Sigh. I feel the need to go into extreme depth for you all, since history seems to mean nothing.
Actually, Jallon might be right with the first weapon. Yes, the MEXICA WARRIORS might grasp the sword and want them, but the MEXICA WEAPONSMAKERS would probably be similar to any weaponmaker anywhere in the world, seeped in traditions and allowing only a small change in overall design in the short term. Making a m?cuahuitl was pretty straightforward. You get a long piece of wood, cut groves on each side, insert obsidian blades into it attached with a adhesive, and cut people with it. It's only a small leap to use steel, and since a m?cuahuitl was used to capture slaves as well as kill, the blunt end might have been seen as rather important. For the second one, putting it into a bar of steel? It has become very important to ground you on the rock of reality.
1) Ironworking is a very complex skill, which came out of thousands of years of Bronze Working. Working copper and being able to smelt steel are two different things. Steel didn't come until quite a long time after that.
2) Large scale mines weren't known to the Mesoamericans like they were to Europeans, so you wouldn't see iron in abundance, which offers no advantage over obsidian anyway.
3) If the Mexica find a way to work steel and get enough of it to use it for warfare, then they will almost assuredly start by copying what works, not copying what they currently have. Would you make a Kevlar bow? It makes great body armor, why not! Because the material isn't practical for that use.
Adhesive sticks to wood much better then metal because of it's porous nature. Just FYI
This was in reply to the conversation you and Jallon were having regarding his proposed m?cuahuitl and Ron Losey's arguments about it. It seemed to me that Ron was arguing against Jallon's initial plan of a Wooden m?cuahuitl handle with Metal blades inset. That is how I interpreted his first post. His second post, after receiving input from Ron, described a metal steel blade whose edges were made of obsidian.
I am not saying I want any weapon in, I am just saying that Jallon's origional design, which he will no longer use, was practical. This appeared to be misunderstood, so I provided what appeared to be clarification thus -
I was arguing against one style, a steel base with obsidian blades, but arguing for wood base with steel blades.
Your comment in reply to what I said shows that you DID miss what Jallon was trying to say with the first post, which caused him to go down the wrong track with his second. That is what I was getting at. That is what wasn't understood, that is what I attempted to clarify, and that is what you posted a reply to as if it were a seperate issue. No doubt this will be misunderstood too, but I provided enough explanations.
Jallon, My opinion of your first work is it is good. Don't discard it.