What was the average weight of the katana?

[Aristobulus]

Hey I was wondering what the average weight of a katana? Thanks for the info.

[louroberto]

around 800 - 900 grams

[Charles Mahan]

I'm afraid that's rather like asking for the average weight of a longsword.

I'd say anywhere from 800 grams to 1500 grams was fairly common, varying by region, length of the blade, personal and stylistic preference, time period, day of the month, season of the year, etc...

[Scott Irey]

There really is no "average weight" for katana, they come in so many lengths, widths and thicknesses. A good "range" for historical katana is 900 to 1400 grams. In my experience historical katana tend to be heavier on average than the modern pieces (Japanese and non-Japanese made both).

Regards,

[Aristobulus]

Thanks What is a gram in pounds?

I had heard that each Ryu or tradition had its own specific specifications. I wanted a average to compare to the average medieval sword, which weighed an average of 2 to 3.5 pounds. depending on its lenght. They were wery light, strong , and well balanced. Which most people dont realize. They had swords in the 16th century that were 6 feet long and weighed on average 5.5 pounds.

Thanks alot for the info.

[jest]

Thanks What is a gram in pounds?

I had heard that each Ryu or tradition had its own specific specifications. I wanted a average to compare to the average medieval sword, which weighed an average of 2 to 3.5 pounds. depending on its lenght. They were wery light, strong , and well balanced. Which most people dont realize. They had swords in the 16th century that were 6 feet long and weighed on average 5.5 pounds.

Thanks alot for the info.

2.21 pounds is 1000 grams = 1 kg

[Ok4mi]

Thanks What is a gram in pounds?

I had heard that each Ryu or tradition had its own specific specifications. I wanted a average to compare to the average medieval sword, which weighed an average of 2 to 3.5 pounds. depending on its lenght. They were wery light, strong , and well balanced. Which most people dont realize. They had swords in the 16th century that were 6 feet long and weighed on average 5.5 pounds.

Thanks alot for the info.

Not trying to be offensive but...you're reseaching european medieval swords and you don't know metric weights!?

[Ken-Hawaii]

Calling most medieval swords "light" depends in large part on just how big YOU are. If you're Schwarzenneger's size, Ray, then pretty much any blade would appear to be light.

But as a long-time European fencer, I've fenced with about 20 different types & styles of blades, few of which I would term light (I'm 5'10" & around 190 this time of year). Compared to a modern fencing foil or epee, a rapier is about 2-2.5X as heavy, for example. And comparing, say, a Claymore to a katana, there is a considerable difference in mass & inertia, to say the least.

I'm rather more curious as to why you're making this comparison in the first place. There are surely more different types of blade use than comparing medieval to Japanese, but I'd be hard-pressed to think of of one off-hand.

Now comparing mead to sake might be an interesting comparison!

[Brian Pettett]

Not trying to be offensive but...you're reseaching european medieval swords and you don't know metric weights!?

They had the metric system in the 16th century? hehe..

[Ken-Hawaii]

Good question, Brian. According to my engineering texts, the metric system first arrived in 1670, but wasn't really adopted anywhere until about a century later, in 1790, by (of all people) the French.

So, no, they didn't have the metric system in the 16th century. But whatever they did use still can be equated to our wonderfully-outdated Babylonian-Egyptian-Roman system of measurement that Ray is researching.

[twayman]

Now comparing mead to sake might be an interesting comparison!

A good mead! Now... there is no comparison!

[Aristobulus]

a 32 to 42 inch sword in the middle ages would be on average 2.5 to3.5 pounds. Unless it was a ceremonial sword in which case the weight didnt matter as long as it could be carried.


thanks for the conversion

[Aristobulus]

Good question, Brian. According to my engineering texts, the metric system first arrived in 1670, but wasn't really adopted anywhere until about a century later, in 1790, by (of all people) the French.

So, no, they didn't have the metric system in the 16th century. But whatever they did use still can be equated to our wonderfully-outdated Babylonian-Egyptian-Roman system of measurement that Ray is researching.

the swords I was looking at were mostly from the 12th to the 16th century. It seems that any weapon used in one hand weighed no more than 3 pounds, maces , axes, flails, etc... swords used with one hand ran under 3 pounds.

you know until about 1360 the English made wine that was as good as the French wines (the French passed laws to keep English wine from being imported) the little ice age is responsible for our love of brews and spirits.

Hoo ray beer!!!!

[Chidokan]

ah, yet another twist on what's the perfect sword..lovely, we can argue for weeks....
My dream sword from santa will be ultra light weight so I can swing it so fast its a blur, so sharp it will cut through anything stuck in front of it, never rusts or goes blunt, and is so strong it can block a charging rhino. Oh, and it needs to endow me with some skill to use it....

[Aristobulus]

No one said there is a perfect sword. There is no such thing. Right tool for the right job. The argument would be based on opinions. Which is a neverending arguement. Thats not my purpose. I just wanted to know the general weight of a Katana. Yes to compare to others . But not to judge which one was better. That answer (if it is answerable) is subject to alot of variables.

It doesnt really matter if there is a perfect sword. There is possibly a perfect sword in your opinion. The katana in the hands of a master is a beautiful thing. I wish you well in your studies.