Saber Forum

Im wondering if anyone has a replica sword they like and what it is?Mine has to be the Templar Kinght sword I got with sword wall holder that has an image on it.Also im thinking of buying a Game Of Thrones replica sword,then excalibur(sword collecting is my other hobby,as is music cds also)

My favorite is Narsil.  But I have long gotten away from collecting "replicas" and no only buy battle ready blades.  After learning more about historical blades I am very critical of "movie and tv" blades.

I wonder how battle ready swords felt,mine one that I have posted on in this topic is made in China(AKA very cheaply made)

Combat capable swords feel very .... different .... from replicas.

It's hard to describe.  Well, first they tend to be sharp, and well made ones will cut paper just by dragging it along the edge.  They also tend to be heavier, since lighter materials can be used for replicas since they don't have to take the impact of hitting anything.  And generally speaking, they tend to favor functional over pretty.  And, they also tend to be much more expensive, and the very best are made to order, not mass manufactured.

Kinda like how Ultrasabers combat lightsabers feel different and more premium and awesomer then the "other guys" lightsaber wall lamps/movie replica lightsaber even ones Star Wars licensed?

Balance is the main difference in feel for a real sword and a "sword like object" (term HEMA people have coined for replicas)  Many times replica swords weigh just as much as a real sword but the balance is way off making it seem heavier or lighter.  Materials are another.  Many replicas are made from Stainless Steel which is not great for sword blades if you want it to perform like a sword.  Replicas also usually have rat tail tangs with threaded pommels.  Very dangerous for swinging.  The tang is the thin part of the blade that fits into the pommel.  A real sword will be peened usually, meaning the end of the tang sticks out of the pommel and is heated, hammered down and polished smooth.  This is the way it was done centuries ago.  Now, there are some swords that have screw on pommels utilizing a hex bolt.  These actually aren't that bad as modern materials and such allow for a better tightness.  The upswing of that is that if the quillions or hilt loosen you can tighten them.  Sharpness is something that all depends on the hardness of the metal.  Any replica (stainless steel) can be sharpened to a stated to cut, but the edge will dull much quicker and be harder to maintain than a real sword.  There are actually well made mass produced battle ready swords but they will always be more expensive than many replicas.  Hope that helped.  :P

Depends on the sword.  If you're sharpening a longsword (or other sword from around the same place and era) the most correct edge is fairly blunt--similar to a chisel edge--for improved durability against the materials you historically would have been cutting.  Compared to the edge you'll see on a lot of stainless-steel replicas, it's not particularly impressive; even 440A stainless can be similarly sharp if you use a more knife-like edge.  There are also plenty of "in-between" swords (or sword-like objects--I like that term), that are well-made enough to be made of a high-carbon steel, and to hold an edge well, but that aren't actually all that durable or well-made and that I wouldn't call a battle-ready sword.  (eg, go on eBay and buy a $200 katana.  Some of them are pretty, but I wouldn't trust any of them for durability.)

To me, a more clear differentiation is flexibility.  A properly-made sword will bend--a lot--and spring back to its original shape.  Most replicas will either bend and stay bent or just break.

There's even a visual difference.  A properly-made sword isn't nearly as shiny as a mass-produced stainless-steel replica.  Stainless steel has an almost chrome appearance to it... largely because stainless steel contains chromium.  A well-polished high-carbon steel can shine, but it looks different.  I'd almost call it a different color, but it's really not something I can describe.  This leads on to another key difference--rust.  Stainless steel swords don't rust--that's the whole point of stainless steel.  High-carbon steels do--hold a high-carbon blade in your fingers, sheathe it, and come back in a week and you'll have a nice rust copy of your fingerprint on the blade, and it'll take a hell of a lot of work to get it off.  (Ask me how I know. :( )  You learn very quickly to take care of your blades!

Also, replicas of fantasy swords look like fantasy swords.  They tend to have lots of fancy-looking extraneous junk.  A battle-ready sword tends to be relatively simple in design; simply put, it has a job to do and anything that doesn't work toward accomplishing that job shouldn't be there.


That's actually not a bad comparison.  My Force FX ANH Luke feels like somebody made it to look pretty.  (...because they did.)  My Ultrasabers feel like somebody made them to be used.  (...because they did.)  There's a similar difference in weight and balance on proper swords vs replicas.


In a nutshell, if you just want a sword to hang on your wall, you actually might be better with a stainless steel replica.  They usually look more fancy, they don't rust, and they take nothing more than a bit of dusting to keep looking factory-fresh.  Just don't ever try to use them for anything but display!

There are though "Fantasy" swords that are functional.  The Lord of the Rings films ( I have a love/hate for them) had weapons that were quite functional but still unique. But the only replicas are non battle ready. Incidently and out of curiosity, which version of Excalibur are you wanting?

Speaking of which, I own a replica of Hadhafang (Elrond's, then Arwen's sword)

(http://www.uniqueideas4gifts.co.uk/pics/lord-of-the-rings/arwen-sword3.jpg)

http://lotr.wikia.com/wiki/Hadhafang (http://lotr.wikia.com/wiki/Hadhafang)

Case in point.  Hadhafang has a viable design.  But, then there is the whole Arwen wielding a sword that irks me.