@BlankPageNumberXIII it was designed for both... However it was riveted. No one ever used butted mail, as it was a waste of very expensive steel and pretty much useless.
@BlankPageNumberXIII Well, from what I've read, mail was not as effective with the blunt trauma the hits came with. I guess a stab would create a lot of blunt trauma than a slash. I'd say yours a logical guess on it. The point was to stop any open wounds because that's what would certainly kill you, at the time infected wounds were a death sentence, even if it wasn't a lethal cut.
So many people get so upset with chainmail vs arrow tests. Ok, standard soldiers medieval mail was built of steel or iron of inferior quality of even the worst modern reproduction so get real, the bodkin was designed to pierce mail and it did so get over it, mail was not designed to resist bodkin shots. Mail did however stop close quarter slashing which was most typical combat style after archers fucked off. Mail did stop the much more lethal broadhead arrows, bodkin pierce mail/padding not deep
Mail also stopped bodkins.... research your history. Maille was not proof against an arrow, but most of the time it worked just fine. Thats why Maille was used for nearly 2000 years.
@EvilxMerlin O so THAT was why chainmail was worn for nearly 2000 years mmm, dont make a fool of yourself, I said a bodkin can pierce mail because its thin profile gets through the gaps and splits a mail link at optimum distance and it does. I never said it can pierce combinations of mail with padding, leather etc which did work, and the bodkin was not noted for doing fatal damage but lets face it a deep stab wound back then was death anyway because they were filthy and disease sets in fast
Learn your history boy. Chain DID stop bodkins. It did so for hundreds of years. Bodkins came about because they were simpler and cheaper to manufacture than broadheads/leaf bladed arrows.
@EvilxMerlin If you even sat back and thought about for a few seconds.. if bodkins could not pierce mail then why the shag would they bring archers to a fight, do you think they just bounced off whats was mostly poor quality thin little iron rings thats gaps provide perfect guides and entry points for these arrows which can hit speeds of over 150 feet per second, think about those speeds, not to mention the weight of the poor guy running onto it, it WILL pierce, maybe not a killer shot but fuck
Again, learn your history. Why did the English field thousands of archers at Crecy and Agincourt which were the hayday of alwyte armour? Why did the English fire over 400,000 arrows at Agincourt and the French report only 370 knights killed by arrows? Tell you what, read up on it. Learnhow chain armour works. Its not just poor quality little iron rings that gaps provide perfect guides. My god, you sound like one of those katana kids that gets his knowledge from cartoons.
@EvilxMerlin Love waking up to read an idiot at his best, listen you shit talker with your "learn your history", if anyone read what you commented they would have a good laugh, the discussion is mail vs arrow, and your talking about Agincourt and Alwyte armour, that was PLATE armour you retard so just stop making a complete tit of yourself and pretending you know about European history, armour and warfare, stick to your American stuff, plate armour stopped arrows, mail did not, why would it..
@EvilxMerlin ...chainmail was not designed to stop arrows, it was designed to stop close quarter injurys such as slashing swords and daggers etc, it first appeared around 300bc with the Celts, by comparison the long bow and bodkin arrows arrived during the 12th century, long long after chainmail was in use which clearly then was not made with arrow stopping in mind, and there is no more to say. In Ireland we have a saying, “never argue with a fool, people may not tell the difference”, bye fool
@EvilxMerlin Admitting your stupid is a bit harsh, just American would have done, and as such you feel the righteous need to insist your half fabricated readers digest version of world history is more correct than a European version of European history, this stuff is my heritage and I grew up with it, studied it and was educated in these topics in a land where they were actually used and are displayed in our actual real castles, stick to your Disney land castles thanks mr evil merlin lol
You still don't understand the history of armour do you? Thank you for proving so. Go do some research on chain armour versus the arrow. Stop getting your rose coloured history from cartoons.
@EvilxMerlin Tell you what, I will believe and world historians will re-write factual history to your fabricated bs version if you upload a video of yourself wearing a historically accurate padded gambeson with and an iron chainmail hauberk charging into a hail of bodkin arrows, if your correct, the arrows that dont find youre face will bounce harmlessly off since you think chainmail was arrow proof, if your wrong, we will all enjoy the predictable outcome but you wont because you know its death
Lets get something correct. Learn to read, I never said PROOF against arrows. I said it was effective at protecting against arrows. And since I have only a haubergeon (my kit is Agincourt era), its kinda a moot point. There is PLENTY of historical documentation on the effectiveness of chain and only chain against bows and crossbows thru all of history. And yes, I'd be willing to put my chain up against a bow and bodkin arrow.
@EvilxMerlin I like you, you know something. Although a gambeson is quite a must when taking arrows, or about anything, because otherwise it will hurt like fuck. But your points are all valid. Though most arrows are quite able to stop a man in chain armour at close range. Not necessarily pierce through, but stop the man.
Oh without a doubt. Chain wasn't worn without a gambeson. To do so is just... dumb. At 20 yards an archer was a forced to be reconed with regardless of what a soldier was wearing for armour. Outside that range, armour was almost proof against arrows (from a bow or crossbow). The reports of archers at Agincourt is all the proof that is needed.
@EvilxMerlin For what its worth I think this vid of test mail v arrow is like all other tests i've seen, not accurate. The fact is to test it correctly it would need to be tested with typical bow, arrow and mail used with the padded gambison and even with leather, it would need to be tested at typical ranges, not 10 feet away, next the target would need human weight and flesh flexing properties etc and men in war dont typicaly stand still so movement needs to be a factor
@0xxRawr0xx0 No composite bows hold a lot more energy ive tested them and on average a lot of composite bows have higher draw weights. I meant a midevil composite bow sorry didnt mention that.
@RalphyGreene most composite bows (i guess you mean mongolian etc. bows)don't go higher than 80 lbs of drawweight were an english longbow wil go well above 200 lbs. So if you have a 80 lbs composite and 50 lbs longbow yeah the composite will punch a bigger hole.
@0xxRawr0xx0 No need to act like im an idiot i compared a 40lb composite bow wood/fiber glass recurve against that material vents are made out of against a 40 pound longbow, and the composite recurve had deeper penetration. Also youre wrong even though i wasnt talking about mongol bows they do go over 80lb draws in medieval times they are said to be average at 160lb theyre recorded to shoot at almost 600 yards *thats arc obviously*. the limbs store more energy in recurves.
@RalphyGreene a wood fiberglass recurve will always shoot an arrow faster just beacause of the string cup thingy on the limbs, also you gotta do your research a horn/sinew bow wasn't made above 100 lbs because they were shot of the back of a horse.
@0xxRawr0xx0 Ok ive never seen a horn/sinew bow above 75lbs where did you find this bow for sale show me. Also a fiber/wood bow is composite its more than one material and they do store more energy and what cup are you talking about I dont have that. Also composite bows dont need to be shot on horseback they had foot soldier composite bows like the russian ones. Do you need links since you cant do research like I did?
@RalphyGreene thats my point , also they didn't have specific foot soldier bows, and if you were talking about a medieval composite bow why add fiberglass?, not so medieval.
@0xxRawr0xx0 man I only said recurve i never said mongol, hungarian, elvish or whatever. When I mention composite you thought I meant mongol bows too. Its like if I said red cars you would think im talking about honda civics or something. lol Are you from America there might be a language barrier.
@0xxRawr0xx0 Ok thats why you dont understand what im saying my recurve bow is not medieval recurve bows are not all medieval most modern hunting bows that arent compound are recurved.
@RalphyGreene i do understand you but first you say your talking about a medieval recurve, and now your talking about a modern 1., i guess your english is fucked up?.,
@0xxRawr0xx0 No I was talking about testing my 40 pound composite bow which is recurve THAN YOU brought up mongol bows I referred to them as medieval bows than you kept bringing up medieval bows of different types. When Originally I was talking about a modern recurve composite fiberglass bow i was just responding to your comments to the medieval bows. Basically what im saying is you keep trying to change the subject and you cant speak english. Now get the last word in so you're able to sleep.
@0xxRawr0xx0 You thought fiber glass bows were in medieval times you scewed up & r retarded. You cant answer any of my questions but I am able to answer yours. Now I'll let you get the last word in so you'll be able to live your life thinking you won in youre own mind so you can also tell your grand children about how you thought you beat some guy in a youtube arguement, or so youre able to sleep soundly thinking you outsmarted me even though in the back of your mind you fear it isnt true.
Firstly thats not a traditional longbow. traditional longbows, or Englishlongbows did't have shelves. The feathers need trimming, and maille wasn't designed to stop arrows at 15yrds esp bodkins which were designed to penertrate armour, so no real shocker. Btw real maille is mento be round section not square.
If you can sit there and bend rings together an arrow can unbend them with out a bodkin you are making ornamental costume armor.There was no need to test it at all. It was not a test nor a historical accurate test at a bodkin was not required to damage that junk in any form or fashion I could stab through with a broad dagger. I could probably unbend rings with my fingers.
You need to test Historically accurate mail riveted ,Braised shut or solid rings every other row wearing that stuff is usless
The mail you tested is not historically accurate it was butted mail a modern reproduction. Historical mail was riveted or solid rings so the test you did was not historically accurate and worthless miss leading the masses into believing mail was worthless.
Please check out my videos here on you tube on maille armor. Historical mail was riveted and solid every other row not just bent together.Butted is a modern costume design!!!!!!!
If you want to shut the haters up. Shoot through the chain and like a couple inches of leather or some other analog. And try different chain mail. But seriously great arrow. Good test. Some people just enjoy being little naggy b*tches.
The ring measurments are pretty good. But the fact that it is butted makes it historicaly inaccurated. Mail was usually made of alternating rows of riveted and solid rings. This made it much more protective against arrows.
the test where not done with the right type off chain-mail they never used butted mail.... ever. its an unfinished product. they only used riveted and solid rings every other row...... and the rings where so small as even 6mm. small enough to withstand the bodkin arrow. you need to read a lot more history before conducting test like this and then use those faulse results as evidence..
the test where not done with the right type off chain-mail they never used butted mail.... ever. its an unfinished product. they only used riveted and solid rings every other row...... and the rings where so small as even 6mm. small enough to withstand the bodkin arrow. you need to read a lot more history before conducting test like this and then use those faulse results as evidence..
lol @ "mideval grade chainmail"... i know you have it pop up that the mail you used was made by you and that it wasnt riveted with solid links, so it's not mideval grade. and it was worn over a padded gambison and leather. get some real maille and put it over a sheet of leather with a padded gambison under that with the jug under it all and see if your bow will still pierce it. too many videos about arrows and chainmail but NONE of them do it right, why?
@seanschwei a warbow with a bodkin point could easily go through all of that like butter. chainmaile even riveted is not adequate protection against arrows. otherwise platemaile wouldnt have come into play.
@seanschwei tell you what man. if you find me or know someone that can send me a 10 inch square sample of riveted maille of historical quality. ill set it up and take some shots ;)
other than that, i think most people go for butted because its cheaper. not many ppl will buy a 150 dollar coif to distroy right? lol
@yourredcomrade717 exactly! but they still use it as if it were the real thing and say, "oh! look how terrible it is.", lol. that's what i'm really getting at.
@seanschwei Yeah, last time I was looking up stuff about chainmail, there were no examples of butted mail anywhere. It's pretty obvious that an arrow would pierce butted mail because there is nothing holding the mail rings together! The arrow hits the ring and pushes it apart because there is no weld or rivet to hold it together. Next time try it with some solid, welded, or riveted rings.
@vlaflipgast Great for slashes, and if it's proper, riveted mail (instead of butted, like the one used in this test), very good at stopping thrusts, lighter impact blows and a few types of arrow.
@vlaflipgast It's a great armor. The one shown here is a butted maille which is what medieval fans wear today. Rea (Riveted) maille is a good armor against pretty much any weapon.
cody0067 what your saying is very innaccurate. They had the chain mail hanging in the same position soldiers wore it. This way more rings would take the impact, with each line of rings over each other.
And european chain mail was made in a 4-in-1 pattern, definately not 6-in-1.
Also, the romans used 16gauge chainmail.
Therefore, since this test was arrow vs mail, not sword vs mail, it was very accurate.
Humans have give, there is supposed to be thick padding under the mail, you need riveted mail, and you're too close (most arrows wounds would be from arrows falling, not from point blank). Do those and then test it...
Hmm, I'd really like to see a test done on a free-hanging mannequin wearing the suit.
Freely hanging, it has more give to it just like a human does. And when in the shape of a human body, the arrow has less of a chance to hit straight-on. These would be a very much more combat-friendly test. Chainmail isn't meant so much for completely deflecting an attack as much as diverting it.
no jerkin or haqueton underneath. need a linen garment 20x layers under the mail. but i think you have proven point about at least, why the mail was riveted!
The reason it penetrated that much is because you were using butted chainmail. This maille is for reenactments. If you use riveted i think it would be much less effective.
pretty decent test i like that you guys took the "squishyness" facter of a persons body in to count, and could you imagine how much more damage it would of done if the bow was the 100+ draw weight of a war bow i bet it would of pased thru most of the dog bed if not all the way thru
mail was made to take the slashing blow of a sword blade and practicly change it to blunt force so the mail wearer only got bruses and no gashes but the sword could still stab through the mail... and traditional medevil mail was made with 12-14 gage steal rings with a apx. 3/8" diamiter at 6 to 1 weave not 4 to 1 .... but it dosent matter its still fun to shoot stuff :D
Swords couldn't reliably stab through mail, nor could spears, a good number of arrows, and even lances at times. The 'standard' mail used in medieval times was between 14-16 ga. and 1/4-1/2" diameter with a 4-1 weave. The tighter and thicker the rings, the more expensive the mail and wealthy the owner would have been.
Heres a vid testing some swords against mail and adequate padding: watch?v=kl-ec6Ub7FM
a couple of things that i noticed wrong with the tests ... the first is for a few shots the ring alignment was vertical when the mail is worn the rings run horizontal so that they overlap more and hang onto the body it also gives the wearer more breathing room... next chain mail was never made to withstand arrows let alone bodkin ( i could be wrong but bodkin was made to assist in penatraiting chain mail)
A couple things to take into consideration. Riveted maille is more historically accurate and archers tended to shoot in volleys from greater distances away.
I live in Canada, and a major woldwide supplier of maille rings is just to my East, so I do not make my own rings, I order pre-fabricated rings from them. 12 guage rings is not too big for 3/8" dia, but it's about as tight as you'd want it for fear of losing flexibility. I also doubt 12 ga x 3/8" dia would stand up to a bodkin, but a broadhead I wonder about. I could always mail you a slab of maille to test, it'd be good for both of us. BTW, I am also an archer. ;)
oh my, yes i suppose ordering rings would save a lot of time! We will be selling our arrows soon if you're interested (we can make any type of tip you want). If you want to mail me pieces to test feel free! I need an email address so i can send you my home address without posting it on youtube ;) haha. we do already have a broad-head arrow made and fletched, how convenient! in fact just last night i was out collecting goose feathers for more arrows.
Have you done a similar test on 14 or 12 guage butted maille? How about rivetted maille? I am also curious how the maille holds up against a broadhead point rather than a bodkin. Any other videos? Good testing, btw.
The 14 guage would be neat to see, but forgive me for suggesting the diameter should not be 1/2". I would suggest 3/8" (10 mm) at the largest. I understand 14 guage maille is a bit tough to weave at 3/8" dia, but it is a common piece of armour. At least consider it anyway, and please keep me informed of any other videos.
I would but the first hauberk we ever made was 14ga 1/2" and i don't have time to make a piece of tighter weave just for a demo. I know 1/2" is too big and will not be very historically accurate but we'll see if a demo of it gives any surprising results...
I am not sure how experienced you are at making maille, and the time needed to weave varies accordingly, but I figure an average mailler would be able to weave a small test piece in a few hours, providing the rings were already available. I actually make custom maille, but I have yet to see any of my weaves tested vs arrows. A true test would be 12 guage 3/8" dia vs a broadhead. I doubt it would hold up against a bodkin however, but it would be interesting to witness all the same.
i dont really relish the prospect of sitting down and putting 4 hours into wrapping, cutting, and weaving a test peice just to destroy. ive never used 12ga isnt that too big? ive never researched historical diameters or guages of rings so im not sure what would be most 'accurate' to test. in battle only bodkins would've been used for their obvious piercing advantage and i dont care what you make maile out of, i dont think any rings will stop a bodkin coming out of a 100lb historical accurate bow
Not only the chainmail is an imitation, but also the carpet is not a gambeson.
MotusSwordsmanship 3 months ago
this is not real mail . Get riveted mail.
conncork 3 months ago
Wasn't chainmail designed to resist slashing not piercing? I don't know. That is what i have heard.
BlankPageNumberXIII 3 months ago
@BlankPageNumberXIII it was designed for both... However it was riveted. No one ever used butted mail, as it was a waste of very expensive steel and pretty much useless.
luciferiexcelsil 3 weeks ago
@luciferiexcelsil But is it still more effective against slashing then stabbing?
BlankPageNumberXIII 3 weeks ago
@BlankPageNumberXIII Well, from what I've read, mail was not as effective with the blunt trauma the hits came with. I guess a stab would create a lot of blunt trauma than a slash. I'd say yours a logical guess on it. The point was to stop any open wounds because that's what would certainly kill you, at the time infected wounds were a death sentence, even if it wasn't a lethal cut.
luciferiexcelsil 3 weeks ago
Yep, this is bullshit, mate. Get riveted.
georgekorovytsky 6 months ago
Shooting arrows against butted mail is useless. If you want to construct a more accurate test try riveted mail with padding
Kingofsomething87 7 months ago
So many people get so upset with chainmail vs arrow tests. Ok, standard soldiers medieval mail was built of steel or iron of inferior quality of even the worst modern reproduction so get real, the bodkin was designed to pierce mail and it did so get over it, mail was not designed to resist bodkin shots. Mail did however stop close quarter slashing which was most typical combat style after archers fucked off. Mail did stop the much more lethal broadhead arrows, bodkin pierce mail/padding not deep
PangeaSpreads 7 months ago
@PangeaSpreads
Mail also stopped bodkins.... research your history. Maille was not proof against an arrow, but most of the time it worked just fine. Thats why Maille was used for nearly 2000 years.
EvilxMerlin 7 months ago
@EvilxMerlin O so THAT was why chainmail was worn for nearly 2000 years mmm, dont make a fool of yourself, I said a bodkin can pierce mail because its thin profile gets through the gaps and splits a mail link at optimum distance and it does. I never said it can pierce combinations of mail with padding, leather etc which did work, and the bodkin was not noted for doing fatal damage but lets face it a deep stab wound back then was death anyway because they were filthy and disease sets in fast
PangeaSpreads 7 months ago
@PangeaSpreads
Learn your history boy. Chain DID stop bodkins. It did so for hundreds of years. Bodkins came about because they were simpler and cheaper to manufacture than broadheads/leaf bladed arrows.
EvilxMerlin 7 months ago
@EvilxMerlin If you even sat back and thought about for a few seconds.. if bodkins could not pierce mail then why the shag would they bring archers to a fight, do you think they just bounced off whats was mostly poor quality thin little iron rings thats gaps provide perfect guides and entry points for these arrows which can hit speeds of over 150 feet per second, think about those speeds, not to mention the weight of the poor guy running onto it, it WILL pierce, maybe not a killer shot but fuck
PangeaSpreads 7 months ago
@PangeaSpreads
Again, learn your history. Why did the English field thousands of archers at Crecy and Agincourt which were the hayday of alwyte armour? Why did the English fire over 400,000 arrows at Agincourt and the French report only 370 knights killed by arrows? Tell you what, read up on it. Learnhow chain armour works. Its not just poor quality little iron rings that gaps provide perfect guides. My god, you sound like one of those katana kids that gets his knowledge from cartoons.
EvilxMerlin 7 months ago
@EvilxMerlin Love waking up to read an idiot at his best, listen you shit talker with your "learn your history", if anyone read what you commented they would have a good laugh, the discussion is mail vs arrow, and your talking about Agincourt and Alwyte armour, that was PLATE armour you retard so just stop making a complete tit of yourself and pretending you know about European history, armour and warfare, stick to your American stuff, plate armour stopped arrows, mail did not, why would it..
PangeaSpreads 7 months ago
@EvilxMerlin ...chainmail was not designed to stop arrows, it was designed to stop close quarter injurys such as slashing swords and daggers etc, it first appeared around 300bc with the Celts, by comparison the long bow and bodkin arrows arrived during the 12th century, long long after chainmail was in use which clearly then was not made with arrow stopping in mind, and there is no more to say. In Ireland we have a saying, “never argue with a fool, people may not tell the difference”, bye fool
PangeaSpreads 7 months ago
@PangeaSpreads
Someone needs to educate himself. There is a saying all over the world... you cannot fix stupid.
EvilxMerlin 7 months ago
@EvilxMerlin Admitting your stupid is a bit harsh, just American would have done, and as such you feel the righteous need to insist your half fabricated readers digest version of world history is more correct than a European version of European history, this stuff is my heritage and I grew up with it, studied it and was educated in these topics in a land where they were actually used and are displayed in our actual real castles, stick to your Disney land castles thanks mr evil merlin lol
PangeaSpreads 7 months ago
@PangeaSpreads
You still don't understand the history of armour do you? Thank you for proving so. Go do some research on chain armour versus the arrow. Stop getting your rose coloured history from cartoons.
EvilxMerlin 7 months ago
@EvilxMerlin Tell you what, I will believe and world historians will re-write factual history to your fabricated bs version if you upload a video of yourself wearing a historically accurate padded gambeson with and an iron chainmail hauberk charging into a hail of bodkin arrows, if your correct, the arrows that dont find youre face will bounce harmlessly off since you think chainmail was arrow proof, if your wrong, we will all enjoy the predictable outcome but you wont because you know its death
PangeaSpreads 7 months ago
@PangeaSpreads
Lets get something correct. Learn to read, I never said PROOF against arrows. I said it was effective at protecting against arrows. And since I have only a haubergeon (my kit is Agincourt era), its kinda a moot point. There is PLENTY of historical documentation on the effectiveness of chain and only chain against bows and crossbows thru all of history. And yes, I'd be willing to put my chain up against a bow and bodkin arrow.
EvilxMerlin 7 months ago
@EvilxMerlin I like you, you know something. Although a gambeson is quite a must when taking arrows, or about anything, because otherwise it will hurt like fuck. But your points are all valid. Though most arrows are quite able to stop a man in chain armour at close range. Not necessarily pierce through, but stop the man.
DiabolusIgnis 7 months ago
@DiabolusIgnis
Oh without a doubt. Chain wasn't worn without a gambeson. To do so is just... dumb. At 20 yards an archer was a forced to be reconed with regardless of what a soldier was wearing for armour. Outside that range, armour was almost proof against arrows (from a bow or crossbow). The reports of archers at Agincourt is all the proof that is needed.
EvilxMerlin 7 months ago
@EvilxMerlin Technically, some people DID wear chain on their bare skin. But they did it as to torture themselves =P
DiabolusIgnis 7 months ago
@EvilxMerlin For what its worth I think this vid of test mail v arrow is like all other tests i've seen, not accurate. The fact is to test it correctly it would need to be tested with typical bow, arrow and mail used with the padded gambison and even with leather, it would need to be tested at typical ranges, not 10 feet away, next the target would need human weight and flesh flexing properties etc and men in war dont typicaly stand still so movement needs to be a factor
PangeaSpreads 7 months ago
thats butted mail no one used that you know why it does not work people only ever used riveted chainmail.
wariscomeing 8 months ago
The chainmail not make to break an arrow asshole :/
markus3ro 8 months ago
wow if thats a 50 pound long bow i wonder what a composite bow could do. lol
RalphyGreene 9 months ago
@RalphyGreene at the same draw weight?, about the same.
0xxRawr0xx0 9 months ago
@0xxRawr0xx0 No composite bows hold a lot more energy ive tested them and on average a lot of composite bows have higher draw weights. I meant a midevil composite bow sorry didnt mention that.
RalphyGreene 9 months ago
@RalphyGreene most composite bows (i guess you mean mongolian etc. bows)don't go higher than 80 lbs of drawweight were an english longbow wil go well above 200 lbs. So if you have a 80 lbs composite and 50 lbs longbow yeah the composite will punch a bigger hole.
0xxRawr0xx0 9 months ago
@0xxRawr0xx0 No need to act like im an idiot i compared a 40lb composite bow wood/fiber glass recurve against that material vents are made out of against a 40 pound longbow, and the composite recurve had deeper penetration. Also youre wrong even though i wasnt talking about mongol bows they do go over 80lb draws in medieval times they are said to be average at 160lb theyre recorded to shoot at almost 600 yards *thats arc obviously*. the limbs store more energy in recurves.
RalphyGreene 9 months ago
@RalphyGreene a wood fiberglass recurve will always shoot an arrow faster just beacause of the string cup thingy on the limbs, also you gotta do your research a horn/sinew bow wasn't made above 100 lbs because they were shot of the back of a horse.
0xxRawr0xx0 9 months ago
@0xxRawr0xx0 Ok ive never seen a horn/sinew bow above 75lbs where did you find this bow for sale show me. Also a fiber/wood bow is composite its more than one material and they do store more energy and what cup are you talking about I dont have that. Also composite bows dont need to be shot on horseback they had foot soldier composite bows like the russian ones. Do you need links since you cant do research like I did?
RalphyGreene 9 months ago
@RalphyGreene thats my point , also they didn't have specific foot soldier bows, and if you were talking about a medieval composite bow why add fiberglass?, not so medieval.
0xxRawr0xx0 9 months ago
@0xxRawr0xx0 Who said medieval bows have fiber glass im talking about my OWN fiber glass composite recurve bow, dude do you even speak english?
RalphyGreene 9 months ago
@RalphyGreene alright are you talking about the hungarian style recurve with siyahs etc., or about a recurve with just recurved tips
0xxRawr0xx0 9 months ago
@0xxRawr0xx0 man I only said recurve i never said mongol, hungarian, elvish or whatever. When I mention composite you thought I meant mongol bows too. Its like if I said red cars you would think im talking about honda civics or something. lol Are you from America there might be a language barrier.
RalphyGreene 9 months ago
@RalphyGreene most medieval recurves are related to the hungarian/mongolian composite bows.. And no i'm not from the us.
0xxRawr0xx0 9 months ago
@0xxRawr0xx0 Ok thats why you dont understand what im saying my recurve bow is not medieval recurve bows are not all medieval most modern hunting bows that arent compound are recurved.
RalphyGreene 9 months ago
@RalphyGreene i do understand you but first you say your talking about a medieval recurve, and now your talking about a modern 1., i guess your english is fucked up?.,
0xxRawr0xx0 9 months ago
@0xxRawr0xx0 No I was talking about testing my 40 pound composite bow which is recurve THAN YOU brought up mongol bows I referred to them as medieval bows than you kept bringing up medieval bows of different types. When Originally I was talking about a modern recurve composite fiberglass bow i was just responding to your comments to the medieval bows. Basically what im saying is you keep trying to change the subject and you cant speak english. Now get the last word in so you're able to sleep.
RalphyGreene 9 months ago
@RalphyGreene "I meant a midevil composite bow sorry didnt mention that." your words...,
0xxRawr0xx0 9 months ago
@0xxRawr0xx0 "wow if thats a 50 pound long bow i wonder what a composite bow could do."
"I meant a midevil composite bow sorry didnt mention that." your words" - MEANING I wanted to see that tested in the video as well as the longbow.
" i compared a 40lb composite bow wood/fiber glass recurve against that material vents are made out of against a 40 pound longbow"
there now re-read everything before you respond to me. If next comment is irellevant/doesnt make sense im not responding.
RalphyGreene 9 months ago
@RalphyGreene i'm still right, you screwed up not me.
0xxRawr0xx0 9 months ago
@0xxRawr0xx0 You thought fiber glass bows were in medieval times you scewed up & r retarded. You cant answer any of my questions but I am able to answer yours. Now I'll let you get the last word in so you'll be able to live your life thinking you won in youre own mind so you can also tell your grand children about how you thought you beat some guy in a youtube arguement, or so youre able to sleep soundly thinking you outsmarted me even though in the back of your mind you fear it isnt true.
RalphyGreene 9 months ago 2
@RalphyGreene you wanted to see what a medieval composite bow would do, so i told you that it wouldnt make any difference.
0xxRawr0xx0 9 months ago
@0xxRawr0xx0 Shut up already you're going nowhere with what youre saying and embarassing yourself.
Desiree473 9 months ago
u are way too close
lotrojoe 11 months ago
Unfortunately, I took a suit of "Real chain mail" like you used and ripped it in half with my bare hands. And I'm a tiny guy.
For a different type of test, take some hard solder and use it to close the rings. Its a much better test.
nivarion 11 months ago
Firstly thats not a traditional longbow. traditional longbows, or Englishlongbows did't have shelves. The feathers need trimming, and maille wasn't designed to stop arrows at 15yrds esp bodkins which were designed to penertrate armour, so no real shocker. Btw real maille is mento be round section not square.
19firebird86 1 year ago
What was the range?
TheLoyalOfficer 1 year ago
To bad real warriors wore real armor. That stuff is just a paperweight in rings.
Gratch2222 1 year ago
If you can sit there and bend rings together an arrow can unbend them with out a bodkin you are making ornamental costume armor.There was no need to test it at all. It was not a test nor a historical accurate test at a bodkin was not required to damage that junk in any form or fashion I could stab through with a broad dagger. I could probably unbend rings with my fingers.
You need to test Historically accurate mail riveted ,Braised shut or solid rings every other row wearing that stuff is usless
ThegnThrand 1 year ago 2
The mail you tested is not historically accurate it was butted mail a modern reproduction. Historical mail was riveted or solid rings so the test you did was not historically accurate and worthless miss leading the masses into believing mail was worthless.
Please check out my videos here on you tube on maille armor. Historical mail was riveted and solid every other row not just bent together.Butted is a modern costume design!!!!!!!
ThegnThrand 1 year ago
That's why butted chainmail was never used historically.
Ranziel1 1 year ago
@Ranziel1 THANK YOU! : D
xxTeutonicKnightxx 1 year ago
Comment removed
BugleKrakatit 1 year ago
Is that arrow made from shovel handle?
BugleKrakatit 1 year ago
If you want to shut the haters up. Shoot through the chain and like a couple inches of leather or some other analog. And try different chain mail. But seriously great arrow. Good test. Some people just enjoy being little naggy b*tches.
TheFall3nangel 1 year ago
the bow that you used is not a longbow but an american flatbow
archery10029 1 year ago
The ring measurments are pretty good. But the fact that it is butted makes it historicaly inaccurated. Mail was usually made of alternating rows of riveted and solid rings. This made it much more protective against arrows.
Kingofsomething87 1 year ago
uh, those feathers, they dont look too nice, no offence though
sengfar964 1 year ago
pretty dumb some people think a chain male is for arrow or that things chain male is for cut protection
desfa000 1 year ago
@desfa000 best protection from arrows is a 3-5 inch plate body
sengfar964 1 year ago
Why dose no know how to test mail armour?
someguy001001 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
the test where not done with the right type off chain-mail they never used butted mail.... ever. its an unfinished product. they only used riveted and solid rings every other row...... and the rings where so small as even 6mm. small enough to withstand the bodkin arrow. you need to read a lot more history before conducting test like this and then use those faulse results as evidence..
VonDrott 1 year ago
the test where not done with the right type off chain-mail they never used butted mail.... ever. its an unfinished product. they only used riveted and solid rings every other row...... and the rings where so small as even 6mm. small enough to withstand the bodkin arrow. you need to read a lot more history before conducting test like this and then use those faulse results as evidence..
VonDrott 1 year ago
lol @ "mideval grade chainmail"... i know you have it pop up that the mail you used was made by you and that it wasnt riveted with solid links, so it's not mideval grade. and it was worn over a padded gambison and leather. get some real maille and put it over a sheet of leather with a padded gambison under that with the jug under it all and see if your bow will still pierce it. too many videos about arrows and chainmail but NONE of them do it right, why?
seanschwei 1 year ago 17
@seanschwei a warbow with a bodkin point could easily go through all of that like butter. chainmaile even riveted is not adequate protection against arrows. otherwise platemaile wouldnt have come into play.
yourredcomrade717 1 year ago
@yourredcomrade717 i never said it would or it wouldn't. i said to the test right.
seanschwei 1 year ago
@seanschwei tell you what man. if you find me or know someone that can send me a 10 inch square sample of riveted maille of historical quality. ill set it up and take some shots ;)
other than that, i think most people go for butted because its cheaper. not many ppl will buy a 150 dollar coif to distroy right? lol
yourredcomrade717 1 year ago
@yourredcomrade717 exactly! but they still use it as if it were the real thing and say, "oh! look how terrible it is.", lol. that's what i'm really getting at.
seanschwei 1 year ago
@seanschwei Bow plonkers?
Rhonerin 7 months ago
@seanschwei Yeah, last time I was looking up stuff about chainmail, there were no examples of butted mail anywhere. It's pretty obvious that an arrow would pierce butted mail because there is nothing holding the mail rings together! The arrow hits the ring and pushes it apart because there is no weld or rivet to hold it together. Next time try it with some solid, welded, or riveted rings.
Spacepup18 6 months ago
@seanschwei perhaps because people can't afford a gambeson and welding equipment to link the chains. But, that's just me.
Thrawn6211 6 months ago
so what is chain-mail good for???
vlaflipgast 1 year ago
@vlaflipgast Great for slashes, and if it's proper, riveted mail (instead of butted, like the one used in this test), very good at stopping thrusts, lighter impact blows and a few types of arrow.
KatakiDoragon 1 year ago
@vlaflipgast It's a great armor. The one shown here is a butted maille which is what medieval fans wear today. Rea (Riveted) maille is a good armor against pretty much any weapon.
TheScandinavianOne 1 year ago
Was it riveted or butted? Butted chainmail was never used historically.
Ranziel1 1 year ago
cody0067 what your saying is very innaccurate. They had the chain mail hanging in the same position soldiers wore it. This way more rings would take the impact, with each line of rings over each other.
And european chain mail was made in a 4-in-1 pattern, definately not 6-in-1.
Also, the romans used 16gauge chainmail.
Therefore, since this test was arrow vs mail, not sword vs mail, it was very accurate.
Forsakensoulsof12 1 year ago
"Quarter inch 1 gauge" damn
jazzharp52 1 year ago
good start, but the goodness was cut short by the crappy music
robertgeorg 1 year ago
riveted maille, plenty of padding underneath, target not backed up against a hard surface. Then this test will be worth something.
headhunter1945 1 year ago
butted maille, plenty of padding underneath, target not backed up against a hard surface. Then this test will be worth something.
headhunter1945 1 year ago
Humans have give, there is supposed to be thick padding under the mail, you need riveted mail, and you're too close (most arrows wounds would be from arrows falling, not from point blank). Do those and then test it...
tsp312 1 year ago
wouldnt go through a 6 in1 that easyly
dago00 1 year ago
woot with the nightwish music
HarbingerRomanus 1 year ago
Find me an actual suit of BUTTED maille from a real acheological dig, and maybe this test might be half-way valid.
TheKNH86 1 year ago
do it to a riveted chain mail then talk my friend.
JacobTheIndoAmerican 1 year ago
Hmm, I'd really like to see a test done on a free-hanging mannequin wearing the suit.
Freely hanging, it has more give to it just like a human does. And when in the shape of a human body, the arrow has less of a chance to hit straight-on. These would be a very much more combat-friendly test. Chainmail isn't meant so much for completely deflecting an attack as much as diverting it.
TuahShinguru 1 year ago
So... you need to wear a carpet under your chainmail, and you're INVINCIBLE!
ReasonAndPurpose 1 year ago
yeah get some rivited maille, flat ring maille is much better to.
robbyradicolie 1 year ago
It's never rivetted, is nobody willing to sacrifice a suit like that to prove a point ;p
Ranziel1 1 year ago
as far as I know butted maille was only used in certain parts of asia in the last thousand years
this test is shit
Lovesgoats 1 year ago
no jerkin or haqueton underneath. need a linen garment 20x layers under the mail. but i think you have proven point about at least, why the mail was riveted!
lebarosky 1 year ago
why did you waste that juice? i would have drunk the juice and filled the jug with something worthless... like you.
rubenshitcock 2 years ago
@rubenshitcock be my guest if you want to drink red-dyed water.
oobergooberkc 2 years ago 23
@rubenshitcock PWNEEEEED!
RockPop1337 1 year ago
Butted mail isn't historical
BigDummy23 2 years ago
Is that an arrow, or a mini spear?
goldenscales 2 years ago
Thats really cool. I might try to make an arrow. Also how long did the 1/4 sheet of mail take you to make?
medievallover120 2 years ago
The reason it penetrated that much is because you were using butted chainmail. This maille is for reenactments. If you use riveted i think it would be much less effective.
amadeus987 2 years ago
pretty decent test i like that you guys took the "squishyness" facter of a persons body in to count, and could you imagine how much more damage it would of done if the bow was the 100+ draw weight of a war bow i bet it would of pased thru most of the dog bed if not all the way thru
xXpreflexXx 2 years ago
mail was made to take the slashing blow of a sword blade and practicly change it to blunt force so the mail wearer only got bruses and no gashes but the sword could still stab through the mail... and traditional medevil mail was made with 12-14 gage steal rings with a apx. 3/8" diamiter at 6 to 1 weave not 4 to 1 .... but it dosent matter its still fun to shoot stuff :D
cody0067 2 years ago
and shoot stuff, we shall!
oobergooberkc 2 years ago
@cody0067 like snot from your nose? lol, jking! but still its fun to shoot stuff :D
sengfar964 1 year ago
@cody0067 This also look like it is butted not riveted mail which kind of make the test pointless as an experiment
OneMindAnyWeapon 1 year ago
@cody0067 it also look slike it is butted not riveted mail making the test rather pointless as an experiment,
OneMindAnyWeapon 1 year ago
@cody0067
Swords couldn't reliably stab through mail, nor could spears, a good number of arrows, and even lances at times. The 'standard' mail used in medieval times was between 14-16 ga. and 1/4-1/2" diameter with a 4-1 weave. The tighter and thicker the rings, the more expensive the mail and wealthy the owner would have been.
Heres a vid testing some swords against mail and adequate padding: watch?v=kl-ec6Ub7FM
WitheringintheDark 10 months ago
a couple of things that i noticed wrong with the tests ... the first is for a few shots the ring alignment was vertical when the mail is worn the rings run horizontal so that they overlap more and hang onto the body it also gives the wearer more breathing room... next chain mail was never made to withstand arrows let alone bodkin ( i could be wrong but bodkin was made to assist in penatraiting chain mail)
cody0067 2 years ago
ya i know it was made to penetrate rings. which is why its so much fun to see what it can actually do!
oobergooberkc 2 years ago
A couple things to take into consideration. Riveted maille is more historically accurate and archers tended to shoot in volleys from greater distances away.
skyknight1281 2 years ago
Thanks for the advice.
oobergooberkc 2 years ago
Was this butted mail or riveted?
humungus3 2 years ago
butted.
oobergooberkc 2 years ago
what is the difference, and wich 1 is better ?
jelisi1 2 years ago
I live in Canada, and a major woldwide supplier of maille rings is just to my East, so I do not make my own rings, I order pre-fabricated rings from them. 12 guage rings is not too big for 3/8" dia, but it's about as tight as you'd want it for fear of losing flexibility. I also doubt 12 ga x 3/8" dia would stand up to a bodkin, but a broadhead I wonder about. I could always mail you a slab of maille to test, it'd be good for both of us. BTW, I am also an archer. ;)
Cheers,
Zeke
SgtZekeAnderson 2 years ago
oh my, yes i suppose ordering rings would save a lot of time! We will be selling our arrows soon if you're interested (we can make any type of tip you want). If you want to mail me pieces to test feel free! I need an email address so i can send you my home address without posting it on youtube ;) haha. we do already have a broad-head arrow made and fletched, how convenient! in fact just last night i was out collecting goose feathers for more arrows.
oobergooberkc 2 years ago
Have you done a similar test on 14 or 12 guage butted maille? How about rivetted maille? I am also curious how the maille holds up against a broadhead point rather than a bodkin. Any other videos? Good testing, btw.
SgtZekeAnderson 2 years ago
we will put up a video soon of 14ga 1/2" dia. 4-1 against this arrow. As well as both against a broadhead. thanks for the interest!
oobergooberkc 2 years ago
The 14 guage would be neat to see, but forgive me for suggesting the diameter should not be 1/2". I would suggest 3/8" (10 mm) at the largest. I understand 14 guage maille is a bit tough to weave at 3/8" dia, but it is a common piece of armour. At least consider it anyway, and please keep me informed of any other videos.
Cheers,
Zeke.
SgtZekeAnderson 2 years ago
I would but the first hauberk we ever made was 14ga 1/2" and i don't have time to make a piece of tighter weave just for a demo. I know 1/2" is too big and will not be very historically accurate but we'll see if a demo of it gives any surprising results...
oobergooberkc 2 years ago
I am not sure how experienced you are at making maille, and the time needed to weave varies accordingly, but I figure an average mailler would be able to weave a small test piece in a few hours, providing the rings were already available. I actually make custom maille, but I have yet to see any of my weaves tested vs arrows. A true test would be 12 guage 3/8" dia vs a broadhead. I doubt it would hold up against a bodkin however, but it would be interesting to witness all the same.
Zeke
SgtZekeAnderson 2 years ago
i dont really relish the prospect of sitting down and putting 4 hours into wrapping, cutting, and weaving a test peice just to destroy. ive never used 12ga isnt that too big? ive never researched historical diameters or guages of rings so im not sure what would be most 'accurate' to test. in battle only bodkins would've been used for their obvious piercing advantage and i dont care what you make maile out of, i dont think any rings will stop a bodkin coming out of a 100lb historical accurate bow
oobergooberkc 2 years ago
thanks for all the conversation btw. keep suggesting things and eventually ill have the time to test them :)
oobergooberkc 2 years ago
hi there - is the maille rivetted or butted together
sharkey1066 2 years ago
It's butted, thanks for asking! anything else you want to know or see put up as a video or test?
oobergooberkc 2 years ago