Medieval Composite Crossbow vs Body Armour Ballistic Vest
Vložit
- čas přidán 24. 07. 2024
- Shooting test of a soft ballistic package with bolts shot from two medieval composite crossbow replicas. To answer the question whether it is possible to penetrate a modern protective body armour with various medieval bolt heads?
0:00 Intro
0:44 History
1:15 Research question
1:53 1st Test - 460 lb crossbow
3:07 2nd Test - 620 lb crossbow
5:10 Results
5:45 Summary
Superb testing... the composite bows are truely impressive . Lovely Bolts and crossbows.
Awesome work as always. Even the bolts that do not penetrate seems to strike hard enough to break ribs and cause internal bleeding. I wish there was a test for damage to soft tissue by blunt impact.
Der Content ist der Hammer, Kollege! Daumen hoch
Great video!
Perfect videos on this channel
Thank you for doing these tests. These crossbows are amazing & perform quite well. However, as others have noted, modern synthetic fabric doesn't necessarily tell us much about historical fabric armor. I'm additionally curious about the effect bolt sharpness has. In other tests, very sharp cutting blades do the best against fabric armor. Something like a very sharp type-16 head, if there's a bolt equivalent, might do a lot better. In any case, the level of deformation from the shots that didn't penetrate suggests that such hits would be unpleasant for the wearer.
Have you seen test on Fateful Force channel? Interestingly enough, broadheads doesn't seem to be doing better than needle bodkins against \some heavy(ish) jack at all, though it's hard to say how sharp are they, exactly.
@@lscibor I have watched those. Being extremely sharp is what has made the difference in other tests against fabric armor, both with arrows & with swords. For instance, modern hunting broadheads did much better against the (speculatively) reconstructed ancient glued-linen armor than reconstructed iron arrowheads. Most historical arrowheads probably didn't manage extreme sharpness, but some might have. We know some were hardened.
Have to say, I was surprised by the results.
Um video sensacional!
Muito obrigado por compartilhar essas informações!
Forte abraço
The shock wave through the body would have some effect on performance of the wearer I’d imagine
now try a broadhead and make sure it's sharp.
Yes. This seems like the way to go against fabric armor.
I can't help but notice that the kinetic performance of that 726 crossbows is already clearly superior to 1200 pounds steel one by Tod from Tod's Workshop for example, despite shooting lighter bolts...
Amazing work, it seems you alone are getting closer and closer to performance that was apparently expected from winch crossbows in the period... (Winch crossbows being generally rated more dangerous to armor than "archer pulled" bows").
What's it's approximate power stroke, BTW?
I think Horn Composite is more eficent then heavy steel bows of a crossbow !
Yes. I suspect the 330kg crossbow here could be spanned from the belt by someone sufficiently athletic, & that historical warriors spanned such heavy composite crossbows from the belt. Spanning heavy crossbows in this fashion is a key feat of strength in the 15th-century text El Victorial o Crónica de don Pero Niño by Gutierre Díez de Games. It describes events from circa 1400.
Exactly, I was going through the numbers as well, comparing Bichler's 462 lbs hook spanned crossbow with Tod's 850 lbs windlass. They deliver the same amount of energy, more or less. Bichler's 94.6 J with a 58.6 g bolt compared to 88 J with Tod's crossbow with a 60 g bolt. But Tod's has almost twice the amount of poundage, impressive...
This is the great advantage of a composite bow over a steel bow ;-)
steel prods are much less efficient cause they are heavy and lots if energy is wasted just by moving this mass. I have a replica of 16 century crossbow from Malta with steel prod (150 kilos) and, to be on safe side of the local regulations, the one from aluminum (30 kilos). Aluminum REALLY outperforms steel. Composite prods are the best performers, of course but no composite prod will fit such small frame.
However steel prods are waterproof, low-maintenance, easy to mass produce, and more compact - just the thing for long naval journeys, wet jungles and conquest of the world :)
Modern soft body armor is made of woven amarid fibers which have tremendously high tensile strength, but virtually no compressive strength. This provides great protection against firearms, while still offering reasonable comfort and mobility.
The mechanism of effect is relatively simple; the armor defuses the kinetic energy imparted by the projectile along a wider cross section than the immediate area of impact, which slows or stops the projectile while also reducing the impact stresses imparted on the wearer.
The faster and smaller a projectile, the easier it is to punch through kevlar or a similar material. Larger diameter bullets are less likely. Imagine trying to push your finger through your shirt, then try it with a needle. The needle will penetrate easier.
Great video as usual. But kevlar is quite different from all medieval textiles so you can not assume that it is possible to make crossbow-proof and wearable textile armour basing on this experiment. And modern hunting broadhead with sharp edges will work even better than bodkin on kevlar :).
You are absolutely right. The idea was to use a standardised material. This makes it possible for others to do tests and compare the results.
@@medievalcrossbows7621 I think a old Broadhead could be maybe get threw the kevlar as well , more likely if they are razor sharp !
@@killerkraut9179 Im pretty sure sharp viking age hunting point will do.
I shot thru a gambeson that stopped bodkins with a 50# hornbow with hunting point replicas from year 850
@@killerkraut9179 I'm not so sure- it's 'broad' as the name says, so the impact is spread out quite a lot, and thus the friction and resistance to shearing. And broadheads, as far as I know, weren't used with war crossbows.
@@mattl3729 I think whe still should try it !
If they edges are razor sharp it would reduce the surface!
great work, but 150 joules concentrated on the tip of any bolt equals severe soft tissue damage underneath, maybe enough to rupture the liver or stop the heart
Super!
Awesome ! But why didn't you try with the giant 1257 lbs horn composite crossbow ?
Yeah, that one is monstruous
Pretty surprised the bolts didn't penetrate deeper.
Hi. Can you make a handheld crossbow that'll shoot a 200 gram bolt 150 meters at a 45 degree angle? What about 400 g? Is it possible ?
That 330kg one seen here should be able to do it.
Hallo, ich genieße deinen Kanal wirklich, er ist interessant und lehrreich, während deine Bögen wunderschön sind. fantastisch. weiter so. gute Gesundheit. Mark Hucker, keltische Armbrust
Danke dir!
Medieval composite cross bows seem quite a bit faster than steel bows
Jep - you are right!
I’ve a late 14th century windlass crossbow made by robin knight I’m try to rehome, If u interested
I would imagine that while you wouldn't be outright killed by a bolt, you'd still be done for the day, non?
not necessary. Kinetic energy is less than .22 round (150+ joules) and this armor should be able to stop 9mm bullet (450+joules). Quarells will leave bruises but will not incapacitate. Bodkin will ruin the day however.
One may try to reduce the impact by making armour rigid. Maniacs from University of Wisconsin who made linothoraxes (rigid armour from glued linen) shot each other from the bow. Arrow failed to penetrate, and the photo of the smiling guy with arrow sticking from the breastplate is quite popular on the web (just google linothorax). However the bow was relatively low-weight, even blunt quarell from crossbow will go trough arnour and the owner :).
@@sasasasa-lx6cl It's not just about kinetic energy. Momentum also matters, & at least the most powerful bolt tested here has more momentum than a typical 9mm round (4.8 vs. 3.2 kg m/s). I agree that the bolts that didn't penetrate wouldn't incapacitate, but I bet the person underneath would be hurting.
The bodkin would potentially kill a person in time- it takes something like 2.5cm (1") penetration to reach internal organs in some places, and if you pierce the intestine or liver, you could quickly end up with peritonitis or just internal bleeding, which couldn't be fixed at the time.
Der Spanngurt ist hin :D
Because atlatl was long forgotten technology by the time Rome became a thing.
It got displaced by bow, or went out of use from some other reasons in most of the word long before history started getting recorded. It surived in Australia and America.
Other than that, atlatl dart weigh couple ounces at best, are long, thin and flexible by necessity, and by design, the flex of the dart allows it to be launched in the first place.
Launching 1.3kg spear out of atlatl is not likely not realistic, at all.
Atlatl darts are something in between arrows and javelins in many way, slower and heavier than arrows, lighter and faster than hand thrown javelins.
👍
Now for plate armor
Did you use sharpened bolts?
Neither hardened nor specially sharpened. Typical of this type of medieval bolt head.
I see. Do you think steel crossbows were just used as hunting tools and not weapons? Because even the 1000 lbs one are garbage. Your wooden and composite crossbows on the other hand are excellent
@@markcorrigan3930 No - the steel bow gradually replaced the composite bow from the middle of the 15th century. The steel bow was first used militarily by the Burgundians under Charles the Bold. The main problem with the composite bow was its long manufacturing time and its susceptibility to moisture. The steel bow, on the other hand, threatened to break, especially at low temperatures, but was very cheap and could be produced in large quantities.
2:05 Very nice video, and those crossbows look very good, but you are cocking the first one wrongly.
You should stay on one straight leg while the foot of the other leg is raised above the ground and in the stirrup and then push the crossbow down with the foot in the stirrup and your hands. The straight leg stays straight during the whole process. This way you won't have to push your own weight (and the weight of your armour ad equipment) too and will be helped by the weight of your leg.
Wrongly isn't right - there are two ways to span a crossbow with a belt. The Problem with the one straigt foot technique is, that you*ll have only the power from one foot availabel.....
@@medievalcrossbows7621 The way you have spanned it, you still have only the power from one foot available! The other foot is not on the crossbow, whereas the foot which is on it is also pushing part of your own weight (and, if you were an actual crossbowman, of your armour, weapons and other equipment) and does not take advantage of its own weight in the process...
Look, I'm sure that, if you try, you'll find that the one straight foot technique will allow you to span a higher maximum poundage. Hell, if you can easily span a 210 kg crossbow the way you did, you might even be able to span the 330 kg one the way I described as a one-foot crossbow (provided you get a well sized stirrup on it)!
Besides, using a craneqin for the 330 kg one makes no sense if you can actually span a 210 kg crossbow with that bad technique: I'm sure that means that you are strong enough to span the 330 kg as a two-feet crossbow (spanning with both feet on the bow in a sitting position). Try it if you haven't: faster than using a cranequin.
By the way, the first one "substantially" corresponds to the crossbows already used in the 12th century! No need to go as far as the 15th century!
Again, great crossbows.
And, if you cannot push the 330 kg one as a two-feet crossbow (which I think you can if the crossbow which you are spanning with the belt is actually 210 kg), a cranequin is by far the wrong choice anyway.
A goat's foot lever would easily do it and be faster (provided that the crossbow is adapted for it).
The cranequin is meant for crossbows which have way more poundage than 330 kg!
balistic armors are not very effective against cuts - meaning knife hits, spears, and piercing weapons with sharp arrowheads... needle bodkin, or similiar.
its efective about stoping round objects, like bullets
composite bows are more effective per same draw weight than steel rods. That's why launching velocity is higher. they simply return to its starting position faster, than steel, so they can achieve higher launching speed, puting this way more energy into bolt.
this is why it brings more velocities and energy than even higher poundage steel heavy crossbows.
the reason, why steel rod crossbows were used much more often, was they have several advantages.
they are cheaper, and can be produced faster
they are more safer, resistant to weather conditions (dont break up, which is particular important when very high poundage crossbow is used)
steel can be reused from broken crossbow, making other stuff from it.
Try with razor sharp hunting tips...