| 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) |
| Author |
Message |
|
Jojo Zerach
|
 Posted: Wed 20 Oct, 2010 9:34 am Post subject: Medieval vs. Renaissance armour thickness. |
 |
|
Obviously we don't have much medieval armour around, though has anyone ever noticed it's thickness compared to later armour? (taking into account any corossion?)
I remember reading on here that the Avant harness had lames in the 1.6 mm region, while late period armours seem to have been thinner on average, except the breastplate/helmet. Though due to the increased use of firearms during the time, it would be logical to move the metal to the breastplate, like the "all or nothing" concept foremerly used for warships.
|
|
  |
 |
|
Sean Manning
|
| Posted: Wed 20 Oct, 2010 5:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Alan Williams has published a table measuring maximum thickness vs. date for a hundred or so breastplates in his book ""The Knight and the Blast Furnace". Generally, armour slowly gets thicker from 1400 to 1650, but a big part of this is an increasing threat from guns.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jojo Zerach
|
| Posted: Wed 20 Oct, 2010 7:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Sean Manning wrote: | | Alan Williams has published a table measuring maximum thickness vs. date for a hundred or so breastplates in his book ""The Knight and the Blast Furnace". Generally, armour slowly gets thicker from 1400 to 1650, but a big part of this is an increasing threat from guns. |
I remember seeing that, though I no longer have acess to it. Were breastplates the only thickness' recorded?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Josh Warren
Location: Manhattan, Kansas Joined: 01 Nov 2006
Posts: 111
|
| Posted: Fri 22 Oct, 2010 4:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
The Avant harness is actually much thicker than 1.6mm in places; some of the frontal fauld lames reach 4mm or more through the center.
Non Concedo
|
|
|
|
|
|
JG Elmslie
Industry Professional
|
| Posted: Fri 22 Oct, 2010 11:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Josh Warren wrote: | | The Avant harness is actually much thicker than 1.6mm in places; some of the frontal fauld lames reach 4mm or more through the center. |
but equally, plenty of parts are much thinner than 1.6mm - the inner plates in the cuisses, inside of the rerebrace, etc, are all much thinner than that, from having seen it upclose more times than I care to count.
|
|
 |
|
|
|
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