| Home | RSS Feeds |
| Funny Pictures | Funny Videos |
| Funny GIFs | YouTube Videos |
| Text/Links | Channels |
| User Rankings |
Katana Vs Sword
There are no tags
| |
#104
-
ShadeElement (09/17/2012) [-] You really can't can't CAN'T do a general comparison between a Japanese "Katana" and a European Broadsword.
WHY?
Two reasons:
1.) Different tools for different jobs. Comparing a Katana to a Broadsword is like comparing a Sports Car to a 4x4. Put the two next to each other on a race track, and the Sports Car will appear far superior. However try taking both off road and see which seems better. You're trying to compare apples to oranges.
2. When it comes to quality and performance of a blade, just like with cars, it all depended on who made it. Sword smiths (Both Euro and Japanese) were artisans. Some were masters of their art, others not so much. Some specialized in **** producing, others crafted one blade at a time, sometimes taking years to fulfill a commission. Also, crafting a sword was a bit like making wine. It all depends on the quality of the materials available at the time. Smiths back then weren't metallurgists, Chemists, or Engineers. They knew what worked, but they didn't know WHY or HOW it worked. So there were lots of random factors beyond their control. So even with the same smith, the quality of their blades could vary dramatically from sword to sword.
So basically the age old debate of European vs Japanese swords is pointless. Even if you were to compare specific blades, (for example The River Witham Sword vs. Kusanagi-no-Tsurugi) you would struggle to find a fair comparison between the two, as both were developed in entirely different environments for entirely different uses.
WHY?
Two reasons:
1.) Different tools for different jobs. Comparing a Katana to a Broadsword is like comparing a Sports Car to a 4x4. Put the two next to each other on a race track, and the Sports Car will appear far superior. However try taking both off road and see which seems better. You're trying to compare apples to oranges.
2. When it comes to quality and performance of a blade, just like with cars, it all depended on who made it. Sword smiths (Both Euro and Japanese) were artisans. Some were masters of their art, others not so much. Some specialized in **** producing, others crafted one blade at a time, sometimes taking years to fulfill a commission. Also, crafting a sword was a bit like making wine. It all depends on the quality of the materials available at the time. Smiths back then weren't metallurgists, Chemists, or Engineers. They knew what worked, but they didn't know WHY or HOW it worked. So there were lots of random factors beyond their control. So even with the same smith, the quality of their blades could vary dramatically from sword to sword.
So basically the age old debate of European vs Japanese swords is pointless. Even if you were to compare specific blades, (for example The River Witham Sword vs. Kusanagi-no-Tsurugi) you would struggle to find a fair comparison between the two, as both were developed in entirely different environments for entirely different uses.
#119 to #104
-
BroadSword (09/17/2012) [-] This whole discussion of weaponry has given me soooo many notifications.
#1
-
heartlesschaos (09/16/2012) [-] Katana are not meant to butcher, they are meant to be used to slash through flesh and meat. An experienced user (or anyone who has read a little about them) knows that the primary part of the blade meant for use is around the tip :/ I really wish they wouldn't have wasted it like that and just shipped it to someone who wanted it...Still thumbed you up because you have nothing to do with their stupidity and it's a pretty obvious result.
#3 to #1
-
madred (09/16/2012) [-]
I am ashamed... i just saw that it is even from a german tv show. Trying to be informative but actually never reaching the niveua of a sesame street for adults...
anyways: There is no way the katana could have "won", cause the sword is fixed to a table or something solid. It doesnt take much to know that it is only a little bit of physics.
anyways: There is no way the katana could have "won", cause the sword is fixed to a table or something solid. It doesnt take much to know that it is only a little bit of physics.
#4 to #3
-
heartlesschaos (09/16/2012) [-] I wonder if anyone noticed that even though it was fixed on the table and the blade was used incorrectly, The sword still received a clean cut. :/
#387 to #13
-
saladtongsofdeath (09/17/2012) [-] **saladtongsofdeath rolled a random image posted in comment #49 at I think art students have given up ** "lets use a jian as the main character's primary wepon" said no writer ever
#11 to #5
-
truemox (09/17/2012) [-] The katana is a brutal weapon. It's perfectly engineerd, but it's not meant for anything other than power strokes to behead/cleave an opponent.
If you can find a real (not that wushu **** ) chinese jian, you'd have a more graceful sword. The jians are meant to be used with long, circular strokes and quick, fatal stabbing attacks.
If a katana is a tiger, the jian is a serpent.
If you can find a real (not that wushu **** ) chinese jian, you'd have a more graceful sword. The jians are meant to be used with long, circular strokes and quick, fatal stabbing attacks.
If a katana is a tiger, the jian is a serpent.
#49
-
ezmack (09/17/2012) [-] Everyone should know katana's aren't made to go full force against another blade right?
Anyway, it's still pretty cool in slow motion!
Anyway, it's still pretty cool in slow motion!
#30
-
2scared2login (09/17/2012) [-]
No way, katanas don't bend, they break. That sword must have been ****** .
#406
-
whatamidoingwithme ONLINE (09/17/2012) [-]
Katana is an overrated weapon. If you can't hit the enemy with it, eg; they parry, block or wear heavy plate, you are going to break it.
I really hate when they show it as the superior of the superior of the superior swords. When a scimitar or kilij is just better off in a combat, or a rapier in a duel.
I blame the anime for it. Let the thumb downs ban me.
I really hate when they show it as the superior of the superior of the superior swords. When a scimitar or kilij is just better off in a combat, or a rapier in a duel.
I blame the anime for it. Let the thumb downs ban me.
#429 to #423
-
2scared2login (09/17/2012) [-]
Eh i'd go for a rapier. Quick and light attacks. Fairly easy for the opponant to block whatever you do but if you have a sheild you can easily get around defence. ^-^ But if it was just a duel and you only had a single weapon...yeah... I would say a shortsword would be better than one that could not block well. Dodging only works for so long. ^^
#432 to #429
-
wheresthefudge (09/17/2012) [-] I believe you misunderstand, anon.
The smallsword was a dueling weapon which evolved from the italian rapier. In comparison, it lost a lot of the extra weight and flamboyance that was inherent in rapier design. Several armies still use the smallsword as a decorative or dress weapon.
The weapon you're thinking of is a shortsword which would have been made of bronze or iron and was out of use by the time that dueling was common. They're sometimes referred to as "hand-and-a-half" swords due to their relatively small size (which was due to the softness of the metals and forging techniques).
The smallsword was a dueling weapon which evolved from the italian rapier. In comparison, it lost a lot of the extra weight and flamboyance that was inherent in rapier design. Several armies still use the smallsword as a decorative or dress weapon.
The weapon you're thinking of is a shortsword which would have been made of bronze or iron and was out of use by the time that dueling was common. They're sometimes referred to as "hand-and-a-half" swords due to their relatively small size (which was due to the softness of the metals and forging techniques).
#476 to #406
-
beerterror (09/17/2012) [-] Sure I'd go for a lightsaber. But katana is made to be used in a specific way and against specific targets.
After all, standard European longsword, 1,5 handed, seem to be the most diverse of swords. But swords aren't the best slashing melee weapons, and such are not the best melee weapons. I'd prefer medium size axes, arabic scimitars, or Chinese-designed swords with many fancy ****** , that katana or European swords never had.
After all, standard European longsword, 1,5 handed, seem to be the most diverse of swords. But swords aren't the best slashing melee weapons, and such are not the best melee weapons. I'd prefer medium size axes, arabic scimitars, or Chinese-designed swords with many fancy ****** , that katana or European swords never had.
#542 to #434
-
whatamidoingwithme ONLINE (09/18/2012) [-]
Heavily curved weapons such as scimitar are better in combat because it is hard to block or parry them, even if you do you still are pretty much overwhelmed. Kilij is slightly curved and most work with counterweight principle. They deal a deadly blow.
When it is in combat, it is not a duel really. It was medieval ages, people just hacked, pierced and slashed whatever it was on their way.
When it is in combat, it is not a duel really. It was medieval ages, people just hacked, pierced and slashed whatever it was on their way.
#133
-
TommyV (09/17/2012) [-] Yeah, that's not what katanas are built for. They're not there to meet a sword head-on.
In Feudal Japan, there was little availability for the elements required to make steel.
They solved their metal shortage problem by making the katana. An extremely sharp and lightweight blade with enough durability to DEFLECT heavier cleavers.
All they had to do was train the user of the blade the proper 'swishing' technique to deflect an enemy sword in battle. That's why samurai fights look so fluid, because they are trained never to strike the enemy directly, but rather swipe in at an angle.
In Feudal Japan, there was little availability for the elements required to make steel.
They solved their metal shortage problem by making the katana. An extremely sharp and lightweight blade with enough durability to DEFLECT heavier cleavers.
All they had to do was train the user of the blade the proper 'swishing' technique to deflect an enemy sword in battle. That's why samurai fights look so fluid, because they are trained never to strike the enemy directly, but rather swipe in at an angle.
#572 to #133
-
2scared2login (11/11/2013) [-]
Katana isn`t light weight.1,5 kg for sword isn`t heavy but neither light. Two handed swords from XIV-XV century,1,8 m in lenght weight from 3 to 3,5 kg, 4 kg at most. Heavier were considered parade weapons, oddieties, or ussles. European longsword way longer than average katana, weight up to 2 kg. And later there were swords and sabres, longer or the same size, as katana, and much lighter. Check out Polish Winged Hussars Sabre- also for slashing, and cutting, 1025 mm in lenght, but weight about 1-1,2 kg. And very durable. So good that Turks, that invented sabres, thought that this type of weapons were invented in Poland. Also european sword were made, so you could recive hit on flat- flexibility, and they weren`t too sharp, so knight could use crossguard for fighting, holding sword by blade- katanas were not- very sharp sword with very hard edge, and that is it. Too sharp, and too hard in fact. You can destroy such blade far more easily, when it hit something hard
#409
-
rosstheboss (09/17/2012) [-] Damn, you wouldnt think so many people knew so much about swords and katanas until now. Coincidence? I think not.
#419 to #409
-
mcfluffykins (09/17/2012) [-] Everyone on the internet is an expert at everything. You didn't know that? You must not be an expert on knowing that everyone on the internet is an expert then. Oh well. Have a picture of people on the internet's two favorite things, on me.
#424 to #419
-
rosstheboss (09/17/2012) [-] Yo dawg I heard you like experts that are experts on being an expert on things.
#384
-
sirformidio (09/17/2012) [-] To all the people whining the Katana lost, it's common ******* sense.
When the Katana was built, armor was not an issue. Armies would literally fight in wood, rope, and bamboo armor for minimal protection from ARROWS. Melee fighting was skill based, one reason why armor would've slowed down the combat on one side. But then you look at the Longsword and realize it was designed to puncture and slice through plate and scale armors, things Japan and China had never heard of at the time. Katana's were good for slicing through flesh in 1 on 1 combat, but would fail if brought up against any form of protection from Europe.
They were both great swords for their era, and great swords for their area, but in the end, the Longsword was designed to do more than slice through flesh.
When the Katana was built, armor was not an issue. Armies would literally fight in wood, rope, and bamboo armor for minimal protection from ARROWS. Melee fighting was skill based, one reason why armor would've slowed down the combat on one side. But then you look at the Longsword and realize it was designed to puncture and slice through plate and scale armors, things Japan and China had never heard of at the time. Katana's were good for slicing through flesh in 1 on 1 combat, but would fail if brought up against any form of protection from Europe.
They were both great swords for their era, and great swords for their area, but in the end, the Longsword was designed to do more than slice through flesh.
#396 to #395
-
sirformidio (09/17/2012) [-] I've wielded them. You can tell from the balance and weight of the blades what they're made to do.
Like the Scottish claymore or Zweihander. It was made to cut through multiple people with no extra effort. You can tell from the awkward balancing, but you can still swing it fine.
Like the Scottish claymore or Zweihander. It was made to cut through multiple people with no extra effort. You can tell from the awkward balancing, but you can still swing it fine.
#277 to #38
-
xnotcreative (09/17/2012) [-]
Well... you don't really need to be a weapons specialist to know about this kinda stuff. It's just kinda common sense.
I don't know much about history in general, but I do know that in the feudal era in Japan, they didn't really wear that heavy of an armour. They wore stuff to keep them cool in the hot temperature, as to where in the medieval era in Europe, they would wear heavy *** armour.
I'm pretty sure the weapon made to kill people in iron armour would be much more durable, compared to the weapon that was just made to cut down people quickly.
I don't know much about history in general, but I do know that in the feudal era in Japan, they didn't really wear that heavy of an armour. They wore stuff to keep them cool in the hot temperature, as to where in the medieval era in Europe, they would wear heavy *** armour.
I'm pretty sure the weapon made to kill people in iron armour would be much more durable, compared to the weapon that was just made to cut down people quickly.
#323
-
Deathfyre (09/17/2012) [-]
I'm pretty sure no sword ever made is supposed to hit another edge to edge like that anyway. :S
#333
-
itsjellis (09/17/2012) [-]
Okay, how about we take both the sword and Katana and to truly test their strengths shove them so far up OP's *** that his eyes bleed. the first one to rip through the top of his skull wins:D.
#55
-
MakiChan (09/17/2012) [-] each sword model is different depending on its use and whos going to use it etc. theres alot of thought and work put in makeing a sword and thus it doesnt mean that the european one is better then the eastern one, just that they are both ment to do differnt things etc. most western swords are ment for full force contact esp with other swords. the katana can only take so much contact with other swords but its use isnt made for that. they are also made quite differently.
either way i love them
either way i love them
