The Energon Pub

by **Master Shake** » Sun Feb 18, 2007 1:31 am

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kusanagi
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excalibur
which sword is stronger?

by **Greed** » Sun Feb 18, 2007 1:37 am

Considering they are swords I'm going to say neither because they are inanimate objects but I like Excalibur better.

by **Evank_Horizon** » Sun Feb 18, 2007 2:22 pm

Hmmm.. why didn't you take Masamune or Murasame? They're more famous and well known swords.

Well anyway no mather how magical Excalibur is any good katana weilded by a suitable samurai could probably beat it. I think occidental two-bladed swords are barabarian and slugish. Not to mention oriental mentality pushes toward techique, training and perfection. Also the samurai has the same level of armor protection with more flexibility.

I say Kusanagi wins.

by **Big_yellow_glasses** » Sun Feb 18, 2007 8:45 pm

I say Excalibur wins this one, I believe that any sword that can unite a kingdom by simply having someone pick it up is capable of destroying anything.

by **Tifereth** » Sun Feb 18, 2007 8:50 pm

Evank_Horizon wrote:Hmmm.. why didn't you take Masamune or Murasame? They're more famous and well known swords.

Well anyway no mather how magical Excalibur is any good katana weilded by a suitable samurai could probably beat it. I think occidental two-bladed swords are barabarian and slugish. Not to mention oriental mentality pushes toward techique, training and perfection. Also the samurai has the same level of armor protection with more flexibility.

I say Kusanagi wins.

agree

by **AutobotGeneral** » Mon Feb 19, 2007 1:49 am

Go watch MythBusters. The Longsword Wins.

by **DesalationReborn** » Tue Feb 20, 2007 1:03 am

AutobotGeneral wrote:Go watch MythBusters. The Longsword Wins.

Agreed. Any armor from Europe was severely more vamped than from mineral-starved Japan (who used seashells and hardened leather for most of their history), and the swords were built to match that. If the blades meet, the longsword would likely shatter the other, and the European would likely win just because he's more protected, if he doesn't collapse from 70 pounds of steel armor first.

by **snavej** » Fri Sep 29, 2023 6:40 am

Excalibur, if it existed, was forged in the early part of the Iron Age. Carbon was added somehow, making Excalibur carbon steel. Consequently, it was much stronger than other swords of the time. It helped the wielder kill more enemies and win battles. I heard a legend that King Arthur once personally killed over four hundred enemies in a single battle. He not only had the best sword but also he was the best swordsman back then.

I'm guessing that Excalibur would've shattered the little Jap blade.