Can medieval ARROWS defeat ARMOUR, both medieval and modern?!

[@willo7734]

This is a really cool channel. It’s what the History Channel should be, rather than Pawn Stars and Ice Road truckers.

[@marcrisa6352]

I have never agreed so damn much with a random comment on youtube.

[@mr2ti41]

One of the best comments in history. 👍

[@garyreed2206]

Agree. This is what History channel USED to be, when it first started.

[@wbbartlett]

@uncletigger This! The constant repetition of the same point / clip on US documentaries makes them absolutely unwatchable

[@wulfric777]

@@wbbartlett it makes me feel the narrator has no respect for my short term memory.

[@nestadious]

This is why I dont have cable TV. Quality informative videos that are not overly dramatic and are actually informative. This channel and Townsend's channel is why I used to love the History channel some 15ish years ago. Keep up the great work!

[@KonguZya]

I just looked up Townsends, and I would like to give you a heartfelt thank you for informing me about them. The channel looks like a gold mine of the "everyday" and practical historical things I would love to know.

[@corazzinatanner498]

I've been watching Townsends for years, but I watch a lot different historical channels and due to the great KZbin algorithm, I just found this channel today.

[@susanwoodcarver]

Thanks for suggesting the Townsend channel!! Hadn’t heard of it. Looks fantastic!

[@bashkillszombies]

The townsends are great. Although I prefer Bjorn Andreas Bull Hansen and other period specific people. Americana is of no interest to me, it's well publicized. Germanic history of our peoples--as an Englishman whose family are listed in the Domesday book from the invasion in 1066--who didn't even know his people's ethnic group had a name as I grew up is far more important. Our history is actively suppressed, and what little is taught is modern colonial era and usually lumped with shame and Germanophobic racism.

[@MikeHesk742]

@@bashkillszombies Dunno about it being actively supressed (though school was a long time ago) but starting at 1066 and then skimming through things definitely doesnt do the job. I think there's a temptation in some groups to try and desperately say us and germans are the same and it's us against the world, i'd dare to pitch our history against theirs and say we're different and better because of our medieval period and because of the colonial period. Everyone hates colonialism, nobody likes to talk about about how we all still reap the benefits - even now.

[@dustinf11]

Jason is so humble, and it makes him unbelievably likeable. He knows about guns, I'm sure. Sniper Elite games are pretty accurate as far as the rifles goes. He still asks questions he knows the answers to.

[@debidattamishra8677]

He’s pretty much the best interrogater I’ve ever seen.

[@Zomby_Woof]

I' like to see modern compound bows and crossbows vs medieval armor.

[@darthplagueis13]

Probably not that well. Modern archery rarely utilizes the kind of drawweight that is required to have a chance at piercing armour. Crossbows are a bit more interesting, they might do just as well as they did in the middle ages.

[@rykercabler9756]

Darthplagueis13 ??? There are PLENTY of bows made today with 75+ draw weights. Compound and regular both. You’ll need to go to specialty shop or online to find them, but the archery and bow hunting scene is still thriving!

[@darthplagueis13]

@@rykercabler9756 I'm not denying that. But the OP specifically asked about armour and warbows that might be able to pierce or significantly dent armour start around 130 and go all the way up to almost 200 lbs of drawweight. There's a significant power spike between a bow that can kill in general and a bow that might harm an armoured opponent. Noone would bring a 160 lbs bow for hunting and you don't need that kind of power for normal sports archery which is the reason why you won't really find a bow with that kind of drawweight today unless it is a replica of a medieval bow.

[@cern1999sb]

@@darthplagueis13 Modern compound bows are far more efficient at transferring energy to the arrow than longbows. This means that you wouldn't necessarily need the same draw weight in order to do the same amount of damage with a compound bow compared to a longbow.

[@2bingtim]

@@darthplagueis13 The efficency of modern recurves & even more, compound bows are a lot greater than warbows, so a 180lb warbow would be equal to c 100 to 120lb compound, maybe less, & a 120-130lb warbow something like an 80lb compound. The modern materials & design outperform the best that medieval bowyers could acheive.

[@KingZealotTactics]

fun fact, last confirmed military kill from a bow was in ww2!

[@greggclarke5822]

Jack Churchill

[@greggclarke5822]

@Nim Boo Mad Jack Churchill, he was a commando. There is am amazing photo of him wadding ashore with a Broadsword in hand. He commenced an ambushed on a German patrol by shooting one of the enemy with an arrow. A google search will bring up more on him.

[@jamieh4148]

Rambo did it in the eighties. :-)

[@daveno8432]

Vietnam actually .................

[@bumbledouche3323]

The Wikipedia entry says he went to war armed with a longbow, bagpipes and a Scottish broadsword. Of those, the bagpipes are surely the most terrifying lol.

[@wolframharms3495]

All film makers and directors who want to make a film on the medieval knights: watch this series - then employ Jason and his friends as consultants. Never seen anything so detailed, and communicated so nicely with British ambition plus humor - very sympathic! Thanks for this work, Jason!

[@ModernKnight]

Thanks very much.

[@AeneasGemini]

I would agree with you if they were as carefully selectful and detail orientated when it comes to picking 'period' armour, sorry but they seem to have found the rustiest piece of pseudosteel imaginable for this 'test'. It's a shame since they gave such a detailed description of the guns and such, without an equally detailed description of the 'armour' they were using (type of metal, period it came from etc) all of which is very important

[@janehaylay1152]

Even world-builders and writers should watch these videos. It gives you plenty of ideas.

[@18IMAMGODINA]

@@AeneasGemini and it didn't even penetrate the armour , making a hole doesn't mean anything if it isn't deep enough to even penetrate flesh

[@therandomizer7187]

@@18IMAMGODINA Let's not forget they're working with stationary target. The real cavalry would have been charging at them with great momentum so combine the two with the bow's power then it would most definitely pierce them or worse pull their insides out if we want to be realistic.

[@mkosmala1309]

An important thing to remember: even if it doesn't punch through the armor, it can still hurt the meat behind. Fantastic video as always

[@mohammadtausifrafi8277]

Sorry to disagree but I have heard from several people that while in armor, a piercing strike to the body does not make you feel much, if anything, of course that is unless it penetrates enough to injure. Blunt force attacks to the body can definitely injure without any penetration, but arrows certainly do not have any real blunt force, you do not feel anything even from spear strikes powerful enough to dent the armor and push you backwards, that is from a first hand account. So, unless the arrows strike the helmet, I do not think the person would be hurt at all.

[@DeadSomething]

a friend got hit by an AK-round in Afghanistan adn compared it to a hit of a horsekick. Broken ribs and painful bruises were to be expected. he still got the armourplate with the projectile that saved his life.

[@domino52o26]

My grandfather likened it to being hit with a baseball bat at full force from a major league player. Ididn't ever really believe him until i watched a demonstration showing the comparison between something with armor getting shot, and then getting hit with a bat.

[@sebastiaandewit159]

It can rip your lungs and make you cough blood. That's a rather unsettling experience.

[@sgtcrabfat]

Was this 2007, we had a bloke into Bastion with something like that, he had, also sustained a left arm injury too, he laughed and said the Osprey was a life saver. tho the unit on this vid is not the Osprey model.

[@digdig1533]

One of my officers got shot in the ass. We never stopped tormenting him with Forest Gump references.

[@eazy2195]

There's actually a vid somewhere of a marine getting shot by a sniper, he dropped to the ground like he got hit by a wrecking ball, survived though with some body trauma

[@GIGroundNPound]

I have watched this at least 4 times and am honestly awe struck at the SOUND the bow and arrow make when loosed. And notice when the arrow hits the "armpit" the tearing sound it makes. The amount of energy translated to the target is honestly way more than I anticipated. Love this channel!

[@necroseus]

You should check out Todd's Workshop here on youtube, he's made a video about this all about the Warbow vs Breastplate, and is working on another test for the near future! Definitely worth a watch!

[@tauceti8341]

Imagine just 7 or so of these hitting you let a lone your horse. That's going to feel like a precussionary blow even in your armor. Like a minor car accident wiplash, bruising. But then again the sheer adrenaline on horse back. It's mind boggling to think people actually had to live that reality for us to enjoy or romanticise today.

[@ericknudsen98]

Instructor: goes over gun specs and operation American viewers: yeah, yeah we know. Get to the tests already 😂 In all seriousness though, love this channel! Glad I discovered it.👍

[@Berzerk_Guy]

Im just blown away by their strict gun laws. It's just crazy to me since I can walk to a store and buy a gun and a magazine. Not just load one bullet at a time lmao

[@daveno8432]

I always do get a laugh out of video's that show poor saps from other countrys that don't allow firearms out at the range for the first time. If the time ever comes when people do need to pick up a weapon and defend themselves in those countries.. Those poor people are going to be shit out of luck. The entire point of the 2nd amendemnt is to give the common people the CHANCE to stand up and fight. Without said weapons they are nothing but one more body to put into the ovens of concentration camps.

[@escalator9734]

@@Berzerk_Guy " I can walk to a store and buy a gun and a magazine" didn't guys do that and just kill en masse ? don't you guys have lots of gun violence ? doesn't happen in strict gun laws country Don't you think it's a bit silly you can just walk in a store and buy a weapon with which you can kill at range plenty of people before being stopped ? Don't bother I know all the pro gun arguments and non arguments, I undertand the benefits and the ideology behind it and I support it to an extent. but don't you think the actual crazy thing is that you can just buy such a thing so easily ? "Without said weapons they are nothing but one more body to put into the ovens of concentration camps" That's why there is a things called an "army". If a country invades another one, it's not the random poor people who defend their country, its the poor people in the army. IF the army gets defeated, the people can still get their hands on scavenged weapons ( ever heard of "la Resistance" ? or every guerilla ever ?) And if it's the government you're trying to defend yourself from, well, good luck fighting the army with their trained personel with their epic weaponery/tanks/helis/aircrafts/drones/etc with you rad taktikal skeleton ar15

[@InnannasRainbow]

@@escalator9734 Our military would not attack its own people, however, the gov't can amass an army comprised of non Americans who are not bound by oath to protect the country and its people. Btw, I am American.

[@WS_00]

ww2 buff yep, they’re extremely rare. Here’s the stats to prove it: en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_United_States_in_2019 Scroll down to see the day by day info, and further down to see by month. It’s the 11th today so there may have been some change which may skew the info shown. I’m actually thinking it might be a full time job keeping this wiki page up to date.

[@TheRamsberg]

As an American, it's wild to see gun experts actually treating guns as the extremely deadly machines that they are. I'm so used to seeing the experts here talk about safety, but in reality still be haphazard.

[@UnleashedTraining101]

100% agree. Firearm safety is just as important as marksmanship principles. If not more so. In the Australian army we place a huge emphasis on safety and muzzle awareness.

[@bcaye]

Luke is a great contributor, so cheerful and enthusiastic.

[@Lionslycer]

I know I’m so late, but seeing someone shoot a 308 at a medieval breast plate(however excessive it seems) is completely necessary to establish a base line for the constant internet debate around the efficacy of middle age armor. Thank you for doing this.

[@sergeant_chris6209]

The guy using the bow is a real beast of a man. Makes you really think about the actual physical strength it takes to use a bow, especially compared to the fantasy stereotype of physically weaker characters using bows

[@TytonidaeIndustries]

i would LOVE to see him and Goe Gibbs shooting volleys together some time

[@lifeisabeach-by2gm]

I can't stand Joe Gibbs. His draw technique is really not that good. If he kept his draw weight to around 115lb and not 150lb or 170lb he would be much better to watch. This guys technique is incredible, its clearly a heavy bow but he draws it soo smoothly, and then takes a second or two to aim! If you watch Gibbs you can see he is starting to shake with the heavy bows, and he rushes each shot

[@kagami27]

They have an elite archer and a noble knight in their party. All they need is a wizard and a priest :D One of the coolest channels on youtube

[@isoperuna2]

Burning the priest and pissing on the bible

[@acvaticlifE]

You can't really compare medieval armor with modern ballistic armor. Statistically, Medieval armor was waay more effective it its time than modern armor is today. Medieval potentially blocked everything. Especially late 15th century armor, it was impervious to everything, due to its extremly advanced design, shape and material. It didn't just absorb some of the impact, like it's said in the video. Modern armor by contrast, does exactly that. It can save your life, but it's not a guaranteed. That doesn't make it less useful, god forbid. Anything that can save your life is priceless. Just pointing out the usefulness difference in these two types of armor. One that is designed to save a life in a very urgent situation, and one that made the combat of its time seem easy.

[@djinn666]

I think we just invented too many new ways of killing. Modern armor does nothing for anything more powerful than a gun. Not grenades, not land mines, not artillery, missiles, bombs, lasers, or nuclear weapons.

[@brandonfoley7519]

@@steamedcream7671 still hurts like a bitch Vests only stop it from going through you it still feels like your being hit by a sledge hammer

[@loganford9997]

So true

[@sand0decker]

We could make armour that is just as effective today, but it's a little expensive and weighs a lot. We do have the technology for power armour and prototypes do exist (I worked at an arms show and they were on display in 2011), but they cost too much for anything but specialist use. Generally, modern warfare for infantry is more just patrolling so an armoured vehicle gives them protection and the lack of being over armoured helps with public relations

[@darthplagueis13]

@@sand0decker I think he is talking about armour efficiency in relation to the weapons of the day. In the late middle ages they had armour that was practical, usable and could protect you from almost anything the battlefield throws at you. In our modern age the killing power of weaponry has just advanced so much that full body armour would be ludicrously heavy and impractival (also, I very much doubt that ceramic would behave in a way that would allow you to move properly) to the point where all we can do is put the armour on a vehicle which overall has less moving parts and can carry significantly more than the human body. The plate armour of then are armoured vehicles today and the fact that we do nowadays need a vehicle on top means that back then armour was a lot more efficient.

[@foolwise4703]

I would MUCH rather be a medieval knight being shot at with longbows than a modern soldier being shot at with anything stronger than an airgun, considering the respective fractions of my body being covered by armor.

[@TheDragiix3]

I'd rather be mowed down by an MG than face arrows hailing down lol. The MG will make sure you die, with the arrows it's a hippeti hoppeti of it might not kill you instantly, but get stuck or simply scratch you and you die from an infection. Bullets may seem worse but in most cases they are a clean shot, believe me, you do not want arrows flying at you with tips that have been drenched in feces before :P Yes, that was a thing. One cut and you are done for.

[@franciscodanconia3551]

I would rather be the modern soldier with an M16 than the medieval knight charging him with a lance.

[@TomahawkDemon]

That wasn’t a fair comparison though because modern foot soldiers usually use plate carriers that have plates that cover almost all of the front sides and rear.

[@Fe7Ace]

Modern soldiers have the advantage of using environmental cover liberally and as long as it suits them, which represents a huge change in warfare. I dare say if charging straight up to your enemy in the face of their fire was still a thing there would be higher standards in modern armor.

[@naiveseeker8346]

But it is a thing. That’s what tanks are best at! They are the modern cavalry. That said, charging straight at your enemy is definitely a last ditch or securing victory attempt.

[@skyborne80]

Wow it's crazy to think how much warfare has changed, but the relationship between armour and weaponry isn't much further off today as it was in medieval times. I must say also, that I really appreciated the safety discussion because it brings back memories for me. During a much too brief stint in the Canadian reserves 20 years ago, the Warrant Officer told us when we first got weapons to learn rifle drill, that if anyone points a rifle at anyone, their going to jail. Even though the rifles weren't loaded, that warning sticks in my mind to this day. It's just so right and it's good to see it's a practice that's apparently consistent the world over.

[@PhantomSavage]

A more accurate ballistic comparison: AR-15 = Longbow Bolt Action 7.62 = Crossbow .50 Cal = Handheld Ballista

[@napoleonbonerfarte6739]

@Abu Troll al cockroachistan agree

[@muhammadnursyahmi9440]

5.56x45mm = you want that person dead within 400m (possibly 600m if using 77gr ammo) 7.62x51mm = you want that person over 800m there dead. .338 Lapua = you want that person over 2 miles away dead. .50 BMG= you want that person over 1 miles way and every non-hardened things along the projectile's path, dead.

[@another3997]

@@muhammadnursyahmi9440 The longest confirmed sniper kill is at much lower distance than 2 miles. A bullet may travel that far, but it will be largely spent and highly unlikely to hit it's intended target.

[@jacktanner4948]

No.

[@lordofbanana6869]

11:42 He really asks like someone from the medieval times would. "So you got an other.. machine that looks quite different!"

[@G1NZOU]

"Please explain these magic boomsticks to me ."

[@joostdriesens3984]

That was a bit like 'I don't like weapons at all, this is too much for me'.. Wait a minute didn't I see you chop the top of a skull off from horseback in the other video just a moment ago?

[@Samhwain]

@@joostdriesens3984 It came across more, to me, as someone genuinely curious about a field they're unfamiliar with trying to be respectful/ find the respectful way to ask the question. He's made it pretty clear he doesn't know guns (or bows) well. By definition guns are a type of machine so it's a fair term to use.

[@joostdriesens3984]

@@Samhwain I think linguistically a better broader term for gun is weapon or device or even tool. The term 'machine' sounds a little bit off for describing a rifle (even a machine gun!). That bothered me a bit and made him sound overly respectful, like 'I have no idea what I'm talking about'. It's largely a matter of perception though and I think he's a great guy, just to be clear.

[@corbinamondo]

This series just gets better and better. I initially found this channel with the food videos(which were also amazing) and decided to watch everything! I’m starting to feel guilty that I’m watching it for free that’s how well done it is. I love the special guests you have in each episode. Thank you so much for this educational and fun channel.

[@ModernKnight]

Thanks for watching, don't feel guilty, we enjoy making them

[@ichifish]

I'd like to see the analysis of archers vs. horses. It seems to me that the main result of a arrow rain would be to cripple the horses, not the riders.

[@mangalores-x_x]

I would like to have a more in depth analysis of the limitations in a tactical sense and in deployment because the English used a curiously defensive set up and infantry based warfare as their war doctrine in field battles compared to most other continental powers. Also distances would be nice. Thing is, horses pumped full of adrenaline charging with a herd (in line with other knights) can be hard to kill. Even later there are reports of horses seeming unaffected by several rifle rounds and not reliably going down so while we would consider that animal torture. You don't need many falling horses to disrupt a charge, but on the flipside not every arrow will stop a war horse either. The knights will however be very mad at how much their expensive horses get ruined by archers and quite a few might still die after a while.

[@VitorRedes]

@@mangalores-x_x seems like the infantry was cheaper and easier to deploy, along with archers, obviuslly. Most of the great battles at the time English Armies found theirselves out numbered by A LOT too. The long bow and clever commanders turned it in their favor tho. I know my comment is not too relevant to your point, sorry about that.

[@MisdirectedSasha]

Horses were also often armoured, at least on the front. Flanking shots to the horse would probably have been more dangerous. Very similar to how modern infantry with anti-tank weapons engage modern tanks and AFVs.

[@Chief2Moon]

An unmounted guy in a suit of armor would be slow,quickly exhausted& at no great advantage against an agile enemy, I would think.

[@Smoshy16]

@@MisdirectedSasha For the most part though arrows would be fired with the aim of coming down as vertical as possible therefore negating armour at the front.

[@EqualKinks]

i love how professional he was when addressing and talking about the fire arms. not acting as if they are scary machines that work for the terminator.

[@gavinjenkins899]

But they are literally scary machines that do nothing but terminate things.

[@opibegoob7585]

Just binging your videos over the past few days. It’s rare I find a channel that has me so engaged, that I often don’t realize how long I’ve been watching. Superb job, as always!

[@youtubethrowaway9324]

2:00 no. The impact would not feel very strong. You can see the dummy barely moving. What's important is that the decent amount of force is applied on a very small area by a very hard material 4:50 modern armor, modern weapons etc are not necessarily "better at everything" just because they're modern or high tech . That's common misconception about technological progress : contemporary stuff is made to address contemporary problems... modern armor is adapted to modern weapons... Even if a warbow could easily pierce a kevlar vest, it would mean nothing since the guy wearing it would also sport a modern weapon an pluck you out 5 times from 20 to 100 yards before you even drew an arrow from the quib... example: kevlar vests that can withstand handgun munitions can be defeated by a knife. There are vests that are designed to be anti stabbing. Different mechanism, different force distributions in time etc

[@techmarine83]

Police wear Kevlar only armor (level 3A) with the exception of teams like S.W.A.T and its foreign equivalents. Soldiers wear level 3 which is steel plates hardened to withstand up to 7.62x39mm ball. Arrows of any kind will not pen that and neither will knives. Overall I agree with you. The arrow wouldn't move a 170lb man in plate at all, there just is not enough mass in that ..what 1 1/2lb arrow.

[@KoishiVibin]

@@techmarine83 This is also the thing: Police range from 2A-3A. from FMJ 9mm to three (or was it five?) hits of .44 Semi Wad Cutter. Some police will wear L3 ceramic hard armor, which is good for six hits of M80 7.62x51mm FMJ. Military operatives wear much heavier ceramic plate, exceeding L4 in all cases today, from Russian GRANIT to US ESAPI REV G. 7.62x39mm FMJ isn't honestly that hard to defeat. The round is mediocre already, and it's slow enough that 7.62x39mm MSC can often be defeated against milspec soft armor helmets.

[@glitterbrains69]

It's so funny to see Jason just totally bewildered by those rifles and whatnot, sort of like a Knight that just came forward in time, and he just stands there with a smile and tries to understand the silly future man's gun jargon. Great video

[@TytonidaeIndustries]

its even funnier when you know that, he is actually REALLY knowledgable about firearms, and has made video games like American Sniper

[@christianh4723]

Watching episodes like this comparing modern and medieval armor and weapons sparked an idea for me: although it is likely completely undocumented, a video discussing the psychological aspects of combat would be very interesting. PTSD, while it has only been identified in the last half-century or so, surely affected combatants on a hand-to-hand, arguably more brutal battlefield.

[@andyv4585]

actually modern battle is often far more brutal. i'm sure PTSD has always existed but there's a reason it has only been recently identified.

[@christianh4723]

@@andyv4585 Not sure if I agree, but it's hard to measure in any meaningful way. I would think that the trauma of seeing somebody's skull bashed in by a mace (or being the one who did it) is pretty equal to seeing somebody die of gunshots or shrapnel...

[@brandonletzko2472]

Thank you for spending the time, effort, and resources to do these videos. As an ex-military American artilleryman, I do find the dramatic music accompaniment to mere rifle firing quite amusing. 🙂

[@ModernKnight]

For most Brits shooting a rifle is s big thing lol.

[@brianfuller7691]

Unleash the archers. This is a great channel. My cousin is an American cop and was shot last year. Her duty vest did it's job and stopped two 9mm rounds. She was bruised seriously and felt as if kicked by a horse but lived.

[@lorib1696]

I knew Jason must be a gun guy. You can't make a game as good as Sniper Elite without enjoying guns. Well done.

[@fauseth]

Luke seems like a pretty good dude. Thank you so much for your channel.

[@slappomatthew]

I just find it interesting that the single shot AR15 had a $$$$ scope on it and the bolt action "sniper" rifle had a $100 china scope on it.

[@joshbashaw5373]

Maybe Barska makes some awesome stuff in the UK only xD

[@benm5913]

@First Last L118A1.

[@pete5777]

Maybe they were consoling the AR for the abomination they turned it into.

[@zoiders]

It is an AICS stock but that's a Ruger or Savage action so its not a L118A1 its a look alike for film or TV use.

[@eazy2195]

@First Last You never Rushed B I see, cyka blyat

[@Gainn]

About 20 years ago we found 3 arrowheads near Winchester. Two of them were very corroded but were most likely bodkins, but one had a squared end with 4 raised points (similar to some war hammers) that seemed like it was more intended to deal concussive damage against hardened targets.

[@Mister_Immersion]

I love the voice of that archer in the beginning! It truly is stunning :O

[@lineardielectric]

seeing those arrows pinging off that armour gave me the shivers. Reminds me of getting hit on the helmet playing cricket, but all over the body and with more power. Must have been terrifying

[@PalleRasmussen]

At Agincourt Marshal Boucicault led the charge and went through the arrowstorm unscathed to the English line. Good armour works.

[@bobbyz9052]

Apparently near the end of the 100 year war, knights would just face down and scrunch up a bit, and the longbows couldn't penetrate their armor.

[@duanehavenga2253]

@starshipeleven I'm curious as to that at well. The armour test done by Tods Workshop confirmed this with similar materials. However I'd be curious as to the exact specs for this equally cool video.

[@j673-e3n]

Which is just one of the reasons why crossbows started to replace longbows.

[@SetuwoKecik]

@@j673-e3n crossbows were at the same era with longbows actually (invented earlier, even), and less effective in terms of punching power. Except the fact that the users were far easier to be trained.

[@boromirofmiddleearth557]

Or he didn't get hit by any arrows at all. Chances are against that. More than likely he was moving ahead of the wave if arrows .

[@Zemnmez]

shooting a mediaeval bow with intro: 5 minutes shooting a gun: 10 mins in and theyre still talking about the gun

[@KoishiVibin]

It's the UK.

[@Zemnmez]

Norian Arijuna ?

[@KoishiVibin]

@@Zemnmez This has many in the UK audience, who are unlikely to be well informed about firearms. While a bow is simple enough, a rifle may be relatively unknown.

[@dothedewinme]

You’re content is much much better, more interesting, and more engaging than most shows/docs about this same subject. When does history or discovery channel give you your own show? You are so knowledgeable you’d have enough to draw on for multiple seasons

[@Barrzy1994]

Watching Luke shoot a bow is extremely satisfying. He's definitely a pro.

[@ViolentKisses87]

I would have been more interested to see a modern compound bow vs medieval armor.

[@DarktroopX]

In my opinion the biggest difference is in the arrows used. Modern carbon fiber arrow with small sharp tip flies faster, tends to turn less and penetrates very well. Ive seen a video where a guy was shooting heavy mediaval windlass crossbow with draw weight over 1200pounds and comparing it to modern hunting crossbow with +- 200 pounds. The modern crossbow with carbon fiber bolt fully penetrated the targed used, while the old bulky bolt of the heavy crossbow struggled.

[@appa609]

Carbon shafts break pretty easy against hard targets.

[@brianmenz1760]

then it wouldn't be history.

[@Daylon91]

That's not what the video was about. There are lots of other videos

[@spectre9065]

The heaviest longbows could outperform the fastest modern compound bows in terms of kinetic energy. However, modern arrows are a lot thinner in diameter which enhances penetration and are made of stronger materials. I'm not sure if carbon fiber shafts are more durable than wooden ones, but FMJ shafts definitely are. A modern crossbow will outperform any medieval crossbow short of a ballista. Steel prods are very inefficient at transferring kinetic energy to the bolt, so even a 1200 lb arbalest will be inferior to a 200 lb compound crossbow in penetration. That's not even factoring in the latter's superior range, accuracy, and rate of shot (15 bolts per minute vs 2 bolts per minute for the arbalest).

[@mengosaurus]

i can't wait to see in the future. there's gonna be video about this but instead "modern gun shoot the armor enegy core vs plasma buster gun shoot the modern ceramic plate armor"

[@Ryan-hn1it]

indoors because of Coronvirus? here: watch someone shoot an arrow at a Kevlar vest.

[@citricdemon]

I really like Jason's enthusiasm in all of his videos. I share his joy!

[@uss_liberty_incident]

I seriously appreciate the educational bits about the chamber flag and magwell lock at 9:50. I'm betting most non-American viewers wouldn't know that.

[@corwin32]

I am impressed AS HELL that the long bow did as much as it did!

[@brianfuller7691]

Armor still works. In 2019, my cousin took 2 9mm rounds in the chest serving a warrant. The vest saved her life.

[@GreatNinjaman]

Tbf 9x19 isn't the most effective round to hit kevlar with anyway. That said, thank God for ballistic vests.

[@n3v3rforgott3n9]

exactly kevlar is rated to stop pistol rounds mostly while plates are there to stop rifle rounds

[@masterdisaster7013]

Cool video, but would be more interesting if you used medieval/renaissance firearms, which actually met metal armor on the battlefield. Like matchlock rifles or wheel lock rifles.

[@jasonkingsley2762]

the point was to look at the longbow and contrast it with a modern gun, but I agree, more period firearms would be nice to feature...

[@projectilequestion]

I know there were some rifles back then, but it is more accurate to say matchlock muskets, and wheel lock muskets.

[@artemisfowl52]

That takes funding and persuasion to get collection holders to risk their expensive antiques for a fairly uncredited contribution. A relatively small channel like this doesn't have the public clout or reputation to warrant museums to take that risk.

[@Riceball01]

@@artemisfowl52 You don't need antiques, there are plenty of reproductions of black powder weapons from various eras out there. All you would need to do is find a reenactment group that reenact the appropriate period that has repro guns.

[@PastaSauce580]

Maybe interesting to see but similar results I imagine. There's a reason the armor disappeared soon after even the period firearms came on the field. It just wasn't effective against them.

[@markarato8034]

The sound of those arrows flying is pure awesomeness! Best channel ever!

[@fredmuhly]

Dude does a great job with interviewing the experts. Asks the right questions and then lets the expert do the talking.

[@gregkral4467]

I appreciate that they are using real riveted maille.

[@EastEndBen]

this made me remember reading about how archers were treated very badly if they were captured around the Hundred Years war-loss of a thumb or the two first fingers as punishment and to prevent them being able to resume fighting later being common. Knights must have hated skilled archers; they completely took away the advantage of mounted troops

[@JohnSmith-kt2xb]

err no they were just dispatched and dumped in a hole.

[@natmorse-noland9133]

Came for the history lesson; stayed for the lesson on the difference between US and UK gun laws/customs.

[@pantoastado1264]

UK cringe mandates, I know! Males me proud to be in the USA!

[@NotYou123]

Fun fact: 223 remington and 556 NATO, are two different ammunition types. 556 NATO is higher pressure and therefore might destroy a 223 rifle. Love everything you do ❤

[@Matt-g1979]

It's great to see people not letting old skills die, great video 👍

[@thelonecabbage7834]

I can't imagine the feeling of being hit with an arrow, feeling it penetrate the armor, and waiting to see if you feel an immense amount of pain.

[@KageRyuu6]

Kevlar is not at all designed to slow down rifle rounds, it's primary job is to stop shrapnel from a grenade or distant artillery shell, and as a bonus can stop most military pistol rounds, because slowing down a rifle round can do more harm than good as the projectile could remain in one's body. Which is why the military uses much larger ceramic plates to cover the entire torso, or at least the majority of it from collar to abdomen, this however is clearly a police vest with a ceramic heart plate.

[@DakotaMilesO]

Matthew Chappell quite unfortunate, it seems to be barely half the size of American ceramic plates

[@r188ops8]

Hi mate, nope not plod issue, def mil issue. I was issued this in the 90's , it was standard issue for Iraq too before the 'bean counters' in the MOD were forced to spend some money on better protection for the bods on the ground.

[@Lappmogel]

2:30 I doubt that the archers would do much at all against a knight in plate. Ofc they will brake up the cavalry charge because horses are large targets and being constantly hammered by arrows when you're in your tin can would probably be disorienting and tiring. But unless you get a shot through a weak point in the armor, the visor or get shot in the same place twice i don't think it will do anything at all. I've seen lots of videos with bows and crossbows being shot at all plate and the penetration is never anything special and the arrows/bolts that go through don't make it especially far anyway, certainly not fat enough to stop a man dead. I think it went something like this for the french knights. Charge > gets your horse killed > continue on foot > get constantly hammered by arrows > forced to keep eyes down so you aren't shot through your visor > get a mallet in your head.

[@tussalgull5986]

Lappmogel we need to see ate tested on a moving target to be sure since it would multiply the damage taken but I have no idea how fast a full gallop for cavalry is

[@mikelotti5064]

Also falling from your horse can lead to serious injuries

[@zoiders]

Assuming it hit the knight and not the horse, then you are riding a very large working hunter having a freak out because its got an arrow in it.

[@jamesdavidson7604]

Awesome episode. Really enjoyed the comparison and in depth review of our History and to see how far we have come.

[@ModernKnight]

Glad you enjoyed it!

[@makom2405]

Another note about kevlar, most kevlar is used on military vests to slow down fragmentation, spawl, and/or small caliber threats. In the same way most military helmets don't stop bullets, most of the vest doesn't either. It's typically there to protect the soldier from other dangerous elements they might face.

[@hundwyn7530]

The powers that be would divorce us from our history and from any connection to our forebears, this is what the History Channels of the world should be. This is good and fun work, has me wanting to go dust off my own bow.

[@Laguero]

Just found this channel today. I've watched several of these and subscribed. Great content!

[@aengberg1]

Great channel, thank you - the credits show how much effort goes into each video and the result is fantastic. One of the very few channels to make me click the Alert button!

[@ModernKnight]

Thank you very much!

[@b.elzebub9252]

2:35 He makes a very good point there. The forward motion of the knight on horseback would make a difference in terms of the amount of force in the impact. So far I have only ever seen tests done on stationary targets. It would be interesting to see how much forward movement and mass would change the equation.

[@woodrobin]

Late medieval armors around the time guns started to arrive on the battlefield had very thick breastplates and very sharp angles (like the prow of a ship) and could deflect rounds if the steel was of very high quality and workmanship. That's where the term "bulletproof" originated: with smiths test-firing rounds at breastplates and placing their personal "proof mark" next to the place the bullet hit. Essentially they were saying "I am the smith X, this is my mark proving that I have fired a bullet at this breastplate which did not penetrate it, and I stake my reputation on this by placing my identification hereupon".

[@charlesballiet7074]

plate is arrow proof, in fact quality armor had proof marks from the armorer, usually using a 320 lb crossbow shot at point blank

[@vanivanov9571]

@vin 950 Depends on the steel. Mild steel? That is worse than most medieval steels, for protection. It will certainly be true, as there are proof marks from muskets and the like later on.

[@bloodysmurf]

Charles Balliet Not if you roll a natural 20.

[@wafflingmean4477]

@vin 950 Yeah I reckon an armourer would only do that early on, in order to prove the quality of their craftsmanship. If you're going to damage every piece of armour you make then that's just counter productive. You are slightly lowering the chances of the buyer's survival and also making the armour look less fashionable, a concern among wealthier fighters. I reckon armourers would have some old breastplate lying around full of dents that they'd bring out every time they needed to prove their skill for a new buyer.

[@prd6617]

@vin 950 a bit of note tho, most of (mass produce) modern reproduction armor are not hardened steel. meaning it look and weight the same like medieval armor but it not have the same hardness as the real one, because as a reproduction most of it use will only be a "costume" for reenactment purpose and it will be a lot cheaper to make and sell.

[@kercchan3307]

that grade of armor was for wealthy/ high status people. the other people probably got the off the rack stuff that was made as cheap as possible and ordered in thousands of sets

[@GamelessOne]

You should have tested the warbow directly on the riveted mail and also on some gambeson. That would have been interesting! But very interesting to see a 140lbs warbow archer hit some fairly realistic armor. Still wouldn't have put more than a dent in the best, most expensive steel plate armor, far as I understand. But it's interesting to see testing on armor, similar to what might have been worn outside the noble elite, in the later period. I was also curious to see how the mail looked after the rifle rounds. Too bad it wasn't shown. Mail served no purpose at all in the tests, it was just there, seemed kind of a wasted opportunity.

[@azcoueshntr]

There is a reason the bow has been in use for 60,000 years.

[@fsdds1488]

@Please Complete All Fields bows are no less effective than early firearm, the latter were used for the moral shock it brings, but musket in Neapoleon era could effectively outperform bows while having similar range and accuracy(while sacrificing rof, but thats not a big issue)

[@Tysto]

Archer: let's do this. Gun guy: let's talk about my guns for 10 minutes.

[@JeffOfTheMountains]

I'm glad I came across this video. I'm a beginning archer and am looking into how to properly use a bow and arrows. Thanks for publishing these videos.

[@ModernKnight]

Glad it was helpful!

[@JeffOfTheMountains]

@@ModernKnight Aye, they definitely are.

[@hubimagine8521]

realy interesting but I'm curious to know what kind of steel and which thikness the breastplate is made of

[@ButlerianG-Haddinun]

it's made of rusty metal that survived the Paradise, CA fires

[@AC-gu9ks]

If it was made out of heat treated high carbon steel the bows would have only nicked the breast plate

[@2bingtim]

Indeed, 3-4mm tempered steel will hold up far better than 16 or 18 guage(1.2-1.4mm) mild steel, which much cheaper modern reproductions are made of.

[@heheWoWrules12]

Didn't even know we had proper ranges like that in England, interesting

[@Dextrius]

There are a few tbf. I have practiced with some bows myself, and crossbows. Crossbows are easier ofc, but bows feel stronger (mainly due to the draw and strength).

[@nerofoxkrell]

Yeah but it's just not the same as going to a gun range in America because UK gun laws are a joke and don't let you have anything fun they even neuter your rifles by making you have to load every round after you shoot

[@TJ4774]

@@nerofoxkrell it's quite the shame now isn't it? I've heard they're trying to ban kitchen knives and even ID checking people to buy plastic utensils in some places as the gun laws did nothing to prevent gun crime and murders. It actually exasperated the problem because now the average citizen has lost the ability to defend themselves

[@nerofoxkrell]

it kind of makes me wish that Trump would let America lead to conquest of the United kingdom and make them a state just to save its citizens from their incompetent Parliament

[@TJ4774]

@@nerofoxkrell idk if I'd go that far with it but I do think they need to take their land back. Governments are supposed to be for the people by the people.

[@duketheking]

11:40 he is very wrong.. the 223 Remington is very similar to the 556 nato. There are differences.. that comes with consequences if you are not aware. For one is that a 556 is a more HOTTER round loaded with different load of powder. The 556 travels faster and has a greater chamber pressure and the neck of the cartridge is slightly different in spec. For that if you load a 556 into a civilian 223 chambered rifle (example mini 14) you can cause major damage to your barrel of Rifle. But if you have a 556 chambered rifle you can use both 556 and 223.. These days there are special 223 barrels made for the AR platforms called 223 Wilde barrels that has the advantages of shooting the more accurate 223 and also can shoot 556 safely. Thanks

[@KageRyuu6]

I'm pretty certain the vast majority of AR's are made to fire 5.56 given it's prevalence as mil surplus and the potential liability of older .223 barrels exploding in someone's face might have in the anti-gun media.

[@ericohara2582]

Having always been fascinated in arms and armour, as well as strategy and tactics of this period, I tried both fencing and field archery. I have to say that I found something quite shocking within myself, for the first few moments of receiving hits in the torso by a foil and on my first beginners use of a longbow, I really experienced the strangest of "primal" feeling of fear and shock which is near impossible to describe. It seemed to give a massive increase of alertness and awareness, but not the typical adrenalin aching legs of fight or flight! A great history lesson that I will never forget. My main hobby at the time was motocross, here I would say that I perhaps experienced a similar feeling on the start line with 40 other bikes. On these occasions the higher awareness seemed to take another step, where sometimes I could "feel" and run (in my minds eye) the first few moments of the start and into the first corner as if I was watching it in my head.. all before the race had even started? This isn't to be confused with deliberately planning my start, but it was a spontaneous inner vision.. The greater this Deja Vu the better the real start usually turned out?! I am sure others must have experienced these feelings?

[@jacobwalsh1888]

Fencing is a modern sport that bears little resemblance to actual sword fighting.

[@whathappenedwas7083]

Underrated, should be a viral sensation.

[@ModernKnight]

lol, thanks

[@livonian]

Plenty of steel breastplates in museums with dents from musket balls in them, including as recent as Napoleonic era cuirassier breastplates. So metal armor was quite effective against firearms pretty much up to the invention of modern cartridge ammo.

[@jasonkingsley2762]

depends on how those proof marks were made, as there are records of them being faked or created with a low charge of powder, but then this is about medieval stuff, not Tudor or beyond.

[@gravygraves5112]

Probably still not effective against stuff like the minie ball since that type of round traveled faster and was not a round shot like the shot used in the Napoleonic era.

[@vanivanov9571]

@@jasonkingsley2762 Yes, this has been tested with reproductions in a couple of recent documentaries. Ancient Discoveries Tank Tech: /watch?v=G_W62KvcB7Q At 23:00 minutes in. Secrets of the Shining Knight: /watch?v=8ptV0h0Kwjc At 39:00 minutes in.

[@SCComega]

​@@jasonkingsley2762 Yeah, I mean we have modern steel plate armor today to deal with rifle rounds with AR500 steel being a rather common level III insert material. The main thing to remember is it's largely about how much material is there to stop a bullet - thick enough steel, even mild steel, will stop a bullet of up to a certain amount of energy, and musketballs only had penetrative power similar to a more modern pistol. So when muskets started appearing in greater numbers, thicker breastplates were developed to deal with it, but with the thickness came greater weight and cost, eventually larger powder loads ended up limiting armor to just the chest, and to those who could afford it, with a single breastplate costing nearly as much as a full suit of field plate. This led to a decline in it's use in the following centuries. More modernly, following industrialization and the ability to mass produce and shape steel, we saw in WW1, there was the british Dayfield and German sappenpanzer steel breastplates, meant to stop pistol and shotgun fire in trench warfare, and did so to effect. And in World War 2, the soviets used the Stalnoi Nagrudnik armor, most notably in number at Stallingrad, and proved effective versus pistol and SMG fire.

[@Sphere723]

@@gravygraves5112 Minie-balls were noticeably slower than Napoleonic era rounds. If you wanted to engage the rifling you could not load rounds as hot as with a smooth bore.

[@laurenceperkins7468]

I worked the math out a few years ago, and assuming the longbow numbers I had were correct the energy of a longbow arrow would be about the same as a .22 magnum. Which would make the mediaeval armor you were testing rate about a 1A to a 1 on the modern armor scale. Might stop some handgun bullets, not much use against anything larger. Later periods, of course used thicker, harder steel and might well get up to a 2. Modern class 3 and 4 armor basically requires modern alloys and/or composites, but isn't actually that much heavier than the mediaeval stuff.

[@fernando47180]

Your calculations may be misleading. Even if the energy between both projectiles is comparable, penetration capability depends greatly on the point of impact and the velocity of the projectile. Any bullet with the same energy of an arrow will have far greater penetration potential than the arrow itself.

[@laurenceperkins7468]

@@fernando47180 Also cross-section and relative hardness. For example, a class 3A kevlar vest will stop any handgun in common usage, but that arrow would go right through it. NIJ class 1 armor will only stop things like .22LR with soft lead bullets and .32 caliber snubby pocket pistols shooting wadcutters or hollow points. Nobody even bothers to make it any more. This plate seems like it might be about on that level. Not technically quite useless, but also probably not worth the weight to wear since all but the weakest pistols would penetrate it easily. For that matter, the heavy crossbows of later periods would likely give it some trouble as well.

[@frauleinhohenzollern]

I would've liked to see how far away you were standing from the chest plate. I'd also like to see this test with the 1,000 lb crossbow you showed us. It's be fun to watch you try and hit the breast plate from certain distances and see how effective the bolts were at different ranges.

[@33TimberWolf]

I've been shooting modern bows my entire life (recurve, longbow, compound) and usually use instinctive aim (no sights). Recently had the pleasure of trying a traditional "English longbow" with a 70lb draw weight.... It beat me up. Much respect to those who could fire such a weapon and even more respect if it was used to down a charging French knight or Saracen. The sheer power and strength that it requires is amazing. Being able to operate it accurately, during combat would have been a sight to behold.

[@michaelb1761]

Actually in the previous video where they first talked about the longbow, a warbow was said to have a draw of 120 lbs to 160 lbs. I believe they were using a 140 lb draw bow in this video, but it may have been a 120 lb draw warbow. Jason used a 75 or 80 lb draw bow in that earlier video.

[@1Greenlemming]

Such a genuine and wholesome channel

[@NoBSSurvival]

The knight in armour declined on the battle field long before guns became common on the battle field. AND armour was still used effectively against black powder guns for a long time. There were breastplates able to protect against muskets as late as Napoleon.

[@GrammarPaladin]

But why was there a huge decline if it protected so well?

[@grishy8203]

@@GrammarPaladin Pikes were a pretty big reason, as well as well-drilled infantry becoming more regular (they didn't break when the cavalry charged)

[@NoBSSurvival]

@GrammarNazi The knight declined as tactics changed to favour large professional armies of infantry with polearms.

[@mangalores-x_x]

@@GrammarPaladin The thing is that the longbow was used by the English in defensive battles in prepared positions. While the rest of Europe knew about the longbow (aka warbow type self bow, various bow staves were imported from other places in Europe by the English) they never adopted the longbow in such a prominent fashion as the English which indicates that it was effective (as they used it to some degree), but either did not gel with their war doctrine or was not considered superior to other weapons (which were as or more prominent in their arsenals) One also has to consider that the prime tactic trained by knights with their chilvarious predjudices was two horses and two knights in full armor at full speed hitting each other with spiked lances. The kinetic impact energy of that is superior to any bow or crossbow and equivalent to a car crash. Their armor protected them decently against that event and their tournament etc. trained them for that case more regularly. I would guess, that without a defensive position like the English preferred the use of any missile troops in a field battle rapidly diminishes and in sieges, where rate of fire is irrelevant, crossbows were more convenient (you could snipe from cover at your leisure) so the essential part for the English was to have a martial yeoman class (soon enough verterans and well disciplines) to support their men at arms in numbers, not necessarily that they used longbows. As said by Grishy, the advent of organized infantry formations backed by artillery was what caused the decline of cavalry in the rest of Europe as they could not hope to break the enemy lines with an initial shock charge, but had to wait for a more opportune moment when the infantry lines were engaged. The Swiss and Flemish militias starting to do a real number on knightly forces was even more shocking than what the English did.

[@PastaSauce580]

@@mangalores-x_x I think it was mostly the amount of time it took to master. The English were training their whole lives using these bows and some people never do master it. Meanwhile, a crossbowman could be trained up in a matter of days or weeks and be ready for the field. The crossbow was slower, had less range, and arguably less penetration but pretty much anyone could be handed one and be reasonably effective.

[@robertrobertson8575]

That armor looked as substantial as a rusted cookie tin.

[@ButlerianG-Haddinun]

b-b-b-but the chain links were serious =)

[@kercchan3307]

@@ButlerianG-Haddinun ya, i saw the riveted chainmail

[@KoishiVibin]

Not even. I've had cookie tins, and I've tested hand weapons against them. Improvised, but still. I'd bet on five of them stacked up stopping an arrow.

[@alexanderflack566]

@@KoishiVibin That depends on the bow. A warbow of the draw weight shown here? No way do those tins stand a chance. Take a look at this: kzbin.info/www/bejne/eoGnm2ucrdyfkNE That went right through a 55 gallon steel drum, front and back, and was still moving pretty fast. The ridiculous part is the tip it was using; instead of a sharp tip that's good at penetration, they were using one of these: www.3riversarchery.com/the-hammer-screw-in-small-game-blunts.html Blunt points blowing right through between 1.8 mm and 3 mm total thickness of steel is a lot more impressive than your five tins. That's more like 1 or 2 mm, and divided into thinner pieces which will make it easier to penetrate.

[@schiz0phren1c]

Loving the video's but that breastplate would be "officially" tossed on the pile to be re-cast as it would no longer pass "Proof" due to being penetrated, you can't just whack a bit of extra plate over the holes and re-use it, Armour had crumple zones same as modern cars, and the science of Proofing armour and its various ways to shrug off blows from all types of weapons is a fascinating subject in itself.

[@Oleffo]

Depends on how wealthy you were :D ... 1 year

[@Arelias95]

High production quality, like always. Keep up the good work.

[@TSmith-yy3cc]

Fantastic video as usual. The guests were great as well!

[@MontyCantsin5]

Interesting to compare this with the experiment conducted recently by Tod's Workshop. It would've been good to have more info with regard to the distance the bow was being used at against the breastplate, as well as the thickness of the armour being used. The conclusion reached at 3:00 mins into this video (the arrows could easily be shot back at the enemy after striking armour) seems extremely dubious given that every arrow in the Tod's Workshop video shattered with heads flying off and the iron being badly deformed. The only conclusion that I can come to is that this armour was of a poorer quality, hence the resultant holes and lack of damage to the arrows.

[@ModernKnight]

Not all armour in the period was the same. We tested a low to mid quality one of the type more common on the battlefield. Tod, who I know well, tested a top of the range one.

[@MontyCantsin5]

@@ModernKnight: Very useful to know that the armours used in each test differ in terms of quality. Thanks.

[@worldtraveler930]

Two points: First point, the Knight does still exist, instead of on a horse and armor he's in a tank and brings his Squires with him as part of the crew. Second point is a question, what is at what distance from the armour are the rifles being fired from?

[@johnvictorengland7703]

Incorrect. The European nobility who came from the families that used to be knights mostly went into the Air Force. That is actually where the tradition of chivalry within the air force comes from. The European air forces in WW1 often refused to let enemy pilots be encamped with the army peasants - they had their own POW camps for pilots that were taken care of by the air force.

[@favorius]

knight is not a military identification but social identification. cavalry whether from nobility or commoners became tanks.

[@JulianFuller001]

At the start of the video, it shows "100m" as the nominal distance of the range.

[@andrewince8824]

110 yards.

[@Tannhauser62]

It's believed that a war bow could stop a charging snooker player, or up to four fully-grown Hercule Poirots.

[@ctakitimu]

But it had trouble when facing a family of arrogant squirrels

[@theangrycheeto]

@@ctakitimu I'd reckon considerably less so than when faced with a flock of vociferously clamorous geese.

[@StellaJorgensson]

Excellent and informative video...from experience I know that a 5.56 round on ceramic stings a little, BUT a 7.62 round on ceramic plate bloody well hurt and causes blunt force trauma. Thank you for sharing this video and information. Stay well, stay safe....Stella (eastern UK Fenlands)

[@kevinmaiuri6418]

I'm glad you did a comparison with medieval and modern weaponry. I always suspected that medieval armor would be no match against a bullet, but was never completely sure. I play a lot of video games, some of which have your character in-game using modern guns against enemies clad in full plate armor (Rise of the Tomb Raider). Now I know that games aren't real, they are meant for entertainment, and not accuracy. This is definitely evidenced by the fact that in the game, modern 5.56 rounds, 9mm rounds, tactical shotgun shells (probably 12 gauge), and even .50 caliber ACP pistol rounds just bounce off the medieval plate armor with a sharp "ping!". Heck it takes half a magazine or even a full magazine of ammo just to put one enemy down. The strange thing though is that it takes one shot from a bolt-action rifle to put an enemy down in-game and will even make them do a kinda strange back-flip type of motion as they fall. I'm glad you debunked that scenario in this video.

[@Peabush]

"The sheer impact would knock you back" Newton dissagrees

[@MeTurtlesLike]

Was going to comment this. Basic physics y'all

[@MarkALong64]

A smoothbore musket against the 1400s armour would be a more useful comparison.

[@eddyguizonde401]

for having shot both muskets and 308 rifles, i think the musket would do even more damage. 308 kicks like a mule and hits like a freight train, but muskets loaded for war kick even harder with a heavier projectile. there's a reason armor was abandonned in the 18th century: your plate cuirass only makes your corpse weigh more.

[@prankmonkeyxs650]

I think skall has a video doing this with various helmets

[@mrsteve4569]

I get the discussion was arrow vs armor, but a comment on the damage at the armpit would have been nice. It seems this would have been more realistic damage during the time period.

[@bernardotorres4659]

That is so cool. So a longbow arrow would indeed stop a charging knight at 100 mts , not by penetrating the plate armor but by the sheer stunning power of the blow . That is very impressive ! Yes .

[@meihem76]

Something that may be worth considering in interpreting this test is how much more homogeneous modern steel is. The difference in grain structure between modern crucible steel and historic hand made steels is dramatic. Whilst hits like this may cause nice little holes in modern steel plate, it may have had more catastrophic penetration on steel with irregular grain structures and impurities.

[@ModernKnight]

Good point. Thicknesses could vary a lot too on the originals, so you might just get hit on an unlucky part.

[@Cr4ckstaR]

Funny when you know he's explaining that stuff to the man who is CEO of the Studio that produced the Sniper Elite Series :D You're welcome for the Mindblow

[@brandonw6340]

It would be cool if you could replicate this arrow test with a target moving the same speed of a horse and test the piercing power of the arrow vs armor moving into the arrow as it would be in combat

[@DiegoVillaOntiveros]

I love the fact that Jason actualy questions and uses language like a medieval time traveler would xD (somehow)

[@edwhatshisname3562]

Actually the term "bullet proof" comes from a period when blacksmiths built breastplates that were designed to stop rounds fired from black powder guns. They would make the breastplates out of layers of steel riveted together around the edges of the armor, they would sometimes then take out a pistol and shoot the breast plate which would leave a dent which became known as a bullet proof, which proved that the armor could withstand hits from a black powder gun. Eventually though guns won that contest and for a very long time troops stopped wearing armor on the battlefield all together because it was fairly heavy and it served no real purpose anymore (later on though steel plated flack jackets and steel helmets started to appear to protect against shrapnel).

[@benjaminbrewer2569]

Imagine being a knight who survives a charging archers. The pause before the charge, fear and excitement build. Then fast galloping friends falling a few arrows skipping of your armor because you are lucky. next to you both horse and riders are being hit and falling. Takes a special kind of courage.