Talk:Sword-like object

Corporal Punishment

Am I the only one who doesn't think that corporal punishment belongs here? Leave that in the boken article. I'm removing it unless someone can give me a good reason not to. Jaerom Darkwind (Talk) 10:23, 04 November 2005 (MST)

I agree that it does not belong here. I tried removing in once, but it was replaced. --Knife Knut 14:54, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

SLO Origin

The phrase "sword-like object" was coined specifically in the sword community to describe nonfunctional swords, not highly specialized forms of swords, practice swords, or implements of punishment.

It was coined by the Historical Armed Combat Association, who also used it for other purposes. They did indeed use it to refer to their practice weapons.

Steel Grade?

What Stainless Steel Grade would not have a sword being considered an SLO versus whatever blade type it is (katana, rapier, broadsword, etc..)?

I've never had any problems with swords made of 440 or even 420 stainless steel, so long as they're near full tang or full tang, and not that crappy screw tang. Carbon steel is better for longer swords however in my opinion. Lord Sephiroth 04:13, 30 June 2006 (UTC)~[reply]

Please elaborate. Do you use this blade for cutting? --Knife Knut 14:41, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Of course. One of the blades I speak of is a 420 Stainless steel single edged short sword from the Bud K catalog which is part of a set called the Twin Vipers, as it comes with an even shorter knife. It is about 26 1/4 in overall with a 16 3/4 in blade. Both blades are constructed as a single solid piece with two pieces of plastic on 7 unsharpened inches of the blade, wrapped originally in nylon, but I removed the nylon and replaced it with baseball bat tape. I've used this blade to slice through living bamboo stalks. I've also had slow-motion duels with it with my friend who used a pair of sai, and the blade left cut marks in the sai. The only time it's ever been even slightly damaged was when I hit a galvanized nail on a wooden treehouse ladder that I was trying to break down (I know...a sword isn't really appropriate, but I didn't have an axe at the time.). The blade was merely nicked. I still find this blade very strong, it's never failed me when I needed it. The only problem I ever had with it besides the grip was the fact that it's dreadfully hard to sharpen on a whetstone, so I used one of those "10 second sharpeners" and I got it sharp enough for my uses. I've had similar experiences with other stainless steel blades of similar quality, but I haven't used too many of them as extensively as this blade. Lord Sephiroth 02:31, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stainless steel is deforms to easily and is to brittle for optimal use in actual applications. As a Iaido student I can tell you from personal experience that there is a great difference between even a well constructed Iaito and a actual hand forged shinken in nearly every aspect including balance and weight.Freepsbane 01:23, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A 16 3/4 inch blade is not long enough for most people to consider such an object a sword or even a short sword, rather, most people would call that a small knife. Stainless holds up just well enough at such lengths, but I doubt, Lord Sephiroth, that you would have the same experiences if you tried fighting with a full 3 to 4 foot sword made out of stainless steel, even if it did have one-piece blade and tang. Just the blade on even a small viking sword is longer than the 26 inches you list for your twin vipers.72.43.149.190 14:58, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. I must add however, I do agree that carbon is better for anything longer than those vipers. Though when it comes to hand forged carbon, are you talking about just any hand-forged you can buy, or do you mean traditional hand forging techniques, such as the folding techniques used by traditional smiths in Japan? I bought a replica of the Masamune from FFVII from a website and it said that it was hand forged high carbon steel, and it balances very well, even at almost 6 feet long. I haven't tested it on any serious cutting yet, however. Lord Sephiroth 21:03, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's not so much the manner of creating the carbon steel (while it is an important factor) as the pure quality of ingredients. Metallurgists, for instance, have concluded that many surviving weapons from the European Medieval and Renaissance Periods, made without folding the steel in the Japanese method, are of equal or greater quality in comparison to the Japanese swords made with the folding technique. The reason this is possible - and the reason the Japanese had to fold steel for swords was the quality of beginning material - the ores in Europe were simply more pure (what luck!), requiring less purification (that's primarily what the folding did, I understand - removing unwanted impurities and refine the carbon count in the steel to increase its strength at the expense of some structural integrity). So technically, a "plain" hand-forged unfolded blade could perform much better than a folded blade of much poorer quality steel. As for that sword - anything that doesn't follow a relatively strict historical design, I would be wary using. Make sure to wear protective gear when cutting with it (3 weapon mask, closed faced helmet, etc) for the first few times and start by simply swinging it around - any snaps or 'wobbles' could turn out to be disastrous if you attempt a full force cut. I should also add that it is not totally unheard of for 6 foot long blades to have proper balance - many of the Renaissance two-handers designed for use (not the ceremonial "swords") are well balanced and comparatively light weapons (especially in contrast to the "45-lb sword" myths). -- Xiliquiern 21:59, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Adding a POV tag

The SLO term itself is a deliberate attempt to redefine the word "sword", so it's inherently POV. I'm also removing the link here from katana, which appears to be advocacy of the term. Chris Cunningham 11:29, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The term is inherently POV, but that does not make the article so. I think you should supply criticism of the article's POV content to help improve it. 192.132.210.30 22:24, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. What about this article is untrue or rather un-necessarily biased? With more specific citations of bias, the article could be better managed. -- Xiliquiern 22:41, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Encyclopediac?

C'mon, is this really encycolpedia form: "A graphic example is available through the Internet, in which a salesman bangs a 'practice katana' on a table while praising its durability."

"Available through the Interent?" Either can that, or provide a link.

the article is really about sword replicas, but focusses on a jargon term with much unencyclopedic rambling. We should have a clean and well-informed sword replica which briefly mentions "SLO" as juvenile or internet jargon. dab (𒁳) 10:03, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge - obvious merge.--Svetovid 19:44, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]