Info Favorites Register Log in
myArmoury.com Discussion Forums

Forum index Memberlist Usergroups Spotlight Topics Search
Forum Index > Historical Arms Talk > Modern butted maille or historical rivited maille? Reply to topic
This is a standard topic Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next 
Author Message
Jojo Zerach





Joined: 26 Dec 2009

Posts: 288

PostPosted: Sun 06 Jun, 2010 8:03 am    Post subject: Modern butted maille or historical rivited maille?         Reply with quote

Do you think butted maille made of modern mild steel or historical wrought iron rivited maille is stronger?
I'm just curious since I found out Japanese maille was generally made of steel, and therefore usually butted, not rivited.
Or am I over-estimating the differance between mild steel and iron?
View user's profile Send private message
Bartek Strojek




Location: Poland
Joined: 05 Aug 2008
Likes: 23 pages

Posts: 449

PostPosted: Sun 06 Jun, 2010 8:09 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Most of butted mails are almost completely useless, blunt spears and stuff can penetrate it, it would be total waste of material in "period".

As for material, I read, here (myArmoury) that wrought iron is actually very good material for mail, it absorbs punishment well with deformations and stuff, instead of breaking at some point of links. Mild steel doesn't fare so well.

Anyway, probably many people'll start heated discussion over it very soon. Wink
View user's profile Send private message
Eric S




Location: new orleans
Joined: 22 Nov 2009
Reading list: 8 books

Posts: 801

PostPosted: Sun 06 Jun, 2010 10:26 am    Post subject: Re: Modern butted maille or historical rivited maille?         Reply with quote

Jojo Zerach wrote:
Do you think butted maille made of modern mild steel or historical wrought iron rivited maille is stronger?
I'm just curious since I found out Japanese maille was generally made of steel, and therefore usually butted, not rivited.
Or am I over-estimating the differance between mild steel and iron?
Were did you see that Japanese mail was made from steel?
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Eric S




Location: new orleans
Joined: 22 Nov 2009
Reading list: 8 books

Posts: 801

PostPosted: Sun 06 Jun, 2010 10:31 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Bartek Strojek wrote:
Most of butted mails are almost completely useless, blunt spears and stuff can penetrate it, it would be total waste of material in "period".

As for material, I read, here (myArmoury) that wrought iron is actually very good material for mail, it absorbs punishment well with deformations and stuff, instead of breaking at some point of links. Mild steel doesn't fare so well.

Anyway, probably many people'll start heated discussion over it very soon. Wink
The Japanese made and used many different kinds of chain armor for several hundred years...all of it being butted or having butted connection links...so I guess they were just stupid and used "completely useless" armor? Were do you get your information on this subject?
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Jojo Zerach





Joined: 26 Dec 2009

Posts: 288

PostPosted: Sun 06 Jun, 2010 10:50 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

In demos of arrows/weapons they always seem to use butted maile, and it never seems to do much good. I think historical maile would have had to have been stronger for it to be so popular, and to justify making such a time-consuming armour. I read the "Chainmaile unchained" feature on here, it was interesting.

I had heard on one website that Japanese maile was made of "tempered wire", though he didn't cite a source, this is just one of those topics where there is virtually no information online. I'm poorly educated as far as Japanese armour goes.
View user's profile Send private message
George E




Location: MA, USA
Joined: 03 Jan 2010

Posts: 6

PostPosted: Sun 06 Jun, 2010 11:35 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Jojo Zerach wrote:
In demos of arrows/weapons they always seem to use butted maile, and it never seems to do much good. I think historical maile would have had to have been stronger for it to be so popular, and to justify making such a time-consuming armour. I read the "Chainmaile unchained" feature on here, it was interesting.

I had heard on one website that Japanese maile was made of "tempered wire", though he didn't cite a source, this is just one of those topics where there is virtually no information online. I'm poorly educated as far as Japanese armour goes.


I find that most demos are VERY badly made...

usually, they consist of a small square piece of chain mail against a wooden target and then procede to bash it...

well, that's not how it was really used. Having padding under the chain mail usually helps it (because the links have space to sink under, among other things). Also, if you hit a human wearing chain mail, chances are they are not as stiff as a wooden target...

Example of this and possibly the ONLY thing they got right in Deadliest Warrior is when they put a pig in chain mail and had the guy have a bash at it with a katana (it was butted mild steel)... nothing happened...

So, would I say butted mild steel chain mail is useless. No, far from it. With that being said, would I like to have a historically accurate maille over it... yeah, but depends on what I use it... I'd rather have the $112 butted version when I'm sparring, so if it busts (and all did, in due time), then I can easily replace it...
View user's profile Send private message
Romulus Stoica




Location: Hunedoara, Transylvania, Romania
Joined: 26 Oct 2006

Posts: 124

PostPosted: Sun 06 Jun, 2010 1:09 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

I have personaly received a blow from a blunt steel sword that glanced from my shield into my butted mail and plates misiurka helmet weared over a felt cap. I was dizzy for about 3 seconds but that was all. Without the helmet I think I would have spent at least a few days in hospital, so... from my personal experience, I don't think butted mail is completly useless.
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Bartek Strojek




Location: Poland
Joined: 05 Aug 2008
Likes: 23 pages

Posts: 449

PostPosted: Sun 06 Jun, 2010 1:22 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Eric S wrote:
The Japanese made and used many different kinds of chain armor for several hundred years...all of it being butted or having butted connection links...so I guess they were just stupid and used "completely useless" armor? Were do you get your information on this subject?


Type "chainmail" on Youtube and you'll find dozens of "tests" of butted stuff penetrated by anything and it's brother. Definitely useless. I've also seen many tests here in Poland and they're silly too with butted mail.

As for Japanese, I have no idea if they found a way for some more efficient "butted" connection - I heard that their mail was somewhat different. And maybe it was just the way they were doing it - I don't know anything about Japanese mail.

Thread started asks about "modern butted mail" compared to historical maille - so I answer that this stuff is in 95% of causes not really protective compared to actual mail. I had heard that some guy made some more efficient butted mail here and there, but I don't know much details.

Romulus Stoica wrote:
I have personaly received a blow from a blunt steel sword that glanced from my shield into my butted mail and plates misiurka helmet weared over a felt cap. I was dizzy for about 3 seconds but that was all. Without the helmet I think I would have spent at least a few days in hospital, so... from my personal experience, I don't think butted mail is completly useless.


Well, generally few pounds of steel on your body isn't going to be "useless" in terms of protection, of course, but Jojo asked for comparison.


Last edited by Bartek Strojek on Sun 06 Jun, 2010 1:26 pm; edited 1 time in total
View user's profile Send private message
Luka Borscak




Location: Croatia
Joined: 11 Jun 2007
Likes: 7 pages

Posts: 2,229

PostPosted: Sun 06 Jun, 2010 2:54 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Didn't japanese mail had more "overlap" of the wire, similar to key rings? So that ends of the wire not just meet each other but go further pass each other?
View user's profile Send private message
Dan Howard




Location: Maitland, NSW, Australia
Joined: 08 Dec 2004

Spotlight topics: 2
Posts: 3,190

PostPosted: Sun 06 Jun, 2010 3:40 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

The most common threat in battle, even in Japanese ones, came from spears and arrows. Testing armour against sword cuts is a waste of time. Pretty much anything worn as armour can offer good resistance to a sword. Some of the Japanese weaves would work a little better than 4-in-1 if both used butted mail but none of the Japanese weaves are as effective as any of the riveted European examples.

Ask yourself what happened after European contact. How many Japanese developments were adopted by the Europeans for battle? How many European developments were adopted by the Japanese? Japanese military technology was retarded when compared to Europe or the Middle East. It is to be expected from a society that deliberately isolates itself.
View user's profile Send private message
R.M. Henson




Location: Honolulu Hawaii
Joined: 14 Feb 2008
Likes: 1 page

Posts: 49

PostPosted: Sun 06 Jun, 2010 3:59 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Bartek Strojek wrote:
Most of butted mails are almost completely useless, blunt spears and stuff can penetrate it, it would be total waste of material in "period".

As for material, I read, here (myArmoury) that wrought iron is actually very good material for mail, it absorbs punishment well with deformations and stuff, instead of breaking at some point of links. Mild steel doesn't fare so well.

Anyway, probably many people'll start heated discussion over it very soon. Wink


This answers the question pretty well. Overall riveted mail will protect against piercing attacks too a certain degree despite being softer iron. Butted steel will have virtually no protection against piercing attacks. Butted chain mail can however resist slashing blows just fine I think.

From my visits to several Japanese museums in Osaka and Fukuoka, it is my general understanding the Most Japanese armor were plates or overlapping smaller plates that were connected by butted chain mail (the body connecting to the shoulders, then to the arms, etc). For the most part chain mail was utilized as a connecting piece, not it's own stand alone armor like in Europe.

The biggest pieces of chain mail that I've seen in Japanese armor where around the arms and legs where penetrating damage was least likely. I've never seen it used to protect the torso.





View user's profile Send private message
Carl Goff




Location: Florida
Joined: 27 Sep 2005
Reading list: 1 book

Posts: 196

PostPosted: Sun 06 Jun, 2010 6:53 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Depends on the link size (inner diameter) and wire gauge of the butted mail.

Personally, I would recommend going with riveted if you can afford it. It's substantially more expensive than butted.

I can't, so I use 14 gauge 1/4" inner diameter butted mail. Nice and tough, but it's awfully heavy.

Oh, East of sands and sunlit gulf, your blood is thin, your gods are few;
You could not break the Northern wolf and now the wolf has turned on you.
The fires that light the coasts of Spain fling shadows on the Eastern strand.
Master, your slave has come again with torch and axe in his right hand!
-Robert E. Howard
View user's profile Send private message
Jojo Zerach





Joined: 26 Dec 2009

Posts: 288

PostPosted: Sun 06 Jun, 2010 6:58 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Luka Borscak wrote:
Didn't japanese mail had more "overlap" of the wire, similar to key rings? So that ends of the wire not just meet each other but go further pass each other?


Yes, I think I also heard that it could be overlaped up to 3 times in some cases.
Though like Henson said, they (Japenese) seemed to use it more to bridge gaps than anything else. Plus they seemed to almost always "build it in" to other armour/clothing, wheras European maile was seperate from it's padding.

I agree that beating butted maile against a wood stand is a bad test. Though butted coifs placed over melons/fruit seem to be easialy penetrated by arrows, in at least one test I saw, the arrow went through the fruit and out the backside of the maile coif.
View user's profile Send private message
Eric S




Location: new orleans
Joined: 22 Nov 2009
Reading list: 8 books

Posts: 801

PostPosted: Sun 06 Jun, 2010 7:12 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

George E wrote:
Jojo Zerach wrote:
In demos of arrows/weapons they always seem to use butted maile, and it never seems to do much good. I think historical maile would have had to have been stronger for it to be so popular, and to justify making such a time-consuming armour. I read the "Chainmaile unchained" feature on here, it was interesting.

I had heard on one website that Japanese maile was made of "tempered wire", though he didn't cite a source, this is just one of those topics where there is virtually no information online. I'm poorly educated as far as Japanese armour goes.


I find that most demos are VERY badly made...

usually, they consist of a small square piece of chain mail against a wooden target and then procede to bash it...

well, that's not how it was really used. Having padding under the chain mail usually helps it (because the links have space to sink under, among other things). Also, if you hit a human wearing chain mail, chances are they are not as stiff as a wooden target...

Example of this and possibly the ONLY thing they got right in Deadliest Warrior is when they put a pig in chain mail and had the guy have a bash at it with a katana (it was butted mild steel)... nothing happened...

So, would I say butted mild steel chain mail is useless. No, far from it. With that being said, would I like to have a historically accurate maille over it... yeah, but depends on what I use it... I'd rather have the $112 butted version when I'm sparring, so if it busts (and all did, in due time), then I can easily replace it...
Your exactly right, hanging a weight from some links of mail is NOT the same as testing the actual armored clothing to see how it would have worked in the REAL world. I get really tired of people making statements that they cant back up....how many people who make these comments have ever seen any REAL authentic chain armor??? Usually they are repeating something they have read some were or seen on some tv show. Take for example the statement that the Japanese did not use chain armor as a stand alone defense....thats just another one of those statements that somehow got repeated so many times that people believe it...just one of many false statements made by people in regards to Japanese armor in general. The Japanese made MANY types of armored clothing using several chain patterns and the chain varied from very light to very heavy depending on what it was being used for. Here is a full suit of Japanese (samurai) chain armor.... Underneath there was different types of armored vests such as this one which is thickly padded and has a type of brigandine "kikko" made from iron or leather plates sewn inside the layers of cloth. I have actually worn some Japanese chain armor and I can say that there was no way it was "completely useless" Here is a link with many pictures of Japanese armor and armored clothing along with some close up pictures of the different chain patterns. http://s831.photobucket.com/albums/zz238/estc...20samples/ Another suit of Japanese chain armor........and another one........Now someone will say that it was only used for parades or some other false but often repeated statement.
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
R.M. Henson




Location: Honolulu Hawaii
Joined: 14 Feb 2008
Likes: 1 page

Posts: 49

PostPosted: Sun 06 Jun, 2010 7:56 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

My statement was purely anecdotal just from what I've seen with my own eyes. Much of what I learned was based off of the typical equipment used by the rich Samurai class during the Late Muromachi to Edo periods. Also the close ups of the weave pattern seems very European looking to me although I'm basing this on preconceptions of "oriental" patterns of chain mail,

It would be interesting to find out if the armor you pictured was used by a common foot soldier or by an aristorcrat.


EDIT>>>>>>>>>

here's an interesting find in regards to Eric's last post:

Quote:
Traditional samurai armor used chain in its construction but the chain was not usually the majority of the defensive material used; the chain was just used in certain areas in conjunction with iron plates which made up the majority of the defensive material of traditional samurai armor. Japanese chain mail armor on the other hand consisted primarily of chain sewn to cloth (and sometimes leather) and was worn as a type of defensive clothing. The chain can be exposed or hidden between 2 layers of cloth. Some chain garments are very fancy, with brocade or colored cloth, heavy chain, and leather trim and some chain garments are basic and utilitarian, using plain coarse cloth and lighter chain. The chain in all armors seems to have been coated in black lacquer to protect it from rust as the Japanese environment is harsh and over 100 yrs later many such armors still have some or most of the black lacquer left intact.

Small armored plates were attached to the chain armor in certain areas but the majority of the defensive material was the chain. In addition to square or rectangular iron plates, small hexagon armor plates or "kikko" would be attached to the chain or sewn to the fabric of the "kusari" garments; the kikko can be exposed or hidden between layers of cloth. Kikko can be made from iron or hardened leather and is often hidden in the collars of chain jackets or "kusari katabira" and was used in other various places as well.

Japanese chain armor comes in various forms of clothing or garments including, jackets, vests, gauntlets and gloves, hoods, thigh and shin guards ,and socks. Kusari is the name for chain in Japanese and gusoku is the name for armor. "Kusari gusoku" is the Japanese name for a suit of chain armor with the individual pieces having their own names such as "kusari katabira" for chain jacket, "kusari zukin" for chain hood, "kusari tabi" for chain socks, "kusari kote" for chain gloves, "kusari haidate" for chain thigh guards, "kusari suneate" for chain shin guards etc. The type of pattern most often used in the construction of the chain is called a ...4 in 1...pattern or "namban-kusari", namban refers to foreigners or foreign influenced.


Like I said, I never said that it never existed, I just said I had never seen it. Also it seems I was correct about the weave pattern being European in style, as it was adopted from Europeans during the late Edo period after the Japanese had lots of exposure to European cultures. From these you could suggest that since it's a regular 4-1 weave and butted it would perform just like European 4-1 butted chain mail of the same diameter, Useless for pierces, possibly ok for slashing. [/b]
View user's profile Send private message
JŠnos Sibinger




Location: Hungary/France
Joined: 31 May 2009

Posts: 50

PostPosted: Sun 06 Jun, 2010 9:43 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Greetings!
On the original question: I don't know if there is so great difference between the wrought iron and the mild steel. (Shame on me! Happy ) Both of them contains low amount of coal, and the wrought iron has got a fibrous structure. The low amount of carbon means that these materials are soft and ductile. I would say that the riveted one is mouch stronger.
Mr. Zerach mentioned that Japanese mail was generally made of steel. The old method of wiremaking requires relatively soft materials, even during the process, the wire becomes mouch more hard, and occasionally, it even breaks. (And I think that this is the main reason for the low carbon in the material of the chainmails: the materials with low level of carbon become brittle mouch later.) So how did the japanese make their steel wire? Does anyone have somekind of idea, information or evidence?
(I have got a mail, made of 1,6 mm (14 or 16 gauges) spring steel, with 6mm (a bit less than 1/4" inner diameter) I always wanted to make test shoots at it... Any suggestions, how it should be done?)
View user's profile Send private message
Eric S




Location: new orleans
Joined: 22 Nov 2009
Reading list: 8 books

Posts: 801

PostPosted: Sun 06 Jun, 2010 10:10 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

JŠnos Sibinger wrote:
Greetings!
On the original question: I don't know if there is so great difference between the wrought iron and the mild steel. (Shame on me! Happy ) Both of them contains low amount of coal, and the wrought iron has got a fibrous structure. The low amount of carbon means that these materials are soft and ductile. I would say that the riveted one is mouch stronger.
Mr. Zerach mentioned that Japanese mail was generally made of steel. The old method of wiremaking requires relatively soft materials, even during the process, the wire becomes mouch more hard, and occasionally, it even breaks. (And I think that this is the main reason for the low carbon in the material of the chainmails: the materials with low level of carbon become brittle mouch later.) So how did the japanese make their steel wire? Does anyone have somekind of idea, information or evidence?
(I have got a mail, made of 1,6 mm (14 or 16 gauges) spring steel, with 6mm (a bit less than 1/4" inner diameter) I always wanted to make test shoots at it... Any suggestions, how it should be done?)
As far as I can find out, no one has of yet checked any Japanese chain for carbon content, I contacted the Royal Armouries of Leeds and the curator of oriental armor (Mr. Ian Bottomley) told me that they had no knowledge of any scientific analysis that had been done on Japanese chain armor , but they had recently found steel being used in some traditional Japanese armor plates.. http://www.royalarmouries.org/what-we-do/rese...ate-armour
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Eric S




Location: new orleans
Joined: 22 Nov 2009
Reading list: 8 books

Posts: 801

PostPosted: Sun 06 Jun, 2010 10:27 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

R.M. Henson wrote:
My statement was purely anecdotal just from what I've seen with my own eyes. Much of what I learned was based off of the typical equipment used by the rich Samurai class during the Late Muromachi to Edo periods. Also the close ups of the weave pattern seems very European looking to me although I'm basing this on preconceptions of "oriental" patterns of chain mail,

It would be interesting to find out if the armor you pictured was used by a common foot soldier or by an aristorcrat.


EDIT>>>>>>>>>

here's an interesting find in regards to Eric's last post:

Quote:
Traditional samurai armor used chain in its construction but the chain was not usually the majority of the defensive material used; the chain was just used in certain areas in conjunction with iron plates which made up the majority of the defensive material of traditional samurai armor. Japanese chain mail armor on the other hand consisted primarily of chain sewn to cloth (and sometimes leather) and was worn as a type of defensive clothing. The chain can be exposed or hidden between 2 layers of cloth. Some chain garments are very fancy, with brocade or colored cloth, heavy chain, and leather trim and some chain garments are basic and utilitarian, using plain coarse cloth and lighter chain. The chain in all armors seems to have been coated in black lacquer to protect it from rust as the Japanese environment is harsh and over 100 yrs later many such armors still have some or most of the black lacquer left intact.

Small armored plates were attached to the chain armor in certain areas but the majority of the defensive material was the chain. In addition to square or rectangular iron plates, small hexagon armor plates or "kikko" would be attached to the chain or sewn to the fabric of the "kusari" garments; the kikko can be exposed or hidden between layers of cloth. Kikko can be made from iron or hardened leather and is often hidden in the collars of chain jackets or "kusari katabira" and was used in other various places as well.

Japanese chain armor comes in various forms of clothing or garments including, jackets, vests, gauntlets and gloves, hoods, thigh and shin guards ,and socks. Kusari is the name for chain in Japanese and gusoku is the name for armor. "Kusari gusoku" is the Japanese name for a suit of chain armor with the individual pieces having their own names such as "kusari katabira" for chain jacket, "kusari zukin" for chain hood, "kusari tabi" for chain socks, "kusari kote" for chain gloves, "kusari haidate" for chain thigh guards, "kusari suneate" for chain shin guards etc. The type of pattern most often used in the construction of the chain is called a ...4 in 1...pattern or "namban-kusari", namban refers to foreigners or foreign influenced.


Like I said, I never said that it never existed, I just said I had never seen it. Also it seems I was correct about the weave pattern being European in style, as it was adopted from Europeans during the late Edo period after the Japanese had lots of exposure to European cultures. From these you could suggest that since it's a regular 4-1 weave and butted it would perform just like European 4-1 butted chain mail of the same diameter, Useless for pierces, possibly ok for slashing. [/b]
I have actually seen 4 different types of Japanese chain patterns, the European pattern is generally accepted to have come to Japan much earlier than you suggested....some time after the 1540s when the Portuguese first arrived....but the Japanese still used their older patterns (which they had for a very long time) right up until the end of the samurai era.....as far as the status of the owner of an armor...as with all Japanese armor and weapons the hight the rank the more color, fancy fabrics, artistic flourishes, leather edging, etc. " Useless for pierces" thats easy to say and may be right...but...until someone does a test on an actual Japanese chain armor or an accurate re-creation of one its just an opinion and not fact.
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Joshua R




Location: Montana
Joined: 23 Mar 2010
Likes: 11 pages

Posts: 71

PostPosted: Sun 06 Jun, 2010 10:38 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Dan Howard wrote:
Ask yourself what happened after European contact. How many Japanese developments were adopted by the Europeans for battle? How many European developments were adopted by the Japanese? Japanese military technology was retarded when compared to Europe or the Middle East. It is to be expected from a society that deliberately isolates itself.


Bearing in mind the fact that the Japanese didn't intentionally isolate themselves from the rest of the world until the 17th Century, the Japanese didn't come into contact with Europeans until armor was well into its decline in Europe, and while the Japanese rapidly adopted (and improved) European-introduced firearms (and, independently but in parallel with Europe, devised pike-and-shot tactics), European-style armor was always integrated into Japanese-style armor, and was limited in use to the occasional breast plate and rare helmet. Perhaps the Japanese found European armor to be prohibitively expensive and they simply decided that its benefits were outweighed by its costs, as Japan is and was poor in iron deposits necessary to make such armor and importing such armor, of course, would be very expensive. In any case, the Japanese seemed to be quite satisfied with their selection of armor in combat against each other and the Koreans and Chinese.

While Japan could very fairly be described as militarily retarded in the 17th-, 18th-, and (the early) 19th-Centuries, to describe that nation as militarily retarded before that time would be an unfair and, I feel, patently false assessment.

" For Augustus, and after him Tiberius, more interested in establishing and increasing their own power than in promoting the public good, began to disarm the Roman people (in order to make them more passive under their tyranny).... "
-N. Machiavelli, The Art of War
View user's profile Send private message
Jojo Zerach





Joined: 26 Dec 2009

Posts: 288

PostPosted: Sun 06 Jun, 2010 10:41 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

That's interesting, I didn't know the Japenese ever used European chainmaile patterns.
I made a very small sheet of maile with a Japenese pattern, I found the concet more basic than European pattern, though actually putting it together was quite tricky for me.
View user's profile Send private message


Display posts from previous:   
Forum Index > Historical Arms Talk > Modern butted maille or historical rivited maille?
Page 1 of 5 Reply to topic
Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next All times are GMT - 8 Hours

View previous topic :: View next topic
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum






All contents © Copyright 2003-2018 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Basic Low-bandwidth Version of the forum