armor in Japan unless they're going to a battle in which case swords are secondary weapons and therefore irrelevant
>you: Nuh-uh! Japan had armor and it was HEAVY
Do you see now where you missed his point entirely?
>>27787899
Not really, because a secondary weapon then isn't quite the same as one now. People say that and get the wrong impression, believing it's like pistols today: practically irrelevant on the battlefield.
That simply wasn't the case, those swords got used a lot. Not as a first choice, but shit happens.
>>27787922
>Not as a first choice, but shit happens.
Just like...a pistol.
Which, aren't irrelevant, they're oh shit weapons if something happens to your primary.
>>27787922
>That simply wasn't the case, those swords got used a lot
Prove it.
>>27787933
Which happens a lot less now. Also there are plenty of situations where a sword is superior to another weapon that would otherwise be the primary. Not really the case for pistols.
>>27787952
Tunnel fighting.
>>27787922
aw nikka you blastin' my sword-pistol analogy that aint cool.
I don't know the differences in training throughout japanese ages historically, but would not the vast majority of infantry be armed with only a spear (and minimal armor) with only officers (samurai) possessing swords?
>>27787984
Even samurai primarily used pole weapons, and when they didn't they used a bow and arrow from horse-back.
>>27787952
>Also there are plenty of situations where a sword is superior to another weapon that would otherwise be the primary.
Such as?
>>27787949
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_sword#Early_history
As a starting point, read about the various reasons changes were made. They all have to do with use of the sword.
For further reading, pick up some history books m8.
>>27787984
Absolutely. However there were quite a few samurai. Their first weapons of choice for most of history would be bows and spears, used on horseback. (although later swords gained more prominence on the battlefield).
>>27788018
You're on foot. Nigga with a spear is coming at you. Your best friend is a two-handed sword.
>>27788035
>Nigga with a spear is coming at you. Your best friend is a two-handed sword.
In what way?
>>27788035
>You're on foot. Nigga with a spear is coming at you. Your best friend is a two-handed sword.
>You're on foot, 50 niggas with spears are coming at you. Your best friend is bows
No one goes one on one with a spear lol. Have fun deflecting a polearm into the guy next to you though, bet he'd appreciate that.
>>27788063
In that it was the counter developed independently in Europe and Japan to spears. In Europe it took the form of great swords of various types like the Zweihander.
In Japan it was the Uchigatana.
>>27788069
>Have fun deflecting a polearm into the guy next to you though, bet he'd appreciate that.
It seems they figured out a way to do it, since that's how they did it. If it was just Japan you might convince me they were just crazy chinks, but Europe came to the same conclusion.
>>27788082
>It seems they figured out a way to do it, since that's how they did it. If it was just Japan you might convince me they were just crazy chinks, but Europe came to the same conclusion.
Cite it.
>>27788035
>You're on foot. Nigga with a spear is coming at you. Your best friend is a two-handed sword.
No, it isnt. A trained spearman will know that he will lose his reach advantage if he lets a guy with a sword in too close. Hes going to do everything he can to make surE he keeps you well out of striking distance poking holes in you from 6ft away.
>>27788069
I think sword>spear in one on one is pretty much bullshit as well honestly.
>All you have to do is get within his guard!
Yes which is why daggers>swords, oh wait they don't.
>>27788095
Two handed swords had mass and could hack though the shaft of polearms.
The response was to add iron strapping down the length of the shaft to prevent the sword from hitting the wood. The japanese also used large rivets along the shaft for the same purpose.
>>27788095
No, since I already did. If you read the previous citation you asked for you'd already know. If I believed you wanted to actually learn and not just be a cunt, I would cite it.
>>27788115
Actually, getting in his guard with a sword, and in a swords guard with a dagger, can and will fuck people up. The problem is the fact that you need to get IN that guard first, and lets face it, unless you have nowhere else to go, moving forward into a spear and risking getting piked the fuck up by something that can change faster than you can move on your feet in armor, is a last ditch effort.
>>27788128
>Two handed swords had mass and could hack though the shaft of polearms.
Kay, you realize polearms have give right?
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQjJavcsNjA
>>27788135
>No
I accept your defeat.
Katanas are overrated
They actually feel pretty awkward compared to other swords IMO
t. someone that spars with real katanas
>>27788113
>No, it isnt. A trained spearman will know that he will lose his reach advantage if he lets a guy with a sword in too close. Hes going to do everything he can to make surE he keeps you well out of striking distance poking holes in you from 6ft away.
Except that is very, very difficult to do. The sword has a serious advantage here in that it's much easier for the swordsman to block the spear and deliver strikes. If the spearman keeps backing up he's gonna have a real bad time, since as people already pointed out, there's never just one guy with a spear.
>>27788082
>In Europe it took the form of great swords of various types like the Zweihander.
"Zweihander" is a meme weapon.
Landsknechts were primarily pikemen just like everyone else at the time and the great two handed swords they are famous for were not the hard-counter to pike formations that colloquial wisdom would have you believe.
>>27786851
Utter trash compared to modern steels and forging methods.
However they are highly crafted works of art to alot of people, so that is their main draw today.
>>27788147
>I accept your defeat.
oh no, i have to commit sudoku now. Forgive me gook moot.
>>27788167
Please do if you're willing to spread bullshit lol, like cmon it's information, I know you might be trolling but there's enough myths in the world of ancient weaponry.
>>27788147
>The problem is the fact that you need to get IN that guard first
Which is a HUGE problem.
>>27788161
>"Zweihander" is a meme weapon.
Yeah pretty much, I agree honestly. If there ever were a meme weapon, it is one.
>great two handed swords they are famous for were not the hard-counter to pike formations that colloquial wisdom would have you believe.
Course not, hard counters didn't exist in the medieval world. When you have dudes poking eachother with sharp bits of metal all kinds of shit can happen. Further the actual weapons are hardly the most important part of warfare anyway, strategy, supplies, numbers, morale, those count for a lot more.
>>27788189
As I already said, I did cite it. You just didn't read it the first time, so I won't bother jumping through hoops for you just so you can waste my time. I have much more important shitposting to do. All you want is a link to not read.
>>27788190
Yeah, a problem that can kill the fuck out of you. Everyone likes to say, hey man, just deflect that shit, but we're talking about wearing armor, you're tired, you need to time your parry, your weapon is feeling heavy in your hand, the terrain is uneven.
It's not JUST deflecting an attack and moving in for a quick kill, I would back the fuck off that spear wall if at all possible, look for targets of opportunity.
>>27788206
>As I already said, I did cite it
Where?
>>27788211
>Where?
Scroll up senpai
>>27788231
Point it out, I go forward mate, if you really did cite it it should not be that hard and I will ackowledge it, but I'm not searching around for something that #1, I never asked for like you claimed I did, and #2 doesn't readily stand out.
>>27786851
Modern katanas are significantly superior and take vastly less work to make, much of the effort in making a katana was techniques used to make up for poor quality iron.
>>27787791
He's not talking about combat on the battlefield, even during the heyday of legendary swordsmen and master swordsmen the katana was largely a sideweapon.
He's talking about you fighting someone dressed in normal clothes, a situation in which your katana would be the weapon you have at hand.
>>27788211
>Everyone likes to say, hey man, just deflect that shit,
I think the problem is so many modern enthusiasts are stuck thinking in the context of sport-combat. It's EASY to blitz and overwhelm a spear guy when you know the worst that will happen to you is a bruised shin. Live steel is a completely different scenario that forces entirely different considerations.
>>27788241
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_sword#Early_history
>https://books.google.com/books?id=FmLpLkEj1LgC&pg=PA22&lpg=PA22#v=onepage&q&f=false
Literally all the transitions in japanese sword, armor, and spearmaking from the late 1300s to the 1600s had to do with optimization of fighting on foot against spears. Lighter armor vs the heavy ass O-Yoroi, new spears, new swords.
>>27786851
They are just nice for the shitty material used to make them.
>>27788300
Reminds me of the little experiment Matt Easton did, I forget the exact details, can link the video, but he was talking about some dude who held a doorway with a lone spear against a relatively large group of people.
When the experiment was recreated at his HEMA club, they just piled in on top of each other which forced the spearman to give up the door and eventually get surrounded. What's interesting is generally, the first dude always "died", second dude got fucked up if not died, and the third guy certainly wasn't combat effective until the whole group eventually pushed into the larger room.
In real life, those people would be dead if they rushed in, and in real life if you saw your friend just get speared, and you have no idea what's behind that spearman in the room, you're going to tactically reconsider throwing yourself into the inevitable.
Unless you're a goblin from LOTR or some shit.
>>27788323
We're you expecting me to not actually read this or something? I'm only seeing one major point where spears influenced the creation of uchigatana, part of the reason being they were dismounted and tachi were optimized for horseback. That doesn't mean they used the sword as a primary weapon against spears, it means they recognized the shortcomings of the current sword arms and tweaked them to give better results.
>The tachi became the primary weapon on the battlefield during the Kamakura period, used by cavalry. The sword was mostly considered as a secondary weapon until then, used in the battlefield only after the bow and polearm were no longer feasible. During the Edo period samurai went about on foot unarmored, and with much less combat being fought on horseback in open battlefields the need for an effective close quarter weapon resulted in samurai being armed with daisho.
Another major influence was the fact that they needed a better on foot, close quarter weapon where spears were too long to be used as effectively. Stop cherry picking.
>>27788400
>Stop cherry picking.
But I'm not anon, different swords for different jobs. It's not cherrypicking to say hammers are for smacking nails and screwdrivers are for screwing screws. They might do pretty much the same thing in the end, but they are not the same. We were discussing the uchigatana if you remember, nothing I said was wrong there.
Is the katana the best sword they could make from the pig metal the japs had?
>>27788477
We're discussing sword vs spear tactics, nowhere have you actually cited what I wanted, which was that the best way to defeat a formation of spears was with two handed swords deflecting them.
Which is fucking retarded, and which is why you can't actually cite it.
No.5(nanboku-cho period) is master race.
>>27788506
That's because what you want doesn't exist. No one flat out said "hey guys use swords against spears". I'm sorry /k/ didn't exist in the middle ages to dumb shit down for you.
Optimizations of swords and armor for foot combat coinciding with new use of mass spear formations, and men wearing those newly optimized swords and armor fighting the men in spear formations is the best you're gonna get.
>>27788555
>That's because what you want doesn't exist
Precisely, thank you.
>No one flat out said "hey guys use swords against spears"
>You're on foot. Nigga with a spear is coming at you. Your best friend is a two-handed sword.
Oookay.
>Optimizations of swords and armor for foot combat coinciding with new use of mass spear formations, and men wearing those newly optimized swords and armor fighting the men in spear formations is the best you're gonna get.
Okay then, your argument is officially dissolved and you are unable to provide any real supporting evidence, moving on.
>>27788506
Not the guy you are arguing with, but there is an actual surviving sword style for doing just that. Charge into spears or sword formations in open fields with a Nodachi.
It is called Satsuma Nodachi Jigen Ryu. Surprisingly, it is very successful and feared during the Sengoku Jidai. Their mindset is kill as many as possible in the charge. Second strikes aren't even considered.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jigen-ry%C5%AB
https://youtu.be/YVSONNESfyE?t=4m18s
>>27788580
>any real supporting evidence
Besides of course what I already stated, that it was the counter developed across the entire world, as the evidence clearly indicates despite not being flat out stated.
>>27788618
>Second strikes aren't even considered.
I wonder why.
Again, I'm not saying things didn't exist, I'm saying they are in no way ideal.
>>27788621
>Besides of course what I already stated
Which was nothing
>as the evidence clearly indicates despite not being flat out stated
Which is something you're just making up lol, hence why it isn't stated or observed in history.
>>27788644
>Which is something you're just making up lol, hence why it isn't stated or observed in history.
Of course, all the samurai fighting on foot at this time against massed spears were merely hugging their opponents to death, hence why they needed new swords and armor more suited to the new conditions of warfare.
>>27788708
>i lack evidence
>time to act retarded
Remember that luckily you're not tripfagging, you don't have to hold onto your pride when you're wrong lol.
Yes, dudes with swords fought dudes with spears, no, it was not ideal. This all stems from you saying your best friend was a two handed sword against a spear, you then changed your statement saying no one blatantly said use swords against spears. You have to get into the guard of the spearman, full force, the only way you're going to do it with any semblance of effectiveness would be something like >>27788618 showed, and it wasn't all that effective. It was just a rush tactic to try to break a formation with brute force.
A much more effective tactic was outmaneuvering, flanking and using ranged weapons, you know, like almost every professional army ever.
Alright before I bed let me point out, since the fucking gif was already posted.
A Knight with a Longsword would decimate a Samurai with the best katana from the best Period in Japan.
It was not a fair fight to begin with though, the katana was made in an isolated island and more thought of as half weapon and half artwork; equaling various but limited martial arts in which samurai trained with strictly. A knight on the other hand, his sword was made by the dozen, strong and sharp, 100% weapon. Though one could argue that there was HEMA style martial arts that did spawn during that time, the knights objective was if the first attack... if that didnt get through, Hit FUCKING HARDER, attacking from all angles until the opponent is honestly shrivels of shredded meat that bleeds profusely.
The Samurai and Katana were meant to be used in specific accordance to their martial art while the longsword in medieval times was the everyman tool of the knight, just send it in to the blacksmith to get major chips out and back to hacking and slashing, literally.
>>27789106
You should probably stop watching game of thrones.
>>27789106
To add to this, I still very much respect the katana and longsword for what it is.
The main difference between modern and ancient is almost everything.
The only modern one your going to find is a more tactical approach to it, using most likely stock removal and G-10/Micarta grips with a Kydex sheath. The ones still made like old fashion timey style are purely meant for decoration. Though the japanese knew craftsmanship thats for sure, cuz there is only a slight marginal difference if any between the sword made in todays time versus ancient times using the forging technique. The only way you can get the 'Original' type steel is forge welding tamahagane, which if done like that, thats a REAL katana, although time consuming considering the whole process of just getting tamahagane. Now a days its getting wrought iron, or some other forgable steel with one another and forge welding that, and then folding it over as usual. Other than that, its the same techniques used in ancient times for todays modern katana forger.
>>27789138
Would you like to elaborate??
>>27789155
It's a bunch of bullshit you're spewing, hopefully because you're tired.
Get some rest, come back when your head is clear.
>>27789106
Neckbeard: The Post
>>27789106
>>27789147
Autism: The posts
>>27786902
>pig steel
Pig iron you dumb faggot.
>>27787224
>Striking edge on edge with swords
lol k
>an european
LOL K
>>27789177
>>27789198
>>27790476
mad cuz did bad in history class
Go back to watching naruto
>>27787224
dude that is a german made katana by some potato counting faggot, no wonder it bends. Try cutting a Tank with a longsword btw.
