Rethinking "standard" size wasters
Posted: Sat Jun 09, 2012 12:00 pm
When I first started carving wasters for sale, I created a thread on this forum asking people what size sword they fought with. More than half of the answers were within a few inches of 36" overall length and very little concern over blade vs tang length. Assuming an added inch from pommel and thrusting tip, I started making the standard length on all of my rattan wasters 35" with a 7" tang.
Since that day, my wasters have grown in popularity and I've seen more newcomers ordering them. Also, this picture has started to haunt me a little.
http://www.museodelarmablanca.com/tiend ... eshott.jpg
Knowing that 36" is an SCA norm, not a historical one, would the Society be better served if I made my "standard" size wasters historical length? Note that this would not prevent anyone from ordering any length they want, just alter my defaults. Or would I be better served by sticking to a single popular size by default?
Since that day, my wasters have grown in popularity and I've seen more newcomers ordering them. Also, this picture has started to haunt me a little.
http://www.museodelarmablanca.com/tiend ... eshott.jpg
Knowing that 36" is an SCA norm, not a historical one, would the Society be better served if I made my "standard" size wasters historical length? Note that this would not prevent anyone from ordering any length they want, just alter my defaults. Or would I be better served by sticking to a single popular size by default?