Carl,
Thanks for the informitive post!!!
On my 450lb crossbow i am firing modern steel bodkins i make here at the shop - its a new thing for me as i saw a need for modern socketed (non rounded) bodkins and finally figured out a way to build them. I have a feeling they are harder then most, but i have not tested them to see how hard.
The 450lb crossbow takes a 190gr bodkin tip mounted on a (measuring it now) 255gr bolt that is 1/2" thick at its widest point (thats 3.5" behind the tip of the bodkin) and tapers to 3/8" at the tail and bottlenecks to 3/8" at the point the bodkin is attached... or much like these
[ Linked Image ]
The picture is slightly stretched.
these come off the bow at 190 fps and strike the target at 40 yards at 184fps (fired through a crony just now at point blank and at 40 yards - that was a trick!!). The bow is consistant in accuracy at long range so the two fps numbers are close or on what they were when i fired on the plate. The plates are as follows:
12 guage soft steel at 40 yards, 13" behind the 12ga plate is a 18ga plate of soft steel.
this is fired at and the results were as follows: The 12 guage plate was completely penetrated, on the shot i talked about earlier the bolt staied together and proceeded to strike the 18ga plate. The bolt sunk into the plate piercing it and stopped 4" into the rear 18ga plate. This is about the widest point on the bolt as well. The bolt has a crack in the rear section, from the impact of either the first or second plate as the bolt was new when fired.
The bodkin used - when fired the bodkin had clean edges, they were crisp and sharp (90 degree angles). The tip bore a sharp tip. After firing the bodkin edges are slightly rounded and dull, the tip is rounded and dull and if im not mistaken missing some of its tip.
Composite prods in period:
It is VERY likely they used a longer draw with composites, a composite bow was able to draw farther due to the nature of the prod materials. But, (as i have posted in other posts) the limit to composites in power seems to be around 300 pounds, heavier can be made, but the builder is then really testing both the outter limits of the materials but the glues as well. Should be noted that even in modern materials the limit on composite prods is also about 300lbs.
Composites also cast faster, however due to how bulky the medieval composite was - and in the ones i have built - there is very little difference in speed, they cast a tad faster sometimes and in others they do not. This depends on the materials, glues and how bulky the prod is. In my experiance however draws of 5 to 7 inches seems to be about the range they used.
You are correct on the steel prod (lathe). When they fire, they rob themselves of energy getting the limbs moving, this takes away from the missile power and the speed the bow "shuts". From testing i have done: a 150lb prod firing at 269fps or so was the same (penetration wise) as a 240lb steel prod moving out at 187fps. The same missile was used and the same plywood board set at 60 yards. The numbers do not match as far as power - but the results after shot over and over and measuring penetration backed the test.
The same can be said for a modern 250lb laminate composite prod the power compares to a 450lb to 500lb steel prod as far as punch and penetration. Fire a 225lb excalibre compound crossbow and it is like firing a 500lb steel windlass bow as far as the power the bolt has. I know the math nuts are going HUH!!! BS!!! but tests against the same ply with the same bolts fired on one bow and then the other do not lie. The best i can tell is its a physics thing beyond my mental capacity - but its very true.
Same thing as a bolt has better flight and loses less speed then an arrow - tested by crony. Tested by range shooting. But then again comparing a bow and a crossbow is comparing apples and oranges - both taist good, both look good and both will feed you, but one can break grease up, the other makes a DARN good pie.
Thanks for the kudos on my bows. I can make prods to 2000+ lbs. Clint Harris is one of the two that help me make the parts for the bows i build, he is a hiltmaker and smith that operates WildWolf forge. They operate the largest non commercial forge in texas, i believe second non commercial forge in the USA - that one is in tennisee and is 2" longer i think - (clint help me out here). They also help in the making of the goatsfoot, the windlass and now the cranqline. As far as i know, i am one of a few bow makers that make heavy crossbows and the prods. I am one of few that actively shoot said bows and also make/sell the goatsfoot, windlass and cranqline. I have shoot crossbows basically everyday and by looking at my arms, shoulders and back have developed what i would think to be the same type of muscles that the medieval archer would have had - old age is gonna be painful im sure.
Onto Dan,
Yes averages are what we are after. Clint and i spent time on the phone today and were talking about that. In a fight MOST blows are glancing, rarely do you get a full on connect and if you do the result is painful. same goes for a bunch of people in armor running around. An archer had the battle to watch, the targets to shoot at and had to lead, aim and do whatever it took to trya nd get a center of mass type shot OR shoot for a weak spot. The crossbow and bow shooters were very tuned to this and very good at it. It did not happen all the time, but it did happen.
I however tend to think that a heavy bow that hit, did do damage more often then not. If an archer was firing at a single target the target was most likely close and at under 40 yards the longbow is a monster, the same goes with a crossbow which is more accurate then a longbow in the hands of a trained shooter and more power can be retained to a longer range on the crossbow. If the shoot found a weak spot, a gap or the armor was not thick enough i believe the person was dead. If not immediately it was enough to take the fight out of the person long enough to get minced up by pikes, swords or whatever was in the way and incoming. I believe even IF the plate fails and the chain catches it, the force of that arrow or bolt is going to knock the wind out of you, the arming garb is not going to take much of that blunt force away.
Bodkins - ok, i can believe bodkins were used for flight arrows, they were compact. But the way the shape of the tip is was not for aerodynamics. It was for piercing things. Leather, chain, plate and shileds. It is the most effient design for piercing things, hence the reason we still use it today. The other tips used on flight arrows were also - no tip and very small medieval field points. I have some of those here as well and i have shot distance in my shooting career. Bodkins fly just as well as a no tip and a field point. Bodkins were also produced in mass for wars, they were used on arrows and on bolts for punching holes into things not for flight contests. They offer no real benifit other then to break through armor. They are not like a bladed head that is designed to hit soft armor or cloth and then drive into the body and cut things up. Hitting anything with a bodkin doesn't cuase massive blood loss or even very much shock to the body - unless it hits kidneys, heart, lungs, etc. Pulling a bodkin out is easy, it was designed in mass for war time.
They are NOT used in target shooting as the edges will cut the strings the bailes (now and then) are held together with. <--- runs into this all the time. It was designed for one thing and one thing only and in bulk mass. Im not convinced that everyone was shooting distance competitions back then. In fact the arrow head of choice in mass fire was a thin profile broadhead like a sinew twister if im not mistaken. Those pierced
shields and cloth and drove a head into the body. Try and pull it out and the barbs on it kept the arrow from coming out - OR the head came off (they were held on by tar and let the head stay in the body - you died weeks later from massive infection.
Need to hit bed, more later :)
David