22 points

European swords outclass katanas due to steel quality but how would a katana made with modern high quality steel hold up?

permalink
report
reply
19 points

Probably still worse. European swordmaking is also very good. But since the european swords tend to be thicker and harder they will probably still beat katanas, all other things considered equal

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Cool, so different smithing techniques wouldn’t make much of a difference. It comes down to weight and thickness etc.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

No, like the original poster says, the fancy Japanese folding technique is just a way to make a decent blade from shitty impure steel. Once that is done, you have better steel. That’s all it does.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points
*

I suppose it could also come down to how you look at the situation at hand. If dexterity and speed of swing are paramount, maybe having a lighter thinner blade would give the advantage. Euro swords definitely have a leg up in raw durability though, that’s for certain.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

That’s the thing, though, European swords cover the whole gamut from ridiculously light foils to nutso zweihanders.

I get that Japanese swords are the same and there are ridiculous nodachi and tiny little wakizashi but the difference is of size more than form.

There’s much more variation in European swords so it’s hard to say ‘the Japanese sword is better than the European one’ because there’s almost definitely a European sword specialized for whatever use case you’re comparing the swords for.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points
*

I have fought with many kinds of European blades, from longswords to zweihanders to sabres and foils. Some of these can be very light and thin. In fact, the average longsword weighs the same as the average katana: between 1.1 and 1.5 kg. But I’ll take the length, cross guard and double edge of a longsword over a katana every day.

Source: I practice HEMA

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I once saw a video talking about how the katana isn’t the right sword to compare with a longsword. Longsword was a battlefield weapon; katana was more of a decorative sidearm. Kind of like an officer’s sabre. Another weapon, called a “tachi” if I recall correctly, was more common in an earlier era when Samurai spent far more time on actual battlefields. It was a longer and heavier blade.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Yes but even the officer sabers are good weapons by themselves.

Also real longswords where really expensive most soldiers have also fought with spears because they are much easier to handle.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

True, but swords (including longswords) are largely a backup weapon or ceremonial too. A sword doesn’t do much against maille or plate armour.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

Well, how does a professional sport player fare when they are given high quality equipment versus the low grade stuff they became a pro with?

In a melee battle, it doesn’t really matter all that much the quality of a weapon if both are highly trained on how to use the weapon. A single mistake on either side could just as easily decide the battle one way or the other. I guess you could say whichever side won was just lucky the other side had an equipment malfunction, hesitated, or chose a bad tactic, etc.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Well yes obviously in a fight the better trained soldier is more likely to win. My question was more aimed at whether the the smithing techniques used for a katana would result in a noticeable difference if using the same materials.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points
*

You seem to be under the impression that having “higher quality steel” would somehow make a sword “better”, that’s not how it works. Japanese smiths usually had access to what’s called Tamahagane steel, it historically had a low carbon content which made it softer than desirable, so they’d fold the steel to rid it of impurities and obtain a higher carbon content for the core of the blade, leaving the edge side softer to be sharpened. Having access to steel with a higher carbon content would only accomplish in the smithing process being more straight forward, with the end result being essentially the same.

The reality is that Katanas (and other Japanese blades) were already as good as they’d get and you can’t really compare Japanese swords to European swords objectively because they were made with different purposes, in different contexts with different results in mind. For instance, a Katana is a single-edged sword with a slight curvature and a somewhat rounded tip, it was made for slashing and it did that really well, but a typical Arming Sword is a double-edged, straight blade with a very pointy end, it doesn’t really slash as well, but can cut in both sides and the point can be used to pierce armor gaps in an adversary.

So you see, “steel quality” has a minimal baring when it comes to the actual usefulness of a weapon, what really matters is how it’s used in combat given it’s characteristics.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

They bend backwards fast and are made for a completely different environment.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

Katana is cool, European swords are cool, all swords are cool.

And the best old weapon is a spear. (or advanced poking stick if you will)

permalink
report
reply

Anime

!anime@lemmy.ml

Create post

Anime is hand-drawn and computer animation originating from Japan.

Anime; the one thing that gets us closer to each other and brings us together.

All spoilers must be tagged!

Community stats

  • 235

    Monthly active users

  • 1.8K

    Posts

  • 5.8K

    Comments