Knight vs Samurai?

Question

who do you think would win? Medieval knight VS Medieval samurai.

I want thought out answers

Heres a few myth busters too think about.

Katanas were only a pound or two lighter then most european swords, they were like two-handed swords, but not as powerful as a claymor.

Knight armor was not as heavy as hollywood says, if it were they wouldnt of used it. It was almost immune too slashing, and if it was curved, it was hard too stab too.

Samurai armor also usually consisted of metal, it wasnt as heavy but it was metal armor.

Samurais were better with bows then swords usually, being the masters of horse and bows.

Knights had shield and sword training, samurai did not and had little experience fighting shielded opponents.

They both had martial arts training, and side arms like daggers. Both trained from youth, and both had a system of nobility/honour.

Answer 1

knights have better weapons and protection.

Answer 2

There are a few things to consider here. firstly the type of weapon used here. Katanas are typically of poorer quality steel and only adept at slashing attacks which would be a significant disatvantage if the knight was in full harness (full armor)

the longsword is a few inches longer however in full harness you would not have 2 hands below the cross guard. you would have to fight with one gauntleted hand above the cross guard and one below, using a style called Half-swording. and a knight would make full use of his armor to get in very close and attack the less armored points of his opponent, like the knees, elbows, and eyes or throat. The longsword could also be used to leverage joints and grapple the opponent or break bones.

Secondly you need to look at experience. Japan being a cloistered society for a long time only really fought each other, never an outsider. so a Samurai would have no experience fighting a fully armored knight.

if were talking about unarmored opponents. the advantages of the longsword are still there but not as pronounced. at this point the winner really comes down to who has more skill and that is determined by the individual not the class. it is possible for a skilled longsword fighter to beat a skilled samurai and vice versa

Answer 3

Knights would win.
They have better armour and weapons.
The katana is not better than the knight swords.
And the reason why katanas are made by folding steel is becoz
of the crap metal in japan.
In Europe folding steel to make swords was a thing of the past or never needed becoz of the better steel and some technological breakthroughs in sword making.
Thus knight swords were strong non brittle light swords and were better than the katana becoz you can use both cutting edges, better for stabbing and use cross guard as a weapon too for an all in one sword that the katana isn't.
The knights armour only weighed 60 pounds which is quite light and also the knight trained for like 15 years to become a knight and also had his own martial arts.

Answer 4

Ah, a katana alone would not cut through plated armor. But you're forgetting the technique and will of the Samurai! Using spirit-strength of the Samurai that wields the katana would slice through the armor, cutting the knight in half at the waist.

Answer 5

I've given it a lot of thought.
The samurai would win so long as it was hand-to-hand combat. Due to speed and precision. The knight would be too slow, although he would have better protection, the samurai could get through it or around it somehow.
If they were doing the thing with the horses and the long sticks (I can't remember the name of it) then the knight would win based on experience with the long stick...thing...
yeah

Answer 6

Knight,duh,that chain mail is invincible to the samurai's sword,although it would be a close match.

Answer 7

Samurai hands down. Two different types of training. Seems to me Samurai have more going for them such as speed. Their technique is more choreographed. Knights have the broad sword against a much lighter Samurai's sword.

Answer 8

medieval knight cuz they have better armor (european countires has better access to the resources needed to create good weapons and armors)...some medieval knight armor are part weapon also like a spiked shield or horned helm

samurai's are the best blade tho

Answer 9

Okay true knights have better armor and the samurai just knows about swords and bows but you have to think Samurais protect there Honor and will kill there self before the knight can actually kill them. So ...nether one will win. the kinght won't kill the samurai before then samurai will kill his self and sure as hell the samurai is going to kill the knight.

Answer 10

A Samurai's armor is less encumbersome. A knight in full, heavy plate could be in mortal peril should he fall over. His armor was very heavy. A samurai's armor looks like it is made to conform to his movements.

Answer 11

samurai!!no doubt!! the samurai were better fighters,and they were more devoted to their master.and ofcourse the samurais had lightier suits,while the knights had that heavy armour that took them an hour to put on,and they cudn't move very well in it.and the katanas were lightier but sharper swords,more easier to handle,while the knights' swords were heavy.the samurai were very fast and good warriors,and i think they'd beat up easy a knight(especially that most of the knights weren't real warriors,they just had the title of knight)