Questions about possible purchase of small Seki stamped sword.

[Rictus]

Recently I got the itch again. My first purchase was a signed Edo era sword but now I am looking to grow my collection. With the prices I was looking for something a little less "desirable" by collectors and decided to check out some of the WWII craftsmanship. I found a signed with small Seki stamped sword for sale. The seller has confirmed it is Western Steel but that it was folded. The swordsmith seems to be a reputable one from what I could find. The hamon looks a bit suspicious as in a little TOO nice and I'm wondering if that is a result of lamination or could it be possible that it is a true natural hamon? So I guess my question is were these stamped swords made solely for military personnel decoration or were they actually able to be used as weapons? When comparing to other katanas I know they aren't traditionally made but would they still be considered a very well made weapon? Should one be wary of a hamon that looks a little too good on a stamped sword and is there collector value and if so what kind of range would one expect? 600-1200 seems to be what they are going for but I'm a little cautious with no paperwork like my Edo katana and being a complete newbie. thank you in advanced. 

[Xander Chia]

They were definitely made with combat usage in mind.

 

I know the question is about swords with a seki stamp but I’m assuming they were tested in some way like RJT blades were. In any case, the seki and RJT blades were made to fulfil the same purpose. Here’s a thread about the manufacturing specifications for RJT blades. 

And a link on the usage of gunto in battle. http://ohmura-study.net/136.html

 

The Toyama Military Academy also issued manuals on the usage of a gunto. An example of one of those manuals: https://dl.ndl.go.jp/info:ndljp/pid/1460369

[Rictus]

thank you, I decided to include some pictures of the one I'm interested in purchasing. says the signature is Noshu Seki ju Hattori Masahiro saku

[Xander Chia]

Unfortunately I cannot comment on the blade due to being inexperienced on the subject of nihonto. But I’d recommend you to always check if the seller is reputable. Especially if they’re on ebay where the feedback can be 100% positive despite many claiming to have negative experiences with the sellers. You can use the search function on the forum and type in the seller’s name or google it.

[Brian]

Legit wartime made sword. They were not 100% traditionally made...so not forged from Tamahagane, and oil quenched not water quenched. But still a legit wartime weapon. The hamon is real, but has been enhanced with acid likely. Showato like this have real hamon from the oil quench, but they don't show all the activities you get from a traditional forged blade. 
In short, a genuine wartime arsenal blade that was crafted by the smith that signed it, but not forged and folded like Nihonto are.
Value...around the lower to mid point of your estimates.

[Bruce Pennington]

@Rictus

Cody,

There are 2 sizes of Seki stamps found on blades.  This one is the larger stamp, and was believed to be used by the Seki Cutlery Manufacturers Assoc. to indicate a quality showato blade.  They are found on blades made from 1940-1945, but the massive majority of them are found on 1942 blades.

 

There were swords made for show, called "dress swords" or "parade swords", but they were mostly the Type 8/19 swords and have distinctively identifiable blades with etched/fake hamon.

 

They look like this:

[Rictus]

You guys are incredible. So happy to have found this forum and will be looking to donate for the help and experience. So I guess that takes me back to my original question of is this blade an actual functional cutter or 100% for show? I guess the main focus of my collection I want to revolve around functionally made Japanese katana. This sounds like it is borderline on functionality and if its subpar in comparison to modern made katana then I think I would have to pass on it and keep looking at other WWII swords. But if you guys think it would still outperform 99% of modern swords being made then I will buy it. I'm not going to be cutting anything with my swords but its still nice to know that the blade was crafted to serve this purpose no solely for show. The seller confirmed its western steel and says it was folded which I guess could still be just a few folds but to hard to tell from the pictures. but he may just be saying that to encourage the sale. so the confusion for me is show and/or function and NCO or officer?

[Rictus]

this is another WWII sword for sale I am looking at. much more expensive. I guess im safe to assume this is Gendaito and also advertised as so. looks to be in excellent condition and specimen. Is an accurate valuation of this sword to be around 2,000 usd or higher?

[Brian]

Your sword is a real, functioning sword. It was not made for show...it was made as a weapon.
I won't get into performance, but it was made to do the same things that any other Japanese sword was made to do.

[Xander Chia]

By modern sword do you mean shinsakuto or swords made with modern technology? Compared to shinsakuto the performance is about the same, maybe slightly better compared to the ones with a wide hamon. Nothing in the past will beat a sword made with modern technology and materials. Modern steel can be tougher while retaining the same hardness. Spring tempered blades are also less prone to breaking and can flex more.

 

The purpose of the shin gunto was to boost morale and “maintain tradition”. However, like Brian said they are completely functional and was meant to do what any other Japanese sword made was made to do. Exceptions being Type 8/19 as Bruce mentioned which are dress swords. In fact the Type 95 was said to be a better sword by some when compared to other shin gunto types due to being less brittle.

 

To summarise:

Shin gunto (whether seki or star stamp etc) are completely functional. Type 8/19 swords are for show. Nothing made in the past is better (for combat use) than a sword made with modern technology. Do some research on the seller before purchasing.

[Rictus]

Thanks again Xander, Brian and Bruce. When I mean functional compared to modern katana I was referring to examples like Paul Chen and the Ronin katana's made in todays world. How a Gendaito would perform compared to these. I guess I was hopeful that a Gendaito or even showta would still be considered more durable or "better made" than these modern ones.

[ROKUJURO]

Xander,

 

when you write: 

......'Nothing in the past will beat a sword made with modern technology and materials. Modern steel can be tougher while retaining the same hardness. Spring tempered blades are also less prone to breaking and can flex more.....Nothing made in the past is better (for combat use) than a sword made with modern technology'.....

I am very interested to know what technology, heat treatment and (superior modern) steel you are talking about? What modern sword production do you mean and how have these swords actually performed in (which) combat? 

Modern steels can have select advantages in comparison to traditional low-alloy carbon steel, but the two opposed properties of hardness and toughness remain big challenges which are difficult to combine in a single workpiece of sword dimensions. Forging a resilient (and thus reliable) sword blade that performs under combat conditions as we may assume them to have been is very special and was mastered in old Japan and Europe when these weapons were used. 

[Xander Chia]

2 hours ago, ROKUJURO said:

Xander,

 

when you write: 

......'Nothing in the past will beat a sword made with modern technology and materials. Modern steel can be tougher while retaining the same hardness. Spring tempered blades are also less prone to breaking and can flex more.....Nothing made in the past is better (for combat use) than a sword made with modern technology'.....

I am very interested to know what technology, heat treatment and (superior modern) steel you are talking about? What modern sword production do you mean and how have these swords actually performed in (which) combat? 

Modern steels can have select advantages in comparison to traditional low-alloy carbon steel, but the two opposed properties of hardness and toughness remain big challenges which are difficult to combine in a single workpiece of sword dimensions. Forging a resilient (and thus reliable) sword blade that performs under combat conditions as we may assume them to have been is very special and was mastered in old Japan and Europe when these weapons were used. 

Before I begin I just wanna point out that both that post and this reply are just my opinions.

 

First off, I would like to clarify what I mean by “better for combat”. As swords are not used in actual battle nowadays (to my knowledge), this is just what I think is more valuable in terms of the function of a sword if it had to be used. From my point of view, being better means being able to take more punishment without the blade failing. Sharpness is not on the list. A butter knife can be sharpened to be as sharp as a razor. Some of the main components that I think are the most important is:

 

-Toughness (ability to withstand punishment without breaking). This may be the most important factor as it determines whether your blade is gonna remain in 1 piece after hitting something.

 

-Resistance to bending (The ability to spring back into shape/resist being bent in the first place). A severely warped blade wouldn’t be able to cut, thrust, parry as well as a non-deformed blade.

 

-Edge retention (ability to keep a sharp edge). Battles involving the use of katanas wouldn’t last very long. Thus, there is important need for a sword to stay sharp after several encounters/fights as that is unlikely to happen. It can always be repolished after the battle.

 

I know that spring tempering isn’t new but it is fairly new when it comes to being used to forge katanas.
 

I do agree that the opposing properties of hardness and toughness is still a big issue. What I meant by modern steel being better is the controlled use of various elements such as vanadium and tungsten. Modern technology has allowed us to control the amount of these components more accurately, thus giving us finer control of the properties of the steel that we manufacture. The hardness/toughness of certain steels can thus be increased without the other decreasing as much. Techniques like crucible particle metallurgy (CPM) limits the amount of segregation (individual “ingredients” separate when cooling creating weak points) in steel and gives a more homogenous mix of carbides. Though this method is not widely used to manufacture katanas.

 

Specific brands/smiths that uses “harder and tougher modern steel” includes the likes of Hanwei and Howard Clark. I am referring to the blades that are made out of L6 bainite. There are many companies that use L6 tool steel but it is not the same as L6 bainite.

 

A differentially hardened katana, referring to both nihonto and most Chinese repros, have a martensitic edge and pearlitic spine. This allows the sword to have a hard edge and tough spine. An L6 bainite katana has a martensitic edge and a bainitic spine. This achieves a harde edge and tough spine just like a regular katana. If I’m not wrong, the difference is mainly in the spine. The pearlitic spine though tough, is prone to bending. The bainitic spine acts more like a spring and can retain its shape. Basically the L6 bainite katana combines the benefits of a traditional katana and a spring tempered katana.

 

I would like to apologise if anything seems off or missing. I am about 1/4 asleep as of writing this.

 

To answer OP, I think that most modern made katanas (assuming the right brand) are able to perform better (more resilient/durable) when using to cut objects. Especially those that are spring tempered, 9260, etc.

[vajo]

I think the best sword for cutting is a Laser Sword.

[Kiipu]

And his new forum name is Darth Vajo of Bavaria!

 

@Xander Chia there are some really good articles that you should take a look at via the link below.  You will find several that discuss the shortcomings of the traditional made sword, especially in regards to cold weather.

Japanese Sword and Tosogu Related Articles

 

This article in particular shows that even back then the shortcomings were known and workarounds were developed to address the problem.

Ura Nihon no Toko By Yoshikawa Kentaro

[Rictus]

I was on my phone when I read Vajo’s reply and I thought his profile picture was a Darth Vader helmet. Fitting he would talk about laser swords. 😆

[Bruce Pennington]

It was this very concern that brought the South Manchurian Railway factory to engineer a 'better' design in their sword production.

Ohmura's page on the engineering comparison of Mantetsu vs traditional blade

 

Excerpts from his page:

[ROKUJURO]

Xander,

although we are far off the topic of the OP, I would like to answer to your last post. Should this be inappropriate, the moderators are kindly asked to shift my post to where it belongs (a new/old metallurgy thread?). 

I will just reply to some points which seem to need a comment.

Of course the traditional heat treatment (YAKIIRE and YAKIMODOSHI) of KATANA (Japanese nouns do not have a plural form) is done in a way to keep a hard edge while obtaining a flexible blade body (= spring tempering). That works fine as long as the forging itself is done in an accurate way. Mass production often lead to quality declines as shown in OMURA's cross-sections of blades. In cases where factory workers (and not master smiths) are doing the work, it might indeed be better to use a system where pre-formed parts are used. 

....What I meant by modern steel being better is the controlled use of various elements such as vanadium and tungsten. Modern technology has allowed us to control the amount of these components more accurately, thus giving us finer control of the properties of the steel that we manufacture.....

 

Alloy elements like vanadium or tungsten are not needed in a sword. They form big crystals in the steel matrix (like hazelnuts in a cake) and cannot increase the properties of a long blade made for a slicing cut. The same applies to the CPM steels which can keep an edge for a long while but which will never be as sharp as a razor because of their carbide sizes. Also, they lack any flexibiliy if used in a blade of KATANA dimensions.

All properties do not only rely on the steel alloy used, but of course on the dimensions and SUGATA.

As we know, the Japanese sword performed very well under the conditions of combat in medieval Japan. Lesser quality blades sometimes failed, but in general, these blades worked very well. I do not think it is completely impossible to make usable sword blades from modern mono-steel, but this has to be tested under similar conditions as traditional blades were tested and used back then.

"In theory, practice and theory are the same. In practice, they are not.” A. Einstein

 

 

 

[Xander Chia]

On 8/14/2022 at 2:38 AM, ROKUJURO said:

Xander,

although we are far off the topic of the OP, I would like to answer to your last post. Should this be inappropriate, the moderators are kindly asked to shift my post to where it belongs (a new/old metallurgy thread?). 

I will just reply to some points which seem to need a comment.

Of course the traditional heat treatment (YAKIIRE and YAKIMODOSHI) of KATANA (Japanese nouns do not have a plural form) is done in a way to keep a hard edge while obtaining a flexible blade body (= spring tempering). That works fine as long as the forging itself is done in an accurate way. Mass production often lead to quality declines as shown in OMURA's cross-sections of blades. In cases where factory workers (and not master smiths) are doing the work, it might indeed be better to use a system where pre-formed parts are used. 

....What I meant by modern steel being better is the controlled use of various elements such as vanadium and tungsten. Modern technology has allowed us to control the amount of these components more accurately, thus giving us finer control of the properties of the steel that we manufacture.....

 

Alloy elements like vanadium or tungsten are not needed in a sword. They form big crystals in the steel matrix (like hazelnuts in a cake) and cannot increase the properties of a long blade made for a slicing cut. The same applies to the CPM steels which can keep an edge for a long while but which will never be as sharp as a razor because of their carbide sizes. Also, they lack any flexibiliy if used in a blade of KATANA dimensions.

All properties do not only rely on the steel alloy used, but of course on the dimensions and SUGATA.

As we know, the Japanese sword performed very well under the conditions of combat in medieval Japan. Lesser quality blades sometimes failed, but in general, these blades worked very well. I do not think it is completely impossible to make usable sword blades from modern mono-steel, but this has to be tested under similar conditions as traditional blades were tested and used back then.

"In theory, practice and theory are the same. In practice, they are not.” A. Einstein

 

 

 

Sorry for taking so long to reply, had a fairly busy 2 weeks.

 

My mistake, when I say modern swords are better I am comparing capability. We are able to create a better sword than what they could back then. Many reproductions are trying to replicate a katana even in construction, so they won’t better significantly better or worse.

 

I think a huge portion of misunderstanding comes from the terms we used. From my perspective and knowledge spring tempering creates a flexible blade which retains its shape better. Meaning it is more capable of flexing back into its original shape by itself. Toughness means that it is able to bend without breaking but does not indicate how well it is able to flex back. From what I have seen from videos nihonto are tough but are not really flexible. As I said I personally don’t consider sharpness to be a main factor. All this assuming the same sugata of course. I agree with CPM steels not being tough and flexible enough for swords, I think I was providing an example of modern production methods. Should have used a better example, sorry.

 

Also agree that theory and practice are different. There have been many cases where knives made with an “inferior” steel perform better than a more premium steel. Usually due to heat treatment which is overlooked by many. There are also many other factors as well. Some steels though different in paper, performed the same in real life.

 

I concur that tests should be performed with modern made swords for an actual real life comparison. Anyone willing to sponsor us a handful of swords for testing? 
 

As you can see Cody the performance of nihonto and reproduction swords are similar enough for such debates to exist. If you value the history and craftsmanship I think a nihonto would suit you better. The upside of reproduction swords is that you can actually use them for cutting (not damaging a historical piece). Showato have value as  ww2 militaria even though they’re not nihonto. By value I do not mean monetary of course.