Could metal armor stop guns?

[@historyofeverythingpodcast]

Hey all please support the channel by getting this months audiobook for only 4 dollars www.chirpbooks.com/book-clubs/the-history-of-everything?source=bookclub_steven&v=t

[@olibob203]

Anyone else think the shot fired weakens the steel round the impact point? Like I get it but maybe not each piece,

[@connorb2112]

METAL ARMOUR CAN STOP BULLETS! Said no one Ever.

[@ailediablo79]

Even today it can but needs to be thick. If you want to stop even a 50bmg then you need your prestplate to be made out of tungsten. However, it might still kill you regardless due to power of the impact. That can be solved by adding powerful springs and flexible bouncey glow layer as well. Eventhough that it most likely would not stop the second 50bmg shot if it hit at the exact same location. To limit that then you need to add 2 layers of modern armor underneath. However except for big rounds like a 50bmg , such armor would be more than enough. Forget about stopping a rounder bigger than a 50bmg. Even a 50bmg , it depends on the distance. If it is less than 100m then you are dead, regardless.

[@malcomx1924]

I’m good… thanks tho.

[@fuckthegrid1159]

You can make the videos for the channel without buying your stuff.. that’s not “supporting the channel” you’re basically selling Merch like every other KZbinr

[@zigzagzipbag6561]

"Uh, excuse me sir, there seems to be a problem with my new armor...it doesn't have a dent in it" "oh, so terribly sorry m'lord, I will fix that immediately!" *shoots at the man* "There you go"

[@thenexus8384]

"Oh why thank you sir"

[@regalblade8171]

"Blacksmith! My armor has no den-" (The blacksmith shoots the man) "Thank you Blacksmith"

[@thenexus8384]

@@regalblade8171 "you're very welcome sir"

[@TheDragonfriday]

@@thenexus8384 "eagle swoop in" *Steal Black Smith wig*

[@thenexus8384]

@@TheDragonfriday what the fuck

[@stetonwalters574]

Also you got to remember back then the ammunition they were using wasn't Metal Jacket so it was just soft lead which means that whatever it hit it would put all of its energy into it

[@piefly2791]

Also black powder which burns slower than the smokeless powder used in modern cartridges resulting in the bullets having overall less velocity than smokeless powder with the same volume

[@MrKaiyooo]

They would also just put gravel or other rocks in gun for a budget grapeshot. Since lead was expensive. Cannons used stone balls for longer and even more commonly.

[@adabsurdum5905]

@@piefly2791 That's why all the old black powder rifles were in crazy big calibers like .70. Can't add energy through increased velocity? Just add mass instead!

[@adabsurdum5905]

Do you know if fragmenting rounds were an issue? With modern firearms, hard armor is not a good idea because even though they stop the round, it often shatters and sprays shrapnel into the face and neck. This may not have been an issue with solid lead balls going like 700fps, though, idk

[@dakdewolf]

@@adabsurdum5905 Spalling is what you're talking about. The bullet fragments continuing perpendicular to the impact and spreading to the neck/chin often. I'd imagine this ancient solid steel armor would have a ton of spalling as modern steel plates cause this.

[@Kriegter]

"i'm quite bothered by the dent over here" - 17th century lindybeige

[@FlinnGaidin]

I think Lloyd would be concerned if there _wasn't_ a dent...

[@Kriegter]

@@FlinnGaidin oh you better see him complain in one of the latest videos

[@fallencrusader2975]

They often times hammered out the dents so you wouldn't notice. Knights wanted to be glamorous so it makes them appear rich and distinct. When you are beaten in battle but appear rich, often times the opponent would spare you to hold you for ransom. You'd benefit more sparing a knight for his money than outright killing him.

[@willdavis3802]

@@fallencrusader2975 That seems incredibly bad for the overall integrity of the piece in subsequent strikes...

[@MGSLurmey]

@@fallencrusader2975 I'm fairly sure by the time muskets were becoming the main form of weaponry, this practice was well in its grave. I could be wrong, though, history has a tendency to overlap much more than we think.

[@gabrielbarba7434]

There’s a samurai armor set in a museum in Dallas that has several shot marks from early guns, but no penetration

[@usagifang]

I mean, these were during times before rifled guns and oblong pointy bullets. It would make sense for a musket marble to not penetrate.

[@Yougotcaged102]

*The only thing I know for real starts*

[@MGSLurmey]

@@usagifang and yet the old trope of muskets being good at penetrating armour is still prevalent. The internet cannot decide.

[@Essethegamer]

@@Yougotcaged102 MGR status

[@carebear2707]

What Museum?

[@adorabomber123]

One of the few situations where a dent in something actually ENSURED quality

[@Greideren]

I've read somewhere that that test where they shoot at the breastplate is where the term "bullet proof" comes from. Is that true?

[@Th3RealPeterGriffin]

@@endhunter569 that wasn’t what he asked

[@TheExtremeIRON]

I don't think the the term bullet proof has any specific origin. It's just a convention of the English language. Proof means to be resistant to damage, and can be used to describe any sort of resistance (fire proof, water proof, etc). So as soon as anything was created that would be resistant to damage from bullets, bullet proof automatically became a way to describe it.

[@endhunter569]

@@Th3RealPeterGriffin it’s related because he was testing if armor was bullet proof

[@tinycockjock1967]

@@endhunter569 it’s not what he asked though

[@Bhartrampf]

I believe the term they used back then was bullet proofed, as it was proofed against bullets. This armor was heat treated the proofing process was to see if the steel was hard enough.

[@SomeGuy-gc8zs]

I've heard that "bulletproof" comes from this practice, because it was a proof mark made by a bullet; in others words it was proof that the armor could stop a bullet.

[@mainhalo117]

Then where did fire proof, wind proof, water proof, stab proof, etc. come from. I’m pretty sure that bullet proof just means that it is resistant to bullets like the other examples above.

[@SomeGuy-gc8zs]

@@mainhalo117 Just because it CAN stop a bullet doesn't mean it WILL stop a bullet every time, or that it'll stop more than one, and similar principles apply to other "proof" things. For example, waterproof watches are only waterproof up to a certain depth, even the best waterproof fabrics can fail in extreme weather, and even the best fireproof clothing can only keep you from getting burned for so long in an intense structural fire.

[@endhunter569]

Plated armor is still effective against bullets up to a certain caliber

[@ronmaximilian6953]

Like .22 short

[@dragon12234]

@@ronmaximilian6953 was used against 9mm in WW1 and WW2

[@ronmaximilian6953]

@@dragon12234 The quality and thickness of the steel would matter. Angling would help. And distance matters, especially with a handgun. l

[@horvathbenedek3596]

@@ronmaximilian6953 Angling and quality wasn't there. The steel armor used in WW1 was mainly structural (i.e. construction grade), case hardened steel. Nothing fancy. Fact is, a 5 mm piece of steel plate will stop a 9 mm luger any day.

[@Khajiidaro]

@@horvathbenedek3596 Yeah, they actually did tests with tanks to figure out what thickness they needed to protect against standard infantry rounds. That same knowledge could be applied to infantry armor, and probably is to a degree, but imagine needing to wear heavy metal armor thick enough to stop a 30-06 from killing you because the fuhrer needs more live bodies for slowing the Russian.

[@RichyArg]

a lot of people assume that firearms immediatly rendered armor obsolete, but that was never the case. it did render full body plate armor obsolete, but not because of it's penetration, but because it changed the way armies were equiped and the way they engaged, the type of weapon heavy plate was meant to counter became increasingly sparser in the battlefield, and so did the melees and chargest it was originally meant for, so the cumbersome armor stopped being worth the weight to carry to battle.

[@dragon12234]

Don't forget that armies marched much longer distances, and wearing heavy armor if you weren't cav became that much untenable

[@asmodon]

@@dragon12234 Plus, making effective armor for an entire army is expensive.

[@fallencrusader2975]

Full plate armor wasn't cumbersome, the problem was that guns became much stronger so the plates had to be thicker to stop a bullet. Eventually people decided it was best to just wear a thick breastplate and helmet. Longer answer: Medieval firearms were invented in the 15th century (1400s) and full plate can still remain light and effective even against firearms. During the 16th century (1500s) guns became much stronger. Yes it was too expensive to equip a whole army with plate armor but that was never the case in the first place. Only the rich could afford full plate armor. However in the 1500s even rich people, and knights started to wear only partial plate armor. The only exception being the few knights who still served calvary roles. Full plate armor was also still worn for the joust and tournament. However heavy calvary started to become obsolete during the late 1500s

[@dragon12234]

@@fallencrusader2975 it's not that it's cumbersome in battle, but cumbersome on the march. As armies started to need to march further and further distances between rests every pound carried counted more and more. And unlike modern soldiers, they didn't have the benefit of vehicles, unless you were cavalry (some of which who did indeed wear armor still). And heavy cavalry as in large men on large horses charging in with swords didn't fully become obsolete until tanks were developed further in the post-WW1 period

[@fallencrusader2975]

@@dragon12234Great points. I would like to say that later instances of calvary are categorized as light calvary. (At least in Medieval/Renaissance terms.) Heavy calvary wear full plate armor with heavy configurations of helmet ex. Armet with wrapper, sallet with bevor etc. Light calvary were more so like skirmishers that did not lead direct charges, but preformed quick hit and run tactics on encampments. The winged Hussars for instance were originally a heavy calvary unit that became light calvary. Later on in history calvary were still used however without use of armor they wouldn't be considered heavy calvary in a Medieval/Renaissance context. I don't know much about calvary during WWI but I assume that tanks would outperform calvary in an all out "heavy" charge and were probably used more dominantly for scouting/recon and skirmishes. However if the calvary unit performs frontal assaults in a modern context it can be considered heavy calvary because plate armor is obsolete however if would still be light calvary in medieval terms. Correct me if I am wrong on the WWI aspect of things, I am just guessing and interested to learn.

[@Someguy21161]

Ned Kelly was an Australian bush ranger who, in his last stand against the police force, equipped himself with a makeshift full metal suit of armour which apparently did well to protect himself from gunfire. The only problem with it to my memory was that he still felt the concussive force of the bullet and was thus wounded. After he was wounded he tried to escape but was found by a a few men who managed to catch Ned given that had sustained injuries and that his armour was incredibly heavy which left him immobile.

[@rodmullen64]

You mentioned Bush ranger but forgot outlaw gang leader and convicted cop killer

[@TheAussieBlue]

​@@rodmullen64those cops were on the payroll of rich cattle barons known as squatters. fuck em.

[@stevez2158]

Some less trustworthy armorers would sometimes even hammer the dent in to sell a low-quality cuirass for more money. The buyer, of course, would never find out the truth until it was too late.

[@hyenascreech2183]

Late age samurai had the same methods and I forgot what they were called but the armor was called "tested" in Japanese and it always had 3 dents in it from being tested for being bullet proof

[@jonajo9757]

Little late, but the term's "Tameshi Dou" when referring to a bullet proofed cuirass in Japan.

[@Specter_1125]

A lot of Japanese armor of the time was actually imported from Europe. You can see European made breastplates with Japanese styled additions.

[@jonajo9757]

@@Specter_1125 Nanban dō directly imported from Europe only formed a small minority of western styled armors In Japan. The majority would've been manufactured domestically, and known as Wasei Nanban dō, referring to it being Japanese made. The one big give away here is that they were made to appeal to Japanese tastes aswell, and often look a bit off in comparison to an actual European cuirass.

[@ConnorSinclairCavin]

Oh, im so using the testing mark thing in my d&d game… for many uses… “you never asked if there were any acid marks on the armor i see” •looking at dm notes• “interesting, carry on.” •player panic ensues•

[@noblesicks]

Girl: I need a knight in shining armor. Me: A knight in shining armor never had his armor truly tested

[@therac197]

I rather prefer it black. gold rims are okay though

[@Asend1ng3]

My bro got to charge his phone lol

[@BHuang92]

Also blacksmiths had the concept of sloping the armor which helps by deflecting the projectile while minimalizing the thickness of the metal hence why alot of examples are sloped not just to fit the torso.

[@Bhartrampf]

Some had deflectors, because of spall also, or a thick over garment to capture the spall ..hmm, kinda sounds familiar to modern armor.

[@carsonjones528]

I think half plate was also popular with the cuirass in the 16th-17th century. It would cover the hips and thighs as well

[@Will-bo7kg]

It also helped that only having the curass helped with the earlier weight issues when people tried to just make thicker full plate armour. This pretty heavy armour requiring far stronger war horses that really eat into your finances 😂

[@matteblack5805]

Not just that but when you take into account the layers you're wearing underneath and the angle you might be standing at when hit, armor would definitely stop or deflect a round

[@Specter_1125]

There’s an account of a cuirassier getting shot twice, one of the bullets glancing off, and the second being stoped dead in its tracks despite the muzzle of the pistol being pressed into the breastplate.

[@gagemullis313]

Well, the term cuirass was still used with full medieval armor, its a term for a combined breastplate and backplate, it wasnt a new term for the cuirassiers of the 17th century

[@PenumbranWolf]

A lot of smiths would also embellish the dent too, engraving and gilding around it to call attention.

[@billcutting2681]

I 100 percent want a cuirass lol

[@mitchellwright5478]

Sadly a .45 doesn’t care for 16th century technology, but believe it or not there is actually polysynthetic, metal, and other materials for ‘armor’ you can basically wear under your armor like a cuirass, like it’s plates around your vital areas

[@billcutting2681]

@@mitchellwright5478 I respect the intellectual response but I want it for the look lol. Average bad guy is packing a 9mm anyways cheap Taurus or hi point in my experience

[@Byrdbeblazin]

My man's got that Italian hand movement

[@boodle399]

I love the idea of someone getting into an argument with a merchant cause his armor LACKED dents

[@TheCompleteMental]

1. Cuirasses already existed 2. Armor didnt start to decline until the 17th century 3. Three quarters armor and half armor was used in and around the 1500s but because it was munitions grade 4. Armor even in the 14th century was proofed by firing weapons like hand culverins at close range

[@masterch33fII7]

Yeah, this video is a bit wrong haha. You could still find pretty full heavy armors in the 1600. And full armors were still definitely a thing in 1500

[@wizardofthedumb6640]

could you do a video on Zheng Yi Sao? to me they're very interesting

[@davidwooden3878]

What's that Oh the Pirate Queen?? Love that they added her in PotC, a true legend

[@replexity]

chinese? i hate the ccp

[@regalblade8171]

Isn't she the most successful Pirate ever?

[@wizardofthedumb6640]

@@regalblade8171 yes, absolutely.

[@regalblade8171]

@@wizardofthedumb6640 also her ship was like gigantic

[@Fyrebrand18]

An anecdote from a museum’s video on 17th century cuirass. During the English civil war a cavalier fighting another cavalier rode into melee pistol drawn. He touched the tip of the barrel onto his opponent’s breastplate and fired, hoping that at point blank the pistol would break through the armor and kill the enemy rider. To his surprise the opposing rider was still very much alive and not at all wounded as his pistol even at point blank did not pierce his enemy’s cuirass.

[@EXPLODINGSPUD]

The first picture of the cuirass is from forge of svan. They are a great company. I bought a full set of brigandine armor from them.

[@wit4023]

Thats kinda interesting and makes sense because guns had to start somewhere and they wouldn't take away the armor with bad guns.

[@dragon12234]

In the end what largely killed armor was that it became too expensive for the everyman soldier and heavy for the long marches on foot. In certain situations armor still remained, like the French and German Cuirassiers heavy cavalry and the "Machine-gun armor" of WW1, and the Soviet Assault Sappers of WW2, and it did work, albeit mostly against pistol caliber rounds (in the case of the Machine-gun armor also rifle rounds but it was almost impracticable heavy) which was largely fine, cause those that wore it was supposed to fight at close ranges anyway, like the Cuirassiers charged people whilst on horseback and wielding swords (which was still an effective tactic where the defenders had not managed to set up defensive positions) and the assault Sappers attacking enemy fortifications

[@mirroredvoid8394]

​@@dragon12234 The same thing is happening with tanks now. They're sacrificing armor to gain the ability to maneuver away from artillery strikes and be cheaper to replace once destroyed by a atgm.

[@dragon12234]

@@mirroredvoid8394 Not really with western tanks. There it's the reverse funnily enough, as they want to make the tanks as survivable as possible. The tanks are already fast enough, and they have enough armor to survive a tank gun shot. So the development is primarily in countermeasures against ATGMs, like lasers and other active protection systems

[@mirroredvoid8394]

@@dragon12234 It doesn't matter where the tank is from. If a artillery piece guided by a drone lands a shot on top of the thin roof of the vehicle the crew is instantly turned into red. That's how Russia lost most of it's armor in Ukraine. The US army has already accepted designs for a vehicle half the weight of the Abrams to replace it in the infantry support role.

[@dragon12234]

@MirroredVoid said light tank is not supposed to replace the Abrams but to reinforce the light infantry, like Rangers and Paratroopers. So it's lightness is much more about making it easy to transport

[@trevorvanderputten7430]

I distinctly remember a Australian bandit that used metal armor to protect himself from being shot, eventually he was hit with an overwhelming amount of firepower and he was killed.

[@Kentucky_Caveman]

Dan Kelly and the Bush rangers

[@marcusmariota9607]

@iands1 correction 'Ned Kelly' and the term bush rangers was a term used for Australian outlaws.

[@walterbuschbacher1122]

There were exceptions to wanting to have a dent in the armor, if the producer had a good enough reputation many didn’t require it to be shot

[@Izunundara]

The dent from the bullet lets you know that the armour was able to stop one bullet before it was ruined by one bullet

[@justaguywhoplaysfalloutsom1104]

During world war one they made a steel cuirass that was to be worn by machine gunners. It wasn’t strong enough to stop rifle rounds from close range, and it was too heavy to be used by average foot soldiers, but it could stop a rifle round from a couple hundred meters. So when a gunner was being shot at from another trench he would be very well protected.

[@danielponiatowski7368]

the germans also had face armour, plate and chain mail, for snipers i think or for observers. the helmet had an extra plate on the front.

[@theconfederacyofindependen7268]

And that's where steel comes into play, when sloped, a round bounces off, muskets and muzzle-loaded cannons won't work, unless you have any high power rounds like AP or HE. They use either a pointy tip or plastic explosives to pen it

[@theprancingprussian]

Sometimes it was tested at farther ranges and other times a fake dent was put in it Cuirassiers in France had fake dents sometimes put into the armor, it did not help much closer than 150 metres or so but did give a morale boost with cuirassiers more likely to launch an aggressive and costly assault

[@Tommyxp420]

Brings the term "lead by example" to a whole different level 🔥😬🤣

[@richardb261]

Heck in the early days of firearms thick layers of silk helped stop bullets. And even if the bullet pierced the skin the silk would hold not letting it get too deep and you could pull the silk wrapped bullet out whole.

[@bingobongo1615]

I feel like this mixes up pistols and early muskets / arquebuses. Yes they tested it against pistols and a cuirass protected from pistol shots and long range musket fire but on battlefield shooting distance armor was getting pretty useless. So a cuirass was useful against other cavalry (pistols) and pikes and some unlucky shots but a direct hit from a musket was pretty deadly to everyone

[@f1r3hunt3rz5]

Even smaller caliber modern bullets can be stopped by moderate quality plate armor.

[@genghiskhan6809]

Cuirassiers (a form of heavy cavalry from the late 16th to the mid 17th century) were the cavalrymen whom originated the now widely known to be incorrect stereotype of knights having armor so heavy that they couldn’t mount their horses by themselves. Their armor needed to so thick and as such heavy in order to resist bullets. By the mid 17th century was when armies started doing away with that armor because it had simply become too impractical because of it’s weight and sheer expense.

[@DaSoda70]

We still make and use steel breast plates as they're cheaper than kevlar. Common bullets generally don't penetrate, but the spalling will get ya.

[@blackwingdragonmasta]

At close range a metal ball would potentially dent or punch through plate but yes plate was definitely strong enough to take the force of the bullet at long range and even modern rounds can have trouble getting through it. Properly forged plate armour has been shown to be able to stop .22, 9mm and .45 ACP so they could stop most handguns.

[@dillonventola408]

So... What's stopping the smith from making a dent with a ball point hammer? If it fails chances are your customer isn't coming back to complain, right?

[@josephmontanaro2350]

Technically they make steel plates for plate carriers, it's a lot heavier then ceramic plates but they do exist, they also make titanium ones, particularly the earlier Soviet body armor of the late 70s, early 80s

[@TheAngryAsianAnimations]

So a little trivia relating to this and samurai armor. So lamellar also known as kozane is perhaps the most well known samurai armor but around the 14 century, solid metal cuirass began making an appearance. However, they did not really catch on until the 16 century when they encountered the Portuguese. The Portuguese traded arquebuses and the llamellar armor was not strong enough to stop it. However, the aforementioned metal cuirass was not only strong enough but more easily made so it soon saw wide spread use and developed into full plate armor called tosei gusoku.

[@salavat294]

That dent from the bullet was the “proof” in bulletproof. The breast plate was proven to be resistant to bullet penetration. Some of these armours were so “bulletproof” that there accounts in memoirs of the Cavalier, Reiter, and Polish heavy winged Hussars riding(all similarly equipped troops, in the same era) up each other, the muzzle of their “horse pistol” touching the breastplate and fired. The shot might unseat one of the horsemen, but still the breastplate was not penetrated.

[@unknowncommenter6698]

Funny that everyone kinda forgets that Russian class II and III armor (for example, from old security vest Module-3M), as well as shooting range targets are just steel plates. They're actually better at stopping buckshot than higher class ceramic plates because steel can take several hits.

[@fabricio-agrippa-zarate]

And that's where we get the term "bulletproof" from.

[@CarryPotter007]

the thing is, only with a little bit of angling your body or with a hit at an angled trajectory or whatever, in stead of getting your chest ripped off or shattered, the bullet would just bounce off of the armor, you might only feel a slight push against your chest tho =P

[@username0984]

Bullet proof vest manufacturers should do this

[@DakkaScrappa]

however that became obsolete when full metal jacket and if your asking no shields will not work against bullets its like an armor piercing shell going through a tank screen

[@joejoelesh1197]

Always a good chance that the armorer used a light load. The testing wasn't independent

[@zachdragon7557]

Another thing that should be mentioned is that is that there was only 50% guarantee that was going to protect you not all the times did it stop the bullet because sometimes the armor was Build part of a good part of it bad the armor is truly never invincible It will still get through especially if you take more than one hit

[@evanlucas8914]

This is where the term "bullet proof" came from. A "proof" was a mark left on the armor or weapon signifying the craftsman or company that made it; kind of like the early version of a brand name. So the dent was the "bullet's proof" signifying thay it was bullet certified.

[@someguyfromfinland4239]

The cuirass couldnt stop a bullet except if it was made really heavy. They were often just shaped in a way that any shot coming from the front would hit the armour at an angle which made it harder to penetrate and often shots glanced off But if it was close range shot with a late arquebus of a early musket from the side so the bullet would hit the armour at a flat angle, it would go right through

[@Lrzmsibelts]

By the guys he’s talking about were mostly cavalry and lasted as a unit of army’s in Europe until the end of the napoleonic wars.

[@logandavis7365]

Cuirassiers in the days of Napoleon are proof that this worked for centuries. They were heavy cavalry, and before the utter destruction of the army in Russia, the cuirass was still very strong and tested similarly

[@unifiedhorizons2663]

Fun fact Spain used plate steel which had a 100% carbon making 308 round worthless it could tank through without a scratch but it had no down sides

[@patrickbuckley7259]

Essentially the Late Medical Renaissance version of a bullet proof jacket, they also had a pot helm to match as well.

[@mr.m.t.j.m6003]

If that meant the person died….the soul would have haunted the blacksmith for all eternity

[@liomurasaki]

Only if they were angled, that makes the bullet to bounce off instead of trying to stop it, making it change direction without penetrating the armor is better

[@AceTaxiaGaming]

Hence the term Bulletproof, you had proof it wasn't gonna get pierced by bullets

[@Gunsandbunsmma]

In the 14th century 12-10 gauge steel was sufficient enough to ward off many of the firearms of the day, considering that they were so difficult to shoot at volume or great distance and were unreliable at best and few and far in between. Shaping and doming of armor was of utmost importance to deflect projectiles. As firearms got more sophisticated, you start to see the decline in wearing of arm and leg armors in the late 16th and early 17th centuries and the thickening of breastplates and cuirasses to contend with said firearms, until the armor became much too heavy to actually be nimble and a capable contributor in battle. The french have some pieces on display in their country, but I would look to the Royal Armouries in Leeds or the Wallace Collection for the most quality “bulletproof” breastplates.

[@captinmez5660]

Finally an actually good KZbin short

[@BK0924]

I wonder what kind of vibe check the Arquebus does to what's wearing the armor. With modern armor it'll stop the bullet but not the force behind it which then vibe checks what's behind it.

[@Dango534]

ned kellys armor was a good example

[@Phantom-bh5ru]

Full plate armor still existed into the mid 17th century though they were not conmen.

[@the98themperoroftheholybri33]

I imagine they wouldn't have been conmen, those suits of armour were expensive

[@jerichohill487]

And that boys and girls is where the term bullet proof came from.

[@jamespaguip5913]

Modern vest armor does have steal plated armor but most are ceramic

[@trapperjohn6089]

The terms “bullet proof” and “proof mark”come from that mark. The dent was proof that the armor would stop a bullet. The dent is the bullet proof.

[@trollerjakthetrollinggod-e7761]

The Aztec Ichcahuipilli was notoriously able to protect against gunfire of the era, better than some steel armor. This is why it was generally favored, and why the Spanish had higher mortality rates than their Tlaxcaltec allies.

[@nexuslax3284]

I submit Ned Kelly

[@danielponiatowski7368]

YES! and his armour withstood modern pattern bullets as well as muzzle loaded types. bit heavy to go running around a battle field though.

[@AHSValor]

@@danielponiatowski7368 irl juggernaut vibes

[@voszvaivaldtkoszikovokh6418]

Dont forget, since it's just a chestpiece, you could make it thicker and heavier than the full plate, which also factored in

[@enraikow6109]

I never knew he gave financial advice, now my 6th crusade against the ottomans will be full of nothing but glory!

[@jacobaugustine6249]

If you have the choice between a scarred and battered shield and brand new one choose a scar and battered one it's been field tested

[@masterhand9305]

It still amazes me that everyone decided to equip guns en mass despite them being unproven and unreliable weapons when Crossbows did their job better in practically everyway. They were faster, more accurate, and even the most backwater peasant could use them with barely any training. They peirced armor with proven effectiveness and even had more than sufficient range aswell. Really a miracle handheld powder weapons became as widely used as they did.

[@irok1]

I wonder if the pellets as bullets being way cheaper than full arrows contributed to that

[@oddityurie3435]

This is a bit of a oversimplification, though yes generally speaking a Cuirass was suppose to stop shots fired from early guns such as Arquebus and later on during the Napoleonic Wars the Musket, they did not always do that. Remember this was all from a time before the industrial revolution where standardization was not really much of a thing, each and every cuirass were usually made by different people from different places with different available materials and quality, sometimes a armourer would have some of the finest pieces of armor ever made in the whole Kingdome while others just gave a rubber stamp and say "eh this is good enough" and even then, most especially later on during the Napoleonic Wars, Cuirasses in that time were probably more or less effective against pistol caliber of ammunition or shots fired from a far distance or angle. Plus the making of such armor was still fairly costly for the person making it so often they would not resort to damaging something that they spent hours if not days trying to make only for it to have a hole shot through it and yes again this was all before the Industrial revolution so you can't simply replace a whole piece of armor because you can't exactly mass produce it while also preserving a similar level of quality. Either way the Cuirass was meant to at least stop some shots fired

[@eagleye2893]

In Other Words, Guns Still Changed the Meta, It's Just That Armor Wasn't as Underpowered as We Initially Thought. Quite Possibly the Opposite If We Consider the Earliest Versions of Firearms.

[@lambsauce5312]

Not modern ones, Spitzer wit dat smokeless powder, goes straight through, will probably still cavitate good

[@John.McMillan]

Polish Hussars and French (I cant remember their name) elite cavalary used breast plates like this as late as the early 1800's, I saw one in a meuseam from a French cavalry officer that had around a dozen spots where balls hit and either deflected or were just stopped, with one hole. Very impressive. Giys arms and legs had to of been shredded.

[@Biblioholic1993]

Although they might have had the dent pounded back out and its wrinkles and slight rust visible, yeah.

[@Clayton_Stewart]

Would black powder firearms of the US Civil War be able to penetrate this armor, or would it depend solely on the caliber?

[@wisemankugelmemicus1701]

The .75 caliber musket rounds of Renaissance-Napoloenic Europe produced about 2,600 ft lbs of energy. No it would not penetrate

[@Clayton_Stewart]

@@wisemankugelmemicus1701 that era was at least 50 years before the time of the American Civil War. Might want to see how firearms and ammunition progressed, and if it was better than the era you're suggesting

[@wisemankugelmemicus1701]

@@Clayton_Stewart I doubt it. It wasn't really until the invention of smokeless powder that rounds could be made to maintain velocity at longer range. Civil War rifles were .58 cal which were used had around 980 foot lbs of energy. Worth noting that modern rounds, short of 7.62x39mm will still fail to penetrate. Which is 1,300 f/lbs of energy at nearly twice the velocity as most muzzle loaders, so this checks out

[@mysteriousstranger5873]

@@wisemankugelmemicus1701do you know a video that tests modern rounds on a historical cuirass? I’d be willing to bet it would be the rough equivalent to modern 3a rating

[@wisemankugelmemicus1701]

@@mysteriousstranger5873 kzbin.info/www/bejne/r5jEhICbic1gnJIsi=1HnW4ooA-m3vFiU0

[@adriandiaz-cabrera1733]

But then.....testing it will reduce the overall strength for when you actually need it.

[@misterjder1.831]

The arcebuse wasnt an early fire arm. Early firearms are to find common in the late 1400s

[@nephicus339]

Also the origin of 'bulletproof.'

[@NatureDocumentaryTF2]

fun fact: farina armor from battlefield 1 is real and not exaggerated in-game that much!

[@johnstevens5517]

I’m new here and I find this fascinating. What is this guy’s background? Is he formally educated or an autodidact?

[@GardenFootCreature]

This dude doesn’t know what he’s saying 40% of the time

[@yugang4430]

I'm quite bothered by the lack of metal on the crotch. Unless you're counting on the balls of steel that you must have to be melee against firearms.

[@boas7742]

Ned Kelly an Australian bush ranger famously wore full iron armour in his final encounter with the police and it worked until they spotted his unprotected feet

[@Lancersilva]

Huh, we went full circle. From cuirasses to plate carriers, neat.

[@ThatSpecificIndividual]

One thing to not is why they stopped using them was not because guns becoming more powerful but it was the cost. The money needed for bullet proof curiass for one man you could give 50 men guns for the same price.

[@Xylophytae]

My favorite distance: kinda close-ish

[@mydogbrian4814]

____, and if it had a dent in it, it ment that it was 2nd hand. And could never be sold as new.

[@ailediablo79]

Even today it can but needs to be thick. If you want to stop even a 50bmg then you need your prestplate to be made out of tungsten. However, it might still kill you regardless due to power of the impact. That can be solved by adding powerful springs and flexible bouncey glow layer as well. Eventhough that it most likely would not stop the second 50bmg shot if it hit at the exact same location. To limit that then you need to add 2 layers of modern armor underneath. However except for big rounds like a 50bmg , such armor would be more than enough. Forget about stopping a rounder bigger than a 50bmg. Even a 50bmg , it depends on the distance. If it is less than 100m then you are dead, regardless.

[@alxsin4439]

Forgot to mention about the blacksmith's that would fake the dent.

[@canadiandoughnut8605]

What about the Soviet armour for the combat engineers? Would they even be partially effective or is it like the cope cage?

[@happydemon3038]

Well, consider the SMG. A rifle cartridge would surely punch through, but the rifles were bolt action so it was a while between each shot. An SMG can unload it's entire magazine by the time the rifle fired it's second shot. 30 shots means you are way more likely to hit something first, and that can prevent the target from shooting at you. But in order to be controllable at such a rate of fire, they use pistol cartridges. So the Steel Bib should be effective against German SMGs, it'll still hurt as hell, but it protects most of the vital organs. Meanwhile the Soviet soldier can unload in return. It may also have been effective against long range fire, but I don't think it'll stop a 2nd or 3rd shot from a full size rifle cartridge.

[@canadiandoughnut8605]

@@happydemon3038 so slight cope cages, but actually helped in certain situations

[@grizzlyblackpowder1960]

I love this channel because i get to hear how I mispronounced things when I was in high school again. Also there are literally hundreds examples of armor from the Renaissance that was not shot at close range by their armorer, some belonging to wealthy and powerful people. Way to make broad statements to keep your video short, and in turn create misinformation. Bravo, we salute you for being part of the problem.

[@TitusCastiglione1503]

A minor gripe; the plate armor depicted is also called a cuirass. It’s more of a general term for metal breastplate

[@trippiechris1852]

The seal of approval is a bullet lmao