Estoc Foil Points

[Joe biebel]

I recently (March, Texas NAC) bought two complete Estoc foil points to try. I set them on some new maraging blades and train with them 3-4 times a week. Iv'e hade a few problems with them so far and would like to know if anyone else is using them and what they think.

So far, 1 base cracked on the end that screws onto the blade. this I thought would not happen, due to the robust look of the base.

The peening that holds the contact on has failed on both tips. If you are careful, that is an easy fix.

They seem to put the light on nicely, and the concept seems sound.

Joe B.

[sallearmourer]

I put one on my wife practice weapon and the barrel didn't last the night. Its the way she parry as a lefty.
I am not impressed with either the epee tip or the foil tip.
Neither as held up for my family. Now the Itailian one as held up well both the foil and epee tip but they are spending.


Tim

[kini mini]

I've never seen one - can someone explain the difference between the Estoc point and, say my Uhlmann ones?

[Joe biebel]

The barrel is in 2 parts and their are no screws. The bottom part of the barrel is screwed onto the the end of the blade, and the top portion (with the tip) screws onto the bottom part. Your "tip tape" prevents the barrel from vibrating free. The concept is great, even if you have perfect eyes and a steady hand, getting rid of the screws is a godsend.
Joe B.

[kini mini]

Nice idea - I might try one sometime . I don't have much difficulty putting grub screws in, but I agree that not having to deal with the tiny things at all would be great .

[sallearmourer]

Screwless are not new they have been around for about 30 years from Russian to the Golden screwless tip out of Fla. None of them really caught on because they all had there problems


Tim

[Joe biebel]

Tim is right about the rather long time frame that the screwless point has existed. Fencing technology in general is on the "slow track." I think this is because of the relatively few people involved and the relatively small amount of money spent on gear. There are only a few manufacturers that are willing to spend any sort of money on research and development. I am always willing to try different things that may be improvements with my gear. What does surprise me is that I see so little improvement in obviously flawed designs or in inappropriate material selection.

I can not think of a foil point, for instance, that does not have a known weakness. Most have been around for a while and still have the same obvious flaw(s). I don't ever expect a manufacturer to get it right on the very first try, but I find it most curious, that even years later, there is no improvement in the processes, materials or designs of known problamatic components.

I commend any company that is willing to risk their hard earned money on a new idea. I hope that the fencing comunity will try the new equipment ideas and use forums like this to let each other and the manufacturers know what's right and wrong with their gear.

Joe B.

[fred]

Manufacturers make money selling replacement points. The only economic incentive they have to improve designs is if a competitor arises with a superior design that captures market share; or if they can come up with a design that reduces their costs. The latter usually doesn't lead to better reliability, more likely the opposite.

Because fencing is such a small equipment market, and has essentially no sponsored "stars" that can endorse new brands, or equipment magazines to review and rate them, there is almost no market pressure. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see the 2-screw foil tip having the majority of the market 30 years from now.

[Joe biebel]

I have given what I believe is a more than fair chance to the screwless Estoc points. I have found them to far too fragile. I have broken and repaired them for four seperate problems that repeat with regularity. It's back to the Uhlmann/Alstar points for me. I think I would give a different brand (say the Schermapoint) a try, as the concept of a screwless point is an improvement in my estimation. The Estoc point simply won't hold up.
Joe Biebel

[Mr_Foilist]

Originally posted by Joe biebel
I can not think of a foil point, for instance, that does not have a known weakness. Most have been around for a while and still have the same obvious flaw(s). I don't ever expect a manufacturer to get it right on the very first try, but I find it most curious, that even years later, there is no improvement in the processes, materials or designs of known problamatic components.

It's a concept called "built in obselescence" (yeah, maybe I spelled it wrong). If you design a perfect foil point that lasts forever, everyone will buy exactly the number that they need and never ever replace them. So, as a manufacturer/supplier, you would see an initial boom in sales (as some do when they introduce a new and exciting design) and then see a painful drop-off or ever dwindelling sales of that item since your consumers, the fencers, are a slow-growing pool of people that will almost always re-use parts that are still good (like your perfect point).

That's one problem. Number two, forging metal that has enough hardness and flexibility to withstand the shock and torque that your average foil point experiences to produce a barrel that won't ever dent or crack has got to be an expensive process. That would drive up the cost of tip parts dramatically, which would then be passed onto the consumers. Now, there's not much money to be made in fencing to begin with and flooding the market with expensive parts would only serve to diminish the profits of suppliers. This, in turn, would affect the suppliers decision to stock those parts in a negative way and would then cause the manufacturer to stop production of that perfect part since they would no longer be receiving any profit from said part.

The trick that many manufacturers/suppliers use is to get the combination of falability and reliability just right so you have people that are satisfied enough with the part to overlook its flaws and continue to buy replacement parts (Uhlmann). Increase either side of that ratio (falability/reliability) and your product will not succeed because it will either be so bad that no one will buy it (France lames foils) or so good that long-term profits will not be sufficient enough to make production viable (no product yet invented to my knowledge).

Bottom line: perfection costs money and doesn't make the maker that much money in the long-run so it will never happen. Sucks, huh?