Most effective sword type for modern unarmored sword fighting

Well ambushes werent the only mode of attack, but was the most popular. It has been used on one man death runs, actual duels, typical battles, etc... Moro fighting techniques generally used alota quick darting moves to close gaps quickly, and were generally one cut ordeals. Most people werent lucky enough to merely be wounded. Unlike movie fighting the goal was to finish quickly and not really enter into a position in which blade contact became an issue. Spacing was key. So despite longer weapons used by opponents these smaller blades still were effective. Of course its not as easy to do, but then again skill generally plays a bigger part than what tool is being used.
 
scotjute,

Yeah I have a KC 29 and I agree you can thrust with it. However I do not believe it was as exclusively designed for the thrust as a rapier and seems like it would be harder to "aim" if you will. I could be wrong not having ever really tried it either way.

As Robert mentions, a sword certainly does not provide the margin of victory.
 
I'm not a sword expert, but have some years of MA experience. Many great senseis taught me that tha most important thing in using weapon is how to compensate for its weak point = safe feeling in opponent.

Thus thinking, the best "slasher" sword is not the one which slashes best, but most capable of thrusting among slashers, because a slasher can slash anyway. It's geometry, and also user's capability. Ditto long and short sword. A short sword capable of long range fight, a long sword capable of very close range, both make formidable swordman IMHO.
 
This is a subject that will garner as many opinions as what the most superior unarmed fighting style is . Everyone has their favorite for their own reasons . I will venture to say that the best sword is the one used by the victor of the duel . ;)
An inferior sword weilded by a superior swordsman will most likely always be the victor .

Regards , Cameron .
 
I would have to say that in unamrored combat in the modern world no other swordsman would be able to stand up to a cocked and locked 45. I mean I love swords but lets be realistic how many sword fights happen these days that aren't staged or planned. There can be only one LOL. The closest thing i ever had to classic combat was when the guy who was previously dating my girlfriend was trying to stalk me or something and pulled out a shovel handle he had in his truck and started talking smack from across the parking lot. This was before I was 21 and I had no pistol, though I carried my samurai sword with me. IT was an actual Gendaito sitting at about 75 years or so resting in Shin Gunto Mounts made Ishido Teruhide. I took one good swing and devistated his stick and then he ran. Had I my HK Tactical at the time he'd be eating through a tube as we speak.
 
Absolutely Ryu, I think we all pretty much agree on that. However this question was a little more hypothetical. I do not believe that the original poster was talking about getting a sword for self defense.
 
The best Sword is the one you feel best with. I've a Shirasaya for selfdefence, because outsiders can't see the blade inside the bamboo. :)
 
Yikes! It is my understanding that a shirisaya should probably only be used as a storage scabbard. There are good reasons for all those fancy fittings.
 
Great talk guys, sorry I'm late:( (not that it matters)

It was my understanding that the advent of the Shirasaya dress was to conceal the blade after the Japanese government banned the Samurai from carrying a sword. It was then later applied as a storage device, and widely known as "Informal Dress".
 
The katana is primarily a cleaving sword more than anything else, but it thrusts and slices adequately as well.

The convex, or "appleseed", grind of the katana makes it very suitable for its primary application, chopping. Despite the misconception that the katana is a draw cutting sword, all Japanese systems I have seen demonstrated employ very percussive, cleaving motions. This style of swordplay is very well suited to the katana due to its convex grind, curved blade shape, and relatively light weight. Simply put, a katana is meant to do severe cleaving damage to tissue, removing limbs or heads with ease.

Katanas tend to be well maintained and razor sharp, so they are adequate draw cutters. Their convex grind works at a cross purpose to draw cutting, however, so they do not slice as well as a flat ground sword.

Katanas also have adequate thrusting ability. Make no mistake - a full force katana thrust will do serious damage. However, the katana sword was designed to focus heavily on slashing, and it shows in the design. The trailing tip of the katana is well suited to slashing, but hinders thrusting somewhat since it is not located in the middle of the blade. Likewise, the curvature of the blade hinders thrusting because it requires more tissue to be cut away to acheive a thrust of equal depth of that of a straight blade. The curvature also makes it difficult to align the tip with the hand.
 
I've tried before to describe the cutting fashion the kat uses.

You cannot definitively describe the katana's cut as a pure draw cut, or as a pure chop. However, the intended cutting motion is a blend of the two, which can be somewhat well summed up by the word cleave.

But yes as most people have stated (including me) the emphasis is not on tsuki/thrusting. People also have to remember that Japanese swords were not these deeply curved sabers (at least not all of them by any stretch), and as they reached their peak (as many sword arts schools see it), the curvature was rather slight. So the kat can't really be disqualified from the role of thruster (if the swordsman chooses to apply that particular focus) due to a "deep" curvature.

:)
 
For close-in work, a gladius might well be the best choice. If well made, it is well-balanced, quick, a proven thruster, and a hell-for-leather cutter. If you don't believe me, read the ancient records, such as Polybius and Livy. My choice would be the gladius hispaniensis or the Republican Era version, which is longer than the later Pompeii version and has a broader blade and more tapered point. I actually have such an item on order and, when I get it, i shall take pictures and get them posted.
 
While it is true that as time progressed, katana design became more straight, this was almost purely for aesthetic and comfort reasons. As we travel later and later into Japanese history, we see that the country becomes more and more stable, and there is less of a need for a truly battle-tested blade. The katanas of this era were crafted shorter and straighter, for swords of this design are easier to carry every day than longer, more curved blades. If used according to traditional Japanese kenjutsu principles, a longer, curved blade will always outperform a shorter, straighter one. A shorter, straighter katana would be much better suited to a more European slash and thrust sword style than kenjutsu which focuses on critical, incapacitating cleaving strikes.
 
There was not a vast amount of time for swords to gradually become shorter and straighter. You have from the Muromachi when the young kat was just a modified tachi to the well-regarded kambun-style shinto blades which were fairly early during the Tokugawa era of peace. The latter is what is oft-considered by iai practitioners of various ryu to be the sword best suited to swordsmanship. In addition, many schools feel that relatively longer blades are preferable, not shorter.

Be sure to remember that while Kenjutsu was around in some forms a long time before, the highly organized and specialized sword arts were not being developed until later.

Mind you I'm not arguing, just different preferences I suppose.
 
interesting discussion going on here.

I think machete type weapons are best suited for modern combat. 1> They are versatile. 2> a fast light cutter is great against multiple attackers where as a thrust dagger can get caught up in someone.


I think a sword (short) still has a valued place in modern combat. everyone always says I would rather have a gun, and in certain situations I would too! but in my home in the dark I would arm my self with a short machete type sword over a gun. fear of over penetration. I also think inside of 20 ft I would rather have a machete than a gun. also in a multiple attack scenario a short sword might be better than a gun if you have a low quantity of bullets. there are also mechanical failures in guns alot can go wrong. yeah those can be called training issues but gun users die too! jams and misfeeds against a short sword user inside of 20 ft even the best clear drills will be challenged.
 
fear of over penetration

That is easily solved by using hollow point rounds or other friable ammunition that will not penetrate walls.

. I also think inside of 20 ft I would rather have a machete than a gun.
Why?

also in a multiple attack scenario a short sword might be better than a gun if you have a low quantity of bullets.
Well maybe but truth be told I think your chances of surviving an encounter is much greater with a gun even with fewer bullets then attackers then it is with a sword. It all comes down to kill radii. If you have 2 or more kill radii overlap yours as you must when using a sword you will almost inevitably lose. This is even more true if your opponents are armed with guns against your sword. Bottom line (and I know it has been said before) don't bring a knife to a gun fight even a big one.

there are also mechanical failures in guns alot can go wrong. You have something there. However on the main I would suggest that you are still probably going to be better off with a gun. Especially if it is something reliable like a 12 gauge pump. If at all possible I do not want opponents within arms length. Also I do not want to be facing either multiple or single opponents armed with guns when I have only a sword.
 
This thread has been going for a while. About the shirasaya mounts. In the olden days LOL they really were used more for storage. I think the word shirasaya means white scabbard. And those who used it for concealment probably had them made from fairly strong wood. And with modern materials being as cool as they can be shirasaya realy isn't a bad way to go. But I have seen some older shintos bust right out of there shirasay mounts on even soft target strikes. So it realy depends on the materials you choose for your mounts. Here is a link for a site owned by a guy named Fred Lohman. He is a really good guy and can fix up any traditional sword. He has done a few of mine. He even knows folks that can hand carve sayas for you swords. It's http://www.Japanese-Swords.com/

Also just to share with the group here is a forum link that debuted the custom sword I had made by smith Jerry Busse. It's http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=178136
 
The thing about shirisaya mounts is that they are missing a couple of key things. Things like tsubas and decent grips are noticeable absent. Those things are there for a reason on fighting swords. The tsubas are there so that your hands don't go slipping down on to your ever so sharp blade and the grips so that your katana does not become a projectile weapons when your sweaty hands slip off of it.
 
shirasaya do make a temptingly attractive sword, I must admit. However, they are simple scabbard mountings and intended for nothing more deliberate.

As Triton said, the lack of tsuba or any kind of solid gripping surface is a very large drawback, ESPECIALLY when committing to any type of thrust. The shirasaya is traditionally also made of honoki. This is the same nowadays, and most western traditional shirasaya are done in poplar or alder, both of which are similarly soft and not capable of withstanding the forces directly. Real sword handles are made of this stuff too, but when given same-gawa and ito, then fitted with fuchi and kashira, you end up with something a LOT more solid. Another factor is bonding agent for the tsuka halves. Traditionally (and nowadays) it's rice glue. With more western work, wood glue is more commonly used, but neither are going to be offering much safety.

Yes, nowadays a few sayashi are working with much tougher woods like maple (or some even tougher woods if epoxy bedded to prevent resins getting all over the tang), and some are doing epoxy or acraglas beddings and bonding the tsuka together with it. If the bamboo mekugi is fitted right and the nakago has a good tight solid fit, I guess I could see it being used without severely damaging the mountings. However, for sake of grip and safety, I couldn't really recommend it.

It's a very beautiful way to see a sword displayed, but I think maybe it should stay limited to display, not use.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top