Thanks for the response, and good points. The blade shape is definitely important for the choice of material. Some materials would have lousy edge retention, but if you go for a dedicated thrusting sword you don't even need edges at all. Also for instance material that does not flex well would be much more suitable for a single-edged blade with thick spine, not a thin double-edged one. As a general rule of thumb you could say that if there was an ultimate sword material it would already be consistently used for making swords. Although on the other side it might be an issue of prohibitive costs, and of course people are not dependent on swords anymore, so it's not high priority.
Then steel would be the ultimate sword material? To be fair, bronze was once considered to be the ultimate sword material. There might be another "ultimate material" in the future, maybe even laserswords.
LarsaXL depending on how you look at it, lead is the current ultimate material. After all, it's the base material of choice in most bullets, and given that most modern conflicts (wars, self-defences and so on) are typically resolved via guns... Granted that's maybe not in the spirit of this conversation.
LarsaXL Swords: Not in use experimental and expensive: Palladium glass, toughest material known at the moment. Mainstream: high-end powder-metallurgical tool steel. There are many types available fitting for different blade shapes. But we shouldn't forget that with steel the heat treatment can be much more important than the base material. Bullets: Tungsten & Uranium, heavier than lead and will ignite after going through the armored target killing the crew inside. Gold would also be a superior choice, without being toxic...
Hi Skall. Yes, my instant response was that steel is basically still used for all modern knives, bayonets and tools, so some form of steel is still going to be the best choice for a modern sword in almost all cases. However, as you've implied, maybe cost is a bigger deciding factor than we know. Maybe if NASA were to take this on with a huge budget they'd actually use other materials. It's a pretty interesting question and I've interested to see what the experts say.
Oh another note that in Virginia it is legal to carry a sword around in public place as long at it isn't concealed and is sheathed. Of course private institutions can of course ban you from entering for it though. Many Halloweens and leaving Ren faires have I walked down the streets with a rapier or a long sword at my side.
Gallowglass That is also legal in CA. It does not mean you won't be challenged, cuffed, stuffed, and take a ride to the police station. It just means that they later have to apologize and give the sword back. One guy got arrested for having a concealed weapon because the cop claimed the scabbard "concealed" his longsword.
The usage of materials in military weapons has been revolutionized in the past few decades. For example the armor of tanks got like 10 times more efficient because people cared to develope them. From steel to composite armor etc. I think if swords were still in use and were developed like that they also could be vastly improved.
i studied evolution of tank armor before. the armor the abrams uses was originally infuenced by the armor used on the challenger 1 and 2. but the abrams uses depleted uranium that is graphite coated(because DU is toxic and pyrophoric). the armor layers are different too. if penetrated, even if the armor is not fully perforated; the tank crew and people around the vehicle, and those who will repair it afterwards are affected by DU toxicity. it is also slightly radioactive when it gets into the bloodstream. this is the reason why there was much secrecy about what this armor was made off(back then). however, even though there are side effects. the abrams is THE BEST TANK in the world. haha. id rather have 20 years shaved off my life span, that to die from anti tank weapons.
Chobham armour isn't tough though; the ceramic plates are sacrificial, which is why the armour is slab-sided. The encasing metal matrix gives the toughness, while the ceramic gives the resistance to plasma and high-velocity metal. Can't see that being useful as a cutting edge/surface, because the opponents would just use guards and armour plate with ridges designed to engage the tough/soft elements of the matrix and break it around the brittle/hard elements. I'd rather go with metals, because you can get a decent weld between them.
Modern tank armour is ridiculously overengineered and strangely worthless given that the consistent weakpoint on tanks is their tracks, and modern tank tracks are still vulnerable to a single AT mine or HEAT round strike.
it is also the desgin of the armor too . . . .sloped armor in variations since world war 2. Also, there is more attention paid to the crew, even the Russians now favor designs that prioritize crew survival.
I love when my favorite sword-related RUclipsrs mention eachother... it's like a cross-over of your favorite sitcom characters! *lightbulb* Lloyd and Matt both live in England. I WANNA SEE A VIDEO OF THEM SPARRING. GO GO GO.
When you talk about the combinations of hardness and toughness you want in a sword as well as the way it performs it’s function, even today carbon steel is still the best material for the job. Even in the nuclear power industry, we still use steel in applications where we care about an alloy that is hard and tough and we don’t care about corrosion resistance. There are certainly very hard alloys made from cobalt and tungsten, but they don’t have the type of toughness and flexibility you want in a sword. Edit: I should note, that a sword is not generally an application where you’d care about corrosion resistance. Steel can rust, but that’s not hard to prevent with proper care.
Pretty sure maraging steel has a better combination of hardness and toughness. The international fencing federation uses it in foils and epees because it's about 10 times tougher than carbon steel. There's several ratings of progressively harder and less tough maraging steels, but you do get more toughness at a given hardness than carbon steel. PS: Maraging steels are martensite alloys high in nickel, and cobalt, but low in carbon.
Just make a sword out of something that's super lethally radioactive and then wear a radiation suit. Then all you have to do is walk within like 100 feet of your enemy and he just dies.
Demons from another dimension come to invade the earth. Their only weakness is swords. After many swordfights with them, we found out that our steel swords are weak against theirs.
The best that can be achieved at this moment is a spring tempered mono blade made from a powder metallurgical alloy. Something along the chemical lines of 3V, S7, 5160, or 9260 manufactured with the aforementioned process. As for handles/ wraps/ sheathes - composite variants like G10 or Micarta are probably the best option, although there's nothing wrong with stabilized wood either. Wraps could be made of composite polymers, or fibrous materials similar to Kevlar, although this has little impact on actual performance.
The problem with diamond dust coating is it doesn't do much for strikes. It's only any good for abrasion. And it's used for tools as the cutting element of a tool is easily removed and replaced. A sword blade would be much more securely attached so if the diamond particles got worn away it would be too difficult to try to add more, the only real way of returning a good edge is via sharpening a steel edge or point.
I have had this discussion with many likeminded people over the years and while there is still a lot of debate over economics, the consensus on material to be used did arrive. It involved a Damascus steel inspired core but involved using synthetic diamonds as the carbon source in the crucible to really strengthen the carbide patterns. For the edge, a moderately sharp cemented carbide (primarily made from tungsten carbide with cobalt and chromium used as binders) could be used..With over 85HRC hardness and the pattern welded steel core, a sword made such would be deadly enough I presume.
Great point about using a mix of materials. Something a lot of people don't know, even tank armour isn't just made of steel anymore but rather a ceramic composite of classified composition.
"It's essentially a thrust only weapon. It does have a very very hard tip. You want it to be very very stiff. but it doesn't necessarily need to have edges." *giggle* im 12 again :>
Based on your discussion: Purpose: dueling is reinstated in legal context. Weapon: A triangular carbon fiber resin shaft with a steel or tungsten needle sharp point for penetration and Razer sharp fins to maximise internal injury. This dueling weapon would essentially be the marriage of an epee or foil with the devastating point of a modern compound bow hunting arrow. The idea would be to thrust a broadhead into your opponent. modern context with a modern solution.
G Nelson And what if I have a 1796 pattern light cavalry saber? Or God forbid a basket hilt sword. The problem with dedicated thrusting swords is that they’re very easy to counter. A thrust os very easy to prey as where a cut is much more difficult. Especially if you thrust to the head where you can literally just move yourself out of the way. Also, even if you make a hit with the thrust, if you’re in the middle of a duel you might not even feel it. However if someone cleaves through your shoulder and chest, you’re on the ground in two seconds or less. I know the context is reinstated legal dueling, but someone like myself doesn’t carry a sword that doesn’t have a better chance at victory. Like Matt said, unless you’re going up against another small sword then the small sword is the worst sword to have.
I'm reminded of robot combat, where weapons have largely settled on tool steel impactors attached to primarily aluminum weapon arms. Aluminum tends to be best at not breaking for a given weight but isn't best at cleaving metal armor so the edges are steel. The way robots tend to do it would be way bulky for human-scale weapon so naturally a person wouldn't use the exact same thing.
3 points : 1) context (as always) 2) think about different material than metal (today's condensed matter physics understanding is amazing!) 3) think about mixing these materials: hardest for the hedges and point, more flexible for the core
Not that I'm a metallurgist, but it would seem that a pommel made of Francium encased in glass (to avoid water vapor) could potentially be used to end them rightly, and with a massive explosion to boot (Francium will explode violently when exposed to water, like all elements of its family).
One interesting material would be transparent metallic glass alloys or other non metallic materials. Having a sword with perhaps up to 99% invisibility would be extremely dangerous especially if it had better capabilities then steel. Though I dont know how sharp they could be made to be.
@@WJS774 The transparent sword was just an example of a special property you could select for by manipulating the general structure, in this case I was thinking of transparent Aluminum. There are obviously other properties aside from transparency you might be interested in which changes the question if you want metallic or non-metallic materials. Also last I heard they did say you could have transparent metallic glass through quantum bullshit.
@@Dasmaster1 'Transparent aluminium' isn't a metal. It's a ceramic, with all that that entails. Extremely hard and heat resistant, but very brittle. You would not want to try making a weapon out of it. There still isn't really anything better to make weapons out of than steel, though of course today's steels are way better than 20th century steels, let alone earlier ones.
Form-wise, I'd vote for saber. It's general purpose and provides hand protection. In my opinion, it's worthy of re-engineering the entire design of the sword akin to the evolution of bows into the modern recurve and compound bows. Modern bows corrected a lot of flaws of the old bows - particularly the archer's paradox by making them center-shot. Rather than the whole bow being one part, bows are now segmented into risers and limbs. So, rather than approaching this from just a materials perspective, it might be proper to start from a mechanical perspective. From what I see, akin to what the archer's paradox was for bows, the main issue with swords is that they break. The way we've compensated for this is that we make them into springs (or ignore the issue entirely). The challenge is to make them as stiff as possible (so that they transfer the force to the opponent rather than disperse it in the vibration) without breaking. Off the top of my head, maybe we can have something like a safety razor type of sword - think of your safety razor but in the shape of a sword with replaceable, segmented edges. The body will be very stiff since the edges can break as much as they want since you'll just be replacing the edges and not the entire blade.
Bows are inherently more mechanically complex though. The way they function kinda gave way to the eventual rope-and-pulley approach of design. Also, do swords HAVE any issues similar to the archer's paradox that needs fixing? At its basic level, the sword is a lever, and your hand is the fulcrum. The power that moves the lever then comes from either your wrist/arm if you're one-handing it, or your offhand if you're two handing it. How do you improve upon that mechanically, exactly? I mean I like your mental approach but I'm not sure where it would lead. The only thing I can imagine is some kind of setup that secures the sword to your hand/wrist/arm more securely and then... has some other mechanisms to provide power more easily? I dunno, that seems weird.
Darlos9D Like I said, the brittleness vs. stiffness issue needs to be tackled. I think it's analogous to the tension aspect of bows - rather than the tension going through the entire bow, the tension on modern bows is now just mostly on the risers. Bows also used to be very simple - bow + string - but now it's riser + limbs + cams + string.
I suppose that would be the one flaw, but I'm not sure how materials science is ever gonna solve it with blunt dumb materials. How do you have a material that's both rigid AND not brittle? You'd have to get into some wacky nanotech level of science at that point, where the material adapts to the forces currently acting upon it, and possibly even repairs its own fractures after the fact. Which would be totally radical.
Darlos9D Maybe blades sitting on springs? Springs absorb the shock but will also return it so no loss in energy going into the opponent. I actually suggested earlier a safety-razor type of sword.
It all depend on what you want to cut or stab with your sword, if you're still tryng to murder unarmored people i guess that spring steel is still a good choice, but if your opponent is wearing a very good armor, much better than plate mail, then i would consider a sword that uses the mechanism of reciprocating saws, but it is obviously built to be handled like a normal sword.
At my university, we have our own dendrolab purely for wood. I have professor's that have a doctorate in wood quality's. And I, as a student Forest and Nature conservation, should know a lot about it as wel, but well, I forgot most things about it. But there are real experts about wood as wel, not just woodworking.
I have to disagree with the choice of diamond dust. You're mixing grinding with cutting. Almost always when diamond dust is used on tools, it's because the tool is used to grind through a hard material, usually metal or stone. It's used for being both very hard and for being abrasive. Swords don't need to be abrasive, if anything they would be better off without an abrasive surface on the sides of the blades that may make the cutting through the flesh harder to do. Now, as a construction worker, someone who has to work with these materials fairly often, I think you will want a tungsten carbide edge As far as metallic materials go, that's the hardest cost effective material we currently have. You're going to want a more springy material to make up the spine of the sword, fortunately you have a variety of spring steels available that will be very good for this purpose. Now, if I wanted to be brave and venture away from steel, I imagine you could make the edge of the sword out of different kinds of carbon composites, but I worry those would be far too likely to shatter. I still do think steels would be the best option even today. And of course, I agree the handles should be made with ash or hickory, and the scabbard should be a good tough plastic that would be cheap to produce, easy to manufacture, but could still take a good beating. What do you think of HDPE?
Diamond dust is indeed a poor choice, but nowadays vapor deposition lets you grow continuous diamond crystal onto many surfaces with essentially atomic-perfect bonding (and you can grow it to a single atom width, too, for a perfect cutting edge, should you desire that) - so it's probably a pretty reasonable choice then. Some of the carbide materials as you mention are worthwhile alternatives to consider though, definitely. HDPE is a good choice for a handle, yeah, though so is carbon fibre (it's really quite cheap these days), particularly chopped fibre even though it's strictly weaker, it's a LOT cheaper than continuous fiber. Nylon is another good contender here.
For Tungsten carbides, the most I have heard is T10 high speed tool steel, consisting of Tungsten instead of Iron to make the steel. The better question is compatibility uniting spring/chromium steel with tungsten steel for shock and edge retention balance. Thinking of a single edge sword with a thicker spine to handle non-combat applications like machetes and bolos have achieved in jungle environments, but a double edge at the tip area for thrust or unorthodox slashing directions.
for a light sword not intending to do any parrying , I like the idea of a Titanium body with a steel or maybe even a ceramic edge. For a chopping and parrying blade, a Titanium body can still work, and high carbon steel for the edge, you still want something not too brittle on the edge since it can still chip off if it is struck hard enough. and the diamond coatings on industrial are usually just industrial diamonds brazed to the blade and are intended to grind through material like stone, not cut like a blade.
I would imagine carbon fiber/kevlar like material could work as a sort of reinforcing skeleton like rebar in cement, possibly allowing for a way to make a thinner sword while maintaining overall durability. I'm sure someone can tell me why this wouldn't work but I'd love to see an attempt to make something like this
I almost fell out of my chair with Norse fury. Had to show your entire post to calm down again. Katana fanboys be damned. They give me high blood pressure.
In 'The Diamond Age' by Neal Stephenson, a character uses nanotechnology to create essentially a chainsaw on a molecular level. It's a sword with a main body of carbon and tiny 'teeth' comprised of diamond that run rapidly around the edge.
I’m 6 years late to your comment, but that sounds absolutely awesome! I’ll have to look into that book. It makes quite a lot of sense for either diamond dust or carbide to be used on the very edge (very similar to how some drills have carbide tips), with a basic carbon steel structure body. Many different methodologies at play here. You have influence from ancient Japanese swords using differential hardness on the blade, modern bi-metal hacksaw blades that use high speed steel (M2) welded to a plain carbon steel body, and of course the carbide/diamond coating. Pretty awesome stuff.
on the streets most dangerous altercations you're going to come across are going to be within a few yards and getting into a fire fight in a public area could cause a lot of unwanted collateral. So it could be thought of as a more "responsible" form of self protection to carry a sword instead of just a pistol?
in this scenario, most people won't expect to use this more than twice in a life time. So you need it to stand up to a few thrusts and cuts, but not necessarily a lot of them. You want it to be reliable and handle being packed up for a move or something. Cheap is preferable to expensive. And you want a very sharp edge. What you won't be dealing with is lots of armor or a variety of melee weapons. So maybe a polymer blade and handle with a high carbon steel edge with a slight curve?
Yes, but most modern humans don't have the intestinal fortitude to handle the amount of bloody mess a sword makes so they are still considered primal and brutal. It also takes a lot more forethought and determination to kill someone with a sword. A jury is much more likely to condemn you for defending yourself with one, in spite of the law even when it allows self defense.
Chris Dron The biggest consideration for carrying a weapon for self-defence against street fights/muggers/etc. is that it me easily carried and have potential for concealment. People who carry pistols do so because it's impractical to carry a rifle on a day to day basis. Therefore, if we're talking about swords, they would most likely become daggers or knives. At the very least, they would be small swords (in size, I don't means smallswords specifically). I would like to see something along the lines of expandable batons. They already have telescoping asps; we could put a small thrusting blade at the end of one of those. The telescoping body would only need to be impact resistant. The blade would be short, six inches at the most, and therefore not need as much flex. It could be made of D2 tool steel, tungsten, titanium. Anything, really. Just something strong, sharp, and impact resistant.
Marcus Armstrong the biggest issue is that people are often killed with their own weapons (often true of guns for example) so ideally you want something an assailant would find hard to use against you, and designed in such away that it’s next to impossible to kill yourself with it
"Zombies aren't using swords back at you." Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't know we needed your approval to use swords. I BETTER LET ALL MY ZOMBIE FRIENDS KNOW, MATT DOESN'T LIKE THEM USING SWORDS! Are there any OTHER marginalized groups who can't use swords? Should I tell my Hispanic friends, "Oh, Matt says you can't use swords anymore. You'll just have to bite and claw people." Freaking racist.
+John Smith Oh great we have the zombie justice warriors at it again. We get it you're the most inclusive group around anyone is welcome as long as they only like the things you like and act like you. Don't you even start, you zombies aren't even a race, you're a culture so stuck up your terrible diet. How do you know someone's a zombie? Don't worry they'll tell you.
Hellsing they still dont ise sword they are primitives that only use assault rifles and submachine guns with the occasional semi automatic pistols shotguns and revolvers
Thats why I love your channel relative to other historical weapon channels because it's not just about the weapon but whats around the weapon and you do a great job at presenting and explaining this to people like me.
How about a time travel scenario, you are going back to year 1200 or something like that. You will be fighting normal swords from that time. You cant take guns and such because that would give you away more than a modern sword. What would be the best sword and best materials to fight (1v1) vs middle ages weapons?
I would go for full Italian white plate (looks better and is equally effective as German gothic plate) with a halberd as weapon. I don't know enough about current metals to say which materials.
the modern materials is exactly the subject of debate. skall and crew came up with a titanium core and tungsten carbide edge for a weapon, allowing flexibility and edge retention. for armour, i can only presume kevlar plus titanium or some sort of plasteel would be best. you want protection from piercing, slashing, and smashing sorts of weapons and you want it to be as light as possible.
Well for the modern high-tech sword debate, the context I prefer to use is this: In a fictional world where the gun was never invented (but we still have modern metallurgy), what materials would countries use to make their weapons?
+Trepur349 I don't think armies would be using swords anyway. Blunt weapons are much more likely to do meaningful damage against what modern plate armour would look like if it was made with all the materials we have now. It could be much lighter and much tougher than the medival versions and it would probably be completely resistant to bladed weapons. Maybe we'd be using weapons that grab the opponent and use hydraulic pressure to crush them inside the armour.
+Trepur349 Most likely, though, there is no modern metallurgy- most modern metallurgy developed to deal with high heat and pressures- either in a firearm or in an engine. I don't know if you can get to today, metallurgically speaking, without firearms.
Titanium or Titanium Alloy core with an advanced ceramic edge like tungsten carbide or silicon nitride coated with a bit of diamond dust. Cross guard or basket should made with something very strong, possibly titanium again, I like tungsten for its amazing strength, but its very dense and heavy and would probably throw the sword's balance off. Now, if you could catch your opponent's blade like a shield that gets cut into, that would be spectacular. If you would put a synthetic rubber or some pine wood where a cross guard would catch a blade and build the cross guard so it puts a great deal of pressure on the material horizontally, it might pinch a blade which slices into it, quickly twist your sword about, and you may just disarm them! The handle, I feel, would again be titanium core with a thin layer of high grip synthetic rubber. The pommel should be a bright stainless steel and worked into an elaborate design with the person's coat of arms, the maker's logo, the head of an animal, or some simple handsome shape like a triangle or small pyramid with sloped edges.
too much so. I mean, ceramics are excellent for cutlery since they don't oxidise vitamins, but accidentally cut into a chicken bone and kiss your edge goodbye. There are titanium tactical knives though, so I wouldn't be surprised if a titanium sword was made. High vanadium/chromium titanium edge and high carbon/nitrogen titanium spine would probably be the best bet at the moment. Although probably the best of the best sword would be made of graphene, but that would have to be actually assembled molecule by molecule rather than forged.
I gotta point out that there is a realistic scenario that might come up if our space industry takes off and that is guns in space on a ship is not the smartest thing to do so this may lead to the rebirth of the age of swords. In this context I imagine that swords would likely not have pointed and designed for much thrusting because we have body armor that that can handle just about any thrust a human can generate and that would make not using guns fairly a waste of time, so the space sword I think would be designed to slash, with little to no piercing ability, and would be mid-length weapon due to confined spaces. I could also see it doubling as some sort of taser or vomit inducing baton as well. Afterall these would likely be introduced or evolved from police units who's objective is to bring down the target without killing them if they can. The cutting aspect could be scene as preventative ability to cut their space suit to disallow them to leave the ship or to get through to deliver the stun. I see them as wanting a single weapon to open the suit and stun the person so it makes sense to combine it into a single weapon. That's what I think anyways.
+Durakken High pressure environments also tend to respond poorly (the air lighting on fire is not generally a desirable outcome) to open flame (such as muzzle flash) so perhaps either deep undersea or on another planet with different pressurization?
+Durakken Actually, most modern body army can't handle knife or sword piercing it. They're just meant to stop bullets, and also do well against slashing weapons. So it would actually be the opposite of what you said. With the exception of reinforced glass/plastic like riot shields and vehicle armor. But we don't use them in body armor. We would prioritize piercing swords, and have slashing as secondary. That is unless, of course, if steel body armor makes a comeback. And it would be steel on par, or even stronger (since you don't have to worry about body armor holding an edge or anything, and can prioritize durability and hardness in it's construction) than what are swords would be made of. If that's the case, then maces, warhammers, and spears would make a comeback as well. But the rest of what you said is highly accurate. I can totally see police adopting those tactics if we were to begin space colonization.
James Glass I thought it was both, but more with piercing because of bullets are piercing weapons. Oh well. I don't see spears being adopted again because of the limited space for it to be used in. There might be some sort of collapsable polearm though and if somehow you invade a ship you'd use a 3 or 4 man group to create a line and walk down the halls in a line as a strategy to sweep through a ship.
+James Glass Yeah, because people will keep making and using the same, ineffective-in-the-new-situation body armor that we have today, gleefully dying to stab wounds because it's impossible to make body armor better suited to stabbing protection.
We still use knifes. Do we use steel knifes or something else? How about hammers, saws, tongs, nails and all sort of other tools? Did we really found a way of significantly improving them? I'd say not, and that's because it may not be possible to significantly improve those age old designs. Swords may be another design which we pretty much perfected long time ago. Anyway, pattern welding is a way of getting around the problem of scarcity, not a way of improving quality. Welds are inherently weak and if we weld two different steels together there is a problem that they need to be hardened and tempered at different temperatures. Today smiths can control the temperature to the fraction of a degree, so they can get away with it, but Viking smiths could not (usually) and their swords were often garbage, frankly speaking. For what it may be worth, I have several very old axes built as they used to build them, with good steel at the edge and low carbon steel elsewhere. Part of the edge on one of them chipped out, one socket broke apart and two others are deformed from hammering against the log (one socket was too brittle, two others a bit too soft). On the other hand, a cheap hatched I bought in a supermarket built out of current monosteel is way better than those old hacks. Yes, pattern welding, differential hardening and all that witchcraft is waay overrated in my personal opinion.
It steel chosen because it is the best mechanically, or because it is very good and also cheap and easy to work with? I'm interested to know if there are better materials if cost is no issue.
scholagladiatoria Titanium is tough, but not as hard as good carbon steel. Ceramic blades can be slightly harder, but not very tough. Overall steel seems to be the winner, but what do I know? I'm not an expert, and I would gladly make some stupid statement which would prompt someone with real knowledge to chime in and correct me. ;-)
bakters "and all sort of other tools" Well, there has been some real advancement in cutting tools for turning procesess for example. From steel to high-speed steel to tungsten carbide in a cobalt matrix with a hard surface coating. Tunnel drills are an other really good example, today they are massive machines made of a combination of many different materials, you can't even compare it to a steel pickaxe anymore.
gurkfisk89 Yes, there are some specialized machines which do not use just steel for cutting, but often enough they are more grinding than cutting machines, are they not? Plasma cutters. That thing cuts, and it's not steel. Water cutters are similar. Laser cutters. Yes, occasionally we use something else to cut with.
bakters Cutting tools for turning procesess does clearly cut into materials. Tunnel drills on the other hand are more a mixture of grinding and pounding.
Great video! I'm not an enthusiast, I don't own any kind of sharp knives or swords other than a few kitchen knives. However I appreciate the depth you went into when answering this and found it very interesting.
Maybe swords can even go past the point of being just a sharp object. Maybe mechanical swords that can adapt to different situations. For example a collapsable sword that can be worn and concealed much more comfartably and still have the range of a longer sword when it was needed. Or maybe the opposite, a telescopic sword that can expand to get more reach in the thrust and rectract to be more nimble again. I know this has many drawbacks and problems but like the smallsword, maybe it can be good enough for the intended purpose. Sometimes the highest priority is for the wapon to be easy to carry. Wich is why pistols, smallswords, collapsable batons and bowie knives are often preferred over more cumbersome but better weapons. Energy swords are common in science fiction, and maybe they are on to something. How aboout an electrified sword that can stun as well as cut, like a tazer. A small cut might temporarily paralyze their arm allowing you to follow up with a killing attack. Even the flat of the blade could be used to take someone down without causing a bleeding wound. Maybe it can even travel trough blade contact and into your opponents hands causing them to drop their weapon after a succesful parry, but that would be easy to counter with insulation. Or maybe you could use energy to make the cut itself. I am not sure wether a lightsaber is even possible but we have plasma cutters that can cut trough steel with ease. How about if you put one of those on the point of your sword and kept the rest of the sword like it is, then you would have a weapon capable of defending like a sword and able to thrust trough any armor. It might make for a less agile sword, but that is often the drawback of anti-armor weapons. (remember the flanged mace)
Stephen Costello I would like to see that. It does make an interesting point, regulations and laws have a lot to do with what weapons are carried and how people try to circumvent the restrictions.
The problem is the mechanics that would go into making a sword like that, and if it would hold up even if you had them. A collapsable sword could easily snap, even if you have the best materials to wind up whatever you have into the hilt in order to let it stay in place and as one shape. That’s why they were never made.
Someone on youtube made one out of polycarbonate. It was vey thick but suprisingly effective against various materials. He even cut through a 2x4 with it.
Sucka Mehoff If there's one area in which mankind has been consistently creative and brilliant, it's finding ways to kill things. Even without gunpowder, someone would probably find another suitable alternative.
Lord Camelslayer Oh hell yeah. Humans wouldn't even miss a blink. It might even do our species some good to go back to the iron age for another century or two.
that is how super alloy is made to my understanding (since the melting points of titanium-nickel-cobalt-lead-vanadium-etc. metals used in super alloy are so far apart) thus since superalloys are critical in modern fighting sword use, yes that kind of forging is necessary.
Titanium... Lighter than steel, stronger than steel in all ways, does not rust, and is more abundant than wrought iron (which is made into steel). Problem is, titanium needs absurd amounts of heat to become malleable. We just need very, very hot forges, and some skilled smiths. Titanium is by far the best, most logical metal for swords.
BloodstainedSinner Doesn't hold an edge. Too malleable. I have a titanium hammer and it is wonderful to pound nails with but when you whack it against steel the face flattens out. More modern ti- hammers have a steel face that screws on. You would have to design a steel edge insert for the long sword blade. I have seen titanium knives that have carbide grit edges but have never tried one. Ti is notch sensitive so if you whacked it hard with a steel blade it might crack at the notch.
Michael Chrest I think a Tungsten would make a better blade than steel, since it is way harder and resiliant, but heavier than steel. Maybe a tungsten based steel could be realy good to for the whole weapon, since it is not realy heavier than steel but a little bit more resiliant and harder.
DarkEternal6 Ya I know that it would be stupid to make a full blade of pure tungsten (It is so heavy nwa), but you can make tungsten based steel or even carbon based tungsten wich can be worked like steel and is not as heavy as pure tungsten ( still something like twice as heavy as steel) so this is why I recommend the tungsten based steel (Steel mixed with a bit of tungsten to harden it).
I imagine that a modern sword would be a narrow gladius, for stabbing through the joints of advanced armour, perhaps with an integrated taser of some sort. But i've really got no idea, and just look forward to seeing (hopefully) the sword making a comeback to warmaking.
As cnc programmer I thought that similar construction as, for example , milling tools would be great. Realtively soft steel core with carbide inserts for the edge. Torsion and bending could be a problem, but as an idea I think it's cool at least.
From scientists point of view, pretty much the same materials old swords were made from. You must imagine it took time but in Europe at least metallurgy was pretty advanced at that time. Better yet the same quality of steel is more difficult to make now due to the process we produce steel now that adds imperfections that cannot be removed in any remotely worthwhile process. (Still the steel now is good enough for what we use now) Diamonds are hard but their toughness (although good) is not suitable for a sword. Same problems go with most ceramics. Amazing hardness but lacking toughness. Wolfram (Tungsten for Americans) Is used in industrial edges for its heat resistance, and honestly it's actually various Wolfram-Nitride compounds that are most often only coated on (unstable in water ...also counts as ceramic already) Or Wolfram-Carbide yes harder also stiffer than steel, but also twice as heavy and the stiffness comes with a downside, it is less resistant to metal fatigue than a good steel is. Forget Aluminium and Titanium unless you want a long solid state lecture on why not. As for nano carbon fibres (I hope the commenter mentioned meant tubes) pricey and difficult to incorporate in the material at temperature into the steel structure. Far more promising price as well as metallurgic wise are ceramic fibres in steel. A project from the metallurgic institute in Slovenia. First results are promising and the technique offers a continuous transition from steel to ceramic. The last point to mention is that apart from a good steel sword being better at being a sword than other materials could provide. A really good steel sword still already costs X000 € where X is not limited to single digits but is more than 1. Any more exotic material would be eye-wateringly expensive. As for armour, there is a reason armour stopped, it is far easier to design a projectile capable of penetrating it than to produce thin enough material to hold it. There is simply no need to have a better penetrating bullet/shell, in fact it would be counter productive. Bullets/shells are made to turn unstable in material they are made to destroy body/stuff. The difference between AP and normal rounds are when this unstable state begins. For un-armoured it would be best on impact for armoured it should absorb X J of energy prior to loosing stability. Silly..but you counter AP rounds by not wearing armour. You do get a hole...but it's a cleaner one that lets you walk away. But that's just from a scientific point of view.
Er, I'd probably like to see some evidence backing up the claim that modern steels aren't of a better quality for swords, as opposed to 'historical' steel (for lack of a better term). It may be true for 'general purpose' steels, but for specialty steels it seems extremely unlikely. Materials science has come a long way.
Daniel Blay Had something longer written, but removed it. Lets just say it is possible but difficult. Also there is no "general purpose" steel as you so put it. All have a purpose and if an engineer does not use it for its purpose than it simply fails or is dangerous.
Axel Alexson If cost isn't an issue, then 'possible but difficult' is fine. But yes, I do understand there's not really such a thing as a general purpose steel. What I really mean is between commonly used and cheap(ish) steels, and highly tailored expensive steels. Also, I only got to read the first paragraph or so of your response, so I'm curious as to what it was. I appreciated the effort.
Axel Alexson Interesting stuff, I always thought the problem of unwanted contamination was no longer such a big problem for high quality steels and more something mostly concerning the earlier parts of the industrial revolution, where steels were at the lowest point in quality. What's you take on amorphous metals? (apart from palladium, which might be an option, costing 20'000+ in raw materials alone for a normal sized blade)
I honestly have to say I would go with a plasma sword. Using superheated plamsa as the blade contained inside of a magnetic field. It is basically a Lightsaber we've been able to make them for ten years now. Currently in the process of making them smaller. Think computers when they first came out.
The main problem I have with diamond blades are that diamonds stick to fat. In many places in the world, diamonds are mined by sifting mined materials onto a ramp covered in rendered fat or lard and places in running water. There's a similar device used for gold panning, where there are steps on the ramp that the gold sinks into.
Here's a thought: you have a sword made out of harder materials that almost anything else. Cuts through even steel if used with enough force. Couched in a frame that absorbs some of the impact but still "pushes" the blade back during a cut. Springs back enough for the somewhat-brittle edge to have space to move but not enough to fail. A weird idea: Would it make sense to make an impact-sword? Like an impact-baton that has fluid inside to drive additional force when struck (the idea is to shock nerves in the muscles). Here it would help drive the edge deeper or even past the hardness of protective material.
I think something else that’s very important is sword design. Not just cut vs thrust or a mixture, but the actual design of the blade. Is it something like a broadsword? Or is it a cavalry saber? For thrusting is it a small sword? Or something like the Troopers saber? If it is a smallsword, is it a triangular cross section, a Colichmarde, or a Spadroon? In short, like you said, it’s about context. There are definitely things that every sword could share and benefit from (say blending the steel with titanium) but there’s never a one size fits all with sword design. It’s just like when people say longsword vs Katana. They can both be good in they’re own right, but it depends on what they’re made from, what style of fencing they use, who’s had longer to train, and even what kind of longsword or Katana you’re using. People just need to realize there can never be a one stop shop for swords.
I disliked it because i came to see what the title said, and left empty-handed. You spiraled around for 13+ minutes saying all kinds of things that aren't on-topic, instead of just messaging the guy saying the truth: "I don't know"
The title really isn't click bait. Aside from the fact that the question essentially has, and will never have, any real answer, he outright mentions his thoughts on various modern materials and techniques that could be used in making a sword. So you not only get the answer that the question has no answer, but he throws out some ideas anyway. So he gave you many potential answers, you're just not happy with what they are.
In a sense, yes. but he didn't address the question. the other comments here actually do address that very question, to great detail. You're not entirely wrong, to be sure. But the title and the content do not match. Maybe click-bait isn't the politically correct term, but it gets the mind pointing in the right direction.
NiceWhenEarned RudeMostlyElse How is it clickbait? He talked about his opinion on what to use, and it was a response to Skall’s video. You just don’t like the answer. Even though he’s right. There is no answer. At least not a definitive one. You’re probably someone who thinks swords can just be thrown into some binary equation and we can find out what the perfect material would be for the ultimate sword.
I feel like the biggest issue with using different materials would be molecular bonding. That's pretty much the sole problem with combining any materials regardless of what it is. The reason why we can use alloys is because we found out how to bond them together for various desirable properties. So while the idea of using exotically different materials is cool... ultimately it's not practical... and probably near impossible to produce with any sense of confidence UNLESS you mean for it to be visually appealing without any durability for field use. Wall hangers are still nice to look at.
Well, technically, Carbon is the most common element in organic material. However, there's a lot of -other- stuff in there. Compare to... basically just raw, elemental carbon, which is way more cohesive, structurally.
Birch is good for axe handles if you chop every day and have extra ones. What you do is make an incision in a birch tree a bit longer than you you want the shaft to be. The tree will heal itself by welling up about the wound so in few years you have two shafts for your son or grandson with a natural rounded grain in it.
The main problem with using more than one material is that the advantage you want to get, a harder edge, is not so easy to find in materials with elastic proprieties... And for what a sword is for, you really don't want to lose those elastic proprieties because it would mean that it would be a lot more prone to broke or bend...
I am a metallurgist, and I agree with you that we'd need to have a premise for building this modern sword. Part of that premise would be understanding how and if we could improve on the traditional sword. As someone who engages in HEMA, do you believe that a lighter (or heavier) sword would really improve your performance? Would different balancing improve performance? Before I would try to develop a modern sword with modern materials, I'd want to know from the experts what changes they need in order to have an improved sword. From my limited exposure to RUclips videos, the only improvement that would really seem to make a big difference would be a material that would have better edge retention. I'm not sure that we have a material that would give better edge retention without sacrificing toughness. We could have harder materials like ceramics or diamond, but those materials tend to be more brittle. We're constantly developing ceramics with more toughness, but I'm not aware of any that would be tougher than a good steel. I don't believe most people are going to be willing to risk major brittle fracture of the blade for the convenience of slightly better edge retention. The idea of a composite is good, but the question is what the composite will really accomplish. We could probably build a sword with a lightweight composite core surrounded by metal. This core would provide some support at a lower weight, but I"m not sure that any kind of composite would really be better than a hollow core. Most of the metal could be a tougher stainless steel that would resist corrosion a bit. The edges would still be much like traditional sword edge metallurgy. Manufacturing this dual metallurgy sword would be feasible, but I'm not sure what the point would be. Would a lighter sword really give an advantage in combat? The other option would be to make a longer sword at the same weight. However, you've taught me that a sword was usually a sidearm and not one's primary battle weapon. Building a longer sidearm means that one's sidearm would be less convenient to carry. At some point, we're building a weapon that no longer fills the traditional role of a sword.
Here's an idea; because of spidersilk bulletproof implants, bullets are no longer sufficient to penetrate the body, but swords and maces have enough weight to kill. So, I would imagine a rapier purely for penetrating power, with the ability to penetrate kevlar. And if that is the case, then probably nanocarbon materials would be best. Flexible and strong, just like carbon steel. I can't say for holding an edge, but I imagine that you can make a point with it. Which of course, means that soldiers will move towards protection that can withstand that kind of penetration. Which means that we are back to flanges.
if normal bullets become insufficient, we would just go towards heavier rounds i'd say. they might have lower range but even a few meters are still enough to gun someone down who is running at you with a sword. also even the strongest armor won't protect you from rockets, grenades and similar explosives, which would also hit you before you reach the opponent.
If that were the case I imagine we would just make needle like bullets. Also I imagine if we can stop a bullet we would have some kind of impact reduction technology.
Kaskade173 the problem with needle shaped bullets is that you need to find extremely shock resistant material, so that the bullet doesnt break when fired or if it hits any kind of armor.
Tauric94 Heavier rounds are indeed an option, but given implants and kevlar armor combined, I think that the force of a bullet, no matter how heavy, won't penetrate two layers and kill. Keep in mind also, in modern day military, guns are made to have an auto-fire option. Heavier bullets jam more quickly, I suspect, but we'd need a gun expert to confirm. Of course, rockets, grenades and similar exposives will get through any armor, but you can only carry so much explosives with you before you are just another link in a chain reaction of explosives. It's not like bombs have replaced guns in the modern period, just because guns jam. Though drones are, in my mind, the primary reason that this idea won't work, because drones are impossible to target and you can have an infinite amount of them hanging in the sky with explosives. Kaskade173 Actually, we already have 'impact reduction tech'. Spidersilk implants already exist; www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2094364/Bio-engineered-bulletproof-skin-human-cells-spider-silk-revealed-video.html Needle bullets would sadly be impossible to balance. If they were possible in the modern age, then they would already exist and be used by everyone. I describe bullets as the extension of thrusting swords; a needle-like point thrust with enough speed and enough weight to penetrate from a distance.
Alderick van Klaveren well, i didnt necessarily mean that infantry is gonna carry lots of explosives, but there are still things such as tanks, planes and artillery. also it is kinda important to know which type of warfare we are talking about(the 'iraque-type' or actual war between evenly matched opponents). and so far you have only critizised my ideas, but what is your take on the issue then?
I use a springy steel with the composition C 0.56%, Si 1.7%, Mn 0.85%, Cr 0.3%, S 0.035% and the rest of course Fe. That is the best steel for cutting edges for cutting and thrusting. And this is for a monosteel blade. The trick is how you add the factors of hardening, grinding angles and a lot of other factors that people don't think about that we do to make good sword or knife that we keep as our own secrets. I'm apprenticed to a master blacksmith named Patric Fälldin in Sweden and we make swords and knifes. My master has 35 years of experience as a blacksmith and has made a lot of research and material experiments during these years. Still comes back to the same steel as the best one for monosteel use. :) We also do patternwelding and usually include that steel with an iron component for instance.
Particularly for the fashion related swords, where carrying is a big part of the use, it would be interesting to look at Aluminium-Copper alloys for a good ratio of strength and hardness to weight.
I feel like the ideal modern designed smallsword would be a diamond tipped plastic of some sort, possibly with diamond lined edges near the base to give it a sawlike 'draw cut' to allow the blade to be used to tear into exposed flesh at close quarters. A weapon like that would be effective, would require none of the usual maintenance in a convenience driven world, and the customization of colors from different plastics would appeal to a general public audience spoiled by video games. Assuming it's for fashion and not any fighting outside the occasional duel.
I would say a segmented, muli-jointed blade that would wrap around the body while at rest in the form of a belt and when needed could magnetize the individual segments to straighten and lock into a purely thrusting focused sidearm.
In a dueling context, plastic components in a sword might change the nature of parrying in very interesting ways. A cut might not slide easily down the plastic blade, but might actually catch in the cut made into the plastic. You could then design your sword to have a sort of defensive component designed to frustrate the opponent's blade movements. This component could be either the edges if you want a thrusting sword, or the body of the blade if you want a cut and thrust sword. Of course this results in damage to the plastic, but since plastic is so cheap it's no big loss. Overall, it would just change the nature of the forces that the opponent will feel in sword on sword contact. As a non-fencer, I'm curious about what you think about this notion. Thoughts?
Hello, Woodworker and bowyer here. (btw a bowyer is someone who makes bows for use in archery) I worked with both Hickory and ash when making bows. Among bowyers Hickory is regarded as one of the indistructable kinds of wood for making bows. It's mighty tough... can face up to alot of abuse in the sence of poor bow construction or rough handeling by the archer. It bends very well. So Hickory is often suggested as a wood for beginning or one-time bowyers and therefore is highly prized, though not yet as highly as Yew or Osage Orange. I myself work with Ash, specifically European Ash, mostly now a days. This is mainly because I'm located in the Netherlands, and the marshy wet conditions are an ideal habitat for the Ash tree to grow and is therefore readily available here. And of course, it's native so it's much more suited for the kind of European stone-age bow I'm interested in. On the whole I'd say that Ash is indeed a little weaker then Hickory. Yet still, Ash is as tough as nails in my opinion. I'm perfectly fine with using ash for spears and axe handles, bows and even arrows. The difference in strength between ash and hickory isn't worth the trouble of buying relatively expansive imported hickory where I can for a fraction of the money go to my buddy the forester to cut down some fine ashes for my needs. ash also smells nicer I think... but that's probably only relevant for crazy woodworkers like myself.
One interesting scenario would be in a space ship setting, then you would avoid projectile weapons, the explosive decompression scenarios is nasty, and you would want to avoid metals that can cause sparks as well, fire is a big bad no-no in space.
While not the "best" material. I know one thing I would do to improve any common steel sword. I would coat them with a thin layer of titanium nitride (say 3 µm thick). It would not change the handling of a sword at all, but it will get a scratch resisting surface and a harder edge. You also don't have to care about rust as the coating is corrosion resistant. That it also would give your sword a golden look is an awesome bonus.
Here's my general idea about modern sword materials: Some both light and durable material for core. This should probably be some aluminum- or titan-based alloy. For outer hard material I'd choose either one of the harder tool-steel materials or even some metaloceramic material (although this may be too brittle)
Great breakdown; the only thing I would add/suggest is that perhaps a weapon wherein the main body is made of carbon fiber might end up being impractically light, assuming some chopping/slashing is intended; I would imagine if it were a pointed weapon for thrusting, that the light weight might not be as much of an issue since a the power of a thrust relies more heavily on the strength of the wielder than in regards to a chop or slash where the weapon's weight helps to increase it's momentum.
i'd go for some light composite core, with a hardened segmented replaceable edge. then you could make the sword longer, without sacrificing manouverability. maybe even make a 1 handed-sword as long as a 2.handed sword.
So, not a sword expert here, but I know a decent bit about materials. To address your point about modern machinery: you are correct, plastics and composites has often replaced wood for weapon handles. But as far as *striking* surfaces? Ceramics are used in modern tools which are designed for abrasive use, slow cutting, or machining processes - i.e. not impacts. Diamond and carbide drillbits are common, but axe heads, shovel blades, and anything else that's supposed to hit stuff very hard is steel. The problem with pattern welding is that if we're talking about a modern sword, we're probably talking about a sword that can be mass-produced inexpensively. Pattern welding is likely to be fairly labor-intensive compared to having a single-material blade that can simply be cut out with a plasma or waterjet cutter and ground to the precise blade profile. Another issue is actually bonding the two materials. Carbon steel welds fairly well, but many of the highest performance modern steel alloys have poor weldability, and you can't really weld steel to plastic (a high-performance epoxy might do okay, but again you're adding quite a bit of labor cost). Pattern welding may simply be unnecessary because modern steel alloys can achieve much better impact toughness at the same hardness than the alloys swords were historically made out of. So, what will work? Well, while we haven't really put a lot of collective effort into making a better sword, we do have a source for what's effective for melee weapons in general. Aside from the various tools - shovels, axes, cuisinart and brush cutter blades, stump grinders, and earthmoving equipment - that use steel for parts which are expected to be exposed to impacts, there is one notable set of examples of modern melee weapons - objects which are used to strike an armored opponent at close range and remain usable afterwards while causing serious harm to the target (as opposed to single-use projectiles such as tank shells). The strongest melee weapons in the world today, and I think probably in the history of the world, aren't swords - nor are they axes, spears, or warhammers. In fact, they aren't usable by humans at all - not directly at least. They are the spinning weapons used in the sport of combat robotics - a mixture of discs, bars, "drums" (aka lengthwise-spinning cylinders with teeth), and shells. These are not elegant, precise weapons. In the heavyweight class, where total weights are comparable to an adult human in armor, they typically weigh between 20 and 50 kg (the heaviest are shells, which also act as armor), are powered by motors producing over 10 kW (13 HP) in most current examples, and spin at thousands of rpm with tip speeds as high as 400 MPH. They are not particularly sharp: they may have sharp edges, but are much blunter than even a tree-felling axe, but they make up for it by simply tearing through armor far stronger than that of any medieval knight, striking with as much energy as a .50 caliber bullet. The construction of these machines takes advantage of many modern technologies: lithium batteries, brushless motors, CNC manufacturing and 3D printing, and modern materials such as titanium. What's my point? Well, the striking surfaces of these weapons are, almost always, made of STEEL, despite the proliferation of modern materials. In particular, they tend to use modern steel alloys that combine high hardness with high impact toughness, such as Chromoly alloys, shock-resistant tool steels such as S7, and wear-resistant steels such as AR400 and AR500 and "Hardox." How do we apply this to swords? Swords need to be very light, sharp, and springy by comparison. The thin blades mean even some shock-resistant tool steels may be too brittle, but something like 5160 or AR500 will likely be effective. There are other alloys such as L6 and 9260 which may perform even better, although I'm not too familiar with those. Certain stainless steels may also do okay, although their only real advantage over the non-stainless ones would be corrosion resistance. This applies whatever the type of sword as long as it is meant to be a practical weapon: cut-optimized, thrust-optimized, and cut-thrust blades all need high hardness to hold a sharp edge and/or point, high strength to let them flex without permanently bending (steels all have about the same stiffness, so the maximum strain before yielding is proportional to yield strength), and high impact toughness to prevent cracking, chipping, or shattering under impacts against hard objects such as other swords or armor (you might have to use your sword against someone wearing steel or ceramic ballistic plates, and you won't always hit the gaps in their armor). Titanium is probably not a good choice: yes it's light, but it's softer than steel and titanium swords will rapidly suffer edge damage if used in combat. It's also much, MUCH more expensive than most steel alloys. Aluminum is too soft, and other metals like tungsten are too soft, too weak, too dense, or too brittle. tl;dr The optimal sword material will vary a bit depending on the application, but it's still always going to be some sort of modern steel alloy that uses elements besides carbon to improve its properties. It's possible that monosteel blades made of very high performance alloys with poor weldability will outperform multi-hardness blades.
not just materials the design too. A modern sword could make use of springs and carbon fibre to completely change the design. think of a sword that can extend an extra foot of carbon spike near the tip. or a short sword that folds out into a longer sword like a flick knife. using joints or hinges made of titanium would allow things never possible with only steel. A spear with a retractable chain built into the shaft so as your swinging you could release the chain and turn it into a giant flail.
If you could choose any material to make a "perfect" sword... My first thought is that honestly steel is a damn good material for making swords from, which is why we make swords from it. If you wanted to make a sword for yourself and don't mind about the cost then idk, perhaps a titanium alloy? I know there are plastics out there which are strong and/or hard enough but usually lack the weight. Steel seems to have the perfect balance of being heavy enough to actually cut into something but light enough to swing it.
If costs aren't an issue, I'd personally go for a composite blade. Something like high carbon steel treated for wear and chemical resistance with a ceramic core (for balancing the blade, or adding weight to desired segments).
Mihalis Benko Of course ceramic is incredibly brittle, mostly used in industrial applications for it's heat resistance not so much strength or flexibility. Ceramic makes great breaks though.
9:59 That's why if you can ever get a hold of some elevator cable, it makes for a pretty good blade. It's already torqued. All you have to do is put it in your forge or furnace and beat it flat.
Assuming a general-purpose sword for fighting against various other swords from various historical periods, I'd want something like a longsword with a handguard, with a diamond or tungsten carbide leading edge, a mostly titanium body (for weight) and moulded polymer grips for both grip and comfort. Either that, or an Incubi Klaive. Goddamn those things look awesome.
For a mad-max kind of scenario, Sword and buckler, the sword regular and the buckler with a potent flash like a photographic camera, to blind your enemies at night
As a blacksmith, i have found 5160 to be the absolute best all around steel for a sword, its durable, flexible and holds a great edge. So long as it is heat treated and tempered properly. The only down side is it requires more rust prevention than others.
Hi Matt. Saw the Skallagrim video. We now know what materials to use to make a very efficient sword. But what KIND of sword? IMHO - a katana-rapier hybrid. A long sword (36+ inch blade) with the reach and thrusting quality of a rapier, but with the cutting quality of a katana. Just imagine a longer katana, with a spine not as thick, hence lighter and with the balance point closer to the hand. And has a more pointy end for thrusting, perhaps with a short back edge on the spine side. And better hand protection - the basket hilt of a rapier. And a longer hilt, enabling it to be used as a two handed weapon as well. Modern engineering calculations (impact loading, bending stress) can allow us to analyze possible stress factors and optimize dimensions of thickness and width, hence keeping it strong enough to chop, yet light and nimble enough for point work. Your thoughts please.
As a chef, I enjoyed becoming an expert with a blade. Your question can be answered at Williams Sonoma or any good cutlery store. Chef's knives these days are pretty high tech.
I imagine a titanium rapier or small sword would be excellent. They wouldn’t cut as well but the light weight would make them scary quick and they could be very stiff. Or you could make the edge of a wicked hard tool steel and the body of titanium. That would probably work alright for cutting swords.
oh also i think your best weapon would be a nano sharpened composite diamond edge on a ceramic and carbon nano tube matrix inner shaft. could wrap it in a stainless steel casing for ruggedness with a composite diamond finish in a pattern that would aid the blade in ripping through whatever material. imagine shark skin on the nano scale.
thought of this, and maybe it isn't cheap or economical but perhaps a blade made of zirconia ceramic? they make razor sharp kitchen knives that actually are quite bendable and shock resistant. its not metal at all but perhaps it would still be a bit too brittle for a sword. maybe a bit lighter as well.
Titanium Nitrate and Tungsten Carbide are used in industrial cutting. I think they could be brought into the bladed weapon category if people had a mind to figure it out. I think a titanium blade with the outer layer being titanium nitrate would be light and sharp, but I'm talking without knowing what I'm talking about
The best material for making a sword would definitely be hard light... But since we don't have that yet, I'll just go with a titanium edge, steel core, side sword...or maybe a sabre.
What if you had to go back in time? Would there be a benefit to something other than steel? I know Knight Errand makes the case that tungsten armor would be lighter.
One easy thing you could use to upgrade any kind of sword would be a coating of titanium nitride which is done on many modern tools. Gives the weapon a very hard surface far beyond any metal and doesn't affect most other properties of the weapon.
That's mine idea too. But it does change two other properties to the better. It makes the sword resistant to corrosion and gives it a nice colour. =) A drawback would probably be that if the sword gets a nick on the edge it would be more difficult to repair.
gurkfisk89 It is not really more difficult to repair. After you are done you just have to coat it again. After every bigger fight you would need to do it anyway if not even get a new sword, just as it always was, but at the fight itself it would be a big advantage. Coating in titanium nitride is nothing you can do at home anyway. It is literally something you would do in an industrial manner because you can, IF you can ^^
Alioth Ancalagon I was thinking about if you have to resharpen your sword. With a normal steel sword you can fix some edge damage with a whetstone. But if you have a TiN coating it would be difficult to sharpen as the material around the damage is so hard. I would like to do it to my swords, but the only PVD/CVD chambers that I would have any chance to use (if I say pretty please) are commonly used for coating silicon wafers and other small samples, and I don't have any sword under 15 cm. =)
gurkfisk89 The blade cannot really become dull before the TiN is already off. The TiN is extremely hard, what also means that it breaks off, if an impact is so strong that the blade gets damaged.
Alioth Ancalagon Yes, but that's the thing. Lets say that you get a nick in the edge, the TiN would not really help there as it's primarily the bulk material that fails in that case and not the sruface. The TiN at the nick might come off, but the TiN at either side of the nick would make it difficult to repair with a whetstone or file.
Thanks for the response, and good points. The blade shape is definitely important for the choice of material. Some materials would have lousy edge retention, but if you go for a dedicated thrusting sword you don't even need edges at all. Also for instance material that does not flex well would be much more suitable for a single-edged blade with thick spine, not a thin double-edged one.
As a general rule of thumb you could say that if there was an ultimate sword material it would already be consistently used for making swords. Although on the other side it might be an issue of prohibitive costs, and of course people are not dependent on swords anymore, so it's not high priority.
Then steel would be the ultimate sword material?
To be fair, bronze was once considered to be the ultimate sword material.
There might be another "ultimate material" in the future, maybe even laserswords.
LarsaXL depending on how you look at it, lead is the current ultimate material. After all, it's the base material of choice in most bullets, and given that most modern conflicts (wars, self-defences and so on) are typically resolved via guns... Granted that's maybe not in the spirit of this conversation.
You may want to look up some Ashby charts--they're an engineering quick reference tool for selecting materials.
LarsaXL
Swords:
Not in use experimental and expensive: Palladium glass, toughest material known at the moment.
Mainstream: high-end powder-metallurgical tool steel. There are many types available fitting for different blade shapes.
But we shouldn't forget that with steel the heat treatment can be much more important than the base material.
Bullets:
Tungsten & Uranium, heavier than lead and will ignite after going through the armored target killing the crew inside.
Gold would also be a superior choice, without being toxic...
Hi Skall. Yes, my instant response was that steel is basically still used for all modern knives, bayonets and tools, so some form of steel is still going to be the best choice for a modern sword in almost all cases. However, as you've implied, maybe cost is a bigger deciding factor than we know. Maybe if NASA were to take this on with a huge budget they'd actually use other materials. It's a pretty interesting question and I've interested to see what the experts say.
Three people dislike this video.... that's hilarious. Maybe they are offended by the colour of the wall.
You shouldn't assume people dislike this video for no reason. I disliked it because I'm offended by the color of the blinds.
maybe they were outraged when you mentioned that you weren't an expert at something?
Oh another note that in Virginia it is legal to carry a sword around in public place as long at it isn't concealed and is sheathed. Of course private institutions can of course ban you from entering for it though. Many Halloweens and leaving Ren faires have I walked down the streets with a rapier or a long sword at my side.
Gallowglass That is also legal in CA. It does not mean you won't be challenged, cuffed, stuffed, and take a ride to the police station. It just means that they later have to apologize and give the sword back. One guy got arrested for having a concealed weapon because the cop claimed the scabbard "concealed" his longsword.
3 out of 440? That's still pretty good :) I can't even see the dislike bar.
The usage of materials in military weapons has been revolutionized in the past few decades. For example the armor of tanks got like 10 times more efficient because people cared to develope them. From steel to composite armor etc. I think if swords were still in use and were developed like that they also could be vastly improved.
Fishyyy m1 Abrams uses depleted uraniumalloy armour and Chobham armour. Chobham is kinda like ceramic tiles. Used to displace the engery.
i studied evolution of tank armor before. the armor the abrams uses was originally infuenced by the armor used on the challenger 1 and 2. but the abrams uses depleted uranium that is graphite coated(because DU is toxic and pyrophoric). the armor layers are different too. if penetrated, even if the armor is not fully perforated; the tank crew and people around the vehicle, and those who will repair it afterwards are affected by DU toxicity. it is also slightly radioactive when it gets into the bloodstream. this is the reason why there was much secrecy about what this armor was made off(back then). however, even though there are side effects. the abrams is THE BEST TANK in the world. haha. id rather have 20 years shaved off my life span, that to die from anti tank weapons.
Chobham armour isn't tough though; the ceramic plates are sacrificial, which is why the armour is slab-sided. The encasing metal matrix gives the toughness, while the ceramic gives the resistance to plasma and high-velocity metal.
Can't see that being useful as a cutting edge/surface, because the opponents would just use guards and armour plate with ridges designed to engage the tough/soft elements of the matrix and break it around the brittle/hard elements.
I'd rather go with metals, because you can get a decent weld between them.
Modern tank armour is ridiculously overengineered and strangely worthless given that the consistent weakpoint on tanks is their tracks, and modern tank tracks are still vulnerable to a single AT mine or HEAT round strike.
it is also the desgin of the armor too . . . .sloped armor in variations since world war 2. Also, there is more attention paid to the crew, even the Russians now favor designs that prioritize crew survival.
I love when my favorite sword-related RUclipsrs mention eachother... it's like a cross-over of your favorite sitcom characters! *lightbulb* Lloyd and Matt both live in England. I WANNA SEE A VIDEO OF THEM SPARRING. GO GO GO.
Haha.
Matt would destroy Lloyd in a duel.
Unless the dueling weapon of choice was swing dance. ;)
lloyd would dance circles around matt... literally lol
When you talk about the combinations of hardness and toughness you want in a sword as well as the way it performs it’s function, even today carbon steel is still the best material for the job. Even in the nuclear power industry, we still use steel in applications where we care about an alloy that is hard and tough and we don’t care about corrosion resistance. There are certainly very hard alloys made from cobalt and tungsten, but they don’t have the type of toughness and flexibility you want in a sword.
Edit: I should note, that a sword is not generally an application where you’d care about corrosion resistance. Steel can rust, but that’s not hard to prevent with proper care.
Pretty sure maraging steel has a better combination of hardness and toughness. The international fencing federation uses it in foils and epees because it's about 10 times tougher than carbon steel. There's several ratings of progressively harder and less tough maraging steels, but you do get more toughness at a given hardness than carbon steel.
PS: Maraging steels are martensite alloys high in nickel, and cobalt, but low in carbon.
Just make a sword out of something that's super lethally radioactive and then wear a radiation suit. Then all you have to do is walk within like 100 feet of your enemy and he just dies.
This actually is a significant question for a fictional world like Dune, where the Holtzman shield makes projectile weapons highly ineffective.
I wonder about a type of metal lasso or net that could catch the whole person and then constrict slow enough to phase through the shield.
Shiga wire homie
A sword made out of pommels would be unstoppable
+PinkLegue that would be a flail lol end them rightly
What if the opponent has a shield or armor made of pommels then?
+S.F Moore no armor made from nokia handys
That's too much power for one person to have
No no, terrible idea. Such an impact would cause the end of the universe in a massive explosion bigger than the Big Bang itself.
Demons from another dimension come to invade the earth. Their only weakness is swords. After many swordfights with them, we found out that our steel swords are weak against theirs.
The best that can be achieved at this moment is a spring tempered mono blade made from a powder metallurgical alloy. Something along the chemical lines of 3V, S7, 5160, or 9260 manufactured with the aforementioned process.
As for handles/ wraps/ sheathes - composite variants like G10 or Micarta are probably the best option, although there's nothing wrong with stabilized wood either. Wraps could be made of composite polymers, or fibrous materials similar to Kevlar, although this has little impact on actual performance.
The problem with diamond dust coating is it doesn't do much for strikes. It's only any good for abrasion. And it's used for tools as the cutting element of a tool is easily removed and replaced. A sword blade would be much more securely attached so if the diamond particles got worn away it would be too difficult to try to add more, the only real way of returning a good edge is via sharpening a steel edge or point.
Modern homogeneous spring steel. It has the best combination of durability, edge retention, hardness and weight we know of.
I have had this discussion with many likeminded people over the years and while there is still a lot of debate over economics, the consensus on material to be used did arrive. It involved a Damascus steel inspired core but involved using synthetic diamonds as the carbon source in the crucible to really strengthen the carbide patterns. For the edge, a moderately sharp cemented carbide (primarily made from tungsten carbide with cobalt and chromium used as binders) could be used..With over 85HRC hardness and the pattern welded steel core, a sword made such would be deadly enough I presume.
Great point about using a mix of materials. Something a lot of people don't know, even tank armour isn't just made of steel anymore but rather a ceramic composite of classified composition.
"It's essentially a thrust only weapon.
It does have a very very hard tip.
You want it to be very very stiff.
but it doesn't necessarily need to have edges."
*giggle*
im 12 again :>
Ah, one of THOSE uncles...
5160, 1095, L6........Those are the steels I like to use for swords
Based on your discussion:
Purpose: dueling is reinstated in legal context.
Weapon: A triangular carbon fiber resin shaft with a steel or tungsten needle sharp point for penetration and Razer sharp fins to maximise internal injury. This dueling weapon would essentially be the marriage of an epee or foil with the devastating point of a modern compound bow hunting arrow. The idea would be to thrust a broadhead into your opponent.
modern context with a modern solution.
G Nelson And what if I have a 1796 pattern light cavalry saber? Or God forbid a basket hilt sword. The problem with dedicated thrusting swords is that they’re very easy to counter. A thrust os very easy to prey as where a cut is much more difficult. Especially if you thrust to the head where you can literally just move yourself out of the way.
Also, even if you make a hit with the thrust, if you’re in the middle of a duel you might not even feel it. However if someone cleaves through your shoulder and chest, you’re on the ground in two seconds or less. I know the context is reinstated legal dueling, but someone like myself doesn’t carry a sword that doesn’t have a better chance at victory. Like Matt said, unless you’re going up against another small sword then the small sword is the worst sword to have.
I'm reminded of robot combat, where weapons have largely settled on tool steel impactors attached to primarily aluminum weapon arms. Aluminum tends to be best at not breaking for a given weight but isn't best at cleaving metal armor so the edges are steel. The way robots tend to do it would be way bulky for human-scale weapon so naturally a person wouldn't use the exact same thing.
3 points :
1) context (as always)
2) think about different material than metal (today's condensed matter physics understanding is amazing!)
3) think about mixing these materials: hardest for the hedges and point, more flexible for the core
Not that I'm a metallurgist, but it would seem that a pommel made of Francium encased in glass (to avoid water vapor) could potentially be used to end them rightly, and with a massive explosion to boot (Francium will explode violently when exposed to water, like all elements of its family).
One interesting material would be transparent metallic glass alloys or other non metallic materials. Having a sword with perhaps up to 99% invisibility would be extremely dangerous especially if it had better capabilities then steel. Though I dont know how sharp they could be made to be.
Metallic glass isn't transparent. It looks just like normal metal. The physical properties are what is different.
@@WJS774 The transparent sword was just an example of a special property you could select for by manipulating the general structure, in this case I was thinking of transparent Aluminum. There are obviously other properties aside from transparency you might be interested in which changes the question if you want metallic or non-metallic materials.
Also last I heard they did say you could have transparent metallic glass through quantum bullshit.
@@Dasmaster1 'Transparent aluminium' isn't a metal. It's a ceramic, with all that that entails. Extremely hard and heat resistant, but very brittle. You would not want to try making a weapon out of it. There still isn't really anything better to make weapons out of than steel, though of course today's steels are way better than 20th century steels, let alone earlier ones.
1:20 I swear he said it: this video is about context..forget swords, forget mediveal times..context
Form-wise, I'd vote for saber. It's general purpose and provides hand protection.
In my opinion, it's worthy of re-engineering the entire design of the sword akin to the evolution of bows into the modern recurve and compound bows. Modern bows corrected a lot of flaws of the old bows - particularly the archer's paradox by making them center-shot. Rather than the whole bow being one part, bows are now segmented into risers and limbs. So, rather than approaching this from just a materials perspective, it might be proper to start from a mechanical perspective.
From what I see, akin to what the archer's paradox was for bows, the main issue with swords is that they break. The way we've compensated for this is that we make them into springs (or ignore the issue entirely). The challenge is to make them as stiff as possible (so that they transfer the force to the opponent rather than disperse it in the vibration) without breaking.
Off the top of my head, maybe we can have something like a safety razor type of sword - think of your safety razor but in the shape of a sword with replaceable, segmented edges. The body will be very stiff since the edges can break as much as they want since you'll just be replacing the edges and not the entire blade.
Bows are inherently more mechanically complex though. The way they function kinda gave way to the eventual rope-and-pulley approach of design. Also, do swords HAVE any issues similar to the archer's paradox that needs fixing?
At its basic level, the sword is a lever, and your hand is the fulcrum. The power that moves the lever then comes from either your wrist/arm if you're one-handing it, or your offhand if you're two handing it. How do you improve upon that mechanically, exactly? I mean I like your mental approach but I'm not sure where it would lead. The only thing I can imagine is some kind of setup that secures the sword to your hand/wrist/arm more securely and then... has some other mechanisms to provide power more easily? I dunno, that seems weird.
Darlos9D
Like I said, the brittleness vs. stiffness issue needs to be tackled. I think it's analogous to the tension aspect of bows - rather than the tension going through the entire bow, the tension on modern bows is now just mostly on the risers. Bows also used to be very simple - bow + string - but now it's riser + limbs + cams + string.
I suppose that would be the one flaw, but I'm not sure how materials science is ever gonna solve it with blunt dumb materials. How do you have a material that's both rigid AND not brittle? You'd have to get into some wacky nanotech level of science at that point, where the material adapts to the forces currently acting upon it, and possibly even repairs its own fractures after the fact. Which would be totally radical.
Darlos9D
Maybe blades sitting on springs? Springs absorb the shock but will also return it so no loss in energy going into the opponent. I actually suggested earlier a safety-razor type of sword.
It all depend on what you want to cut or stab with your sword, if you're still tryng to murder unarmored people i guess that spring steel is still a good choice, but if your opponent is wearing a very good armor, much better than plate mail, then i would consider a sword that uses the mechanism of reciprocating saws, but it is obviously built to be handled like a normal sword.
Heh, how many channels can refer to 'wood experts' chiming in on a discussion and not be joking.
lol
Check out bushcraft channels and carpentry, plenty of people know how to work wood.
jaknife99 theres a whole load of websites full of many many precious individuals who know how to work wood
At my university, we have our own dendrolab purely for wood. I have professor's that have a doctorate in wood quality's. And I, as a student Forest and Nature conservation, should know a lot about it as wel, but well, I forgot most things about it. But there are real experts about wood as wel, not just woodworking.
I have to disagree with the choice of diamond dust. You're mixing grinding with cutting. Almost always when diamond dust is used on tools, it's because the tool is used to grind through a hard material, usually metal or stone. It's used for being both very hard and for being abrasive. Swords don't need to be abrasive, if anything they would be better off without an abrasive surface on the sides of the blades that may make the cutting through the flesh harder to do.
Now, as a construction worker, someone who has to work with these materials fairly often, I think you will want a tungsten carbide edge As far as metallic materials go, that's the hardest cost effective material we currently have. You're going to want a more springy material to make up the spine of the sword, fortunately you have a variety of spring steels available that will be very good for this purpose.
Now, if I wanted to be brave and venture away from steel, I imagine you could make the edge of the sword out of different kinds of carbon composites, but I worry those would be far too likely to shatter. I still do think steels would be the best option even today.
And of course, I agree the handles should be made with ash or hickory, and the scabbard should be a good tough plastic that would be cheap to produce, easy to manufacture, but could still take a good beating. What do you think of HDPE?
Diamond dust is indeed a poor choice, but nowadays vapor deposition lets you grow continuous diamond crystal onto many surfaces with essentially atomic-perfect bonding (and you can grow it to a single atom width, too, for a perfect cutting edge, should you desire that) - so it's probably a pretty reasonable choice then. Some of the carbide materials as you mention are worthwhile alternatives to consider though, definitely.
HDPE is a good choice for a handle, yeah, though so is carbon fibre (it's really quite cheap these days), particularly chopped fibre even though it's strictly weaker, it's a LOT cheaper than continuous fiber. Nylon is another good contender here.
For Tungsten carbides, the most I have heard is T10 high speed tool steel, consisting of Tungsten instead of Iron to make the steel.
The better question is compatibility uniting spring/chromium steel with tungsten steel for shock and edge retention balance.
Thinking of a single edge sword with a thicker spine to handle non-combat applications like machetes and bolos have achieved in jungle environments, but a double edge at the tip area for thrust or unorthodox slashing directions.
i would love to see a sword out of bucky paper. Just imagine the durability and cutting power.
for a light sword not intending to do any parrying , I like the idea of a Titanium body with a steel or maybe even a ceramic edge. For a chopping and parrying blade, a Titanium body can still work, and high carbon steel for the edge, you still want something not too brittle on the edge since it can still chip off if it is struck hard enough. and the diamond coatings on industrial are usually just industrial diamonds brazed to the blade and are intended to grind through material like stone, not cut like a blade.
Diamond dust would also make the blade difficult to clean and it would eat through your scabbard.
Finally someone else who thought of titanium. A Damascus steel blade using high carbon steel and titanium would be medium weight and super strong.
***** I have heard that titanium does not always retain its edge well, it is the ideal armor though.
Shining Darkness
I saw a youtube video a while back where someone forged a Ti sword and torture tested it, it actually held up pretty well.
Awesome!
I would imagine carbon fiber/kevlar like material could work as a sort of reinforcing skeleton like rebar in cement, possibly allowing for a way to make a thinner sword while maintaining overall durability. I'm sure someone can tell me why this wouldn't work but I'd love to see an attempt to make something like this
People don't try to make a better sword because science has already proven that the Katana is the perfect sword.
/sarcasm
Actually, I agree.
I almost fell out of my chair with Norse fury. Had to show your entire post to calm down again. Katana fanboys be damned. They give me high blood pressure.
scholagladiatoria
What
scholagladiatoria WHAT
scholagladiatoria
ahaha
In 'The Diamond Age' by Neal Stephenson, a character uses nanotechnology to create essentially a chainsaw on a molecular level. It's a sword with a main body of carbon and tiny 'teeth' comprised of diamond that run rapidly around the edge.
I’m 6 years late to your comment, but that sounds absolutely awesome! I’ll have to look into that book.
It makes quite a lot of sense for either diamond dust or carbide to be used on the very edge (very similar to how some drills have carbide tips), with a basic carbon steel structure body.
Many different methodologies at play here. You have influence from ancient Japanese swords using differential hardness on the blade, modern bi-metal hacksaw blades that use high speed steel (M2) welded to a plain carbon steel body, and of course the carbide/diamond coating.
Pretty awesome stuff.
on the streets most dangerous altercations you're going to come across are going to be within a few yards and getting into a fire fight in a public area could cause a lot of unwanted collateral. So it could be thought of as a more "responsible" form of self protection to carry a sword instead of just a pistol?
in this scenario, most people won't expect to use this more than twice in a life time. So you need it to stand up to a few thrusts and cuts, but not necessarily a lot of them. You want it to be reliable and handle being packed up for a move or something. Cheap is preferable to expensive. And you want a very sharp edge.
What you won't be dealing with is lots of armor or a variety of melee weapons. So maybe a polymer blade and handle with a high carbon steel edge with a slight curve?
Yes, but most modern humans don't have the intestinal fortitude to handle the amount of bloody mess a sword makes so they are still considered primal and brutal. It also takes a lot more forethought and determination to kill someone with a sword. A jury is much more likely to condemn you for defending yourself with one, in spite of the law even when it allows self defense.
Chris Dron The biggest consideration for carrying a weapon for self-defence against street fights/muggers/etc. is that it me easily carried and have potential for concealment. People who carry pistols do so because it's impractical to carry a rifle on a day to day basis.
Therefore, if we're talking about swords, they would most likely become daggers or knives. At the very least, they would be small swords (in size, I don't means smallswords specifically).
I would like to see something along the lines of expandable batons. They already have telescoping asps; we could put a small thrusting blade at the end of one of those. The telescoping body would only need to be impact resistant. The blade would be short, six inches at the most, and therefore not need as much flex. It could be made of D2 tool steel, tungsten, titanium. Anything, really. Just something strong, sharp, and impact resistant.
Marcus Armstrong the biggest issue is that people are often killed with their own weapons (often true of guns for example) so ideally you want something an assailant would find hard to use against you, and designed in such away that it’s next to impossible to kill yourself with it
i think the question is what metal makes an indestructible blade that keeps an edge like crazy .
"Zombies aren't using swords back at you."
Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't know we needed your approval to use swords. I BETTER LET ALL MY ZOMBIE FRIENDS KNOW, MATT DOESN'T LIKE THEM USING SWORDS! Are there any OTHER marginalized groups who can't use swords? Should I tell my Hispanic friends, "Oh, Matt says you can't use swords anymore. You'll just have to bite and claw people."
Freaking racist.
+John Smith Oh great we have the zombie justice warriors at it again. We get it you're the most inclusive group around anyone is welcome as long as they only like the things you like and act like you. Don't you even start, you zombies aren't even a race, you're a culture so stuck up your terrible diet. How do you know someone's a zombie? Don't worry they'll tell you.
Hellsing they still dont ise sword they are primitives that only use assault rifles and submachine guns with the occasional semi automatic pistols shotguns and revolvers
Thats why I love your channel relative to other historical weapon channels because it's not just about the weapon but whats around the weapon and you do a great job at presenting and explaining this to people like me.
DIY small sword: Steel cable with sharpened point xD
Henry Wang I've many times, had to wrestle with #4 gage conductor :P
How about a time travel scenario, you are going back to year 1200 or something like that. You will be fighting normal swords from that time. You cant take guns and such because that would give you away more than a modern sword. What would be the best sword and best materials to fight (1v1) vs middle ages weapons?
Doesn't matter because as an untrained scrub, you'll lose either way.
Why untrained? If you have time travel there is no reason you have to not know how to swing a sword
I would go for full Italian white plate (looks better and is equally effective as German gothic plate) with a halberd as weapon. I don't know enough about current metals to say which materials.
the modern materials is exactly the subject of debate. skall and crew came up with a titanium core and tungsten carbide edge for a weapon, allowing flexibility and edge retention. for armour, i can only presume kevlar plus titanium or some sort of plasteel would be best. you want protection from piercing, slashing, and smashing sorts of weapons and you want it to be as light as possible.
kevlar is a poor choice against blades and arrows.
Well for the modern high-tech sword debate, the context I prefer to use is this:
In a fictional world where the gun was never invented (but we still have modern metallurgy), what materials would countries use to make their weapons?
Trepur349 Also, what would the weapons look like?
Very interesting rabbit hole.
+Trepur349 I don't think armies would be using swords anyway. Blunt weapons are much more likely to do meaningful damage against what modern plate armour would look like if it was made with all the materials we have now. It could be much lighter and much tougher than the medival versions and it would probably be completely resistant to bladed weapons.
Maybe we'd be using weapons that grab the opponent and use hydraulic pressure to crush them inside the armour.
+Trepur349 That is quite obvious. Valerian steel of course.
+Trepur349 Most likely, though, there is no modern metallurgy- most modern metallurgy developed to deal with high heat and pressures- either in a firearm or in an engine. I don't know if you can get to today, metallurgically speaking, without firearms.
+Jon Hendrickson what about steam cannons?
Titanium or Titanium Alloy core with an advanced ceramic edge like tungsten carbide or silicon nitride coated with a bit of diamond dust. Cross guard or basket should made with something very strong, possibly titanium again, I like tungsten for its amazing strength, but its very dense and heavy and would probably throw the sword's balance off.
Now, if you could catch your opponent's blade like a shield that gets cut into, that would be spectacular. If you would put a synthetic rubber or some pine wood where a cross guard would catch a blade and build the cross guard so it puts a great deal of pressure on the material horizontally, it might pinch a blade which slices into it, quickly twist your sword about, and you may just disarm them!
The handle, I feel, would again be titanium core with a thin layer of high grip synthetic rubber.
The pommel should be a bright stainless steel and worked into an elaborate design with the person's coat of arms, the maker's logo, the head of an animal, or some simple handsome shape like a triangle or small pyramid with sloped edges.
titanium armour :3
Jintaro Kensei Why, are the advanced ceramics too brittle for a sword?
too much so. I mean, ceramics are excellent for cutlery since they don't oxidise vitamins, but accidentally cut into a chicken bone and kiss your edge goodbye. There are titanium tactical knives though, so I wouldn't be surprised if a titanium sword was made. High vanadium/chromium titanium edge and high carbon/nitrogen titanium spine would probably be the best bet at the moment.
Although probably the best of the best sword would be made of graphene, but that would have to be actually assembled molecule by molecule rather than forged.
Jintaro Kensei no titanium swords just no
Jintaro Kensei Gotcha, your suggestion sounds better, and probably easier to make too.
12:00
I think you were looking for Kevlar. In Terms of ratio of stability and weight that is about the best we got.
The context is that I'm going back in time and want to use my "magic" sword to prove that I am the one true king...
I gotta point out that there is a realistic scenario that might come up if our space industry takes off and that is guns in space on a ship is not the smartest thing to do so this may lead to the rebirth of the age of swords.
In this context I imagine that swords would likely not have pointed and designed for much thrusting because we have body armor that that can handle just about any thrust a human can generate and that would make not using guns fairly a waste of time, so the space sword I think would be designed to slash, with little to no piercing ability, and would be mid-length weapon due to confined spaces.
I could also see it doubling as some sort of taser or vomit inducing baton as well. Afterall these would likely be introduced or evolved from police units who's objective is to bring down the target without killing them if they can. The cutting aspect could be scene as preventative ability to cut their space suit to disallow them to leave the ship or to get through to deliver the stun. I see them as wanting a single weapon to open the suit and stun the person so it makes sense to combine it into a single weapon.
That's what I think anyways.
+Durakken High pressure environments also tend to respond poorly (the air lighting on fire is not generally a desirable outcome) to open flame (such as muzzle flash) so perhaps either deep undersea or on another planet with different pressurization?
+Durakken Actually, most modern body army can't handle knife or sword piercing it. They're just meant to stop bullets, and also do well against slashing weapons. So it would actually be the opposite of what you said. With the exception of reinforced glass/plastic like riot shields and vehicle armor. But we don't use them in body armor. We would prioritize piercing swords, and have slashing as secondary. That is unless, of course, if steel body armor makes a comeback. And it would be steel on par, or even stronger (since you don't have to worry about body armor holding an edge or anything, and can prioritize durability and hardness in it's construction) than what are swords would be made of. If that's the case, then maces, warhammers, and spears would make a comeback as well. But the rest of what you said is highly accurate. I can totally see police adopting those tactics if we were to begin space colonization.
James Glass I thought it was both, but more with piercing because of bullets are piercing weapons. Oh well.
I don't see spears being adopted again because of the limited space for it to be used in. There might be some sort of collapsable polearm though and if somehow you invade a ship you'd use a 3 or 4 man group to create a line and walk down the halls in a line as a strategy to sweep through a ship.
+James Glass
Yeah, because people will keep making and using the same, ineffective-in-the-new-situation body armor that we have today, gleefully dying to stab wounds because it's impossible to make body armor better suited to stabbing protection.
why on earth would you need to invent context to answer such a simple question..
We still use knifes. Do we use steel knifes or something else? How about hammers, saws, tongs, nails and all sort of other tools? Did we really found a way of significantly improving them?
I'd say not, and that's because it may not be possible to significantly improve those age old designs. Swords may be another design which we pretty much perfected long time ago.
Anyway, pattern welding is a way of getting around the problem of scarcity, not a way of improving quality. Welds are inherently weak and if we weld two different steels together there is a problem that they need to be hardened and tempered at different temperatures. Today smiths can control the temperature to the fraction of a degree, so they can get away with it, but Viking smiths could not (usually) and their swords were often garbage, frankly speaking.
For what it may be worth, I have several very old axes built as they used to build them, with good steel at the edge and low carbon steel elsewhere. Part of the edge on one of them chipped out, one socket broke apart and two others are deformed from hammering against the log (one socket was too brittle, two others a bit too soft). On the other hand, a cheap hatched I bought in a supermarket built out of current monosteel is way better than those old hacks.
Yes, pattern welding, differential hardening and all that witchcraft is waay overrated in my personal opinion.
It steel chosen because it is the best mechanically, or because it is very good and also cheap and easy to work with? I'm interested to know if there are better materials if cost is no issue.
scholagladiatoria Titanium is tough, but not as hard as good carbon steel. Ceramic blades can be slightly harder, but not very tough. Overall steel seems to be the winner, but what do I know? I'm not an expert, and I would gladly make some stupid statement which would prompt someone with real knowledge to chime in and correct me. ;-)
bakters "and all sort of other tools"
Well, there has been some real advancement in cutting tools for turning procesess for example. From steel to high-speed steel to tungsten carbide in a cobalt matrix with a hard surface coating.
Tunnel drills are an other really good example, today they are massive machines made of a combination of many different materials, you can't even compare it to a steel pickaxe anymore.
gurkfisk89 Yes, there are some specialized machines which do not use just steel for cutting, but often enough they are more grinding than cutting machines, are they not?
Plasma cutters. That thing cuts, and it's not steel. Water cutters are similar. Laser cutters. Yes, occasionally we use something else to cut with.
bakters Cutting tools for turning procesess does clearly cut into materials. Tunnel drills on the other hand are more a mixture of grinding and pounding.
Great video! I'm not an enthusiast, I don't own any kind of sharp knives or swords other than a few kitchen knives. However I appreciate the depth you went into when answering this and found it very interesting.
Maybe swords can even go past the point of being just a sharp object. Maybe mechanical swords that can adapt to different situations. For example a collapsable sword that can be worn and concealed much more comfartably and still have the range of a longer sword when it was needed. Or maybe the opposite, a telescopic sword that can expand to get more reach in the thrust and rectract to be more nimble again. I know this has many drawbacks and problems but like the smallsword, maybe it can be good enough for the intended purpose. Sometimes the highest priority is for the wapon to be easy to carry. Wich is why pistols, smallswords, collapsable batons and bowie knives are often preferred over more cumbersome but better weapons.
Energy swords are common in science fiction, and maybe they are on to something. How aboout an electrified sword that can stun as well as cut, like a tazer. A small cut might temporarily paralyze their arm allowing you to follow up with a killing attack. Even the flat of the blade could be used to take someone down without causing a bleeding wound. Maybe it can even travel trough blade contact and into your opponents hands causing them to drop their weapon after a succesful parry, but that would be easy to counter with insulation.
Or maybe you could use energy to make the cut itself. I am not sure wether a lightsaber is even possible but we have plasma cutters that can cut trough steel with ease. How about if you put one of those on the point of your sword and kept the rest of the sword like it is, then you would have a weapon capable of defending like a sword and able to thrust trough any armor. It might make for a less agile sword, but that is often the drawback of anti-armor weapons. (remember the flanged mace)
Just seen an extendable rapier today that expands in length to allow it to be carried when swords were limited to 1 yard when carried openly
Stephen Costello
I would like to see that.
It does make an interesting point, regulations and laws have a lot to do with what weapons are carried and how people try to circumvent the restrictions.
The problem is the mechanics that would go into making a sword like that, and if it would hold up even if you had them. A collapsable sword could easily snap, even if you have the best materials to wind up whatever you have into the hilt in order to let it stay in place and as one shape. That’s why they were never made.
Nitrided medium carbon steel core or titanium core with tungsten carbide edges. Sounds like something that could actually cut through a sword lol
The best material you can make a sword is plasma.. no kidding O_0
+Mihail Atanasov plasma is not a material -.-
It is the 4th state of matter, so that makes it a material in the state of plasma
Good luck with a plasma sword.
Seriously though, plasma swords are some of the dumbest stuff I've seen in this series of videos.
Plasma is too hot. Sorry, it didn't work.
Someone on youtube made one out of polycarbonate. It was vey thick but suprisingly effective against various materials. He even cut through a 2x4 with it.
If guns were hypothetically vaporised off the face of the earth? That would be an interesting context.
I wonder how long it would take for guns to appear again... Even if all the knowledge of guns was erased from history.
77jarim
Not long unless you erase all knowledge of gun powder too.
77jarim if you still had gunpowder, it wouldn't take very long I guess
Sucka Mehoff If there's one area in which mankind has been consistently creative and brilliant, it's finding ways to kill things. Even without gunpowder, someone would probably find another suitable alternative.
Lord Camelslayer
Oh hell yeah. Humans wouldn't even miss a blink. It might even do our species some good to go back to the iron age for another century or two.
I wonder if monocrystalline forging like is done with jet turbine blades would be advantageous for modern day high tech swords.
that is how super alloy is made to my understanding (since the melting points of titanium-nickel-cobalt-lead-vanadium-etc. metals used in super alloy are so far apart) thus since superalloys are critical in modern fighting sword use, yes that kind of forging is necessary.
Titanium... Lighter than steel, stronger than steel in all ways, does not rust, and is more abundant than wrought iron (which is made into steel). Problem is, titanium needs absurd amounts of heat to become malleable. We just need very, very hot forges, and some skilled smiths. Titanium is by far the best, most logical metal for swords.
BloodstainedSinner Everything I'm reading is saying that Titanium isn't hard/strong enough, and it's comparable to the weakest steel.
BloodstainedSinner Doesn't hold an edge. Too malleable. I have a titanium hammer and it is wonderful to pound nails with but when you whack it against steel the face flattens out. More modern ti- hammers have a steel face that screws on. You would have to design a steel edge insert for the long sword blade. I have seen titanium knives that have carbide grit edges but have never tried one. Ti is notch sensitive so if you whacked it hard with a steel blade it might crack at the notch.
BloodstainedSinner Not quite my friend.
Michael Chrest I think a Tungsten would make a better blade than steel, since it is way harder and resiliant, but heavier than steel. Maybe a tungsten based steel could be realy good to for the whole weapon, since it is not realy heavier than steel but a little bit more resiliant and harder.
DarkEternal6 Ya I know that it would be stupid to make a full blade of pure tungsten (It is so heavy nwa), but you can make tungsten based steel or even carbon based tungsten wich can be worked like steel and is not as heavy as pure tungsten ( still something like twice as heavy as steel) so this is why I recommend the tungsten based steel (Steel mixed with a bit of tungsten to harden it).
I imagine that a modern sword would be a narrow gladius, for stabbing through the joints of advanced armour, perhaps with an integrated taser of some sort. But i've really got no idea, and just look forward to seeing (hopefully) the sword making a comeback to warmaking.
My wife walked in at 5:55
As cnc programmer I thought that similar construction as, for example , milling tools would be great. Realtively soft steel core with carbide inserts for the edge. Torsion and bending could be a problem, but as an idea I think it's cool at least.
From scientists point of view, pretty much the same materials old swords were made from. You must imagine it took time but in Europe at least metallurgy was pretty advanced at that time. Better yet the same quality of steel is more difficult to make now due to the process we produce steel now that adds imperfections that cannot be removed in any remotely worthwhile process. (Still the steel now is good enough for what we use now)
Diamonds are hard but their toughness (although good) is not suitable for a sword. Same problems go with most ceramics. Amazing hardness but lacking toughness.
Wolfram (Tungsten for Americans) Is used in industrial edges for its heat resistance, and honestly it's actually various Wolfram-Nitride compounds that are most often only coated on (unstable in water ...also counts as ceramic already)
Or Wolfram-Carbide yes harder also stiffer than steel, but also twice as heavy and the stiffness comes with a downside, it is less resistant to metal fatigue than a good steel is.
Forget Aluminium and Titanium unless you want a long solid state lecture on why not.
As for nano carbon fibres (I hope the commenter mentioned meant tubes) pricey and difficult to incorporate in the material at temperature into the steel structure.
Far more promising price as well as metallurgic wise are ceramic fibres in steel. A project from the metallurgic institute in Slovenia. First results are promising and the technique offers a continuous transition from steel to ceramic.
The last point to mention is that apart from a good steel sword being better at being a sword than other materials could provide. A really good steel sword still already costs X000 € where X is not limited to single digits but is more than 1. Any more exotic material would be eye-wateringly expensive.
As for armour, there is a reason armour stopped, it is far easier to design a projectile capable of penetrating it than to produce thin enough material to hold it. There is simply no need to have a better penetrating bullet/shell, in fact it would be counter productive. Bullets/shells are made to turn unstable in material they are made to destroy body/stuff. The difference between AP and normal rounds are when this unstable state begins. For un-armoured it would be best on impact for armoured it should absorb X J of energy prior to loosing stability. Silly..but you counter AP rounds by not wearing armour. You do get a hole...but it's a cleaner one that lets you walk away.
But that's just from a scientific point of view.
Great answer, thanks :-)
Er, I'd probably like to see some evidence backing up the claim that modern steels aren't of a better quality for swords, as opposed to 'historical' steel (for lack of a better term). It may be true for 'general purpose' steels, but for specialty steels it seems extremely unlikely. Materials science has come a long way.
Daniel Blay Had something longer written, but removed it. Lets just say it is possible but difficult.
Also there is no "general purpose" steel as you so put it. All have a purpose and if an engineer does not use it for its purpose than it simply fails or is dangerous.
Axel Alexson
If cost isn't an issue, then 'possible but difficult' is fine. But yes, I do understand there's not really such a thing as a general purpose steel. What I really mean is between commonly used and cheap(ish) steels, and highly tailored expensive steels.
Also, I only got to read the first paragraph or so of your response, so I'm curious as to what it was. I appreciated the effort.
Axel Alexson
Interesting stuff, I always thought the problem of unwanted contamination was no longer such a big problem for high quality steels and more something mostly concerning the earlier parts of the industrial revolution, where steels were at the lowest point in quality.
What's you take on amorphous metals? (apart from palladium, which might be an option, costing 20'000+ in raw materials alone for a normal sized blade)
I honestly have to say I would go with a plasma sword. Using superheated plamsa as the blade contained inside of a magnetic field. It is basically a Lightsaber we've been able to make them for ten years now. Currently in the process of making them smaller. Think computers when they first came out.
Where are the wood-experts?
You mean my ex gf?
Dom Lamson If she left you does that mean she found the quality of your wood to be inferior?
The main problem I have with diamond blades are that diamonds stick to fat. In many places in the world, diamonds are mined by sifting mined materials onto a ramp covered in rendered fat or lard and places in running water. There's a similar device used for gold panning, where there are steps on the ramp that the gold sinks into.
tungsten carbide edge, titanium core/body and a liner around the titanium of ar500 steel to get apropriate weight if needed.
Here's a thought: you have a sword made out of harder materials that almost anything else. Cuts through even steel if used with enough force. Couched in a frame that absorbs some of the impact but still "pushes" the blade back during a cut. Springs back enough for the somewhat-brittle edge to have space to move but not enough to fail.
A weird idea: Would it make sense to make an impact-sword? Like an impact-baton that has fluid inside to drive additional force when struck (the idea is to shock nerves in the muscles). Here it would help drive the edge deeper or even past the hardness of protective material.
The ultimate material would be Adamantium, clearly. :D
I think something else that’s very important is sword design. Not just cut vs thrust or a mixture, but the actual design of the blade. Is it something like a broadsword? Or is it a cavalry saber? For thrusting is it a small sword? Or something like the Troopers saber? If it is a smallsword, is it a triangular cross section, a Colichmarde, or a Spadroon?
In short, like you said, it’s about context. There are definitely things that every sword could share and benefit from (say blending the steel with titanium) but there’s never a one size fits all with sword design.
It’s just like when people say longsword vs Katana. They can both be good in they’re own right, but it depends on what they’re made from, what style of fencing they use, who’s had longer to train, and even what kind of longsword or Katana you’re using.
People just need to realize there can never be a one stop shop for swords.
I disliked it because i came to see what the title said, and left empty-handed. You spiraled around for 13+ minutes saying all kinds of things that aren't on-topic, instead of just messaging the guy saying the truth: "I don't know"
good, well-thought out info, for sure. But in a real sense, the title is click-bait, instead of the thumbnail.
The title really isn't click bait. Aside from the fact that the question essentially has, and will never have, any real answer, he outright mentions his thoughts on various modern materials and techniques that could be used in making a sword. So you not only get the answer that the question has no answer, but he throws out some ideas anyway. So he gave you many potential answers, you're just not happy with what they are.
In a sense, yes. but he didn't address the question. the other comments here actually do address that very question, to great detail. You're not entirely wrong, to be sure. But the title and the content do not match. Maybe click-bait isn't the politically correct term, but it gets the mind pointing in the right direction.
NiceWhenEarned RudeMostlyElse How is it clickbait? He talked about his opinion on what to use, and it was a response to Skall’s video. You just don’t like the answer. Even though he’s right. There is no answer. At least not a definitive one. You’re probably someone who thinks swords can just be thrown into some binary equation and we can find out what the perfect material would be for the ultimate sword.
I feel like the biggest issue with using different materials would be molecular bonding. That's pretty much the sole problem with combining any materials regardless of what it is. The reason why we can use alloys is because we found out how to bond them together for various desirable properties. So while the idea of using exotically different materials is cool... ultimately it's not practical... and probably near impossible to produce with any sense of confidence UNLESS you mean for it to be visually appealing without any durability for field use. Wall hangers are still nice to look at.
i disagree complete;y to what you said about ash..... ash is black in colour and is just carbon... it cant be used to make good handles.... so :(
+sten beetlex Darma Ash is a type of wood….
Well, technically, Carbon is the most common element in organic material. However, there's a lot of -other- stuff in there. Compare to... basically just raw, elemental carbon, which is way more cohesive, structurally.
+scholagladiatoria and witches float because they are made of wood too! ;p
+JerryJr65 also very small rocks :)
And nothing is purer than ashes! Damnit! Get it strait buddy! ;)
Birch is good for axe handles if you chop every day and have extra ones. What you do is make an incision in a birch tree a bit longer than you you want the shaft to be. The tree will heal itself by welling up about the wound so in few years you have two shafts for your son or grandson with a natural rounded grain in it.
The main problem with using more than one material is that the advantage you want to get, a harder edge, is not so easy to find in materials with elastic proprieties... And for what a sword is for, you really don't want to lose those elastic proprieties because it would mean that it would be a lot more prone to broke or bend...
if you used a plastic handle would you have to use lead to balance it? You would right?
I am a metallurgist, and I agree with you that we'd need to have a premise for building this modern sword. Part of that premise would be understanding how and if we could improve on the traditional sword. As someone who engages in HEMA, do you believe that a lighter (or heavier) sword would really improve your performance? Would different balancing improve performance? Before I would try to develop a modern sword with modern materials, I'd want to know from the experts what changes they need in order to have an improved sword.
From my limited exposure to RUclips videos, the only improvement that would really seem to make a big difference would be a material that would have better edge retention. I'm not sure that we have a material that would give better edge retention without sacrificing toughness. We could have harder materials like ceramics or diamond, but those materials tend to be more brittle. We're constantly developing ceramics with more toughness, but I'm not aware of any that would be tougher than a good steel. I don't believe most people are going to be willing to risk major brittle fracture of the blade for the convenience of slightly better edge retention.
The idea of a composite is good, but the question is what the composite will really accomplish. We could probably build a sword with a lightweight composite core surrounded by metal. This core would provide some support at a lower weight, but I"m not sure that any kind of composite would really be better than a hollow core. Most of the metal could be a tougher stainless steel that would resist corrosion a bit. The edges would still be much like traditional sword edge metallurgy.
Manufacturing this dual metallurgy sword would be feasible, but I'm not sure what the point would be. Would a lighter sword really give an advantage in combat? The other option would be to make a longer sword at the same weight. However, you've taught me that a sword was usually a sidearm and not one's primary battle weapon. Building a longer sidearm means that one's sidearm would be less convenient to carry. At some point, we're building a weapon that no longer fills the traditional role of a sword.
Here's an idea; because of spidersilk bulletproof implants, bullets are no longer sufficient to penetrate the body, but swords and maces have enough weight to kill.
So, I would imagine a rapier purely for penetrating power, with the ability to penetrate kevlar. And if that is the case, then probably nanocarbon materials would be best. Flexible and strong, just like carbon steel. I can't say for holding an edge, but I imagine that you can make a point with it.
Which of course, means that soldiers will move towards protection that can withstand that kind of penetration. Which means that we are back to flanges.
if normal bullets become insufficient, we would just go towards heavier rounds i'd say. they might have lower range but even a few meters are still enough to gun someone down who is running at you with a sword. also even the strongest armor won't protect you from rockets, grenades and similar explosives, which would also hit you before you reach the opponent.
If that were the case I imagine we would just make needle like bullets. Also I imagine if we can stop a bullet we would have some kind of impact reduction technology.
Kaskade173
the problem with needle shaped bullets is that you need to find extremely shock resistant material, so that the bullet doesnt break when fired or if it hits any kind of armor.
Tauric94 Heavier rounds are indeed an option, but given implants and kevlar armor combined, I think that the force of a bullet, no matter how heavy, won't penetrate two layers and kill. Keep in mind also, in modern day military, guns are made to have an auto-fire option. Heavier bullets jam more quickly, I suspect, but we'd need a gun expert to confirm.
Of course, rockets, grenades and similar exposives will get through any armor, but you can only carry so much explosives with you before you are just another link in a chain reaction of explosives. It's not like bombs have replaced guns in the modern period, just because guns jam.
Though drones are, in my mind, the primary reason that this idea won't work, because drones are impossible to target and you can have an infinite amount of them hanging in the sky with explosives.
Kaskade173 Actually, we already have 'impact reduction tech'. Spidersilk implants already exist;
www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2094364/Bio-engineered-bulletproof-skin-human-cells-spider-silk-revealed-video.html
Needle bullets would sadly be impossible to balance. If they were possible in the modern age, then they would already exist and be used by everyone. I describe bullets as the extension of thrusting swords; a needle-like point thrust with enough speed and enough weight to penetrate from a distance.
Alderick van Klaveren
well, i didnt necessarily mean that infantry is gonna carry lots of explosives, but there are still things such as tanks, planes and artillery. also it is kinda important to know which type of warfare we are talking about(the 'iraque-type' or actual war between evenly matched opponents). and so far you have only critizised my ideas, but what is your take on the issue then?
I use a springy steel with the composition C 0.56%, Si 1.7%, Mn 0.85%, Cr 0.3%, S 0.035% and the rest of course Fe. That is the best steel for cutting edges for cutting and thrusting. And this is for a monosteel blade. The trick is how you add the factors of hardening, grinding angles and a lot of other factors that people don't think about that we do to make good sword or knife that we keep as our own secrets.
I'm apprenticed to a master blacksmith named Patric Fälldin in Sweden and we make swords and knifes. My master has 35 years of experience as a blacksmith and has made a lot of research and material experiments during these years. Still comes back to the same steel as the best one for monosteel use. :) We also do patternwelding and usually include that steel with an iron component for instance.
Particularly for the fashion related swords, where carrying is a big part of the use, it would be interesting to look at Aluminium-Copper alloys for a good ratio of strength and hardness to weight.
I feel like the ideal modern designed smallsword would be a diamond tipped plastic of some sort, possibly with diamond lined edges near the base to give it a sawlike 'draw cut' to allow the blade to be used to tear into exposed flesh at close quarters. A weapon like that would be effective, would require none of the usual maintenance in a convenience driven world, and the customization of colors from different plastics would appeal to a general public audience spoiled by video games.
Assuming it's for fashion and not any fighting outside the occasional duel.
I would say a segmented, muli-jointed blade that would wrap around the body while at rest in the form of a belt and when needed could magnetize the individual segments to straighten and lock into a purely thrusting focused sidearm.
In a dueling context, plastic components in a sword might change the nature of parrying in very interesting ways. A cut might not slide easily down the plastic blade, but might actually catch in the cut made into the plastic. You could then design your sword to have a sort of defensive component designed to frustrate the opponent's blade movements. This component could be either the edges if you want a thrusting sword, or the body of the blade if you want a cut and thrust sword. Of course this results in damage to the plastic, but since plastic is so cheap it's no big loss. Overall, it would just change the nature of the forces that the opponent will feel in sword on sword contact. As a non-fencer, I'm curious about what you think about this notion. Thoughts?
Hello, Woodworker and bowyer here. (btw a bowyer is someone who makes bows for use in archery)
I worked with both Hickory and ash when making bows. Among bowyers Hickory is regarded as one of the indistructable kinds of wood for making bows. It's mighty tough... can face up to alot of abuse in the sence of poor bow construction or rough handeling by the archer. It bends very well. So Hickory is often suggested as a wood for beginning or one-time bowyers and therefore is highly prized, though not yet as highly as Yew or Osage Orange.
I myself work with Ash, specifically European Ash, mostly now a days. This is mainly because I'm located in the Netherlands, and the marshy wet conditions are an ideal habitat for the Ash tree to grow and is therefore readily available here. And of course, it's native so it's much more suited for the kind of European stone-age bow I'm interested in.
On the whole I'd say that Ash is indeed a little weaker then Hickory. Yet still, Ash is as tough as nails in my opinion. I'm perfectly fine with using ash for spears and axe handles, bows and even arrows. The difference in strength between ash and hickory isn't worth the trouble of buying relatively expansive imported hickory where I can for a fraction of the money go to my buddy the forester to cut down some fine ashes for my needs.
ash also smells nicer I think... but that's probably only relevant for crazy woodworkers like myself.
One interesting scenario would be in a space ship setting, then you would avoid projectile weapons, the explosive decompression scenarios is nasty, and you would want to avoid metals that can cause sparks as well, fire is a big bad no-no in space.
While not the "best" material. I know one thing I would do to improve any common steel sword. I would coat them with a thin layer of titanium nitride (say 3 µm thick). It would not change the handling of a sword at all, but it will get a scratch resisting surface and a harder edge. You also don't have to care about rust as the coating is corrosion resistant.
That it also would give your sword a golden look is an awesome bonus.
Here's my general idea about modern sword materials:
Some both light and durable material for core. This should probably be some aluminum- or titan-based alloy.
For outer hard material I'd choose either one of the harder tool-steel materials or even some metaloceramic material (although this may be too brittle)
Great breakdown; the only thing I would add/suggest is that perhaps a weapon wherein the main body is made of carbon fiber might end up being impractically light, assuming some chopping/slashing is intended; I would imagine if it were a pointed weapon for thrusting, that the light weight might not be as much of an issue since a the power of a thrust relies more heavily on the strength of the wielder than in regards to a chop or slash where the weapon's weight helps to increase it's momentum.
i'd go for some light composite core, with a hardened segmented replaceable edge.
then you could make the sword longer, without sacrificing manouverability. maybe even make a 1 handed-sword as long as a 2.handed sword.
So, not a sword expert here, but I know a decent bit about materials. To address your point about modern machinery: you are correct, plastics and composites has often replaced wood for weapon handles. But as far as *striking* surfaces?
Ceramics are used in modern tools which are designed for abrasive use, slow cutting, or machining processes - i.e. not impacts. Diamond and carbide drillbits are common, but axe heads, shovel blades, and anything else that's supposed to hit stuff very hard is steel.
The problem with pattern welding is that if we're talking about a modern sword, we're probably talking about a sword that can be mass-produced inexpensively. Pattern welding is likely to be fairly labor-intensive compared to having a single-material blade that can simply be cut out with a plasma or waterjet cutter and ground to the precise blade profile. Another issue is actually bonding the two materials. Carbon steel welds fairly well, but many of the highest performance modern steel alloys have poor weldability, and you can't really weld steel to plastic (a high-performance epoxy might do okay, but again you're adding quite a bit of labor cost). Pattern welding may simply be unnecessary because modern steel alloys can achieve much better impact toughness at the same hardness than the alloys swords were historically made out of.
So, what will work? Well, while we haven't really put a lot of collective effort into making a better sword, we do have a source for what's effective for melee weapons in general. Aside from the various tools - shovels, axes, cuisinart and brush cutter blades, stump grinders, and earthmoving equipment - that use steel for parts which are expected to be exposed to impacts, there is one notable set of examples of modern melee weapons - objects which are used to strike an armored opponent at close range and remain usable afterwards while causing serious harm to the target (as opposed to single-use projectiles such as tank shells).
The strongest melee weapons in the world today, and I think probably in the history of the world, aren't swords - nor are they axes, spears, or warhammers. In fact, they aren't usable by humans at all - not directly at least. They are the spinning weapons used in the sport of combat robotics - a mixture of discs, bars, "drums" (aka lengthwise-spinning cylinders with teeth), and shells. These are not elegant, precise weapons. In the heavyweight class, where total weights are comparable to an adult human in armor, they typically weigh between 20 and 50 kg (the heaviest are shells, which also act as armor), are powered by motors producing over 10 kW (13 HP) in most current examples, and spin at thousands of rpm with tip speeds as high as 400 MPH. They are not particularly sharp: they may have sharp edges, but are much blunter than even a tree-felling axe, but they make up for it by simply tearing through armor far stronger than that of any medieval knight, striking with as much energy as a .50 caliber bullet. The construction of these machines takes advantage of many modern technologies: lithium batteries, brushless motors, CNC manufacturing and 3D printing, and modern materials such as titanium.
What's my point? Well, the striking surfaces of these weapons are, almost always, made of STEEL, despite the proliferation of modern materials. In particular, they tend to use modern steel alloys that combine high hardness with high impact toughness, such as Chromoly alloys, shock-resistant tool steels such as S7, and wear-resistant steels such as AR400 and AR500 and "Hardox."
How do we apply this to swords? Swords need to be very light, sharp, and springy by comparison. The thin blades mean even some shock-resistant tool steels may be too brittle, but something like 5160 or AR500 will likely be effective. There are other alloys such as L6 and 9260 which may perform even better, although I'm not too familiar with those. Certain stainless steels may also do okay, although their only real advantage over the non-stainless ones would be corrosion resistance. This applies whatever the type of sword as long as it is meant to be a practical weapon: cut-optimized, thrust-optimized, and cut-thrust blades all need high hardness to hold a sharp edge and/or point, high strength to let them flex without permanently bending (steels all have about the same stiffness, so the maximum strain before yielding is proportional to yield strength), and high impact toughness to prevent cracking, chipping, or shattering under impacts against hard objects such as other swords or armor (you might have to use your sword against someone wearing steel or ceramic ballistic plates, and you won't always hit the gaps in their armor).
Titanium is probably not a good choice: yes it's light, but it's softer than steel and titanium swords will rapidly suffer edge damage if used in combat. It's also much, MUCH more expensive than most steel alloys. Aluminum is too soft, and other metals like tungsten are too soft, too weak, too dense, or too brittle.
tl;dr The optimal sword material will vary a bit depending on the application, but it's still always going to be some sort of modern steel alloy that uses elements besides carbon to improve its properties. It's possible that monosteel blades made of very high performance alloys with poor weldability will outperform multi-hardness blades.
not just materials the design too. A modern sword could make use of springs and carbon fibre to completely change the design. think of a sword that can extend an extra foot of carbon spike near the tip. or a short sword that folds out into a longer sword like a flick knife. using joints or hinges made of titanium would allow things never possible with only steel. A spear with a retractable chain built into the shaft so as your swinging you could release the chain and turn it into a giant flail.
If you could choose any material to make a "perfect" sword...
My first thought is that honestly steel is a damn good material for making swords from, which is why we make swords from it. If you wanted to make a sword for yourself and don't mind about the cost then idk, perhaps a titanium alloy? I know there are plastics out there which are strong and/or hard enough but usually lack the weight. Steel seems to have the perfect balance of being heavy enough to actually cut into something but light enough to swing it.
If costs aren't an issue, I'd personally go for a composite blade. Something like high carbon steel treated for wear and chemical resistance with a ceramic core (for balancing the blade, or adding weight to desired segments).
Mihalis Benko Of course ceramic is incredibly brittle, mostly used in industrial applications for it's heat resistance not so much strength or flexibility. Ceramic makes great breaks though.
9:59 That's why if you can ever get a hold of some elevator cable, it makes for a pretty good blade. It's already torqued. All you have to do is put it in your forge or furnace and beat it flat.
What about alloying the steel with other metals like Gold? Would that make an effective sword?
Assuming a general-purpose sword for fighting against various other swords from various historical periods, I'd want something like a longsword with a handguard, with a diamond or tungsten carbide leading edge, a mostly titanium body (for weight) and moulded polymer grips for both grip and comfort.
Either that, or an Incubi Klaive. Goddamn those things look awesome.
For a mad-max kind of scenario, Sword and buckler, the sword regular and the buckler with a potent flash like a photographic camera, to blind your enemies at night
As a blacksmith, i have found 5160 to be the absolute best all around steel for a sword, its durable, flexible and holds a great edge. So long as it is heat treated and tempered properly. The only down side is it requires more rust prevention than others.
Yes, but why wouldn't the hard part of the sword just crack off the flexible centre when you hit things with it?
Riley B That is my question.
Hi Matt. Saw the Skallagrim video. We now know what materials to use to make a very efficient sword. But what KIND of sword?
IMHO - a katana-rapier hybrid. A long sword (36+ inch blade) with the reach and thrusting quality of a rapier, but with the cutting quality of a katana. Just imagine a longer katana, with a spine not as thick, hence lighter and with the balance point closer to the hand. And has a more pointy end for thrusting, perhaps with a short back edge on the spine side. And better hand protection - the basket hilt of a rapier. And a longer hilt, enabling it to be used as a two handed weapon as well. Modern engineering calculations (impact loading, bending stress) can allow us to analyze possible stress factors and optimize dimensions of thickness and width, hence keeping it strong enough to chop, yet light and nimble enough for point work. Your thoughts please.
As a chef, I enjoyed becoming an expert with a blade. Your question can be answered at Williams Sonoma or any good cutlery store. Chef's knives these days are pretty high tech.
I imagine a titanium rapier or small sword would be excellent. They wouldn’t cut as well but the light weight would make them scary quick and they could be very stiff.
Or you could make the edge of a wicked hard tool steel and the body of titanium. That would probably work alright for cutting swords.
oh also i think your best weapon would be a nano sharpened composite diamond edge on a ceramic and carbon nano tube matrix inner shaft. could wrap it in a stainless steel casing for ruggedness with a composite diamond finish in a pattern that would aid the blade in ripping through whatever material. imagine shark skin on the nano scale.
thought of this, and maybe it isn't cheap or economical but perhaps a blade made of zirconia ceramic? they make razor sharp kitchen knives that actually are quite bendable and shock resistant. its not metal at all but perhaps it would still be a bit too brittle for a sword. maybe a bit lighter as well.
Titanium Nitrate and Tungsten Carbide are used in industrial cutting. I think they could be brought into the bladed weapon category if people had a mind to figure it out. I think a titanium blade with the outer layer being titanium nitrate would be light and sharp, but I'm talking without knowing what I'm talking about
The best material for making a sword would definitely be hard light... But since we don't have that yet, I'll just go with a titanium edge, steel core, side sword...or maybe a sabre.
What if you had to go back in time? Would there be a benefit to something other than steel? I know Knight Errand makes the case that tungsten armor would be lighter.
One easy thing you could use to upgrade any kind of sword would be a coating of titanium nitride which is done on many modern tools. Gives the weapon a very hard surface far beyond any metal and doesn't affect most other properties of the weapon.
That's mine idea too. But it does change two other properties to the better. It makes the sword resistant to corrosion and gives it a nice colour. =)
A drawback would probably be that if the sword gets a nick on the edge it would be more difficult to repair.
gurkfisk89 It is not really more difficult to repair. After you are done you just have to coat it again. After every bigger fight you would need to do it anyway if not even get a new sword, just as it always was, but at the fight itself it would be a big advantage. Coating in titanium nitride is nothing you can do at home anyway. It is literally something you would do in an industrial manner because you can, IF you can ^^
Alioth Ancalagon I was thinking about if you have to resharpen your sword. With a normal steel sword you can fix some edge damage with a whetstone. But if you have a TiN coating it would be difficult to sharpen as the material around the damage is so hard.
I would like to do it to my swords, but the only PVD/CVD chambers that I would have any chance to use (if I say pretty please) are commonly used for coating silicon wafers and other small samples, and I don't have any sword under 15 cm. =)
gurkfisk89 The blade cannot really become dull before the TiN is already off. The TiN is extremely hard, what also means that it breaks off, if an impact is so strong that the blade gets damaged.
Alioth Ancalagon
Yes, but that's the thing. Lets say that you get a nick in the edge, the TiN would not really help there as it's primarily the bulk material that fails in that case and not the sruface. The TiN at the nick might come off, but the TiN at either side of the nick would make it difficult to repair with a whetstone or file.