PDA

View Full Version : Interesting article on Swod Blade Niku



John Lindsey
7th August 2001, 04:27
http://japanesesword.homestead.com/files/niku.htm

I thought this article was very well done. Even mentions Howard Clark too :).

JamesG
7th August 2001, 15:27
My thanks to you, Mr. Lindsey, for posting this link and to Mr. Larman for writing it! I found it very informative and many of my questions on the subject were answered. I consider this a prime example of why I come to this fine site.

Regards,

James Grubbs

Erik Tracy
7th August 2001, 16:03
Keith does a very thorough job of explaining a concept which impinges on a very important aspect of swordsmanship - the effect of blade geometry on cutting efficiency.

But, I do have some questions that I've been pondering based on my own limited experience in tameshigiri with several swords I own.

The concept of niku as it applied to the good old tough and dirty days of battlefield conflict with opponents in armor: were samurai *really* concerned with completely and totally cutting THRU their adversary?

From my limited readings - the most preferred types of sword techniques in these situations is for the 'place and cut' variety. Wait for the opening - the vital spot in the unarmored areas- and reach out to slice/cut either pulling or pushing. The main emphasis to seriously wound but not necessarily to sever your opponent's appendages or vital areas.

As such, the benefits of niku are apparent: your katana will take a beating but keep on cutting.

My experience with bigger softer targets of beachmats and tatami omote is that a blade with pronounced niku will *not* cut thru these types of targets unless compensated for with an increase in force (putting the blade more at risk for bending due to poor hasuji).

Perhaps with the decline in armored opponents, the katana changed in conjunction with technique to allow for the larger slicing motions intended to completely cut/sever thru a 'target'? - because it could?

As for high and low shinogi. I tend to think the opposite. If the thinner cross section of the hira zukuri blade can slice like a hot knife thru butter(and I've seen it first hand on tatami and such), wouldn't the lower shinogi approximate this shape? And in the hands of a smith who can heat treat his steel skillfully - I would think he could produce a blade with a low shinogi that was yet very tough and stiff. To me, and I'm just guessing at the reasoning - the higher shinogi increases the angle of the edge presented to the target which would increase its difficulty to completely cut thru a large diameter target -given the same force of the cut compared to a lower angled edge (as with the lower shinogi variety).

Fascinating topic. I'd love to hear feedback from the more experienced practitioners who emphasize cutting in their arts.

Erik Tracy

James Williams
7th August 2001, 20:34
Excellent article by Keith. My personal experience is that on very large thick targets swords with niku cut through with much less chance of bending. I personally find no problem in cutting large diameter targets of various materials with swords with niku. Niku in my experience makes the cut easier as the target gets larger. I have personally observed on numerous occasions swords without niku bending on relatively small diameter targets. The lack of niku in modern Japanese swords is, in my opinion, a direct result of them being used for tameshigiri only with no consideration for combat function. This is fine in regards to modern function, it is not however Samurai. I have copied a part of a post made by Toby Threadgill sensei from the Bugei forum in regards to his teacher the late Takamura Yukioshi sensei's view on swords.

"For the record I believe James is alluding to a specific story he heard about my Sensei, Takamura Yukiyoshi concerning a new student who desired to start training in kenjutsu. He had previously studied a modern style focused largely on tameshirigiri. Dojo etiquette required that Takamura Sensei inspect any new swords brought in to the dojo for training. The new Japanese forged sword this student presented for inspection had a very thin flat ground blade made specifically for study in this modern sword style. I believe he told us the blade cost him around $6000 dollars in shirasaya. It was a very attractive blade, nicely furnished. We were all silenced as Takamura Sensei inspected it disapprovingly.
I'll paraphrase as accurately as possible:
"This sword is fine for cutting straw mats. It is like a shinai for kendo. It is not a real sword. It would not stand up under the abuse of battle. For kenjutsu study I require my students use a real sword. Please put that thing away and use a bokken until you can buy a real sword. Perhaps we can trade that for a better one at the next sword show."”

This in no way detracts from the fact that everyone is involved in what we call "martial arts" for different reasons. This also means that there are going to be many interpretations and ways of doing things. The tools used will change as the art or the interpretation of the art changes. My point being is that niku was used by the Samurai because of the demands placed on them by the environment in which they were used. For those who are interested in the function of the sword as defined by the Samurai will choose arts and weapons that reflect that era. An era that was rapidly changing by the mid 1600's, was formally abolished by the Emperor during the meiji restoration and which was virtually eradicated, except in some small pockets by the Second World War.

Perhaps my viewpoint is colored by the fact that I am still involved with the modern CQB environment and teach skills that increase the chance of survival and victory in that environment and I assess the ancient arts from a strictly performance point of view.

Erik Tracy
7th August 2001, 22:57
This brings up an interesting difference of observation between what are considered swords specifically for tameshigiri.

On the one hand I've seen swords that are basically hira zukuri, very very shallow sori, and wide (first hand in competition, and on several video tapes). I've heard these swords categorized as cutting competition swords - and must admit - they do slice thru standard sized targets of tatami, even Bugei wara, and of course, beach mats with relative ease. I don't recall seeing them bend, but I suppose it is quite possible and has happened.

Then, on the other hand, we have the bigger blades also termed specifically by some as tameshigiri-yo - characterized by being thicker (kasane), robust shinogi-zukuri, and unabashedly forward balanced.

So, what is the categorization here? I'm not sure. It seems as if cutting against accepted materials has been approached from both ends of the spectrum.

And then this leads into the discussion as to which is "better" for combat as used by the samurai. But doesn't this question have to be asked in the context of time?

I disagree with the idea and popular misconception that the *samuree* sword was of a fixed design and geometry thru time - precisely because the targets it was meant to oppose changed with time as well.
Why so much formality and attention to actual cutting tests against actual cadavers with recorded results? If there was one ideal geometry for all targets then this surely would have resulted in a fixation of design - but that isn't the case. And hence the keen interest by the samurai on how their swords would perform: different swords cut with different efficiency against different targets.

And I seem to recall from some reading that there are historical examples of katana that employed swords with little/no niku - precisely because it was thought to cut flesh and bone *more efficiently* than the standard 'clam shape' (i.e pronounced niku). But this was in the more peaceful Tokugawa era when conflicts with the sword were not so much on the battlefield against armored opponents as they were in duels or skirmishes.

What I am suggesting here is that the katana changed over time as the Japanese smiths and samurai employed different shapes for the opponents they faced. Not disputing the prevelance of shinogi-zukuri, but am meekly pointing out that niku was not necessarily fixed either, that more was necessarily better- even for the samurai.

James Williams
8th August 2001, 00:34
The stress on swords during combat entails more than just the target to be cut. There is the opponents weapon to contend with for one. A very popular cut in Iaido is cutting of the belly from the draw. If this particular cut is analyzed both the tessen, if the Samruai was carrying one, and the wakizashi would come in contact with the edge of the sword. Not only would the chances of seriously wounding your adversary be quite small but the edge of you sword is going to contact steel with force. Try this with various sword shapes, ie. degrees of niku, and see how they handle contact with hard steel objects. Try the same thing with swords both edge to edge contact and edge to shinogi and mune. Do this test at various angles of contact and check the results. It becomes apparent which shapes will stand up to common feudal era, read Samurai, usage. Old cutting texts talk about things like "fat does not stick to hamagiri ha allowing the blade to slide through the cut easier" this is a paraphrase I will try and find the original writing. It is also not just shinogi zukuri blades that had niku, shobu zukuri and hira zukuri blades also had niku. And of course blade shapes changed, the less combat engaged in the less was demanded of the blade which is the point. Most modern Japanese styles don't even do tameshigiri from a combative standpoint. If the art and the practice do not adhere to feudal era training and usage why would the swords?

Dan Harden
8th August 2001, 03:41
The study of edge geometry and its use by various indeginous cultures is fairly well known. Enough weapons and litterature have survived both past and present to support a reasoned discussion. The conversation would do well to explore and expand upon the topic- beyond the "Japanese" idea of what may or may not cut well- or even what the young bucks who have decided to get interested in pointy things may currently think.

Really, other than having some discussion of what may or may not have been present 'historically" on older Japanese blades (tough to do with all the polishing that has been done) There is little to be said as to whether or not Canard edges are superior for heavy use- they simply are.

The world has explored the science of "edges" for centuries; From the highly unusual Pirang Ihlang, Dyak Head hunter swords with convex and matching concave geometry to Jambiyas with diamond cross sections with niku and without, Viking swords, To tulwars (almost always canard edged) to the elegant wavy Kris, to Kukris, hollow withh secondary edges, Yatagans (canard) Even French Cutlesses with distal taper and canard edges... etc. The types are with out end. What is facinating is that most of the heavy use blades I have seen use canard edges.
There is a world class Museum called Higgins Amory is right down the street from me. The whole place is medievil armors and swords; mostly European- but they also have a wealth of Kris, kukris, Katana that I have seen by touring their vaults. There are many places like this world wide that have weapons with original geometry to be seen.
There is little mystery or investigative work to be done. The weapons are there, to be seen and examined all over the world. Canard edge are the most common on heavy use weapons. Even the ones with central fullers most often taper from the fuller to a canard edge. It would have been easier with the old water driven wheels to form a hollow edge; But they knew better.


There is a thread here (Post crash) wherein I brought up the discussion of Hira niku and blade geometry from back a year or so ago.
Earl do you remember that thread title? It was around the same time as the Stainless steel thread we were yaking about.

Anyway, I have to side with James here. So many cultures have opted for the appleseed or canard edge due to its inherent strength and cuttiing ability, as well as its ability to HOLD that edge that it is not even worth trying to convince anyone of it.
Many modern smiths have undergone their own experiments and surprise!! they came to the same conclusions as our predessors; canard edge geometry was better at cutting and supporting and edge. So much has been written in the various trade journals over the last two decades on the superiority of the canard edge, that one could say it is a forgone conclusion that the canard edge will hold its edge longer and be more servicable under heavy use.

As far as the Modern Japaneses opinion of Niku goes;
Of course there is a unique "Japaneseness" to everything "Japanese"- so any methods they now use may be warranted due to "special" Japanese bodies, or armor being different there then it is when fashioned with the physical properties of the rest of the universe. And maybe their grass mats are special as well.

For the rest of us knuckleheads in the real world- appleseed edges cut flesh and hard objects better then flat angles. A reduced angle from the shinogi to the mune keeps further resistance lower than a flat shinogi ji as well.
Flat angles cut grass well.
For impacting ANYTHING hard; a canard, appleseed (hira niku) geometry supports itself better and will keep on cutting till it gets dull. It won't cut rocks, jump out of the scabbard/ saya (what have you) nor will it slay your enemy for you....
And it will get dull eventually.

I will have to say that in twenty years of smithing I have found that the canard edge tends to not roll or curl as much and does most definitely hold its edge longer. I have cut a lot of meat and bone with my swords as well as routine cutting of live trees.
We recently held class where four people cut aprox. 30 live trees all multpile cuts, with an 11 year old Katana of mine done in a Naginata Shape with Hira Niku. It cut paper cleanly, sap and all, after class. I find that it does cut flesh and bone better than flat angles without question

A little American cutlery tidbit in closing
In a time where America was automating and producing what most white suburban males still call "knives" these days- through hardened secondary edge sharpened garbage- there were several American Knife smiths before WWII who went around showing their cutlery cut through steel, actually being hammered through it, then cut paper after. Even Buck knives used that little diddy to sell its knives.
You know what edge geometry they all used??
Canard!
The knowledge is old, old....

Dan

Tony Peters
8th August 2001, 06:21
During the Viet Nam war my father was a Navy Pilot. He looked long and hard for a survival knife before taking a Kukri and a Bolo to Buck for them to pattern a custom knife. They charged less the $50 for the knife it's 14" with a short (3") angled area at the end) width is about an 1.5" and yes it has a Canard edge. I have never found a machete or Hatchet that cut as well as it does. About 20 years ago a Buck rep knocked on the door to ask to see it. and he stared at it in awe realizing that they could never make it now(then), it would cost too much. That knife went through survival training with him and has chopped more kindling than I care to remember. I think it gets sharpened about once ever 2 years or so. It just doesn't need it (thankfully as I hate sharpening it...that is a tough job).

Erik Tracy
8th August 2001, 07:03
I will, of course, defer to those with more practical experience in making and use of the katana, so I would like to solicit opinions on the excerpts and diagrams from the book "Swords and Hilt Weapons" which touches on the issue of blade geometry.

Here is the cross section for a blade with hira niku - aka canard edge - aka appleseed.
http://www.users.cts.com/king/e/erikt/Pictures/hamaguri-ba.jpg

The cross section is described as "The clam-shape, or hamaguri-ba cross section on the right was introduced during the Kamakura period in order to split armour more effectively." Pg 157

Here is the cross section for a blade with flat ji:
http://www.users.cts.com/king/e/erikt/Pictures/oroshi-mune.jpg

The cross section is described as "[During the Muromachi period]...a new blade section known as oroshi-mune was developed. This echoed, in exaggerated form, the high shinogi of the old Yamamoto style and was specially designed for cutting thru flesh and bone, its sloping surface offering less friction during the cutting." pg 160

Would both these periods be considered feudal?

I understand the benefits of niku as it relates to combat effectiveness, durability, survivability, et al - but in terms of the confined discussion for pure cutting efficiency against soft targets (as stated in the article originally linked) - the quoted text supports the flat sided blade.

It kinda makes sense, but then again it is a textbook and could very well be bunk! Is it bunk or not?

Just want to get the facts straight.

Ted Tenold
8th August 2001, 09:45
Hi Erik,

I don't know if I would call it bunk but it does have some inaccuracies, probably because it covers such a wide spectrum of different swords from different countrys.

First off, the style of blade that the book *appears* to be talking about is Yamato, not Yamamoto. The Yamato traditon is one of five named traditions of sword manufacturing style. The others being Bizen, Yamashiro, Mino, and Soshu. The Yamato tradition is actually accredited as the earliest of the five traditons. Amakuni (the smith to whom the original Kogarasumaru is credited) was a Yamato smith and the earliest signed works are Yamato. Even in the Kamakura period Yamato blades are known for high shinogi. So it wasn't a new revelation in the Muromachi era.

They still have niku too(or should), which is the other thing the book seems misguided on, because the illistration shows the ji surface on the high shinogi outline without any niku. That is inaccurate. My next restoration polish is on a Yamato Tegai School sword, and one of the biggest concerns and time consuming tasks will be the preservation of the niku in it. It is high shinogi. It was far from an innovation even in it's time (this one is from around 1350ish). The shape was just the preffered shape of the tradition, but all of the traditons had to worry about hitting hard objects, so niku was key in every shape. Some blades regardless of style were very light on the niku, (which is refered to as "scant niku) especially as the Sengoku Jidai elapsed, and armor became knick knacks in the house. But it was always there in some amount.

"Oroshi mune" has me a bit concerned as well, because Oroshi usually is a term relating to the Iori style (predominately seen double surfaced) Mune profile angle itself without relationship to the other surfaces. Gentle Oroshi means the angle in the "roof" of the mune is obtuse and not strong. Steep Oroshi means that the angle of the roof of the mune is more acute like an A-Frame roof to shed snow. But that particular term in it's usage evades me for context of the thread. Could be one of the 10,000 or so sword terms I have yet to learn though. heh heh.

As for whether high vs. low cuts easier or harder, well, I guess I better get my butt qualified under someone so I can explore cutting with them for myself and make a qualified answer based on personal experience. However, from my perspective of shape I would have to put my dollars on the high shinogi to cut better on a soft target like mats, tatami, etc. High shinogi doesn't mean a broader cross section than low shinogi. The thickness at the shinogi line of the blade could be the same for high or low shinogi. It's the depletion of thickness at the mune cross section that make the shape what it is, not adding to the middle. So for me, it stands to reason that if the cutting thickness is the same on the ji surface between the two shapes, but the contact with the target "en route" is lessened as in high shinogi design, then friction will have less affect on the blades momentum.

I will be the first to say also though, everything depends on the situation and all the factors involved before saying what is the best so and so. The swordsman, the target, the weather, a fight with the wife the night before, whatever, can play a huge part in what happens when the metal meets the fiber and it becomes very subjective. One guy can pick up a sword and do not wrong. Another guy picks up the same sword and couldn't cut cooked rice with it. Shape and niku issues ain't fixin' any of that.

Hope to see you at the show. Take care.

Dan Harden
8th August 2001, 12:49
Erik

Herein is one of those nice discussions where people can postulate and sound knowledgable-sort of like "talking" about fighting arts VS being able to actually man handle someone who is intent on your undoing and has the abiltiy to carry it through- and you handling him with any measure of finess. We can create all sorts of exercises to try to demonstrate the drag VS force and cutting vectors with various edges. We can all qoute articles both recent and historical and make pretty pictures to look at- myself included.

Cutting for twenty years may have taken my previously "open" mind and made me develop opinions about what works better - or maybe too much cutting in the sun has made me lose too much of it......anyway, since its all in fun, here's my attempt at sorting it all out :) Remember though, that we are discussing not just the WAY a canard edge will cut but the ability to retain its edge AFTER cutting things.
I will repeat that.
Niku (canard , appleseed) edges HOLD and edge better after cutting anything. This is no small fact when considering weapons grade design


All that said, it is still fun to try to figure out the WHY of its cutting properties.

I still can't find the thread where Earl and I went over this a year ago. But lets use your submission

In your model; look at the dotted line demonstrating the niku. Lets call that line the "after contact material flow path"
At the moment of contact the angle is much steeper; pushing material outward That dotted line would be flaring out.
Now, what happens with the flow of differing materials is pertinent.

Hard materials:
These will create tremendous drag on a flat angle; in a sense dragging themselves along every sq. centimeter of metal causing friction. That drag force (which reduces your cutting efficiency) can be overcome by another force; that is the force applied by your cutting through the target. Your applied force (to a point) is greater then the resisting flow of material so the hard material does what it will do due to its inherent properties- whatever they may be; meaning it wll shear, crack, bend what have you. They will do so until they have either absorbed your energy, thus stopping your cut, or the material fails and parts or pushes out. I would include trees in this example. Wood seems to part better with niku with a reduced shinogi to mune profile then a flat angle with a flat shingi to mune. This may be due to the decreased drag.


Grass
From what I can see the material flow rate of grass offers different resistence and abbrasion as it is indivdual pieces acting independently as they move "away" from the edge. They seem to tend to stay with the steel' forming to it. A good example can be seen in any cutting video in slow motion. The "cut" doesn't open up much at all. I will have to bow to the many grass cutters and their experiences as I do not spend time cuttng it.



Soft materials
These will flow more. Many people have written in Blade smithing journals about the soft materials supposedly flowing around the canard edge with the presumption that the niku in its elongated and reduced secondary plane provides less drag. While I believe this is partly true I do not think its is the largest contributing factor. Years ago While I was test cutting some bad beef (bones and all) I happened to make some slow cuts and made an observation that changed the way I thought about this.
The material flow of soft material that I previously considered as flowing around the force of the blade did NOT behave that way at all. Instead, it exploded (an exagerated term to clarify my point) away from the advancing edge. Explaining all this to my metalurgist and engineering friend did not surprise him at all. I got a lengthy dissertation on the properties of material flow which explained why the material would respond to such explosive sudden impact by parting away and not contacting the blade momentarily. There is no way I will convey that information well but here goes
Flesh- in a way-is under tension and pressure. When cut with force it parts with that pressure releasing energy that parts it from the blade. It flows easier then a harder object therefore it expands away from force easier. This is why he explained that it didn't just "slump and suck in" and flow along the edge.
That said, the increased angle of the niku parted the material with more force then a flat angle would have.

************************

Summary
What is important here is not simply the cut. The niku offers a three fold advantage;
first
it pushes more material in a short section. This causes greater soft tissue damage, decreases the chances for wedging in and enables a wider range of succesful cutting of differing materials IE best "all around" trade off (what have you) cutting profile

Second
In larger materials sections it offers less drag
It doesn't allow the material to drag along that dotted line path I mentioned in the earlier drawing; as the niku offers the material a smaller profile to contact in a straight path of resistance. The flat angle becomes ALL resistance.


Third
It has more material to support its edge against edge curl or roll thus preserving the edge from damage-and aside from any damage it will simply sustain that edge longer.



Now, all that said, I have listened to all of this very same information being refuted by engineers on the Iai list and here; with them going to great lengths to create models and explain with calculations why certain mechanical properties and energy make the Japanese sword the best cutting instrument in the world (more crap) and why flat angles are best.
Yet here you have experienced cutters saying they not only cut better, the edge lasts longer.

It should be an exact science- try asking opposing engineers (I have to do it all the time) they will be glad to tell you why they are right. I don't much care what the Japanese or pretty suburban boys who slide around on the floor in skirts think about it either.
I am content to be alone; cutting, redesigning and cutting some more to see what works.


Tony

Can't beat those Kukris hey?. They and custom machetes remain as my favorite choppers and weapons. My machetes will outcut my Katana in single hand use on trees. I have forged machetes and kukris for years. I recently got to make a pattern of a 100 year old backcountry hand forged Kukri that was given to a student as a gift in Nepal. Several interesting design features I had not seen in any commercial offerings. I forged one up- including Hamon and all (I just can't resist) it cuts and lays in-the-hand better then my other offerings, so I am switching to it for all future work. I learned some things from that knife.

Did Buck offer you any Money for that blade?

Dan

I edited in more content and tried to improve the format and style (yeah thats gonna happen)

James Williams
8th August 2001, 14:06
Excellent posts Gentlemen and a fun thread. Dan, you have provided some really good information here. Not something that most talk about however really to the point of the issue. If I may continue along the line of Dan's post just a bit. As Dan pointed out edge shape directly affects the amount of tissue deformity. When you are the one doing the cutting you want maximum tissue deformity to facilitate the most rapid fluid loss. The cuts from flat and especially hollow ground blades tend to self cauterize in the moment (ie. the tissue closes up). This slows down the bleeding potentially prolonging the engagement. The longer the engagement the greater the chance that he will cut you. Flat and hollow ground blades also have a great propensity for sticking in objects like bone by wedging in. This can be a problem when faced with someone who is not yet dead and who would like to see you in that state. I realize that these considerations are not a an issue with most styles of practice, however when we are talking Samurai they become the crux of the issue.

Howard Clark
8th August 2001, 14:12
sounds sort of like someone else we know :)

Dan Harden
8th August 2001, 15:05
Hey ya Guys





Isn't it odd that people who know how to make em AND use em, arrive at the same or similar conclusions independently of one another

I still have this feeling in my gut that if the many of the old founders came back from the dead they would look at their very own ryu's and say what the hell is that?? Who taught you that? That will get you killed :)

Howard
Hugh Bartrug, Jimmie Fikes and Jimmie Shmidts first introduced me to canard edges and geometry in 1980 or so. Later I shared notes and learned some things from Al Pendray and Don fogg. I owe the finding of my 50lb chambers hammer to Don. After two years of my looking he found a guy getting rid of one. He told me to be prepared to spend up to two grand.
I got it, and an anvil, spare dies, and so many tools I lost count for $200 from a retiring smith with cancer. He woudn't take any more -he was thrilled that a smtih was getting it. Don said #$$%@# what a deal.

Dan

Erik Tracy
8th August 2001, 16:17
I'll agree - excellent discussion all around and I'm appreciative of the good information. Now I just have to do much more experimentation on my own...

But I do have one more question that hasn't been fully addressed and that is the current popular use of the thin flat type of blade used for competition cutting. I saw one recently that was extremely efficient and easy to use against a typically sized target of traditional cutting material (not grass).

And the cross section was pretty darn near hira zukuri. So, it makes me wonder in relation to the comments here of parting/splitting open the target for less drag (as argued here). The sword shape I saw would have presented a flat edge against which the wara would have traveled over completely as the edge passed thru the target.

So given the argument of canard as producing less drag (also meaning easier to cut and more efficient), what explains the popularity (and seeming performance) of these types of blades?

Personally, I do not use such a blade as my instructor would not approve of one for the various reasons presented here, opting for the traditional shaped - as used by the samurai.

But the notion does perplex me - being an engineer by profession - and so try to figure out in my mind (not having access to such swords for direct testing) how this all fits together in the real world.

Thanks again for the good discussion.

Tony Peters
8th August 2001, 19:25
Dan, I'm not sure about them (Buck) offering money for it. I was but 16 at the time. I know that my dad wouldn't part with it, still won't, though as the knife sharpener in the family (it was passed to me from my dad's dad) I get to sharpen it every two years or so. I know that I have tried on more than one ocasion to abscond with that knife and have had it removed from my posession. I probably ought to take a picture and have someone make a copy.
On the Subject of edges as relates to the Canard shape. I've noticed that Fibrous materials Wood and Flesh in particular ride the sides of the blade more than the edge. Try chopping green wood sometime with a cheap machete and then a roofers hatchet. I once had to cut 400 lbs of beef in one day and I went though a lot of my knives before settling on a small Sushi style knife to do most of my cutting, triming and everything with with. It had a flat side and a round side very differant than any other knife I've found. I cut for 6 hours with that knife though (I also didn't eat meat for a year afterwards).

Erik Tracy
8th August 2001, 23:29
Not to poke anyone in the eye, but since we are attempting to be precise and specific - the nature of trying to discuss concepts in the cold of cyberspace....shouldn't the term for the appleseed shape be *cannell* not *canard*??

Dan Harden
9th August 2001, 05:04
I don't mind a poke or two Eric. I can only tell you what I was brought up with-which is canard. Perhaps in this case it is more indicative of the shape hence the name. F16 x's have canards

Regarding your earlier comments:
Don't confuse a canard edge (niku) with a particular blade/ body shape. A thin machete can be made with an appleseed edge and retain its thin section. In fact the South American ones I was given came from the maker just that way; distal tapered, thin section, canard edge.
Discussing its shape in shinogi Zukuri or hira zukuri -as they say in P.A. "makes no beans" It works in everything.

Whether thin section or thick both could have niku....see?
As far as a thin blade being good at cutting mat test targets; what does that mean to you?
they won?
What else does it really mean? What value does it have?

Sometimes people confuse the tool that test cutting is. Its never to impress the peanut gallery and win a ribbon. The idea was for design testing NOT JUST skill testing. Giving different blades to ONE tester to test was for a reason; did the damn things work. If not why? Not so you could sit and watch some guy do well. You picked a good man with a predetermined record of cutting excellence to see if the blade was good not the jamoke using it.
The rest of its value falls under the title of personal training to make the practioner better-why we need to do so in front of crowds is beyond me.

The best point of the exercise (to me) is to demonstrate what consistent skill can do with varying targets and blade types. With the very serious understanding that these things are weapons.
I could care less who the shmo is that is this seasons best man. Whoopee! I want to see what my blades will do Then I want to see what I can do with it.


If I wanted to best "men in skirts" cutting up woven grass with bladed weapons I sure as hell wouldn't use a Katana. I'd use a yatagan with a distal tapered thin cross section made out of A2 (very agressive edge and yes I can cut in straight line thank you)
Anyone who thinks that Katana are the best weapon in the world needs to get out more.
But the point Eric is that I would "design it" to win that grass cutting match. Though it would NOT be representative of a sword for wars full potential.
Take my example for a thin and good grass cutter above; and cut something substantial or hard with it.......duck it may fail!
and then try to deflect and use it in service Yikes! A2 would probably snap or bend. Depending on what heat treat you use for the body. I would NEVER use the same cross section and steel for a war sword.

You would design a thicker cross section for a period piece to consider it a serviceable sword that would cut many different things well. If you choose shinogi zukuri I would opt for hira niku, with a high shinogi tapered back to the mune.

This is an important point;
Everything can be designed to do ONE thing well. But a weapon had to service you in many environs with many targets and deflection needs-hence a beefier blade that would theoretically save your ass. But aw shucks! Wouldn’t do so well cutting grass with the boys.

Good test cutting should take that in to account and demonstrate that. If we really wanted better tameshigiri events I would approach them differently.
Think the way you should in a martial art; consider the level of attacks you are training against- Are you just playing and kidding yourself? or are you as close to dire straits as is safely possible?

In that same vain Having serious men challenge their smiths and themselves by cutting trees, armor, moving targets as well as multiple placed targets then having the blades hit from the sides and gradually bent to a predetermined angle would be more telling of the men and the various weapons AND a hell of allot more fun don't cha think?
Gees! American smiths have been doing this sort of nonsense with their own blades at Ashoken knife get togethers for twenty years or more.

So, as for thin blades winning... heh heh.
If you used my criteria above for Tameshigiri;
Depending on what you let them cut first the thin stuff or the thick stuff; The thinner blades would do great then probably fail outright and not survive the rest of the required tests.
The thicker blades wouldn't cut the grass as well but they would make mince meat out of the rest of the test.....and then theoretically still be able to "Save your ass."
They call this stuff re-enactment. What the hell are we supposedly re-enacting is the real question.

Think of all of this. Then ask yourself who..out there...among commercial companies is putting their products to that type of test.
Who is even asking, no DEMANDING; that type of performance from their products?
Who else even has the skill at using them to even make the demands of their product through design and trial and error before the clients touch them?

Only one my friend......they stand alone among commercial companies

Bugei

Dan

socho
9th August 2001, 14:20
Dan, Dan, Dan
"... who..out there...among commercial companies is putting their products to that type of test. Who is even asking, no DEMANDING; that type of performance from their products?
Who else even has the skill at using them to even make the demands of their product through design and trial and error before the clients touch them? Only one .....they stand alone among commercial companies - Bugei "

Is this a paid commercial announcement? Is this 'the rest of the story"? Kidding, kidding (sheesh). I am sure it is not and you are sincere in your respect for the martial artists and businessmen of Bugei. Especially since they sell blades from a variety of sources, including US smiths. I have met a couple of very good folks from there and would NOT want to get in front of Tony when he was cutting.

Personally, I like the blades from Nosyuiaido (swordstore.com). Scott and Rick are accomplished martial artists and do very good testing (including test cutting) and quality control. Destructive testing? Couldn't say. They have Japanese shinken(on hand and custom orders) and blades made in China (not Chen), all with nice, tight Japanese fittings and all meant to be used. As I said before on another thread, it all depends on what you want. In any case, I would strongly suggest that anyone contemplating a cutting blade purchase it through someone who knows how to use them. That would include Bugei, Nosyuiaido, and Bob Elder of ecmas.com . There may be a couple of others.

Dan, I do agree with some of your comments on the value and purpose of test cutting. It should not be a sideshow or something cool to do on a hunting trip.

Later,

Dave D.:toast:

Dan Harden
11th August 2001, 14:53
Is this a paid commercial announcement? Is this 'the rest of the story"? Kidding, kidding (sheesh). I am sure it is not and you are sincere in your respect for the martial artists and businessmen of Bugei. Especially since they sell blades from a variety of sources, including US smiths.

************************

Hi Dave
It's just one man's opinion. You read and talk to the sellers about their definition of what is......is, regarding their own products testing and design parameters and then decide for yourself. You like Nosy. As a smith and artist with decades of experience and severe testing in both venues; I would back Bugei.
In the end most people have to trust the companies research in buying the product;
"ya pays ya nickle and ya takes ya chances."
How much of a chance you take is NOT the same for all peoples if you are sharp you do your own research before buying .

Lets face it- they all sell good blades. We are not debating that at all. We are simply discussing the intentional over the top design performance.
As far as comparing the quality of blades for a superior performer: to properly do this you need to test the product to severe limits commensurate with its in-service use, and then test the material limits to the point of destruction. If you don't or didn't- I don't want to buy from ya.

You mentioned the wrap as being a factor-that may be- but the slight edge in that area is not enough to win everyone over. At the end of a day of testing that smiths would do for performance-most everyone there "will be a watchin that thar steel" a hell of allot more then a handle. Were I a betting man- I could make some money on which blades would win out. Want to know why?

The answer to that question is the reason their product is so good; research and testing.
The crux of my previous post was not so much about the blades offered- but more about the combined knowledge, type of art, and research, done by the owners-that leads to the type of performance they as owners would (or should I say COULD) ask of their blades.

I won't repeat the previous posts about the quality of people’s experience- the point is this.
Say I wanted to market a product like this; whom would I have test it for in-service use?
I would hire me of course (kidding) but seriously who should test it?

I would give it to someone with years in an art that has severe limits; which is why I mentioned the fact that they used men with proven ability in the old days to independently test BLADES not the jamoke doing the cutting.
Next I would search out that field of men to find someone who knows and understands metallurgy (good luck).
Then I would look for someone who at least on a design and materials spec level is completely unmoved by national origins and independently considers quality as a first priority- then (and only then) going after a cost-effective product.
Combine all of them with a dogged determination for a performance curve and chances are you will get a superior product.

All that said; I don't think you will find anyone out there who has that combination of factors and done the years of research James has. He has undertaken a detailed study of both metallurgy and blade geometry from qualified people. He has taken that knowledge to China and used it to educate and ask for design limits from Paul Chen.
Who else tests their blades to their limits; blade to blade in vice impact studies, then in vices again for bending and deflection studies, then in severe cutting tests that would exceed anything a customre might ask of the product- and then demands more?

And who else "as owner" has educated themselves to the point that they can now talk intelligently about why the blade does thus and such and can give you a detailed discourse on how to improve it? Then goes to the source and asks for "thus and such" on a material spec end.
I am not trying to be contentious in any way- but the man (lets not forget Jesse either) and the company deserve the rewards of the sweat, and the study time, as well as the costs of research they put in for years.
Their reward is their own confidence in a product that could be designed by them and then tested by them and is not dependent on the knowledge and experience of others, but on their own.
Other products are fine too but they were not arrived at in the same manner.

Naturally I would take a smith with years in a decidedly martial art as a top contender for excellent product design over a retailers advice. Bugei comes as close to that as can be had in a retailer.

Dan