Added: 5 years ago
From: wvdmc
Views: 110,267
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (209)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Average use of the Dark Wood Grain Ring

  • Dark Souls General.

  • Dark Wood Grain Ring does wonders.

  • Eyup... We sell armor and aerobic accessories.

  • Lightning bruiser example from TvTropes!

  • A ring mail alone is 10kg

  • @LSLencrypted Depending on the size & pattern of it, of course. I have one of 1,6/12mm rings in 1-to-4 pattern. It's almost to my knees, and has long sleeves. It weighs about 14kg.

  • love the koth theme song

  • @passwordresetisbroke

    "pierce it with soggy newspaper?"

    I'm not sure where you're getting that.  My suit weighs close to 70 pounds with all the components, and is pretty thick, especially through the breastplate and helmet.

  • @ArmoredJosh How thick? Doesnt look like more than a couple of mm, though its hard to judge thickness from a vid.

    Also if you dont mind posting it to me so I can steal it, I mean test if I can pierce it :D

  • Cool armor and airsoft gun (with low battery?)

  • Now I'm imagining Crusaders doing backflips on the walls of Jerusalem..

  • @Feralbreed Plate like that didnt exist during the Crusades, sire.

  • @Siluriuskaeso Plate armour did in fact exist during the crusades. It's just a matter of which one. See the seventh to ninth crusade. Late 13th century, milady/sire.

  • i could imagine someone wearing real armour and do kip ups xD

  • This is always a great video for any debate about how encumbering armor really is. The logic is very sound anyways, no one would never go into battle wearing something that slowed them down significantly.

  • @ShainEighmey Modern soldiers go into battle with equiptment that slows them down significantly, so your point is wrong right off the bat :P

    Its impossible to know how encumbering armour of the period is AFAIA, because most of what survives is ceremonial/show armour. (At least this is as far as I'm aware)

    It doesnt make sense (to me anyway) that armour like what Josh is wearing is what they would have worn into combat, as you can peirce it with soggy newspaper.

  • @gurkfisk89 Figurative speach my friend, I am sorry if it upset you.

    Anyway youtube is full of videos which show how easily modern recreations of plate armour can be penetrated.

    One called Swords vs Armor for instance shows a guy who doesnt look or seem very strong stabbing through plate with his first attempt with a thrust that was sub par.

    Using something purpose designed to penetrate (ie a spiked axe) plate recreations are totally useless. Thats why I think real battle armour was thicker.

  • @passwordresetisbroke

    No, i'm not upset so you don't need to be sorry =)

    I agree that many recreations of plate armor isn't could be penetrated rather easy. But I think that it's because people don't have the money to get armor that would work in a medieval battle.

    For the Sword vs Armor video. I don't know anything about that armor but I don't think they took much of the budget to get a good breastplate. And the stab in the video would not be fatal, I may not even go through the padding.

  • @passwordresetisbroke

    But as you said, he didn't look that strong. If you want to look at an armor that would be like the ones that they had in the medieval times I suggest this video:

    watch?v=NqC_squo6X4

    around 34 min in you can see a well made armor weighing 50 pounds. But sadly not someone that tries to pierce it.

    The thing that makes me think that you can't easily pierce armor is that all the medieval manuscripts tells you to go for the gaps or weak points in the armor.

  • @passwordresetisbroke

    And that isn't true only for swords. The text known as "Le jeu de la hache" (play of the axe) that talks about the pollaxe doesn't say that you just have to thrust your point to his belly and he will die. It rather says that it's better to stab in for example the armpit or you try to take him down to the ground and then try to finish him.

    I'm sorry that my first reply may have been a little offensive.

  • @gurkfisk89 The thing is though, it is easy and cheap to make good quality metal now, so a cheap breastplate recreation wont neccesarily have inferior quality to period armour. And all plate I have seen (recreations and supposed period peices in the Leeds Armoury Museum) have all been very thin.

    No that stab wouldnt have gone even into the padding I dont think, but the point of it was that it peirced the metal itself, thus greatly weakening it, and it wasnt a powerful thrust.

  • @passwordresetisbroke Also to me, the breast plate in that film looks much the same as the the one worn by the man giving demonstrations of getting on a horse and getting up in plate in your movie. Though without knowing absolute specifics of each peice this is nearly meaningless.

    Stabbing for weakpoints is pretty much logical, even if the armour was easy to peirce, going for the weaker bits is what you want to do.

  • @passwordresetisbroke Im not saying armour was unweildy, just that it must have been thicker than stuff worn during recreations now, look at the jousting bit in your vid for instance, they barely touch eachother, and that is the kind of forces reproductions are made for. And all the reproductions I have seen are about as thick as supposed combat armour I have seen in museums.

    This is baseless presumption however.

    Still I would prefer a suit of Vasci Caenlann/Fenlan.  Cause they look awesome.

  • @passwordresetisbroke

    Cheap breastplate recreations are typically inferior to any period armor. They typically arn't heat treated like real armor is, which gives it a good deal of it's protective capabilities, and the type of metal is important(wrought iron < low-carbon steel < medium-carbon steel)

    As far as thickness, most field plate varied between 1.5-3mm thick, with horsemans plate getting up to 4mm or higher, and was damned difficult to pierce with Anything.

  • @passwordresetisbroke True, but keep in mind that the design itself isn't too restrictive of limb and midsection motion.

    Authentic battle armor or no, the shaping's the same, even if the thickness and weight are not.

    Also keep in mind that the guys wearing the authentic field plate were built like bodybuilders or else had to wear a lighter, and thus more vulnerable, armor.

  • @MerlinsJester I wasnt saying plate was restrictive, I was merely making the point that. "no one would never go into battle wearing something that slowed them down significantly" while it makes sense isnt actually true :D

  • what happened at 0:13 ?!?!

  • In games like Oblivion, your skill with armor goes up the more you get hit. So let me help you by banging you up with a shovel. That should make you proficient with your heavy armor. (:D))

  • backflip dismount from your warsteed and use a spetznaz neckbreaker attack = most awesome kill evar!

  • I for one would cartwheel into battle wearing this armor in hopes of confusing my enemies into submission.

  • And who says european armor was primitave, slow, heavy, and cumbersome? What do those ninjas got on us now?

  • @MurryFolt

    Who cares about ninja?

    Samurai > Knight.

  • @SickBritKid Yeah, ninjas suck.

    However, there was a period in which Samurai armor likely didn't give you the flexibility and control to perform what we see with the platemail here. I believe the time was when they stopped using shields and had these large square sections of armor everywhere to block arrows. But a battle between a Knight and a Knight (japanese), I'd like to see that. No guaranteed winner there...

  • @MurryFolt

    The large square sections of armor were actually rather archaic.

    The later suits were a blend of steel and leather, with strips of leather and steel set in folding and overlapping "scales" that would allow maximum flexibility while at the same time providing great protection.

    The giant square sections were more archaic, in that those suits were more used for a psychological warfare sort of thing...

  • @SickBritKid Okay, well I was very ignorant in the area of Samurai, so I could only remember a little bit of their armor and history.

    I was sure, however, that their armor in the rest of their history they would make flexible. It would be incredibly stupid for them not to and for me to think otherwise.

    And I can see how those square sections could be used for psycological warfare... very intimidating. Just like their helmets.

  • @MurryFolt

    Yeah, but there was a further element.

    Because, as any samurai historian knows, the samurai were originally just really fast mounted bow cavalry meant to ride across Japan and slaughter rebellious Ainu or peasantry in the name of the Emperor.

    When they started with the new "mounted elite footsoldier", their armor was designed to take in any amount of arrows fired at them, because that was the general weapon of peasant rebels...

  • @SickBritKid Aha! Right. I *did* know about the samurai's roots as mounted archers, just had forgotten at the time.

    And had the square peices been used for what you just wrote? To protect themselves from arrows? Or a different armor technique.

    I have a feeling that one of the liquids the Samurais walked through after the battle was this strange yellow one mixed in with the blood...

  • @MurryFolt

    Exactly.

    The large squares provide great protection from arrows, though they faded overtime and were replaced by those rounded and scaled pauldrons that most associated with samurai.

  • @SickBritKid I forgot just how awesome samurai were. No wonder there are so many legends. Invincable enemies, after all...

    Thanks for the very intriguing history lesson. My specialty is more european history, but it's good to hear some history from asia that doesn't involve "The japanese katanas were the best swords in history, far outmatching swords from all over the world, and can cut through machine gun barrels!" crap I'm used to.

  • @MurryFolt

    Don't worry about it. I, myself, and a bit of a Japanese history fan, myself, having been birthed from my days as a weeaboo.

    Nowadays, I'm not so much a massive fan of the samurai anymore but I DO acknowledge that they were one of history's most elite, if not the most elite, warriors.

  • @MurryFolt

    So what they'd do when fired at by arrows is "turtle up" into their armor, essentially hiding any and all weakspots and having all of the arrows bore into their armor and stay there, but still be unharmed.

    So what you'd then have is this screaming armored warrior with a spear and/or sword running at you with arrows sticking out of his body(so he's invincible, too) wearing a facemask that looked like a demon was snarling right into your face.

    VERY intimidating to meek peasants.

  • See, now I just wanna get a suit of armor so I can be that spry and fit...

  • but look,when he gets up from wheel,he cant stand well cause the armor is restricting his mobility

  • @ahmadov Go outside and do 10 cartwheels.

    I'm willing to bet almost half of those will end up with you staggering in a loss of balance for a brief moment. That's how it is with most people who aren't gymnasts or consistently athletic and spry; its the result of your center of balance trying to right itself again.

    The armor would have a negligible effect on that, it wouldn't be the reason for it.

  • @phalanx1234 not by small jumps as this guy did,you are wrong.it is evident his leg had some restraint because of leg armor couldnt keep up with changing position of leg

  • @ahmadov It again doesn't work like that. Go back and do what I suggested; I just did this morning, and 4 out of the 10 times I stumbled EXACTLY as he did.

    Because again, center of gravity was shifted ever so slightly on the cartwheel.

  • @phalanx1234 will i cant do that move so i dont know about that,if you can send me such viedoes it may help or tell me the name of this flip

  • @CaptainCheap21

    Oh nice. What's your obsession with my mother now? I think you should tell your shrink about that, looks like you're repressing some deep issues.

    Well, aside from the moronic delusions. Kiddo, your idiotic babbling doesn't impress anyone.

  • Sunglass + indoors + armor. Brought to you by the Rule of Cool.

  • ah, I love this video. use it as proof in a samurai vs knight forum and watch the opposition crumble. have at ye!

  • Epic teabag at 0:14

  • It's doable, the weight isn't the problem, mobility is. Can do pushups and squats pretty easy, but the cartwheel, no. Probably cause I can't do it even naked. But in an english full plate, trying that is a pain in the ass. after a couple of minutes i'm gasping for air like a cheap hoe, and that's without the chain parts, if I add those, i doubt i can even get back up.

  • truth is that most likely people rarely wore such armors, they were just too expensive and took too long to make for those outside royalty, which dint do much in terms of sword branding

    your average knight, mercenary and soldier likely wore quicker and cheaper armors made of combination of plates, leather, hard cured leather, rivets , diferent kinds of mail and whatever was at fashion at time

  • @khhnator Actually there are several accounts of mercenaries wearing plate armor. Some of the decisive battles won by the French in the 100 year war where won because of hired Lombard mercenaries who wore plate armor.

  • First knightly pelvic thrust ive ever seen

  • A cool pair of shades. That's what knights were missing in medieval times.

  • that's pretty cool

  • ... And Josh is now my hero for doing cartwheels in his plate armor. Someone needs to give that man a medal.

  • I can back tuck in mine i win :)

  • Hey I know Josh! His suit is very nice.

  • When an armor in the 17th century was created it had to go through the bullet test, every armor was hit by a pistol, if it penetrated it would go back into the forge, if not it would be used!

  • What's the song? XD

    Nice vid :P

  • @Lendolas

    It's the intro song used in the show "King of the Hill"

  • like your armor!

  • I once read somewhere that during the transition between chainmail and plate armour, they used both together, making some of the heavier armours of the times.

    Mycenians also had MASSIVE armour that required incredible physical strengh and endurance to fight with.

    Some armour was really heavy and cumbersome, but in most cases it wasn't.

  • Slavubog is right

    Just watch an armor of one member of an eastern europe medievalism group and one of an SCA, the SCA armor is so much thin than the european because the eastern europe groups are nearer to a real fight than most american groups, just search "vyborg castle" over here and a "pensic war" and see the diference.

    That is why most american reenactors cant see the diference of an indiamart replica and a true medieval armor

  • The helmets are thicker because the alloy is not that grate! It is cheap stuff. Mild steel is cheap steel, it is ok for a real war, but if you want maximum protection, they need to be thicker...

    I am in real sword fighting. Ever herd of ARMA? They do it how the masters did it. We even have some Armor combat arts as well...

  • I do have a few real true helmets, but they are from the Modern era. Swiss m18, German m18 ear cut out, US m1, US m88 Kevlar.

    I also have a replica of German Gothic armor. I fought in it ones in ARMA. (I do sword fighting)

    If I remember, Armor and most Helmets very on thickness depending what it's tactical use & what type of armor or helmet it is...

    They can range from 3mm to 1.1mm thick on different arias on the head & body...

  • so do not write anything about medieval helmets cause you don't know anythink about. real ones weight up from 4 lbs ( those thin ones )

    and if they reach 3 mm - helmet from 3mm weight about 9-10 lb ( standart klapvisor without coif )

    standart is about 5-6.

    tournament helmets more ( even much ) than 10.

    plate on helmet must weight to provide safety.

    do not take examples from replicas, ut from real ones

    of course i write about those from medieval times

  • Ok, tell me smart one. What steel alloys were medieval helmets made off? Or the closest alloy that is made off? How did they make them stronger with out MAKING THEM THICK? (this goes the same as the rest of armor) Please tell us all? How did are they 10 lbs?

    I am not talking about tournament armor, those can be heavy as hell, I am talking about armor made for COMBAT or WAR!

  • Heat treating armor, in essence making the steel into rudimentary forms of spring steel, was the most common method of creating hardened armor for combat during the era of plate, which lasted roughly from 1400-1575 or so, when firearms took precedence on the field of battle and rendered most full harnesses useless. After that, only making the plate thicker to stop penetration from ball was effective, and for the most part it couldn't stop bullets anyway.

  • That, of course, led to the eventual abandonment of plate by all but heavy cavalry cuirassiers, who used cuirasses (breast/back plates) through the 18th century on the fields of Europe.  By the late 16th century the last full face helms, known as close helms, were abandoned because they were trivialized by firearm combat and the benefits declined not because of weight, but because of afforded protection. It's a really long, confusing process... But weight wasn't much of an issue.

  • I think there were Cuirassiers with plate up to 1914 AD in WW1?

    Yea, there was almost no close helms by then.

  • @wisgliebau Well, fire arms did not make harden steel full plate useless over night... What you said about that is more true by 1550s and up...

  • Are you confusing the metric with the English?

    I meant ONE helmet as different thickness.

    Parts of it like the top of the crown of the skull and the sides of the head CAN be as thick as 3mms, the back of t he helmet CAN BE as thin as 1.1 mms! That's how they kept it light...

    They gave thicker parts of the head were it is needed most or tactically most.

    I mane by tactically; the helmet may be shaped different, more or less like a cone, it can be thin on top to thick at bottom...

  • Ooh, gothic? Nice. Could you get a video of you in that armour?

  • Impressive acrobatics and raw strength.

    Respect;

    And fun to watch.

    Thanks a lot guys

    silk

    ;-))

  • hilarious video. :)

  • alright buddy, how about wearing a helmet. then equip yourself with shield and sword or any desirable weapon as you wish and do the acrobatics. how would that fare?

  • The helmet would fall off, the sword would probably get in the way, shields were rarely used with that kind of armor. Anyway, people didn't jump and flip in combat, the purpose of this video is to show a that suit of plate armor isn't all that cumbersome. Probably also to show that this Josh fellow is awesome.

  • The helm wouldn't fall off. This is a late 14th-early 15th style harness, and Milanese at that. It'd most likely be worn with an armet, covering the throat as well.

    That, and helms had straps on as modern motorbike helms do..

  • Well the helmet will be strapped on, it would not fall off...

  • @Ranziel1 Well, the helmet most probably wouldn't fall off, since you have chinstraps to prevent it from doing just that.

    But as you say, the video wasn't made to show that knights were doing cart-wheels on the battlefield but to show that it is indeed very possible to do cart-wheels in full armour.

  • @Ranziel1 and to be fair this josh person seems fairly awesome not the most awesome I have seen but he does qualify

  • What the fuck kind of statement is that? You expect anyone can cartwheel with a sword in one hand and shield in the other, even unburdened by armour?

  • strap your sword and shield in your back, like duh!

  • That will just be inconvenient, not add much difficulty except in the case of a freak (if amusing) accident.

    "So you're saying he /fell/ on the sword?'"

  • LOL Wow, you are funny.  Its like asking a modern soldier do pull ups holding you rifle with both hands...

    yea, he can do that. but a sword strap to him, a long sword is only 3 lbs, a helmet is only about 2 ½ to 4 ½ lbs.

  • ...holding his rifle with both hands...*

  • @255Knights If it's a helm made for real combat it weighs in around 10 lbs.

  • 99% of any helmet even made for war or combat weighs less then 5 lbs. Most were 4 lbs to 2 ½ lbs.

    WWI & WWII German Helmets and most other like the American helmet were less then 3 lbs!

    I do not know of any helmet that is even 6 lbs...

    Hummm, I think it was my late 1400s German Sallet helmet is 3 lbs and 3 oz.

  • @255Knights for full contact sword-fighting, we use viking helmets with chainmail hanging from them (protecting the neck). they easily weigh 4,5 kilograms which would be like... 9... 10 lbs?? these are very common around here.

  • helmet with mass 2,5 lbs ?? from what king of metal nad how thin ?? i dont think so, no protection

  • Those most likely are open face helmets... Most helmets in WWI and WWII were less then 3 lbs, the same goes with open face helmets before then...

  • The metal they had for armor back in t he days were something VERY close to modern 1050 or 1065 alloy steel. This is WAY stronger then those stainless steel or mild steel armors people use in mass combat. (That's why in those mass combats they have very thick helmets that are 5 lbs)

    WWI and WWII steel helmets were out of Chromium steel (Germans, Swiss, and a few others) & 12% or 13% manganese steel (USA and Briton)... (I think Chromium steel is a bit better)

  • ok, but wtf are you talking about WW I & II helmets, no meaning for topic

    stanless steel is totally useless, it break when received strong blow.

    have you got any practice experience or ever hold real helmet at museum ??

  • My point was that helmets made for war do not change that much in weight with about the same coverage. Open face helmets from today to Greek bronze age times were about 2 1/2 to 3 1/2 lbs. This has not changed... (I am only talking about Western helmets)

    Helmets like a steel Sallet or a close helmet or a Modern kevlar helmet with a ballistic viser are a bit heaver. Most are going to be less then 6 lbs

    Practice experience? Well I am in ARMA and I read this stuff from Arms and armor books...

  • but you do not answered to my question - have you ever hold real medieval helmet for example in museum ?? or your knowledge is only from some books.

    practical - if you have, you will get to know how thin or not thin steel behave despite of its hardness, reading books is not the key, practice in full contact fights can tell many more about armours and arms.

  • I agree with you there! I am not saying that you do not have knowledge on this stuff. (You do)

    I held only one, it was a long time ago, I think it was a Viking helmet... (I think about 5 years ago; it looked like a Viking helmet or a Norsemen) I Know Viking helmets did not have those horns that we see, at least not that we know of.

  • Comment removed

  • I just got sent a link to this on facebook! I have a very similar harness, but I can tell you I'm not THAT mobile in it . . . of course, I'm 55, and have a few more miles on these knees and shoulders. Nice work!

  • lol

  • where the heck do you find a suit of armor like this walmart? lol (joke)

  • king of the hill lul

  • Hi Josh,

    That rocked! When my armour is tuned up I'll post something like it -- but I can't make it is funny as you got it! Nice work!

    -Aaron from the Archive

  • Lol.

  • a full set of maille like the kind worn during the 11th-13th centuries would be much more heavy and cumbersome then then a 15th-16th century set like this. people say that earlier sets of armor were lighter.....that would mean that technology went backward.......

  • I have a set of late 12th century style riveted maille, it has a thick ratio and is alternating riveted and solid links. It is long sleeved and goes to just above my knees, it weighs around 32 pounds. I am still making the maille hose, mitts, and the hood. But it will still not be as heavy as Josh's milanese harness, and is not more cumbersome. Early maille is definitely thicker and heavier than later period maille, in general, though.

  • @wvdmc didnt they wear mail beneath the plate to cover underarm thighs and back of the legs? that would surely add 10 more pounds to it , plus the helmet and weapons, that would be a notable feat to do these moves with it ;P

  • @sushanalone

    I may be wrong but I think that they would wear a padded jacket beneath with chainmail only at the weak points such as joints. You don't need a full chainmail shirt if you already full plate. But sure, it will add some weight.

    These are not moves used in battle so if it's hard to do with weapon doesn't really matter.

  • @sushanalone The thing is, a fully decked out knight would have the weight evenly distributed across his body, making it rather 'easy' to handle for a well trained man. It'd probably be about on par with the weight of the full kit of a modern infantryman, yet more evely distributed.

  • That would only be true if you made the assumption that Light weight equals Advanced.

    Armor actually got very very thick toward the end of the armor wearing ages, due to the invention of guns!

  • for metal plate maybe

  • @braytex or it of gone forward, stronger armor is going to be natrually heavier unless its been made within the last few dacades

  • @TheMHandDSfan

    Not necessarily. Advancing metallurgy and production processes can create stronger and lighter materials. Design changes can make armour more efficient in that it offers the same general protection at less weight. That was as much the case 1000 years ago as it is today.

  • @Magni56 yup my bad i forgot about the different forging systems why i typed that in

  • @braytex I'd argue that technology went forward, in that the mathematics behind the armor were more advanced. The materials were lighter and stronger, and the angle of the plates deflected the enemy blades and arrows more effectively. A bullet-proof vest from the 70's is a steel plate that weighs a ton. A BPV from 2010 is so light, you can wear it all day, and it will still protect you from more than the 70's vest ever could.

  • dude where did you get that armor/ harness?

  • i could do that all with my chainmail. easily

  • Probatly not. I once tried running in a Viking replica. Its a heavy b*tch. And with no structur to make it follow your limps, it feels even heavier. The big advantage of the plate is, that it is stiff and fixed

  • I go on weekly runs in my armour. It's long sleeved riveted maille and a helmet, we do 4 miles, normally.

  • okay, but that is still not upside down :)

    And would you disagree that a fixed armour probatly would be easier to run around in?

  • What exactly were you not convinced by?

  • What's wrong with the video? I don't see your point.

  • What a wise input. What are you going to tell us next? That using safetybelts in cars actually pose a bigger threat than driving without?

  • And another urban legend dies a fiery, horrible death.

  • Funny :)

  • I love it. I love all of it. This is just glorious.

  • Nice evidence that medieval european knights weren't immovable pieces of metal, but a wrecking ball of swordwiedling death. Thanks for the video.

  • Awesome! Goes to show how maneuverable medieval armor actually was. Knights would train in wearing armor from the time they could walk, so moving around in it was very natural for them. It was not uncommon to be able to vault onto horseback in full armor, or even to swim in it. Such mobility is enabled by the excellent weight distribution offered by plate armor.

  • Strawman fail.

  • ..What? Your post is nonsensical.

  • @TeshnosFire Holy shit I actually agree with one of my older comments. xD But damn what a jerk-like way of making my point.

  • weighs 71 pounds? WOW! But yea it not to bad; it is very well distributed across the body...

    I have full German Gothic Plate and even with the soft armor padding that I am getting to put underneath; it will be only about 44 to 46Lbs!!! (44 to 45 pounds) and the ARMOR IS STEEL! I think it is even battle ready steel!

    I did read that the decorations on the metal would make the armor lighter and stronger...

    This will explain why armors like Gothic plate is often very light...

  • I meant (44 to 46 pounds) sorry

    Yea I need to make a youtube video...

  • wow!

    chain mail aint to well distributed :P (the weight :P)

    i did like 1 push up HAHAHA

    ok the chain mail oss down to my knees but that dont matter u rock!

  • Problem with chainmail is that the weight dangles from your shoulders, whereas plate armor is evenly distributed across the body by straps.

  • But you wear mail underneath plate, don't you?

    And I've seen reenactors do some crazy stunts in a hauberk and surcoat.

  • Depends, what he was wearing was gothic plate, so no, probably not, as it was later period.

    Although mail was mainly on the shoulders, a belt was worn at the waist to spread the weight, so it'd be just as easy to do this in mail if it was a haubergon or a hauberk with a split

  • LMAO :22

    :) shot w/ airgun

  • THE MIGHTY CRAZY KNIGHT !!! LOL 5/5

  • It's kinda like Jack Ass done medieval style.. except that this was actually GOOD.

    d(^_^d)

  • XD sorry bad english there XD XD i wear a weighted vest, pants, gloves and ankle weights all togeather thats 120 Lbs.XD lol i want to get some armor lol

  • XD that shit ways XD what 10 to 20 lbs XD

  • I can't be certain, but I *think* you're asking how much my armour weighs? As stated earlier in these comments, it weighs 71 pounds. It sounds like a lot, but it's well-distributed, and doesn't *feel* like I'm wearing 71 pounds. It's not as difficult to move around in as you'd think...

  • I work at a renn fair which is far from historically accurate but I take my job pretty serious and like to know my knowledge. Your right Legions. You just read my post wrong

  • Ohhh I see what you mean! you were talking about owning armor not using it! Ok ok I guess you are rite then... Sorry about that! It was a misunderstanding! Sorry.

  • Yes I know your right I was trying to note the myth that anyone could go around owning Plate Mail. As I said the only people to have plate mail were foot soldiers who were the majority of the army but they did not own the armour. I should have noted that my first comment of even chainmail being rare as being about vikings. The few people who actually owned armour in the renaissance were Knights and Nobility.

  • Yes I know your right I was trying to note the myth that anyone could go around owning Plate Mail. As I said the only people to have plate mail were foot soldiers who were the majority of the army but they did not own the armour. I should have noted that my first comment of even chainmail being rare as being about vikings. The few people who actually owned armour in the renaissance were Knights and Nobility.

  • Even Mail was rare. Leather, Hide, Fur. Armour only reached a point where most soldiers used it in the rennaissance, and even then only foot soldiers and calvary, Plate and Metal Armour in general wasn't as common as most people think.

  • You are very wrong Th3RedX. You must be thinking like the years 700 or 800 or 900

    Metal Armour was very, very common befor and after those 300 years that I put up there...

    Your foot soldiers and calvary men had Plate armor in the mid and late 1400s...

    You do know the Renaissance started in the year 1400 AD...

  • indeed, the vikings at clontarf 11th C battle vikings vs irish rebellion were described as a sea of grey (thousands were wearing mail)

  • ´haha funny one

  • Good stuff

  • Very impressive. I wish I could do this with 71 pounds on me.

  • The scene at 0:13 looks very bad.

  • XD,muy chula la armadura,yo me estoy haciendo una armadura de este tipo,mas o menos,cuando la termine haré un video parecido al tuyo que está muy bien

  • Excelente, amigo! Cuando terminas tu video, muestramelo! Quiero ver tu armadura tambien.

  • Should try it with the armour inside a hazmat suite.

  • Been there, done that :)

  • GAS GAS GAS!

  • Doing cartwheels in full armor, it's been done before, but pull ups in armor is pretty impressive.

  • Blackwwoolff Knights had to master some unarmed combat but not twenty forms, manly Roman reselling and Greek boxing put to gather. Knights also had to master Acrobatic, throwing javelins, and other things.

  • Didn't mean to take up so much space.

    Awesome video!

  • Reenactments with modern day masters from both sides brings me to believe that real samurai couldn't have any less speed. The samurai were required to master up to or more than twenty forms of unarmed combat (all of which required and increased mobility) and forty or more other martial related disciplines. Armor or weapons (ex. 10lb swords) that are on display are at times made larger for the purpose of standing out moreso on display but their size was never used in actual battle.

  • I didn't say that they were a thousand times faster. I simply stated that the samurai certainly weren't slower. The weight of the armor varies based upon the skill (and to a degree the design) of the one that made it, the average weight of top of the line full body armor for both sides is similar (generally 40lbs or more). Both allowed a fit person to run, jump and even swim.

  • Dude everyone knows that ninjas and samurais had secret techniques that made them faster and more mobile than even cheetahs or very quick gazelles. Duh! Haven't you ever watched Samurai Champloon?

  • .....

    that is a joke right? lol