Page 7 of 11 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 105 of 152

Thread: The Kwan Dao weighing 100lbs? That is ridiculous!

  1. #91
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Julien, you are dwelling on late medeival european armour.

    Which fits the description of what you are talking about.
    There's not much point in getting angry about legendary tales of great heros.

    If you are ever near the royal ontario museum in canada, drop in for a look at one of the finest armoury collections in western civilization.

    You'll be surprised at some of the pieces you will find in the collection.

    Kung Fu is good for you.

  2. #92
    100lb steel plate at the size of a pizza pan and 1 inch think? that is impossible

    u are probably using a comparison to weights that u train with which are filled with a much heavier metal... most likely lead.

    that plate u described would only weigh about 2-5lbs

    your information cannot compete at all with that of Arms and Armor because of the simple fact that they have been making weapons as an official company for about 25 years. they make them so they obviously weigh them

    they make weapons from all ages. they know what they are talking about.

  3. #93
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    minneapolis, mn
    Daniel, Julien - The average was about 10-12 shots a minute. An English Archer could probably put more out then that in a minute but this was a pace set for upwards of an hour, and they were puling at around 100 lbs. I can pull my 65 lb traditional bow, not compound, for about 30-45 minutes, with no let off but that includes going to get my arrows and taking my time.
    I'd tell you to go to hell, but I work there and don't want to see you everyday.

  4. #94
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Oakland, CA

    I've spent a great deal of time around steel plate. The figure of 2-5 lbs is HIGHLY innacurate.

    Standard steel ballast for ships weighs 265# to the cubic ft.

    By my calcuations, a cylinder of this steel measuring 2ft across and 1 inch thick would be 69.38 lbs.

    Considering that the 100 lb plates in a gym are a bit thicker and larger in diameter (not much, but just a bit), this is hardly unreasonable.
    "In the world of martial arts, respect is often a given. In the real world, it must be earned."

    "A stupid man's report of what a clever man says is never accurate because he unconsciously translates what he hears into something he can understand. "--Bertrand Russell

    "Liberals - Cosmopolitan critics, men who are the friends of every country save their own. "--Benjamin Disraeli

    "A conservative government is an organised hypocrisy."--Benjamin Disraeli

  5. #95

    Re: Claymore!!!

    Originally posted by AndyM
    the famous sword of William Wallace, was not a Claymore.

    That is a matter of semantics. It was a two-handed sword, and as such would have been called a claidheam mor (great sword) by the Scots. It did not have the distinctive downsloped quillons with trifoil terminals of the "classic" claymore, but that was a later development.

    If you ever get across to Scotland, visit the Wallace Monument near Stirling, and you'll realise that the sword weilded by William Wallace, could never have been thrown one handed across a battlefield by an Australian midget. I don't know what it weighed, but I would guess 30-50 lbs.

    It weighs 6 pounds.

    Which underscores the point that most people can't judge what a weapon weighs by looking at it, or necessarily even by picking it up, unless they have a previous point of reference.

    Julien is right. It would be physically impossible for even an EXTRORDINAY physical specimin to weild a 100-pound kwan-dao effectively as a weapon. Being able to life a 100-pound weight is a very different thing from being able to swing and CONTROL that weight once it has been distibuted over a few feet.

    There were few hand weapons used, historically, which were heavier than 10 pounds. Most ranged between 2 and 6 pounds, for the simple reason that this was the weight at which they were most effective. Lighter, they would become fragile and lose cutting ability, heavier, they would be too slow, and would exhaust the weilder.

    Here's some perspective: I recently had to replace the steering column in my '72 Eldorado. We're talking about something which is about 4 feet long and 5 inches across. It isn't solid, of course, but there's a lot of meat to it. Well. if you don't support both ends of the column while pulling it out, it wil BEND under its own weight, and it only weighs about 25 pounds. I can lift it and move it around, but if I were to try to hold one end and swing it, I would not be able to keep the other end up.

    A loveseat weighs about 100 pounds. Could you swing one of those around?

  6. #96
    Originally posted by Kung Lek
    I have seen examples of medieval weaponry that are at the 70-100 lb weight. These are in the form of two handed broadswords, halbierds, and even a large and evil looking mace.
    I am aware of a couple of two-handed "swords" in the 20-pound range, but these were ceremonial items only. Where have you seen a sword, intended for battle, that weighed 70-100 pounds? Please site the specfic collection, if you can. Because every one of the hundreds of real swords I've seen in books and museum collections weighs in under 12 pounds, most well less than that, even the largest renaissance two-handers. Why would anyone make a sword 10-times heavier than those used by most people. SOME variation is to be expected, but you are talking about an order of magnitude. You are talking about something that must have ten times as much metal in it as another example of similar size and shape.

    I own a five-and-a-half foot two-handed sword at home. It is about 2 inches across at the base, and less than half an inch thick. The handle is solid metal. It isn't the best-designed sword of its type, so it is thicker than it needs to be, and has little distal taper. It weighs 8 pounds. It is pretty hefty and clumsy relative to other swords of that size which I've handled. Now imagine if you had ten times as much metal there. If you DOUBLED every dimension, making a weapon 11 feet long, an inch thick, and four inches across, it still would not weigh 80 pounds.
    Last edited by blackjack; 05-07-2002 at 11:27 PM.

  7. #97
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Perth, Australia
    I'm not going to comment on the question of whether a Kwan Dao weighing 100 lb would be wieldable effectively... but I thought I'd chime in on the weight of steel...

    According to my copy of Balfour's Hints on Tool Steel (Eagle & Globe Steel Company, old book, no date), carbon steel (close enough approximation, I figure, to the right sort of weapon steel), for a round bar of 2 inches diameter weighs about 11 lb/ft.

    (10.68 actually, but close enough).

    So a 7-ft bar of the stuff would weigh about 75lb.

    Of course, a Kwan Dao isn't just a long steel bar, but it might give a reasonable idea of the possibilities...


    -A hundred enemies, a hundred cups of wine. Infinite enemies, infinite wine.-

  8. #98


    you have to think abou tHOW a guan dao is's pretty much swung in circles meaning that if the balance is right, which you can be well sure it was on a real guan dao used for war, it would not be AS hard as you think.

    OF course it's still VERY VERY hard to weild a 100 lb guan dao, the general is the most respected martial arts person ever...i wouldn't put that above him saying he wouldn't be able to use a 100 lb guan dao.

    the purpose of the guan dao is to have so much force behind it, you can't block it, even if you did your going to die.

    but im sure everyone knew that, but just reminding you.

  9. #99
    Join Date
    Dec 1969

    Re: ..

    Originally posted by CrushingFist
    the purpose of the guan dao is to have so much force behind it, you can't block it, even if you did your going to die.
    What if you blocked it with another guan dao of equal weight?

    "If you like metal you're my friend" -- Manowar

    "I am the cosmic storms, I am the tiny worms" -- Dimmu Borgir

    <BombScare> i beat the internet
    <BombScare> the end guy is hard.

  10. #100
    That is a matter of semantics. It was a two-handed sword, and as such would have been called a claidheam mor (great sword) by the Scots. It did not have the distinctive downsloped quillons with trifoil terminals of the "classic" claymore, but that was a later development
    Funnily enough I actually contacted the 'Wallace Monument' by e- mail before posting, knowing what you guys are like! According to them, the Wallace sword is *NOT* a Claymore, but a two handed broadsword. Does it really matter so much?

    That photograph you posted looks nothing like the sword I saw in Stirling. Perhaps it comes from the 'Mel Gibson' museum.

    I was flippant in my judgement of weight, but I still maintain that Mel Gibson could not toss said sword across a battlefield ala Braveheart.

    Come toss my caber!

    I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve.

    J.R.R. Tolkien

    Originally posted by SifuAbel
    OMG, some body got a DNA sample from the burnt carcass of the last dead horse, separated the live cells, cloned another horse, watched it grow, let it come to maturity and then

  11. #101
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Sydney, NSW, Australia
    the average two-hander weighs about... um... 4-6lbs i think or maybe even lighter
    I happened to be talking to a PhD in History the other day and he said this is not true. He reckons the average sword used way back when was a lot heavier.

    Who knows. I am just passing on what he said .
    Behold, I see my father and mother.
    I see all my dead relatives seated.
    I see my master seated in Paradise and Paradise is beautiful and green; with him are men and boy servants.
    He calls me. Take me to him.

  12. #102
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Orillia, Ontario, Canada

    100 lb kwandao do exist.

    When my teacher was in his mid 50's I had the pleasure of watching him with a kwandao in his back yard. The Kwandao weighed a little more than 100 lbs., yet he moved it with speed, deftness, and precision.

    He, himself, weighs little more than the kwandao, and is just over 5 feet tall.
    When he was in school in China he did power lifting for one school year and finished with a city weight lifting title by lifting 105 kg (230 lbs) over his head. Then he quit weight training because he didn't want big muscles.

    He has been training at least 6 hours per day since he was 5 years old. He the lineage holder for Emei snake style, a wrestling champion, a tai chi champion, a champion in 3 kinds of sword, and one of two people I know who can handle a 25 lb sword.

    His movements with the heavy kwandao demonstrated far more than strength. He showed his incredible coordination of core muscles, subtle leverage, and profound timing.
    I wish I had understood then what I was seeing. I had become so accustomed to him doing the impossible that I took it for granted.
    Cloud Mountain Martial Arts, Orillia, Ontario, Canada
    Tai Chi, Qigong, Wushu / Kungfu, Self Defence
    "I have learned that it is the weak who are cruel, and that gentleness is to be expected only from the strong." - Leo Rosten

  13. #103
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Xi'an, P.R.C.
    Quote Originally Posted by Daniel Madar View Post
    I am sure that I am not the only archer on this board. With a bow, 10 shots a second is **** fast. Especially with a pull of 100 lbs.

    As for training slowly to use a 100 lb bow, I cant say I exactly understand, but when I was a kid my parents got me a 50 lb compound bow. Even with the 50% let off, I could only draw it 5 times when I first got it. After a month of daily practice, it was no problem. But I still wasnt sending up 10 arrows a second.
    Video containing 10 shots in 4.9 seconds:

    Also, as far as the 100lb Guan Dao...sure, a few people here have said it can be done but the point is not that you can't wield it. It's that you could never wield it effectively. Just too freaking slow. Powerful and graceful, sure. Fast? Not nearly enough.

    Y'all keep forgetting that General Guan Yu was basically Paul Bunyon. Post mortem, he was elevated to demi-god status. 100lbs is no big deal for a superhuman demigod.
    Last edited by omarthefish; 12-02-2012 at 06:42 AM.

  14. #104
    100 pound guan daos are for weightlifting, not fighting. heaviest training guan dao is 120 pounds.

    heaviest guan dao in battle is 30 pounds, even at 30 lbs you cant swing it anymore. you just hold it out and use horse momentum.
    Last edited by bawang; 12-02-2012 at 12:27 PM.

    25th generation inner door disciple of Chen Style Practical Wombat Method
    Officially certified by Ethiopian Orthodox patriarch Abune Mathias
    grandmaster instructor of Wombat Combat™®LLC Practical Wombat Method. international academy retreat

  15. #105
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Quote Originally Posted by omarthefish View Post
    Also, as far as the 100lb Guan Dao...

    Y'all keep forgetting that General Guan Yu was basically Paul Bunyon. Post mortem, he was elevated to demi-god status. 100lbs is no big deal for a superhuman demigod.
    I agree with this. More than likely he was stronger, bigger, and had a heavier guan dao than people were used to. Over time as people told stories this got exaggerated.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts