A friend of mine asked me this question...who would win in a match which posed a katana (jingum) against a rapier? Apparently he read in a an article (I don't know the source) that a rapier would be superior. My answer was anybody can be beaten, regardless of weapon.

This does bring up a good point. Though battles are won on superior skill and a little luck, regardless of style or weapon, is one weapon technically superior over another. In this case, is the rapier a better weapon than the jingum? What is your opinion, especially those of you who have fought with the RSW swords against other weapons than the jingum?

Thank you

Behold... a chestnut...


Making the fighters equal [which you must in this sort of question ~ one of the most tenacious sword questions on the internet...] you are left with the weapon characteristics to consider.

Energy consumption, weapon speed, weapon reach, weapon applications, and weapon durability all contribute to looking for answer.

The rapier requires less energy to use, has superior reach and speed, and as it is almost entirely a thrusting weapon, has an edge in durability. It should also be noted that the user is free to use the off hand for non-weapon attacks and defenses.

The two-handed sabre has a dual function, thrusting almost as well as it cuts. In both cases, the sabre has a superior wounding capacity - cutting more deeply, and creating a larger wound channel on the thrust. The user can opt to fight single-handed, but the effectiveness and speed of the weapon is reduced.

So... how do these advantages combine in opposition? What weaknesses are present to be exploited?

That's like saying, "Who would win in fight, between Superman and that dude with the eyes, and the flippy thing.". We all know who would win.

Seriously, I really comes down to two things; luck and luck.

Aren't our opinions always usually outweighed by our preferences? For example, in the "who would win?" superhero argument, I'd pick Batman, because I like him better, but if I were to reflect objectively, I'd be forced to choose again. As for the weapons, as Anthony showed, they each have their strengths and weaknesses. If they didn't, why would both of them exist?

Haidong,
Dean.

one who fights better will win

Which weapon is superior is like asking which unarmed fighting style is superior. Every weapon has strengths and weaknesses and can be matched up effectively against any other weapon. Just like with unarmed arts, a standing style verse a ground fighting style, each style has its ways of dealing with every type of other style. Once you learn to apply one style properly against another that is. What it comes down to is which practitioner is better at their style and knowing how to use it against the other style.

Don’t ever let someone tell you that their style or weapon is better than yours, and at the same time don’t ever be folly enough to think your style or weapon is better than theirs. The skill and ability of the practitioner is the only thing that matters. What style, and what weapon you choose should come from what compliments your personal style, values, abilities, strengths and desires best. And that weapon or style is just as effective as any if you are able to use it well enough.

Between any weapons or styles that both legitimately matched(a sword vs a broken bottle might not be a truly valid match up) the skill and ability of the practitioner is what will decide the outcome.

From 100 meters away, a howitzer is better than a sword. So yeah, some weapons are better than others.

Hence my sword vs. broken bottle concept

Although a Lazer sword vs. the machine gun might be a bit more effective... but i suppose that belongs in another forum.

This is wandering off track in more ways than one.


The original question doesn't posit a situation between fighters of different skill or temperments, it seeks a comparison between the strengths and weaknesses of two tools.

So... where do the advantages mainly lie, with the civilian defense/duelling weapon or with the military field weapon? Do the speed and range of the rapier overcome the power of the sabre?

The range and speed of the rapier would decide the bout, in my opinion. Anyone?

How many places on the human body will, when punctured by a rapier, result in instant incapacitation or death?

Well...

grab a jingum in your right hand, turn your left body towards the opponent using a rapier and use your left arm to guard your face, neck and heart. Take an initial hit with your left arm and swing the jingum at your opponent at the moment you hit.

For lefties, change the side

I'm not sure that the weapon can be divorced from the technique (i.e., style) when debating which weapon is superior. Imagine switching the weapons between the two stylists. It would seem that both of the weapons would lose effectiveness.

The problem lies in the fact that the rapier can stick n' move faster than the jingum. Most rapiers also have a longer reach. I can pretty much stick someone with out worrying too much about getting hit.

Just cleave the rapier in half with the jingum... Then you've got no more range issues