Consider how long time this actually takes next time you are playing insert-generic-RPG-here and are putting on full plate armors like this on in split seconds...
When people in the movies kill someone thats wearing armor with on hit, its not very realistic. Warriors long ago would train to find weaknesses in the armor, getting through armor like this would be very tough, so people found other ways to kill the knights.
Lovely harness. My only issue is the articulation of the pauldrons, when he lifts his arm up the tiniest bit they flip right back because they don't drop low enough and one of the edges is catching on the top of arm harness. Small point but you might want some larger pauldrons.
so killing guy in armor like this with sword is difficult, you can only stab his visor, elbow, groin, armpit or try a cut behind the knee... everything else is useless, you would just annoy him and he would kill you. I would recomend 2handed Axe, Crows beak, Warhammer, Mace and maybe halberd. I remeber how I have to hit guys in plate with full strenght with my 2,6kilo sword and the effect was he just noticed that something has pushed his back :D dont slash, stab! :D
@Railstarfish Yeah I know it as a Mortschlag :D pretty nasty thing. And that sword is one hander 98cm overal lenght, I admit it is pretty heavy but I like it because you can clear all blades and shield or anything out of your way :) look at my video Training Duel I or II I'am the one with shield and black tabard :) btw in that battle we fought about 45minutes and I get 15 or 16 kills and 4 deaths, its about the habit I think, now I have new sword 1,2kilo, its like nothing in the hand :D
Reading all the posts in here is so funny. I can't believe people think, a sword of any kind could cut through armour like this, its just not happening. Oh and Knights raped and pillaged all the time, but then so did Samuria and just about every other warrior including modern times.
@Iselas181 Swords cut through armor all the time in the middle ages. Especially the chain mail. They had swords that could split a man's head to the teeth. They were very heavy swords and they knew how to use them.
@nancythetall Granted if you got him in the chainmail but chainmail was designed to provent slashing attacks from cutting you, and he would still take damage from the blunt force trama. I am not saying chainmail couldn't be cut through only that I would have to be the perfect blow and against a moving, trained knight it would be difficult at best. Also the type of sword you are talking about was designed to crush much like a mace or war hammer not cut.
@Iselas181 Since when were any swords designed to crush ? That would defeat the purpouse of actually making a SWORD. They had maces and hammers to crush. Swords were all made to cut, but some were made to cut with more weight.
@ivanlagrossemoule This is true they were made to cut but by the later periods armour was so effective that all a sword could do was crush armour so they made them heavy for the dual purpose of cutting and crushing, or be thin enough to stab through joints and gaps.
@Iselas181 Even in later periods swords were light and not designed for crushing, the weight is balanced mostly towards the hilt - which makes it agile and easy to handle but reduces the amount of power you can put behind a blow. If you wanted to smash armour but all you had was a sword, you held it by the blade and swung the hilt at them, using the crossguard as an improvised warhammer - called a mordhau or murder-stroke. Also, not everyone wore armour, so not every weapon had to be anti-armour
@nancythetall During the middle ages swords in Europe were no heavier than swords everywhere else. 3 lbs was a good weight for a sword. Armour was actually really effective at stopping swords, which is part of why people went to the trouble of dressing up in armour like this. Maces, hammers, picks and axes were the anti-armour weapons, even they rarely cut through it, but just hit hard enough to slow them down.
Well, we should keep in mind that while it's naive to think all knights were noble and chivalrous, it's also very cynical and almost certainly wrong to think that none of them were. Chivalry was an ideal to aspire to, and most of them did, but few of them actually met it. They were people, not paragons.
Also, samurai probably did more morally questionable things, considering that chivalry expects you to do the right thing, while bushido expects you to follow your lord no matter what.
@IAmTheStig320 Chivalry and bushido are remarkably similar (though bushido is more ritualistic and insanely suicidal, whereas chivalry is more pragmatic and individualistic). It's true that chivalry was an ideal to aspire to - the thing is, that ideal permitted and in some cases lauded atrocity, including rape. If you want to know what ideals knights aspire to, just hang out with some hardcore gangbangers or mafiosi long enough to get an idea of what they admire and aspire to.
a). Medieval armor reached its apex during the 16th century and, yes, it was near impenetrable to the sword as it easily deflected blades. The solution to this was to use blunt weapons instead.
b). Every armor had its weak points. During the crusades, for example, the muslims took advantage of the christian knight's momentum and killed many with carefully timed and placed spear wall defenses or just knocked them off their horses and killed them when they were down.
@AndyRaslan Because the knights armor was made to give more movement, then just dented in the moving parts until they hindered the knights until they hindered them instead, then when the knight could not effectively, they finished him off.
@ragdoll485 Knights were warriors. Warriors (including noble ones) rape. It's one of the perks that inspires people to become warriors. Historically, the chance to rape and loot and gain land or rank, the thrill of killing other people (preferably while they are helpless), and of course glory and honor (i.e. reputation for strength, skill, reliability, and ruthlessness) have been the big draws to a life of professional soldiery. I understand this is not very romantic, but it is true.
@ragdoll485 ROFL yeah and i supposed Columbus discovered America and was nice to the natives, didnt kill them off, or enslave them; And that the puritan pilgrams sat down with the natives to have a big thanks giving feast.
@Iselas181 Don't generalize the real warrior's from slime, though there will always be more evil, there is still good, Also, swords could not cut through armor like this.
my scottish claymore cuts through chainmail and pierces through 1/20 inch of solid steel with ease. but piercing the entire armor of steel plate, chainmail,leather and cotton... I don't think so, though I never tried it. But I think the damage it would inflict with a full force blow would be enough to crush several ribs.
@Rivannous Depends You might be able to do significant damage to the armor, but in an actual fight the person you would be fighting would not let you most of the time swing that massive thing of yours.
Of course it could, but not by human hands. Or do you have a good source for such a thing. I mean, even the largest two handed swords where rarley over 3 kg and I haven't seen any evidence of them cutting through any kind plate armor.
What a nice replica of Maximilan Gothic Armour from Holy Roman Empire (now Germany). The best medieval armour ever made in history. Pretty much the best plate armour ever made in history, period.
the armors look safe and strong, but it's too bad they were made with heavy steel. In the real battle, they would slow a knight's motion and skill, no wonder Ganghis Khan's army slay them like nothing in Eastern European countries with less armors.
The Mongols NEVER faced knights in this kind of full plate armor, as it was developed long after the Mongols invasions. The Mongols never made it to Western Europe, for that matter. The wetter climate would have been bad for their composite bows, and the hilly, forested terrain was not as suitable for their tactics developed on the open plains.
@broly218 Yep, it should be around there. Ironically, the gear carried by a U.S. Marine weighs about 150 pounds, and that's mostly on the back and shoulders. Medieval armor hardly ever weighed half of that, and the weight is evenly distributed over your whole body.
@gandi19 i honestly think it came about because at the time they where seen as the "betters" of society they were rich and warred for most of their lives. humans cant help but romanticise war its hardwired into us until your in ot you dont truly comprehend it.
I think its funny how we romanticize things that were in no way romantic or even nice at all. Knights were not these noble men that did right by anyone but themselves their lords. Samurai often took trophies of people they didnt kill to bring to their lord to get payment. Its fun to pretend these archetypes were nice and noble but that was not ever the case.
@gandj19 Eh eh eh... don't be so hasty with those accusations. Now tell me, if none were like the way we romanticize them to be, then how exactly did they get such a reputation?
Some knights raped peasant women, but some knights were noble. How else was such an archetype created if none were like this archetype?
@PrismaCry No they couldnt. some of the best european armours came from Milan, genoa, or Bologna. These armoured suits withstood most attacks, gunshots included. they actually did a test called proofing where they would take a handgun and shoot it point blank at the armor. However, most european armour makers were mediocre in quality and could easily of been taken out by rifles.
@Tneisnart Wow, even gun shot, really? I'm working on body armor and I've never seen a single medieval armor can stand a rifle round. Not that I rejected it. Some parts of me want to believe that armorers can beat gun smiths. Just that armor must be very rare and premium.
They don't hold for modern firearms. But they did stand a decent chance against the firearms of the day. Many breastplates of the time has a dent in them after a bullet as a "proof mark" from the manufacturer.
Later when guns became more powerfull the armors needed to be thicker so after a while the troops did only have a thick breastplate and a helmet (no armor for the limbs). And after that we are in the modern era with armors with engines (tanks and other armored vehicles).
@gurkfisk89 Ah right, I remember that now. The way carabiniers used to fight. History said their armor is bullet proof to some extend, except being fired from rifled musket at close range. It could be the skill of armorers to determine whatever the wearer survive blows or not.
@PrismaCry jep.. it can be beaten by arrows.. but a modern kevlar vest can also be beaten by a simpel cheap pistol.. you just need a big amount of luck to do so
this steelplate is (in a big battel) not penetrable for any arrow
@Snorlax891 *nods* I can see that. Sorry to be a medievalist pill. It does make a pretty funny point about Tolkien and the way he blended periods, though. :-)
Armor was so expensive then that only nobles and wealthy men had it. We're talking the equivalent of a five bedroom house in the suburbs here. The vast majority of men going into war went with padded clothing, or just whatever they wore daily. Some only had a staff as a weapon. If you look at medieval manuscripts on warfare you'll see that those guys had to have balls of steel to rush into a knight with a stick.
Not all medieval armor looked so robotic and massive. There was armor for jousting and armor for parades and combat armor. This video shows what looks like parade armor. Combat armor was less massive than Gothic parade armor.
This actually looks like a reasonable replica of a gothic armour which would've been used in combat. The fluting lines and ridges were functional in that they strengthened the plates and helped guide blows away from direct hits which might pierce the armour or shock the knight inside. The helmet arrangement (where a clamshell-looking "sallet" is paired with a bevor, or chin-piece) is also indicative of a combat armour, as it allows the knight to look around in combat.
Depends on what era. In the era of this armour, gothic, they actually wore LESS maille, called voiders, and unless they were tilting, they often wore just this type of helm for gothic armour, and a sligtly less angular salet if wearing Milanese style armour. Possibly a babute...
I’ve always wondered what they did back in the day when they were fully suited, and the all of a sudden needed to take a crap. Seriously, what did they do?
If you wear armor in a battle, you may die. To have dirty pants is the least of your problems and you could always let a squire clean your armor afterwards.
So if they needed to take a crap they took a crap and fought on. I also suppose that knights took care of things like that right before they put on the armor, to avoid unpleasant events like that.
@gurkfisk89 thank you for recognizing the genius of mike loades. I was worried i was the only one at this point. some of the comments make my cringe with historical inaccuracy induced rage
Ive got a question about this particular suit of armor in the video, if anyone who knows the answer please share. Im interested in buying this suit of armor but wherever I look i see that its about 6 and 1/2 feet tall in the product description. Can this suit be worn by shorter people because Im only 5'9" , and what is the max torso width of this armor?
@spleegulence I've used katanas and I've used broadswores and double handed medieval swords. The katana is much better at slicing thanks to the curvature.
But then I'd have to explain pressure, and how curved metals are much better at slicing.... Go do some physics
@idricool Yah its better at slicing if you care about that kinda stuff, which i don't. Slicing does nothing to maille or plate maille. Its why swords designed to fight armour aren't curved. No reason to explain physics i am quite acomplished in that feild thank you.
@idricool Wait your the guy who thinks a sword can slice through arms grade metal? And I need to do physics!? nvm your to far lost for me to even begin to bother argueing with.
@spleegulence No you're the idiot for speaking shit out of your mouth without using common sense.
How the fuck do you think medieval knights wearing armored plates got killed ? You're claiming to win the argument because you're afraid and running away.
@idricool Well there were maces which probably did the most damage and which could crush some plate armor. Yes, some knights did die by the sword but usually in spots where there was no armor, like the back of the thighs was a spot but wouldnt be deadly. Swords really cant go through plate armor chain mail and a gambeson. Although a sharp lance just might do the trick on the battle field where their tournament armor which was thicker would not be worn.
@idricool I dont know why you are getting angry with me when i was in some way supporting what you said. I just dont think someone can thrust a sword through steel armor, chain mail, and a wool gambeson. Maybe if the got stabed by cavalier on a horse running by it might go through. But taking a sword and thrusting it through steel chain mail and a gambeson just would not really work. As i said before a lance just might have done the trick.
@idricool Listen, you rude brute. I do know, infact some armor stoped bullets at the time. You have no right to be angry about this. We can have a civilized debate about this if we have different opinions. But this doesnt call for swears or fighting. Maybe some armor was poorly constructed and thus could not have taken a stab with a sword.
@thestarsandbars The difference between piercing and impact are quite large. Modern day kevlar vests can stop a bullet, but will be penetrated by a sword. It's why they make a certain kind of armor for close combat to stop bayonette's and the like. Steel plate armor /can/ stop bullets depending on where it's hit. That's why when plate armor become more common medieval soldiers started using more blunt objects, like maces and axes to deliver force through the armor, not pierce it.
@idricool Actually most french knights died from longbow wounds at Agincourt. Plus you claimed a katana could slice right through armour, which is absurd. Yes armour could be penetrated with a hefty thrust, but thats a completely different story. This said it seems your the only one talking shit out your mouth in this case, and I am not the only one who thinks so.
@spleegulence You are an idiot. Have you ever used a katana ? I did. It is probably one of the best sword to slice.
And THIN armor can be cut. Go learn some fucking materials behavior, strains and stress and pressure before talking out of your asses. I can't have a conversation with an idiot who doesn't know about metals and physical aspects.
@idricool I honestly probably know more about the actual properties of metal in a practical way than you ever will as i hand work metal all the time. Sure I don't pay a university to teach me the physics of it, but neither did the armour smiths who originally designed the armour.
@idricool Yes actually I make armour, and then test it. Even mild steel armour of 16 guage thickness once work hardened with edges rolled stops a sword slice. I don't even use carbon steel most of the time, which is what knights armour was made of. Honestly a class room can only take you so far. Never doubted the ability of a katana to slice, its just not sliceing through real armour in any meaningful way. The metal pipe in the video was pretty thin no offence, its hardly comparable to armour
No. Samurais are known to be one of history's best warriors because they are. Also, to end this dispute about whose armor's best. Take out the armor of both warriors and consider the results. Samurais with their katanas only and knight with their sword and shield. Result is samurai will cut down knight without doubt. Facts samurais where known to have fought without armor during the meiji restoration.
Um, you do realize that European knights trained without armour, without shields too? Jebus cripes where the FUCK do people get info from? Go find out what Blossfechten is and then get back to us. Stop getting your info from cartoons and comic books, especially those from Japan.
Yeah, I hate to say it, but a katana-armed samurai would be pretty screwed against a late medieval knight like in this video. The katana is a light, fast cutting weapon and there is VERY little unprotected area in a suit of armour like that. Since the Japanese didn't really use blunt weapons at all, the samurai would be better off using a Yari (spear) and trying to pierce the chainmail or go for other gaps in the plate.
Samurai(s) are better in battle against unarmored or lightly armored targets which that area was mostly everyone was using light clothing unlike Europe which the civs was using leather armor and had some protection. I've did some fighting with a friend of mine(love European armor/sword and know how to fight with them all I can say is his practice sword is longer than my practice katana but when it came to slashing he had a lil problems due the swinging weight imo each side had a purposethearmors
No. Civilians did NOT wear armour. They did however wear linen and wool which were effective in helping stop slashing weapons. A katana and longsword from the same era weighed about the same so not sure what you mean by swinging weight.
@EvilxMerlin Gambesons aren't really that great against slashing weapons, messers and falchions devestate gambesons much more so the longswords do. I assume u meant gambeson , jacks etc when u said linen and wool.
That´s a proud looking nerd!
tetzer 3 weeks ago
good music, it gives the feeling of greatness
Balamutus3000 1 month ago
Hi, does someone know the theme music for this video, I will really appreciate the help.
HadesLament 1 month ago
where can i buy this armor???
kilzinha 1 month ago
@kilzinha
Museumreplicas.co*m
I don't know if it's really accurate to medieval armor but it sure looks nice.
gurkfisk89 1 month ago
I have one question,are the model is descendant of a knight?
libextremist 2 months ago
why does this look so sensual
ilovetofu2000 2 months ago
Consider how long time this actually takes next time you are playing insert-generic-RPG-here and are putting on full plate armors like this on in split seconds...
Piranha1992 2 months ago
@Piranha1992
You would be surprised how easy it is to generate shit these days!
SarryRide 2 months ago
When people in the movies kill someone thats wearing armor with on hit, its not very realistic. Warriors long ago would train to find weaknesses in the armor, getting through armor like this would be very tough, so people found other ways to kill the knights.
KittyykattxOxO 2 months ago
2:04 - Who remembered Star Wars, when Darth Vader puts his helmet?
MetalMilitiaCaptain 2 months ago
I want a knight armor.
bryanZ17 3 months ago
I want that armour.
MrCouchmen 3 months ago
where is this video made it looks realy beautiful i mean not as nice as armor but still beutiful
vanjaisadrumer 3 months ago in playlist Armour
@vanjaisadrumer
The castle is called Chillon, it's in Switzerland.
gurkfisk89 3 months ago
@gurkfisk89
Thanks :)
vanjaisadrumer 3 months ago
Lovely harness. My only issue is the articulation of the pauldrons, when he lifts his arm up the tiniest bit they flip right back because they don't drop low enough and one of the edges is catching on the top of arm harness. Small point but you might want some larger pauldrons.
tantorecords 3 months ago
@Wolfric77 hahah well said.
tantorecords 3 months ago
This spells: "Power"
Tarimoth 3 months ago
Was he wearing slippers?
Azreal357 4 months ago
funny argue here :D
so killing guy in armor like this with sword is difficult, you can only stab his visor, elbow, groin, armpit or try a cut behind the knee... everything else is useless, you would just annoy him and he would kill you. I would recomend 2handed Axe, Crows beak, Warhammer, Mace and maybe halberd. I remeber how I have to hit guys in plate with full strenght with my 2,6kilo sword and the effect was he just noticed that something has pushed his back :D dont slash, stab! :D
Wmaniak 4 months ago
@Wmaniak 2.6 kilo? Is that a zweihander/bidenhander/claymore type sword I assume? The weight seems heavy for any other sword.
Another trick is the mordhau, if you look up harnischfechten videos it should show you a few tricks. :)
Railstarfish 4 months ago
@Railstarfish Yeah I know it as a Mortschlag :D pretty nasty thing. And that sword is one hander 98cm overal lenght, I admit it is pretty heavy but I like it because you can clear all blades and shield or anything out of your way :) look at my video Training Duel I or II I'am the one with shield and black tabard :) btw in that battle we fought about 45minutes and I get 15 or 16 kills and 4 deaths, its about the habit I think, now I have new sword 1,2kilo, its like nothing in the hand :D
Wmaniak 4 months ago
CHAAAAAAAAAAARGE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
MatriXtyle 4 months ago
German gothic
GlopeClover 4 months ago
@Wolfric77 LMFAO!!
kx06 4 months ago
noob gear lv 20
DanteAtomosKageokami 5 months ago
The eyes of that guy aren't strong enough for this suit >:(
Aserox 5 months ago
THE problem with this video....TOO much light...your inside a large thick materia tent and only candles or a lantern...Too much light
Davesintexas 5 months ago
Reading all the posts in here is so funny. I can't believe people think, a sword of any kind could cut through armour like this, its just not happening. Oh and Knights raped and pillaged all the time, but then so did Samuria and just about every other warrior including modern times.
Iselas181 5 months ago 21
@Iselas181 Swords cut through armor all the time in the middle ages. Especially the chain mail. They had swords that could split a man's head to the teeth. They were very heavy swords and they knew how to use them.
nancythetall 4 months ago
@nancythetall Granted if you got him in the chainmail but chainmail was designed to provent slashing attacks from cutting you, and he would still take damage from the blunt force trama. I am not saying chainmail couldn't be cut through only that I would have to be the perfect blow and against a moving, trained knight it would be difficult at best. Also the type of sword you are talking about was designed to crush much like a mace or war hammer not cut.
Iselas181 4 months ago
@Iselas181 Since when were any swords designed to crush ? That would defeat the purpouse of actually making a SWORD. They had maces and hammers to crush. Swords were all made to cut, but some were made to cut with more weight.
ivanlagrossemoule 4 months ago
@ivanlagrossemoule This is true they were made to cut but by the later periods armour was so effective that all a sword could do was crush armour so they made them heavy for the dual purpose of cutting and crushing, or be thin enough to stab through joints and gaps.
Iselas181 4 months ago
@Iselas181
Sorry but this is false.
Two-handed swords (aka longswords) were mostly used against riders and light armored enemies (and even spearmen to clear the lines).
Try to crush a plate armor (especially the late armors) with a sword (no matter the type), and you will do nothing but damage your sword.
It was ineffective. Even the heaviest 2handed sword, with only 2kg, had too few crushing power to damage anything.
And don't mind touching legs, arms or head. It just needs perfect precision
Nightwyl 4 months ago
@Iselas181 Even in later periods swords were light and not designed for crushing, the weight is balanced mostly towards the hilt - which makes it agile and easy to handle but reduces the amount of power you can put behind a blow. If you wanted to smash armour but all you had was a sword, you held it by the blade and swung the hilt at them, using the crossguard as an improvised warhammer - called a mordhau or murder-stroke. Also, not everyone wore armour, so not every weapon had to be anti-armour
Railstarfish 4 months ago
@nancythetall During the middle ages swords in Europe were no heavier than swords everywhere else. 3 lbs was a good weight for a sword. Armour was actually really effective at stopping swords, which is part of why people went to the trouble of dressing up in armour like this. Maces, hammers, picks and axes were the anti-armour weapons, even they rarely cut through it, but just hit hard enough to slow them down.
Railstarfish 4 months ago
@Iselas181
Well, we should keep in mind that while it's naive to think all knights were noble and chivalrous, it's also very cynical and almost certainly wrong to think that none of them were. Chivalry was an ideal to aspire to, and most of them did, but few of them actually met it. They were people, not paragons.
Also, samurai probably did more morally questionable things, considering that chivalry expects you to do the right thing, while bushido expects you to follow your lord no matter what.
IAmTheStig320 3 months ago 7
@IAmTheStig320 Chivalry and bushido are remarkably similar (though bushido is more ritualistic and insanely suicidal, whereas chivalry is more pragmatic and individualistic). It's true that chivalry was an ideal to aspire to - the thing is, that ideal permitted and in some cases lauded atrocity, including rape. If you want to know what ideals knights aspire to, just hang out with some hardcore gangbangers or mafiosi long enough to get an idea of what they admire and aspire to.
fakejohnwilkesbooth 2 months ago
@Iselas181
a). Medieval armor reached its apex during the 16th century and, yes, it was near impenetrable to the sword as it easily deflected blades. The solution to this was to use blunt weapons instead.
b). Every armor had its weak points. During the crusades, for example, the muslims took advantage of the christian knight's momentum and killed many with carefully timed and placed spear wall defenses or just knocked them off their horses and killed them when they were down.
AndyRaslan 2 months ago
@AndyRaslan Killed many? Hah, your funny.
Meixafuhellzman2 2 months ago
@AndyRaslan Because the knights armor was made to give more movement, then just dented in the moving parts until they hindered the knights until they hindered them instead, then when the knight could not effectively, they finished him off.
Blaawen 2 months ago
@Iselas181
Knights did not rape.They where nobles and rape was never a thing nobles did.What are
your sources?
ragdoll485 2 months ago
@ragdoll485 Knights were warriors. Warriors (including noble ones) rape. It's one of the perks that inspires people to become warriors. Historically, the chance to rape and loot and gain land or rank, the thrill of killing other people (preferably while they are helpless), and of course glory and honor (i.e. reputation for strength, skill, reliability, and ruthlessness) have been the big draws to a life of professional soldiery. I understand this is not very romantic, but it is true.
fakejohnwilkesbooth 2 months ago
@ragdoll485
You are wrong, sir.
BOKO00 2 months ago
@ragdoll485 ROFL yeah and i supposed Columbus discovered America and was nice to the natives, didnt kill them off, or enslave them; And that the puritan pilgrams sat down with the natives to have a big thanks giving feast.
aqrzpro 2 months ago
@Iselas181
A sword is just a big knife, I swung a knife at a plastic bottle and all it did was make a scratch. lol imagine plate amour!
ragdoll485 2 months ago
@Iselas181 Don't generalize the real warrior's from slime, though there will always be more evil, there is still good, Also, swords could not cut through armor like this.
Meixafuhellzman2 2 months ago
Comment removed
Balamutus3000 2 months ago
@Iselas181
my scottish claymore cuts through chainmail and pierces through 1/20 inch of solid steel with ease. but piercing the entire armor of steel plate, chainmail,leather and cotton... I don't think so, though I never tried it. But I think the damage it would inflict with a full force blow would be enough to crush several ribs.
Rivannous 1 month ago
@Rivannous Depends You might be able to do significant damage to the armor, but in an actual fight the person you would be fighting would not let you most of the time swing that massive thing of yours.
ErwinRommelsBattles 1 month ago
@Iselas181 A big enough sword swung with enough force could cut through armor thicker than what is seen here.
vash1053 2 weeks ago
@vash1053
Of course it could, but not by human hands. Or do you have a good source for such a thing. I mean, even the largest two handed swords where rarley over 3 kg and I haven't seen any evidence of them cutting through any kind plate armor.
gurkfisk89 1 week ago
I wish, Medieval era still exist
kadendiran 5 months ago
weight and speed bring power.
8966paul 5 months ago
thatd be terrible if you had to tak a piss though
l3054 5 months ago
@l3054 WHAHAHAHAHAHAHA I laughed my ass of on that!
3klo 5 months ago
last part.....BOOO!
LinksRoyal 5 months ago
What a nice replica of Maximilan Gothic Armour from Holy Roman Empire (now Germany). The best medieval armour ever made in history. Pretty much the best plate armour ever made in history, period.
UnitedKorean 5 months ago
the armors look safe and strong, but it's too bad they were made with heavy steel. In the real battle, they would slow a knight's motion and skill, no wonder Ganghis Khan's army slay them like nothing in Eastern European countries with less armors.
la626boyz 6 months ago
@la626boyz
The Mongols NEVER faced knights in this kind of full plate armor, as it was developed long after the Mongols invasions. The Mongols never made it to Western Europe, for that matter. The wetter climate would have been bad for their composite bows, and the hilly, forested terrain was not as suitable for their tactics developed on the open plains.
ryddragyn 4 months ago
How much does this weigh? I'll make the novice guess of 60 lbs.?
broly218 6 months ago
@broly218 Yep, it should be around there. Ironically, the gear carried by a U.S. Marine weighs about 150 pounds, and that's mostly on the back and shoulders. Medieval armor hardly ever weighed half of that, and the weight is evenly distributed over your whole body.
MikhailAndRaghu 6 months ago
@gandi19 i honestly think it came about because at the time they where seen as the "betters" of society they were rich and warred for most of their lives. humans cant help but romanticise war its hardwired into us until your in ot you dont truly comprehend it.
volarion 6 months ago
I think its funny how we romanticize things that were in no way romantic or even nice at all. Knights were not these noble men that did right by anyone but themselves their lords. Samurai often took trophies of people they didnt kill to bring to their lord to get payment. Its fun to pretend these archetypes were nice and noble but that was not ever the case.
gandj19 6 months ago
@gandj19 Eh eh eh... don't be so hasty with those accusations. Now tell me, if none were like the way we romanticize them to be, then how exactly did they get such a reputation?
Some knights raped peasant women, but some knights were noble. How else was such an archetype created if none were like this archetype?
TheAtcyJAC 5 months ago
I like the armor, but... IT MUST BE BIGGA AND STRONGA! >:)
Bidmartinlo 6 months ago
And this didn't cost anything.
FungnubRoMCraft 6 months ago
So fucking cool. If I was rich and had a mansion I'd totally buy a knight suit and walk around in it eating coco pops.
Hellsconsort 6 months ago
This guy has a set of really good Gothic style armour...
Eishaar 6 months ago
epic smiley face
1OwainGlyndwr1 6 months ago
best weapons and armor came from germany. its just the same today, germans make the best tech. im not german btw^^
pettersaethre 6 months ago
@pettersaethre yeah your right
eliteswordsman1 6 months ago
@pettersaethre
Yeah best cars...People with best guns are Israelite or Americas.
IceyHedgehogTV 6 months ago
@IceyHedgehogTV so you think the uzi are better the the hk mp5 then ^^
pettersaethre 6 months ago
@pettersaethre
my only weapon experience is CoD. But honestly I don't think it matters. Both of them kill.
IceyHedgehogTV 6 months ago
0:17 such a pimp er he looks like a pimp um sorta
redaustin103 6 months ago
After all that pieces of metal and steel. One can still get killed. People sure have great skill killing each other =_='
I'm a bit pissed off by the fact that these armors can be beaten with arrows.
PrismaCry 7 months ago
@PrismaCry No they couldnt. some of the best european armours came from Milan, genoa, or Bologna. These armoured suits withstood most attacks, gunshots included. they actually did a test called proofing where they would take a handgun and shoot it point blank at the armor. However, most european armour makers were mediocre in quality and could easily of been taken out by rifles.
Tneisnart 6 months ago
@Tneisnart Wow, even gun shot, really? I'm working on body armor and I've never seen a single medieval armor can stand a rifle round. Not that I rejected it. Some parts of me want to believe that armorers can beat gun smiths. Just that armor must be very rare and premium.
PrismaCry 6 months ago
@PrismaCry
They don't hold for modern firearms. But they did stand a decent chance against the firearms of the day. Many breastplates of the time has a dent in them after a bullet as a "proof mark" from the manufacturer.
Later when guns became more powerfull the armors needed to be thicker so after a while the troops did only have a thick breastplate and a helmet (no armor for the limbs). And after that we are in the modern era with armors with engines (tanks and other armored vehicles).
gurkfisk89 6 months ago
@gurkfisk89 Ah right, I remember that now. The way carabiniers used to fight. History said their armor is bullet proof to some extend, except being fired from rifled musket at close range. It could be the skill of armorers to determine whatever the wearer survive blows or not.
PrismaCry 6 months ago
@PrismaCry jep.. it can be beaten by arrows.. but a modern kevlar vest can also be beaten by a simpel cheap pistol.. you just need a big amount of luck to do so
this steelplate is (in a big battel) not penetrable for any arrow
watch?v=D3997HZuWjk
TheLoki7281 6 months ago
Where is the horse and the rider? Where is the horn that was blowing? They have passed, like rain on the mountain.
Snorlax891 7 months ago 28
@Snorlax891
Nice, quoted from Lord of the rings, isn't it?
davedetrick 4 months ago
@davedetrick Yes it is. It seemed to fit the situation.
Snorlax891 4 months ago
@Snorlax891 : the "ubi sunt" you've just given us is Anglo-Saxon, not medieval. The Anglo-Saxons did not have knights like this . . .
Amaharper 3 months ago
@Amaharper True. It just reminded me of when Theoden was being armed in Helms Deep.
Snorlax891 3 months ago
@Snorlax891 *nods* I can see that. Sorry to be a medievalist pill. It does make a pretty funny point about Tolkien and the way he blended periods, though. :-)
Amaharper 3 months ago
@Amaharper It's cool. I'm ALLWAYS doing the same thing. It bugs me when people get historical info wrong.
Snorlax891 3 months ago
Il a oublié la cale pour la tête!
mereosful 7 months ago
How long did it take to put on?
ColFeren 7 months ago
gothic armor is the prettiest armor ever made
Nickolas847 7 months ago 2
omg
Raucher15 7 months ago
nice shoes...
spiedey8 7 months ago
Armor was so expensive then that only nobles and wealthy men had it. We're talking the equivalent of a five bedroom house in the suburbs here. The vast majority of men going into war went with padded clothing, or just whatever they wore daily. Some only had a staff as a weapon. If you look at medieval manuscripts on warfare you'll see that those guys had to have balls of steel to rush into a knight with a stick.
punchdrunkatheist 7 months ago
Why would the 2 disliking people dislike a beautiful piece of armor!!!
SpartanOfAmerica1234 8 months ago
Not all medieval armor looked so robotic and massive. There was armor for jousting and armor for parades and combat armor. This video shows what looks like parade armor. Combat armor was less massive than Gothic parade armor.
monsterzeroJr 8 months ago
@monsterzeroJr
This actually looks like a reasonable replica of a gothic armour which would've been used in combat. The fluting lines and ridges were functional in that they strengthened the plates and helped guide blows away from direct hits which might pierce the armour or shock the knight inside. The helmet arrangement (where a clamshell-looking "sallet" is paired with a bevor, or chin-piece) is also indicative of a combat armour, as it allows the knight to look around in combat.
HURR 7 months ago
+ over 9000 armor
Gadockahrok 8 months ago
ever so slightly homoerotic...
gaymerguy 8 months ago
-15 Dexterity...
halfmumi 8 months ago 2
@halfmumi actaully you would be surprised how manuverable plate armor is
fallendmr 6 months ago
se super coole and so began et french revolution watkinna idoit will dislike this loosers
Kingkarnan1999 8 months ago
se super coole
Kingkarnan1999 8 months ago
@Kingkarnan1999 Vous voulez dire «c'est» Oui?
Blaawen 2 months ago
Ah yes, the armor of a Gothic Knight is truly a sight to behold.
medivalme 8 months ago
This armor is so gorgeous. If I could only wear it once...
TheUsrper1 8 months ago
wouldnt this be more early renissance though?
mscooman 8 months ago
this is so gay
Clat2o 8 months ago
lol look at his shoes xD
randox16000 8 months ago
most knights wore chain mail and full helm
mscooman 9 months ago
@mscooman
Depends on what era. In the era of this armour, gothic, they actually wore LESS maille, called voiders, and unless they were tilting, they often wore just this type of helm for gothic armour, and a sligtly less angular salet if wearing Milanese style armour. Possibly a babute...
EvilxMerlin 8 months ago
Cold forged armor was a true art
rpare666 9 months ago
what is the music in the beginning called?
khan233 9 months ago
what is the music in the beginning?
khan233 9 months ago
he is now ready for ice hockey..
khan233 9 months ago
Does anyone know what castle is that at the beginning? Cheers.
Sylvestro 9 months ago
@Sylvestro
Chillon in Switzerland.
gurkfisk89 9 months ago
I’ve always wondered what they did back in the day when they were fully suited, and the all of a sudden needed to take a crap. Seriously, what did they do?
adacatbridgar 9 months ago
@adacatbridgar
I don't know but here's my guess.
If you wear armor in a battle, you may die. To have dirty pants is the least of your problems and you could always let a squire clean your armor afterwards.
So if they needed to take a crap they took a crap and fought on. I also suppose that knights took care of things like that right before they put on the armor, to avoid unpleasant events like that.
gurkfisk89 9 months ago
@adacatbridgar
They pulled down their braies and took a dump. Armour covering the ass itself, till the late 16th century, was very simply a maille skirt.
EvilxMerlin 9 months ago
attack the shoes!!
SuperPeNat 9 months ago
its not steel mail its chain mail
bonbon123451 10 months ago
@bonbon123451
Its not chain mail, thats redundant. Its simply maille.
EvilxMerlin 9 months ago
Yes...BUT WILL IT BLEND!? Answer: Yes.
Dunthyon 10 months ago
cain male alone is 12 killos or 45 pounds
AgelessGlory10 10 months ago
@AgelessGlory10
If you have plate armor that covers most of your body you only have chain mail where you needed it. For example, look at this clip with Mike Loades:
watch?v=dasPQW1fjPM&t=4m25s
This way you reduce the weight a lot.
gurkfisk89 10 months ago
@gurkfisk89 thank you for recognizing the genius of mike loades. I was worried i was the only one at this point. some of the comments make my cringe with historical inaccuracy induced rage
spleegulence 9 months ago
@AgelessGlory10 12 kilos is 24 pounds
dasgilde 10 months ago
I wonder if it has a cup holder...
DaUsher 10 months ago
was the practice of wearing a whole hauberk under plate harnesses common? at least for gothic period armour?
elgostine 10 months ago
good now that youve got all that armor on i can judo slam your ass into the ground with extra weight :p
Taud 10 months ago
Enjoy the vid :)
Luka1180 11 months ago
FUCKING SHUT UP FLAMERS!
Luka1180 11 months ago
Ive got a question about this particular suit of armor in the video, if anyone who knows the answer please share. Im interested in buying this suit of armor but wherever I look i see that its about 6 and 1/2 feet tall in the product description. Can this suit be worn by shorter people because Im only 5'9" , and what is the max torso width of this armor?
TauEmpier 11 months ago
good luck breathing in that
chiefbroom 11 months ago
@chiefbroom
Then I think everyone is lucky. With a bevor that you can lower and a visor that you can raise the breathing problem is somewhat already solved.
gurkfisk89 11 months ago
a video about wearing knight armor! =)
How did samurai come into play ==?
Just watch the video and enjoy it dam it
RoConie 11 months ago 23
it would be sad if they whent through all of that and he had to go take a piss. xD
inkybait 11 months ago
No metal boot? So the feet are the weakest link. I will invest in hammers.
sok8888 11 months ago
A samurai sword is so dangerous, it will slice a medieval armored knight in half.
idricool 11 months ago
@idricool Ahahah, yeah I'm sure it would ; )
NemanorTheAlmighty 11 months ago
@idricool ......(wow).......
spleegulence 11 months ago
@spleegulence I've used katanas and I've used broadswores and double handed medieval swords. The katana is much better at slicing thanks to the curvature.
But then I'd have to explain pressure, and how curved metals are much better at slicing.... Go do some physics
idricool 11 months ago
@idricool Yah its better at slicing if you care about that kinda stuff, which i don't. Slicing does nothing to maille or plate maille. Its why swords designed to fight armour aren't curved. No reason to explain physics i am quite acomplished in that feild thank you.
spleegulence 11 months ago
@idricool Wait your the guy who thinks a sword can slice through arms grade metal? And I need to do physics!? nvm your to far lost for me to even begin to bother argueing with.
spleegulence 11 months ago
@spleegulence No you're the idiot for speaking shit out of your mouth without using common sense.
How the fuck do you think medieval knights wearing armored plates got killed ? You're claiming to win the argument because you're afraid and running away.
idricool 11 months ago
@idricool Well there were maces which probably did the most damage and which could crush some plate armor. Yes, some knights did die by the sword but usually in spots where there was no armor, like the back of the thighs was a spot but wouldnt be deadly. Swords really cant go through plate armor chain mail and a gambeson. Although a sharp lance just might do the trick on the battle field where their tournament armor which was thicker would not be worn.
thestarsandbars 11 months ago 2
@thestarsandbars Oh really? And what about the Battle of Agincourt ... Where French Knights (full Armored) died by getting stabbed in the chest plate.
They can get through, an why ? Because it's not thick enough.
I am an Engineer and took classes on stresses, strains and materials so I know what the fuck I'm talking about.
idricool 11 months ago
@idricool I dont know why you are getting angry with me when i was in some way supporting what you said. I just dont think someone can thrust a sword through steel armor, chain mail, and a wool gambeson. Maybe if the got stabed by cavalier on a horse running by it might go through. But taking a sword and thrusting it through steel chain mail and a gambeson just would not really work. As i said before a lance just might have done the trick.
thestarsandbars 11 months ago
@thestarsandbars Have you ever tired or are you just talking out of you ass?
Do you know how thin the Armor were ? it's about Thickness.
idricool 11 months ago
@idricool Listen, you rude brute. I do know, infact some armor stoped bullets at the time. You have no right to be angry about this. We can have a civilized debate about this if we have different opinions. But this doesnt call for swears or fighting. Maybe some armor was poorly constructed and thus could not have taken a stab with a sword.
thestarsandbars 11 months ago 15
@thestarsandbars
Indeed. You are VERY correct. Thats why the word proofing exists...
EvilxMerlin 9 months ago
@thestarsandbars wow what a dickhead
apemannen3000 9 months ago
@thestarsandbars The difference between piercing and impact are quite large. Modern day kevlar vests can stop a bullet, but will be penetrated by a sword. It's why they make a certain kind of armor for close combat to stop bayonette's and the like. Steel plate armor /can/ stop bullets depending on where it's hit. That's why when plate armor become more common medieval soldiers started using more blunt objects, like maces and axes to deliver force through the armor, not pierce it.
punchdrunkatheist 7 months ago
@idricool Actually most french knights died from longbow wounds at Agincourt. Plus you claimed a katana could slice right through armour, which is absurd. Yes armour could be penetrated with a hefty thrust, but thats a completely different story. This said it seems your the only one talking shit out your mouth in this case, and I am not the only one who thinks so.
spleegulence 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@spleegulence You are an idiot. Have you ever used a katana ? I did. It is probably one of the best sword to slice.
And THIN armor can be cut. Go learn some fucking materials behavior, strains and stress and pressure before talking out of your asses. I can't have a conversation with an idiot who doesn't know about metals and physical aspects.
idricool 11 months ago
@idricool I honestly probably know more about the actual properties of metal in a practical way than you ever will as i hand work metal all the time. Sure I don't pay a university to teach me the physics of it, but neither did the armour smiths who originally designed the armour.
spleegulence 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@spleegulence Here's proof
watch?v=RyO46RQhYkQ
And do you have any sort of education ? Do you go to college/university ? Have you taken mechanical or material engineering classes?
idricool 11 months ago
@idricool Yes actually I make armour, and then test it. Even mild steel armour of 16 guage thickness once work hardened with edges rolled stops a sword slice. I don't even use carbon steel most of the time, which is what knights armour was made of. Honestly a class room can only take you so far. Never doubted the ability of a katana to slice, its just not sliceing through real armour in any meaningful way. The metal pipe in the video was pretty thin no offence, its hardly comparable to armour
spleegulence 11 months ago
No. Samurais are known to be one of history's best warriors because they are. Also, to end this dispute about whose armor's best. Take out the armor of both warriors and consider the results. Samurais with their katanas only and knight with their sword and shield. Result is samurai will cut down knight without doubt. Facts samurais where known to have fought without armor during the meiji restoration.
faircombanant 11 months ago
@faircombanant
Um, you do realize that European knights trained without armour, without shields too? Jebus cripes where the FUCK do people get info from? Go find out what Blossfechten is and then get back to us. Stop getting your info from cartoons and comic books, especially those from Japan.
EvilxMerlin 11 months ago 4
I have just ordered a full handmade suit of armor like this one. almost the same except it also has foot armor.
I am so damn happy with it XD can't take it off! must-go-to-school-with-it
TheRealTRASHMASTERS 11 months ago
Yeah, I hate to say it, but a katana-armed samurai would be pretty screwed against a late medieval knight like in this video. The katana is a light, fast cutting weapon and there is VERY little unprotected area in a suit of armour like that. Since the Japanese didn't really use blunt weapons at all, the samurai would be better off using a Yari (spear) and trying to pierce the chainmail or go for other gaps in the plate.
EnDSchultz1 11 months ago
@EnDSchultz1
The katana and longsword from the same era weighed in about the same...
EvilxMerlin 11 months ago
awesome mechanic
alexaurus87 11 months ago
Samurai(s) are better in battle against unarmored or lightly armored targets which that area was mostly everyone was using light clothing unlike Europe which the civs was using leather armor and had some protection. I've did some fighting with a friend of mine(love European armor/sword and know how to fight with them all I can say is his practice sword is longer than my practice katana but when it came to slashing he had a lil problems due the swinging weight imo each side had a purposethearmors
XxXPenrdXxX 11 months ago
@XxXPenrdXxX
No. Civilians did NOT wear armour. They did however wear linen and wool which were effective in helping stop slashing weapons. A katana and longsword from the same era weighed about the same so not sure what you mean by swinging weight.
EvilxMerlin 11 months ago
@EvilxMerlin Gambesons aren't really that great against slashing weapons, messers and falchions devestate gambesons much more so the longswords do. I assume u meant gambeson , jacks etc when u said linen and wool.