posted 03-02-2005 04:55 PM            

How soon can you ship, and what's your paypal ID?

By the way, I have a shotgun which is illegal in Canada. Therefor, I win all these "duels," even against the (has-been) Teutonic-rifle-wielding types.

posted 03-04-2005 08:05 PM               

PS: I am canadian. I have nothing to fear from gun-toting loonies other than myself. And my lawyer happens to be the incredible hulk as well, so prepare for a big, green yokozuna.

posted 04-20-2005 02:19 PM               

I'd expect that the majority of educated posts in this forum would not give you that impression. As for pattern techniques, it is not something unusual in the era, but how meticulously that progress is achieved. This is what we mean by superiority.

"As for the Mauser 98k,it is certainly the best looking WW2 service rifle,but give me an SMLE or later model Enfield any day.The enfield has a much smoother quicker turnbolt action and is nearly as accurate."

posted 04-22-2005 04:40 PM               

Come on admit it!the Enfield is better than the 98k.Quicker action,(have you heard of the "mad minute"in WW1),ten rounds opposed to five,magazine opposed to stripper clip,need I go on?
But you are right,being a Brit Iam biased.

posted 04-22-2005 05:34 PM               

Actually, I have quite a few Bolt-Actions in my collection, including a 1903 Springfield (itself being a Mauser replica) as well as, *drum roll* an Enfield. Of course, my most prized collections are the series of Mausers I have...

Based on my experience with the Enfs, I am not sure if I like handling it more so than my Mauser. First and foremost is the ammunition, 2 catridges, while being fine and dandy to contain more ammo, it made the rifle somewhat unbalanced in terms of weight.

Then comes in the firing procedure, my ammo jams ever so often in the chamber, which requires me to manually pull the spare ammo out. Maybe there is something wrong with the catridges.

And lastly is what you claimed to be the "mad minute", I assume its about the firing rate or ammo capaicty of Enfield vs. the Mauser. But here is the problem, there are only superficial difference between the firing rate of an Enfield and a Mauser, and unless you can spray your fire with Bolts llike a machinegun, there is really no point of keeping some 10 ammo inside a box. After all, in World War I, close-quarter spray weapons for the Germans was the Maschinepistole or the Sub-Machine gun, and in WW2, it was the MP-38/41. Likewise, the Brits would be inspired to create the Sten later.

*GDS - Formally known as Tak*

posted 04-26-2005 12:17 AM               

Just the same I'd take my AK47 any day.

posted 05-20-2005 03:22 PM               

"The Americans built rifles for target-shooting.

The Germans built rifles for hunting.

The British built a rifle for war."

posted 05-20-2005 03:28 PM               

- Tak (The man who gave his rifle a woman's name)

posted 05-20-2005 03:35 PM               

Colonel Jeff Cooper notes that this attitude is very prevalent among europeans today. "We shoot them in the legs and they just sit down and cry" is what the Colonel quoted. It may very well be that the USA, being a nation of immigrants, a welter of sometimes conflicting peoples is just plain more ornery that the general class of even euro-criminals. Europeans, not realizing we have a large portion of "take it to the limit" types among us consider our "shoot center of mass/shoot to stop" to be brutal and barbaric. The reality is, its often the only thing that works.

posted 06-03-2005 05:05 AM               

"I'd expect that the majority of educated posts in this forum would not give you that impression. As for pattern techniques, it is not something unusual in the era, but how meticulously that progress is achieved. This is what we mean by superiority."

Im not sure exactly what is meant by this, it almost seems as if a degree of inferiority is implied in those who are of that opinion..? But perhaps that could be clarified.

Excellent and well mentioned thoughts, non theless Welshguy39.- If I may say , dont be so easy to sway your opinion.
Also to Vince: who posted a while back- Amen brother! The unfair and simply untrue portrayal of European sorts has as of recent been changing for the better, with informed scholars and practioners, etc. such as many of US on here are helping to achieve. And true- no martial art is truly superior to another.
In favor of the Katana- They do have several unique attributes: 1.certain broader spectrum parry capabilities due to the curvature, 2. A different and often greater degree of attack/defense angles due to the hand-and-a half hilt and subsequent positiong of the arms and relative movments (note: The same however, of course applies to European and other culture's Hand/half forms) Im assuming thought we are in comparison with single hand broadsword forms though. 3. Drawcuts are often more efficient with blades of curved form.
In favor of the broadsword: 1. straight blade- better bind and lock potential. 2. Two cutting edges(most types). 3. possibly better thrust potential -again depending on specific blade type. note: some Katanas were made with Acutley pointed tips. 4. A single hand grip can offer certain techniques not possible with other namely multi handed and up- grip types. two main kinds- a. ablity to get in/out zones with more stealth. b. free off hand. (on a few of these; I have touched on a few unique and advance concepts- but maybe more on that another time).
Do pardon me if i went a little long on the last part , or repeated some things already stated.
To sum up and answer the original question:
I say if on the offensive then Katana, if on the defensive then the Broadsword ( I ended up feeling it best to answer in this fashion) ..Ahha then in truth the dark cloaked figure reaches for the folds and draws a strange flashlight-like object ( here we go
!: Dun Dun duna da dun dun Dunna da Dunn..)- Katana man and Broad sword man pause for a moment to notice serenely humming illuminated blade just 'passed' through them.. then they and their swords fall to pieces, and a tad crispy in the middle to boot. mm um.
Ah, love doing that- Hey weve all heard the phrase bring it, - well this time theres nothing to be brought , it been signed ,delivered, only thing left to do is open the envelope and read 'say hello to the Force for me' - this after kisses their non-Jedi Buns goodbye of course...

posted 06-03-2005 12:39 PM               

"Im not sure exactly what is meant by this, it almost seems as if a degree of inferiority is implied in those who are of that opinion..? But perhaps that could be clarified."

Welshguy seem to understood it just fine.
He said, and I paraphrase "Saxon blades are not inferior to Japanese ones", in which I reply "hopefully, inferiority is not what we've given as an impression on this forum".

"Also to Vince: who posted a while back- Amen brother! The unfair and simply untrue portrayal of European sorts has as of recent been changing for the better, with informed scholars and practioners, etc. such as many of US on here are helping to achieve. And true- no martial art is truly superior to another. In favor of the Katana... etc."

The problem with this post in the first place was that it made compairson between the wrong weapons. Katana vs. a Broadsword? Why?

The Katana was not a battlefield weapon, it was circumsized to accomodate the will of the Shogun after the 1600s, when battles have disappeared. The correct weapon in this configuration suitable to perform a direct compairson is a Tachi, Odachi or one of their variants.

"Right on with your earlier post- The Saxons, as your example were indeed making pattern welded blades at least 300 years( actually a fair bit longer) before the Japanese made famous their forging techniques/ or familiar sword Design for that matter."

I see very little point instigated by this post. Whatever be the case it doesn't matter, given the fact that the most recognizable weaponry by a larger part of the world of the middle ages (12 - 15 centuries) was the lance and, (uh oh, here I go again) the Mongolian recurve bow.

If this argument is made valid at all, should we also give the Chinese a million browny points for their technical advancements?

"Few things beat a Dragenoff- in its class anyway"

The Dragnov is a semi-automatic, it would not have been comparable with both the Mauser or Enfield given the latter's bolt-action mechanism.

Superior weaponry or not, at this point, I am just using my commie-sacrified, magically enchanted Mauser pretty much as a comic relif

- Tak

posted 06-14-2005 07:05 AM               

Otherwise I'll opt for the "scream like a girl and run" manoeuvre.

posted 06-19-2005 12:40 AM            

And:
"I don't have to outrun the bear, I just have to outrun YOU!"