| myArmoury.com is now completely member-supported. Please contribute to our efforts with a donation. Your donations will go towards updating our site, modernizing it, and keeping it viable long-term.
Last 10 Donors: Anonymous, Daniel Sullivan, Chad Arnow, Jonathan Dean, M. Oroszlany, Sam Arwas, Barry C. Hutchins, Dan Kary, Oskar Gessler, Dave Tonge (View All Donors) |
| If you could have a suit o' maile, which would it be? |
| Vendel Period please! |
|
6% |
[ 3 ] |
| Lorica Hamata honey! |
|
4% |
[ 2 ] |
| Maciejowski Bible baby! |
|
47% |
[ 21 ] |
| Viking/Norman now! |
|
36% |
[ 16 ] |
| Maile? Meh. |
|
4% |
[ 2 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 44 |
|
| Author |
Message |
|
Sam Gordon Campbell
Location: Australia. Joined: 16 Nov 2008
Posts: 678
|
 Posted: Sun 10 May, 2009 7:00 am Post subject: Mailing maille and getting galvinistion of cheap chain. |
 |
|
Well just a quick question,
After having a search for ways to get galvinisation off my cheap (but riveted  ) repo-maile, there didn't seem to be one certain way or indeed a safer way other than using acid and risking poisining.
So I was wondering, how would you fine people go about doing it, and indeed if you have done it, then how?
And if all else fails, let this be a maile armour thread!
Oh, and here's the offending kit/maille.
 Attachment: 92.64 KB
I was part of a protest. Can you guess what for? :D
Member of Australia's Stoccata School of Defence since 2008.
Host of Crash Course HEMA.
Founder of The Van Dieman's Land Stage Gladiators.
|
|
  |
 |
|
Ken Nelson
|
| Posted: Sun 10 May, 2009 9:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
Try abrasives, do you know of anyone who has either a sandblaster, large tumbler, or tub vibe? the galvanizing should rub off in a few hours in any of those. In a "poor man's" solution to a tub vibe, is a box of sand in your trunk, and a lot of bumpy roads. A friend of mine cleaned a shirt of mail in about one month that way.
Another possibility would be to find a place around you that does galvanizing, the two galvanizers I use for large outdoor projects have the equipment and acids to strip the galvanizing if they need to. You might be able to talk one of them into cleaning your shirt for a few bucks, or beers.
Ken Nelson
Iron Wolf Forge
"Live and learn, or you don't live long" L. Long
|
|
 |
|
M. Eversberg II
|
| Posted: Sun 10 May, 2009 10:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
Get one of those plastic tubs, fill it with vinegar (outside), chuck in maille.
Wake up the next day and dry it out. When dry, toss it in a bag with sand, and knock the rust off.
M.
This space for rent or lease.
|
|
    |
|
Gabriele A. Pini
Location: Olgiate Comasco, Como Joined: 02 Sep 2008
Posts: 239
|
| Posted: Sun 10 May, 2009 2:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Are you sure you want the galvanization off? You will obtain a more historical correct armor, with all the rust necessary...
You better have near a cask with a lot of fine sand to keep her rust-free: just put her (the chain mail) in it and do some kolm with it... on foot, naturally.
|
|
|
|
|
Christopher VaughnStrever
|
| Posted: Sun 10 May, 2009 2:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | Sam Gordon Campbell
And if all else fails, let this be a maile armour thread! |
Personally, galvy is another issue I have never wanted nor will touch. However if it wee me (which it was a few yers back) I would do one of two things.
1. Order stainless steel wire, cut it up yourself (Or more pricing buy the rings already cut) make the maile. Never ever worry about possible rust(unless your caught in the rain) Order a 14ga. wire to put worries of the rings breaking to rest. [url]www.theringlord.org [/url] for supplesor for supplies and all maile questions and concerns and topics go to www.theringlord.org/forum
2. buy a much cheaper wire such as mild steel (wire or rings) and constantly oil the entire piece (every wear or every two weeks from my personal experiane.
Though I have a feeling your keeping with your original piece so I dont have a answer to your question.
Experience and learning from such defines maturity, not a number of age
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sam Gordon Campbell
Location: Australia. Joined: 16 Nov 2008
Posts: 678
|
| Posted: Sun 10 May, 2009 5:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hey, thanks for the replies and tips guys.
I'm aware that the moment I take off the galv it'll be more work to maintain, but hey, this hobbie isn't meant to be easy 
I recently bought a nasal helmet, basicaly I was somewhat inspire by The New Varangian Guard and this chap.
So thanks again for the help.
Attachment: 37.43 KB
Inspiring!
Member of Australia's Stoccata School of Defence since 2008.
Host of Crash Course HEMA.
Founder of The Van Dieman's Land Stage Gladiators.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gary Teuscher
|
| Posted: Sun 10 May, 2009 6:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I've read much about painted and "blackened" mail (One in the same?)
Maybe you could follow Mick Jagger's advice, and "Paint it black"
|
|
|
|
|
Dan Howard
|
| Posted: Sun 10 May, 2009 9:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
I never understand why anyone would want to get rid of galvanisation. Removing it doesn't make it any more historically accurate and you have a hell of a time keeping it clean.
|
|
|
|
|
M. Eversberg II
|
| Posted: Mon 11 May, 2009 12:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Dan Howard wrote: | | I never understand why anyone would want to get rid of galvanisation. Removing it doesn't make it any more historically accurate and you have a hell of a time keeping it clean. |
Zinc smells HORRIBLE.
M.
This space for rent or lease.
|
|
|
|
|
Jean Thibodeau
|
| Posted: Mon 11 May, 2009 5:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| M. Eversberg II wrote: | | Dan Howard wrote: | | I never understand why anyone would want to get rid of galvanisation. Removing it doesn't make it any more historically accurate and you have a hell of a time keeping it clean. |
Zinc smells HORRIBLE.
M. |
I would rather have the smell than the rust but that is just me. 
Maybe darkening the zinc would look better and I know that old zinc looks dark grey instead of the overbright too shiny look of new zinc ! is there some " safe " chemical way to darken the zinc without actually removing it !
As an aside wore plate armour over a gambison ( yes I know we should call it an aketon in modern discussion for clarity or consistency  ) , the gambison after 4 hours got very wet with sweat and the inside of my armour need some immediate attention when I got home to remove rust stains ! Oh, this armour showed to trace of rust just lying around for years at a time with little or no maintenance ! Not a big problem and I guess just the normal maintenance needed every time armour is worn for any amount of time. Sweat seems like a real killer as far as rust is concerned and should be worse with maille: I guess if you don't mind spending 3 or 4 hours doing a rust cleaning every time you go out in maille and sweat even a bit I guess you can " endure " the rust and deal with it.
Now, my " The Ring Lord " stainless welded haubergeon shows no trace of rust with zero cleaning and it was closer to the sweat than the inside of the plate armour.
Everything is a compromise and as Dan said if the maille isn't 100% historical anyway why make it more subject to rust than it has to be ?
You can easily give up your freedom. You have to fight hard to get it back!
|
|
|
|
|
Dan Howard
|
| Posted: Mon 11 May, 2009 6:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Jean Thibodeau wrote: | | I would rather have the smell than the rust but that is just me. |
Me too. In any case, after a few hours of activity there are plenty of more pungent smells to worry about than zinc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nat Lamb
|
| Posted: Mon 11 May, 2009 7:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
On the zinc removal, I made a coat of plates last year, and had to decide between finishing the project using galvanised flathead nails as rivits, or not finishing it. I was happy with the overall effect, but a bit sheepish about the galvanised nails.
A fellow re-enacter got some flathead rivets, and as a project decided to tin them, which he said was period , and I am not enough of an expert to have any idea. weeks of setting up, hours of grinding and sanding, more of tinning the little buggers, and low and behold, he had a rivit that was indestinguishable from...drumroll... my galvanised nails.
The only way we could tell the diference was by taste, the tinned ones made my fillings feel weird. I figure as long as no-one licks my armour I should be able to get away with it (if they do, I will just counter that their fillings arent perid either )
|
|
|
|
|
Jonathan Blair
|
| Posted: Mon 11 May, 2009 7:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Dan Howard wrote: | | I never understand why anyone would want to get rid of galvanisation. Removing it doesn't make it any more historically accurate and you have a hell of a time keeping it clean. |
With all due respect, the argument you've made would be like saying, "I don't know why anyone would want a sword made of anything but stainless steel, because both are steel and you have a heck of a time keeping carbon steel clean."
Considering that only Eric Schmidt (I assume I spelt that right) is making truly historical maille, I think it is really a matter of getting as close as possible with what you can afford. Galvanization is very historically inaccurate, whereas mild steel wedge riveted rings are much less so. Frankly, I think if we all had the choice, we'd all spend the money on a harbergeon of wrought iron rings with historically accurate cross section and perfectly formed rivets, but some of us can't afford that, so we make do with what we can afford.
"Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword." - The Lord Jesus Christ, from The Gospel According to Saint Matthew, chapter x, verse 34, Authorized Version of 1611
|
|
|
|
|
Dan Howard
|
| Posted: Mon 11 May, 2009 5:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Evidence of galvanisation has been found on Indian mail so there is at least some precedence for its historical use as a rust inhibitor.
Ask yourself why you want to rmove the zinc. If you want to make it more historically accurate then you are wasting your time. If you want the superficial appearance of historical mail then there are a few ways to darken the zinc while keeping its rust inhibiting properties. Why make needless work for yourself?
The stainless steel sword analogy is flawed. It isn't much use for reenactors. Galvanised mild steel mail has many practical uses for reenactment. Better to compare a sword made using modern steel and a power hammer and one made using traditional materials and tools.
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. Gadda
|
| Posted: Mon 11 May, 2009 10:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Dan Howard wrote: | Evidence of galvanisation has been found on Indian mail so there is at least some precedence for its historical use as a rust inhibitor.
Ask yourself why you want to rmove the zinc. If you want to make it more historically accurate then you are wasting your time. If you want the superficial appearance of historical mail then there are a few ways to darken the zinc while keeping its rust inhibiting properties. Why make needless work for yourself?
. |
Yes, but there is no evidence for galvinization being used on European maille, which I think is rather the point. Indeed, according to the article you are presumably citing (in Royal Armouries No. 5, "Galvanized Indian Mail" by Bottomley and Stallybrass), zinc was "...unknown in Europe until the 17th century..." (even though brass was made in Europe by applying zinc ores to molten copper back to Roman times). Granted that the Indians had isolated it by 12th century, so I suppose you could make a case for the process to be exported to Europe in some nebulous fashion. However, applying the same inflexible standards that you use to reject the existence of Viking Age padding, you should have to reject the Indian evidence for galvinization, as least as applies to European maille. It is pretty clear that galvinzation would be inaccurate for really any European maille - except after 1620 AD or so.
So, yes, at least with modern replica riveted maille from India or whatever removing the galvinzation would be a step in the right direction, at least if you really want to be a bit more accurate. Whether it is worth the effort is an open question, however. Having done it I can attest it is a lot of work.
I've also heard health concerns raised about galvanized maille rings. Don't know if its true, but the concern had to do with the galvinization being absorbed into the skin, particularly when one is sweating. Given the dangers associated with vapourizing a galvinized coating, I do not dismiss this possibility at all.
Note that tinning is a distinct possibility for European maille, though I do not know of any direct evidence for this - I'm only familiar with it's use on Roman armour and helms, and later Vendel period material. Then again, I am not sure if anyone has investigated the surviving maille material that closely to determine one way or the other.
|
|
|
|
|
Dan Howard
|
| Posted: Tue 12 May, 2009 1:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
Zinc isn't considered particularly toxic. It is one of the metals that the body needs in small amounts. Fumes from welding or attempts to remove the zinc are completely different and can be toxic - expecailly since galvanising rarely involves ONLY zinc. Other trace metals such as lead and chrome can cause additional problems. Birds can suffer from zinc toxicity from too much contact with galvanised iron but not humans.
|
|
|
|
|
Jonathan Blair
|
| Posted: Tue 12 May, 2009 9:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Dan Howard wrote: | | Evidence of galvanisation has been found on Indian mail so there is at least some precedence for its historical use as a rust inhibitor. |
Since none of the examples listed in the poll were Indian maille, I don't count it as part of the discussion. Each example in the poll was European maille, not Japanese or Indian, or whatever.
| Dan Howard wrote: | | Ask yourself why you want to rmove the zinc. If you want to make it more historically accurate then you are wasting your time. If you want the superficial appearance of historical mail then there are a few ways to darken the zinc while keeping its rust inhibiting properties. Why make needless work for yourself? |
Some living history groups, like the one I am a part of, won't allow galvanized steel as part of the kit. Mild steel, or better yet wrought iron, is the only thing allowed. It comes down to where do you draw the line. If you allow galvanized steel, do you allow stainless? Chrome tanned versus vegetable tanned leather? 100% wool or 98% wool/2% lycra? Does the public know any better? Probably not, but if you are trying to represent history as best as can be accomplished, taking shortcuts undermines the effort made.
"Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword." - The Lord Jesus Christ, from The Gospel According to Saint Matthew, chapter x, verse 34, Authorized Version of 1611
|
|
|
|
|
Jean Thibodeau
|
| Posted: Tue 12 May, 2009 9:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Jonathan Blair wrote: |
Some living history groups, like the one I am a part of, won't allow galvanized steel as part of the kit. |
Totally legitimate with your goals and objectives but not everyone who wants armour has the same criteria for what they find acceptable: Maintenance, or rather low maintenance, being more important for some as well I might care about the look of my armour in general terms and that it should wear well and fit properly to enjoy the experience of wearing armour, but I might not care as much about the fine details or use of historically accurate materials.
So, it's not a question of being against people with very high standards for historical accuracy, it's only that we don't have to all have the same standards for enjoying the activity.
At the extreme we always have to make some compromises or the costs of the hobby would be unmanageable for most and the difficulties of meeting the challenge of " perfect " historical accuracy so high as to not be very much fun or even possible.
Naturally for some the " fun" is to get as close as possible to perfection and full marks for this degree of dedication. 
You can easily give up your freedom. You have to fight hard to get it back!
|
|
|
|
|
Jonathan Blair
|
| Posted: Tue 12 May, 2009 12:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Jean Thibodeau wrote: | | Naturally for some the " fun" is to get as close as possible to perfection |
Exactly my point.
"Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword." - The Lord Jesus Christ, from The Gospel According to Saint Matthew, chapter x, verse 34, Authorized Version of 1611
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brian Robson
|
| Posted: Wed 13 May, 2009 12:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
Just throwing my two penneth in on the pro's and cons based on my personal experience (having owned and fought in both galvanised and ungalvanised for a number of years)..
Probably worth mentioning that some of the pro's/cons are related more to butted/rivited - but it is relevent as most galv mail you can get in the UK is also butted... most rivited is not galvanised..
My first set - Galvanised butted... Made by myself almost 20 years ago
Started as a haubergeon which I gradually added to to make it a full-sleeved hauberk with integral mufflers and mail chausses (fitted sabatons included).
Pros:
Survived many camping weekends in the English summer without rusting..
Survived many sweaty combat events and rainy events without rusting
Did not have to worry about it getting wet/damp or keeping it oiled.
Easily modified/fitted (due to butted more than anything)
Cons:
Needed constant repair work (again due to being butted rather than galv)
Didn't look right - either too shiny at first, and a manky dull grey when older
My current groups don't accept Galv - on authenticity grounds.
Heavy (again not galv-related, but the shape of links and lack of riviting)
My current set - Cap-a-Pie mixed solid/rivited flat-section rings - round rivits - Had for 2 years
Pros:
Looks fantastic from a distance (or even quite close up when wearing it) - which makes me feel good .
Accepted by UK LK groups
Feel happier to show to the public close-up (described as a reasonably accurate re-creation apart from ring thickness)
Half the weight of my butted suit (again not galv-related).. Doesn't sound much but it really makes events a lot more fun as I get less tired, and am more likely to win combats
Cons:
Rust-prone.. from damp, rain, or sweat. (but I've had no rust yet due to careful maintenence)
Needs regular spraying with silicon or ptfe-based lubricants to provide rust-protection.
Lubricants rub-off dirtying/damaging undergarments - so need to be careful about what is worn with it. (now have one aketon for may mail only - and one to be worn alone).
Need to ensure padded undergarments don't allow the mail to touch the skin anywhere (mainy around the neck/face) to keep sweat away from it.
Need seperate set of 'low-station' kit for combat in heavy rain.. I simply won't wear it if I know it will get soaked - especial at an event when camping and so having limited capabilities to dry it out.
Makes me a lot more concious of the weather..
Had to create period stuff for storage.. Made a very strong linen sack (double-layered) - sprayed the outside with fabric waterproofing and let the oil from the mail coat the inside. Now also have an oak box to put it in. (But it all adds to the LH)
More Expensive
I'm not gonna tell anyone which set to go for - just to make their own conclusions based on what they want from it and an understanding of what difference it will make.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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 2003-2024 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Basic Low-bandwidth Version of the forum
|
This is a standard topic
