Carbon is what makes steel harden in water. Up until the 1700's it was difficult to control it, so they would basically burn all carbon content leaving almost pure iron (wrought iron). Wrought doesn't harden, so the European smiths would reintroduce carbon or "steel" the blade, or forge weld knife quality edges into the blade. Wrought is prone to fatigue and would break. The only exception were the Nordic swords, they were every bit as complex as the Japanese blades and the finest produced in Europe. I could go into their construction, but it's very complex.
None of the steels produced then can match the performance or strength of modern steel. A sword made from a lowly truck spring has the potential to out perform the best ever made in the ancient world.
i would disagree as would many others,
the Japanese swords styles are different then the European sword styles. so the sword designs are different.
the Japanese swords are lighter (2 to 3 lbs, but more towards the lighter side) then the European swords (2.5 to 4 lbs), swords were very rarely heavy then 4 or 5 lbs.
the Japanese swords being light were also more stronger then there European counter parts due to the way they were constructed
fyi your third point is wrong,, the katana was designed to be flexible and bend, much more then their European counter parts, this is due to not only the layering of the katana, but the type of metal used as the core. if you try this with the crappy knock offs they make then you will have the results you described, but not with a real katana.
Not entirely right:
Food for thought.
http://www.thearma.org/essays/longsword-...
http://imgur.com/gallery/XNiCN2S
Be sure to see the "longsword vs longsword"
I've wielded both, even tamahagane. There is no superior. One is not better than the other.
It all depends on the metallurgy. Ay they were made differently, using different techniques to forge the steel, but they were both made to do their jobs on the battlefield and they did.
This goes back to the age long question of Katana vs. Longsword
I say let it rest. I can pull up hundreds of videos making the katana the best sword, and I can do the same with the longsword. Facts. Were to get them? What's real and what isn't.
I've read from many "respectable" and knowledgable "masters of arms", people who deal with swords their whole lives, study them, train with them, etc, say the the europeans had better steel, I've seen other say it's the katana.
I say Shut Up, Grab a sword, and train.
Your question is based on several fallacies and facts that does not reflect reality, that I am having a really hard problem deciding even how to start answering it, so in no particular order -
1) The Japanese katana is made with several types of steel because it is the construction of the layered approach that gives the katana the durability and strength that is NOT present in European swords. By "layer" I do not mean folding the blank to produce the layer. I mean the differ crystalline structure of steel. Steel is not just a metal, but several types of refined iron mixed with impurities and treated with different types of heating and cooling techniques. A hard steel is also a brittle steel and it will crack or shatter if struck with sufficient force. A soft steel will bend and malform, but not break. Using several types of steel, the katana has the toughest hard steel along the cutting edge, backed by increasing softer layers of steel. Should the edge be nicked or cracked, the softer layer absorbed the shock, prevents the break from further extending across the blade and decreases the chance the entire blade will break off. European swordmakers did not use this very advance technique because they did not know how. Even today, you cannot manufacture such a sword with any machine.
2) What Possum told you about ores and the making of steel is right on the money. It is not the ore, but the process of refinement that determines the quality of the end product - the steel. Whoever told you that Japan has "crappy" steel because the ore is crappy is an ignoramus poser.
3) Who do you mean by "European swords" and at what period? Scandinavia? Roman? 19th century British? Medieval? To you consider ancient Damascus part of Europe? And if you do, do you realize the process of Damascus steel was lost and what we have today was "rediscovered" With all that, name one European swordmaker who uses any of the traditional "European" technique of swordsmith. I can't think of a single one. But in Japan, the making of the traditional Japanese sword is still alive and well after more than 1000 years.
4) Your idea of "springy steel" proceeds from ignorance. One of the main characteristics of all steel is that it is "springy" or more precisely having high tensile strength. That's why steel replaced iron because iron is not "springy" and will shatter or crack much more easily that steel. The assertion that European sword are springy is patently false - it is the Japanese sword that is "springy" because of the multi-layer steel construction.
Crappy steel? Who pointed that out to you?
Some of the world's best swords are made in Japan. The quality of ore is not as important as the quality of the process used to extract the ore, which should result in more pure iron. And after that, the quality of the sword is directly associated with the smith making the sword. By the time you get your hands on a quality Japanese sword and a quality European sword, you would not be able to tell the quality or ore at all.
And before the swordsmith goes to work on a blade, the ore extraction should include the addition of metals and other compounds (like carbon, nickel, manganese, etc) so as to create different results.
The rest of your question is beyond my knowledge. I know that in some cases, I don't know about Japanese, but different substances - like oil or blood - would be used for tempering the steel, as that would allow carbon (in the case of oil and blood) to be included in the steel, and trace elements (in the case of blood) to control visual and mechanical qualities of the blade. Legend has it that true Damascus steel was made this way, and at the time was considered the best steel in the world. But the recipes are said to be long lost, although modern technology has come close to replicating Damascus steel.
It has been pointed out to me that the steel and forging process of a European longsword is superior to those of the katana.
My question is why? What quality is there in Japanese iron ore that makes it into such crappy steel? Is it too much carbon? Too little carbon? What makes European iron ore better?
And how did Europeans forge their swords and why is it considered more advanced? How were they able to produce spring (?) steel whereas Japanese had to mix hard edge and soft back for the katana? I know a bit about the forging of the katana, how it needed to be folded to even out the carbon, but how were they tempered and how did Europeans do it differently?
