I'm assuming that the thickness of historical helms varied depending on time, place, culture, and use. My question is how much did they vary and what is the appropriate thickness for a decent reproduction helm? I'm seeing that a lot of the the entry level helms are between 18g and 16g. Does this fall under historical parameters? What is the thinnest a helm can be while still being functional? Any info would be much appreciated. Thanks in advance.

-JM

Historical helm thickness and quality of materials varied greatly. If you are going to use a helm for combat, I would recommend at least 16 gauge mild steel. 18 gauge mild steel is too thin for repeated hits. ideally, heated treated steel is the way to go, if you can afford it. Don't forget to pad the helm with at least 1/2 inch of padding.

See here: http://www.myArmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t=9475

:)

EDIT: Too slow to post

As Scott says, though if you're doing steel weapon combat with head blow, particularly with charged blow, you will definitely want 14 gauge(2mm) or 12 gauge. While 16 gauge is fine for some small club head blow, head blow quickly gets out of hand at inter-club events, especially in the biggest action zones, so 16 gauge just gets destroyed. I've even seen 14 gauge get seriously roughed up, though that was from some serious combat that was invitation only, and it was a paid gig.

Cheers

also for thickness, dont forget the metal being used matters a great deal.

I'd never touch 18ga mild steel for a helmet, but I'd consider 18ga spring carbon steel for a burgeonet's side-plates, for example.

Whats appropriet depends on the purpose of the helm. Display, living history, SCA, WMA or some other purpose. I raised my bascinet from a welded cone of 18g and it finished out less than 4oz off the museum piece I based it off. So for an accurate reporduction its right in line, but its way to light to sustain much impact.