| 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) |
| Considering all of this week's latest additions, please rate the quality of our efforts. |
| Excellent |
|
60% |
[ 44 ] |
| Very Good |
|
30% |
[ 22 ] |
| Good |
|
6% |
[ 5 ] |
| Fair |
|
2% |
[ 2 ] |
| Poor |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 73 |
|
| Author |
Message |
Nathan Robinson
myArmoury Admin
|
|
    |
 |
Chad Arnow
myArmoury Team
|
 Posted: Mon 23 Jul, 2007 8:28 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Hopefully people are enjoying our first update in a little while. It's a little different for us and a welcome addition.
I'd also like to welcome Michael Edelson to our authoring family. Thanks, Michael! 
ChadA
http://chadarnow.com/
|
|
|
|
|
Jean Thibodeau
|
| Posted: Mon 23 Jul, 2007 9:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Chad Arnow wrote: | Hopefully people are enjoying our first update in a little while. It's a little different for us and a welcome addition.
I'd also like to welcome Michael Edelson to our authoring family. Thanks, Michael! |
Yes, I enjoyed it and I did buy TWO of the Revival Clothing gambison because they are so comfortable that I wanted to wear one around the house and keep any maille dirt or grease away from it and use the other one with the armour.
So thanks to Michael for the great review that I can confirm is accurate. I will mention that the one I wear almost daily like a pyjama top ( O.K. weird but comfy ) is showing a little wear in spots on the outer shell, but this was daily wear for maybe a year or two ! But nothing that would affect it's use as underarmour. ( Very minor wear ).
Also, the article by Alexi was very good information for anyone not familiar with arming clothes. Maybe less useful for those who have already read a lot about them here, but we do need articles that don't assume that everyone knows this stuff and reading a concise and well written article is still useful for the more knowledgeable.
Oh, pourpoint if read in French as two words: POUR (for) POINT (point ) is very descriptive and this meaning might be missed by those not familiar with French.
The less " positive " review by Mark is very useful in deciding why one would buy one i.e. very low price for costume use with the biggest negative being that the synthetic materials are going to be very warm and sweaty.
You can easily give up your freedom. You have to fight hard to get it back!
|
|
|
|
|
Alexander Hinman
|
| Posted: Fri 27 Jul, 2007 9:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
This is a fantastic update. Cloth armours are one of my favourite subjects, so it's great to see what's out there in the cheap and expensive (relatively) categories.
The real highlight for me, though, is the spotlight article, so extra thanks to Alexi for the article!
|
|
|
|
|
Steve Grisetti
|
| Posted: Sun 29 Jul, 2007 9:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks for this update. The reviews are very helpful, but most interesting for me is Alexi's article on quilted armor, since I knew very little about this subject.
"...dismount thy tuck, be yare in thy preparation, for thy assailant is quick, skilful, and deadly."
- Sir Toby Belch
|
|
|
|
|
Chad Arnow
myArmoury Team
|
| Posted: Sun 29 Jul, 2007 10:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'm glad people like the update. It's funny, there have been a number of people leaving feedback votes, but not a lot of other discussion about it.
After a publishing layoff of 2 months, this is the first of a bunch of new groups that will be published going forward. We're hard at work finishing these new groups up as we speak. My hat's off to Nathan who has spent a lot of time on the last couple of weeks on things for this site, despite being busy with his real (paying) job. In that span of time we've gone from not having any groups quite ready for publication to 8-10 groups (plus other ungrouped pieces) that should be put together soon, giving us a nicely full publication slate for the coming months.
Though we've left the every two week publication schedule, we're still hard at work bringing new articles and reviews to our readers.
ChadA
http://chadarnow.com/
|
|
|
|
|
Pamela Muir
|
| Posted: Sun 29 Jul, 2007 1:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I voted "excellent". I especially enjoy these themed updates on non-sword subjects. (Don't get me wrong, I enjoy sword updates too.)
With this update, I would also have liked to have seen a mention of patterns that allow you to make your own gambeson. Just some comments on historical accuracy based on the picture on the package, not necessarily a critique of the sewing instructions. I had to go the "make your own" route because I was too cheap to buy the Revival gambeson, but I wanted lots of padding. I'm curious about the accuracy of the pattern that I used.
Pamela Muir
Founder/Lead Instructor
Academy of Chivalric Martial Arts
"I need a hero. I'm holding out for a hero 'til the end of the night. He's gotta be strong, And he's gotta be fast, And he's gotta be fresh from the fight." ~Steinman/Pitchford
|
|
|
|
|
Jean Thibodeau
|
| Posted: Sun 29 Jul, 2007 9:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | QUOTE: " Some forms of quilted defenses were made from layers of linen (at least two) quilted vertically to make tube-like pockets. These pockets were then stuffed with wool, tow, rags, animal hair, cotton, or some other padding. " |
The above from Alexi's article.
Just a question and a possible suggestion for stuffing the tubes if one wants to make a gambison based on vertical tubes over the body and either vertical or circular horizontal ones for the arms? ( Don't know which was used or if both are historically correct. )
The question would be: Was or could heavy rope be used inside the tubes ? Hard to cut fibrous rope, a finger thick in diameter, might work very well and might be wrapped in cotton batting around each rope or wool for more of a padding effect. Each tube could be sewn to adjacent tubes directly and/or sewn to a strong linen canvas backing.
Probably many possible variations of this idea, but the main thing is using rope as the hard to cut core of each tube.
This might also be better for a thick " stand alone " gambison but too thick or rigid for use under plate.
Pamela: This might be and easy way to make a gambison tube by tube with or without a pattern.  ( Cut and try ? Add half length sections to tailor and taper where needed maybe ? )
Since I'm asking about the use of rope historically I guess this is sort of ON topic wondering if there was any mention of this in the research material for the article or if anyone has information about this. ( Oh, this could be split off as it's own topic about ways to make a gambison ).
You can easily give up your freedom. You have to fight hard to get it back!
|
|
|
|
|
Sean Flynt
|
| Posted: Mon 30 Jul, 2007 9:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | The question would be: Was or could heavy rope be used inside the tubes ? |
I wondered about this, too. It does seem like a technologically reasonable solution, but I would guess that, given the steps and skill involved in making rope in the medieval era, the rolled fabric or loose stuffing options make more economic sense. Of course, it's much easier for us to just buy a coil of cheap rope than to sit all day cutting and rolling fabric. For us, rope is cheap, time is expensive. If I were making my own gambeson for training, I'd look very seriously at the rope option. Seems like rope would be much more shock-absorbent. The visual effect wouldn't be the same as historical methods--crisper and more pronounced, I would guess, since the rope can't flatten out in to oval section like cloth or stuffing might.
-Sean
Author of the Little Hammer novel
https://www.amazon.com/Little-Hammer-Sean-Flynt/dp/B08XN7HZ82/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&keywords=little+hammer+book&qid=1627482034&sr=8-1
|
|
|
|
|
Jean Thibodeau
|
| Posted: Mon 30 Jul, 2007 9:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Sean Flynt wrote: | | Quote: | | The question would be: Was or could heavy rope be used inside the tubes ? |
I wondered about this, too. It does seem like a technologically reasonable solution, but I would guess that, given the steps and skill involved in making rope in the medieval era, the rolled fabric or loose stuffing options make more economic sense. Of course, it's much easier for us to just buy a coil of cheap rope than to sit all day cutting and rolling fabric. For us, rope is cheap, time is expensive. If I were making my own gambeson for training, I'd look very seriously at the rope option. Seems like rope would be much more shock-absorbent. The visual effect wouldn't be the same as historical methods--crisper and more pronounced, I would guess, since the rope can't flatten out in to oval section like cloth or stuffing might. |
Thanks Sean, nice to know I'm not the only one who has these questions or design ideas. 
One could vary the size of rope for different results or even vary the size (diameter) in the same gambison to increase shock-absorbency ( thicker ) or smaller were flexibility takes priority.
Heavy 1" or more hemp rope should be very " extreme " in cut resistance against anything but the sharpest blades ?
( maybe too extreme but interesting to test ).
You can easily give up your freedom. You have to fight hard to get it back!
|
|
|
|
|
Nathan Robinson
myArmoury Admin
|
| Posted: Mon 30 Jul, 2007 10:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Jean Thibodeau wrote: | Thanks Sean, nice to know I'm not the only one who has these questions or design ideas.
One could vary the size of rope for different results or even vary the size (diameter) in the same gambison to increase shock-absorbency ( thicker ) or smaller were flexibility takes priority.
Heavy 1" or more hemp rope should be very " extreme " in cut resistance against anything but the sharpest blades ?
( maybe too extreme but interesting to test ). |
I would think rope is far too "tight", its compression lending itself to being easier to cut should a blade actually hit it straight on. Further, because of its compression, its absorption properties aren't going to be the same as an authentic garment. Further still, I would be concerned with its breathability. And then there's the issue of flexibility for wear: I'd presume the garment in question would be far more flexible in one direction than another and have quite different properties from a traditionally quilted example.
My own thoughts about this type of thing is to look at the historical garments and go off of that. Should improvements want to be made, one must start with the real stuff first. Why reinvent without first exploring the real thing?
.:. Visit my Collection Gallery :: View my Reading List :: View my Wish List :: See Pages I Like :: Find me on Facebook .:.
|
|
|
|
|
Jean Thibodeau
|
| Posted: Mon 30 Jul, 2007 10:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Nathan Robinson wrote: | I would think rope is far too "tight", its compression lending itself to being easier to cut should a blade actually hit it straight on. Further, because of its compression, its absorption properties aren't going to be the same as an authentic garment. Further still, I would be concerned with its breathability. And then there's the issue of flexibility for wear: I'd presume the garment in question would be far more flexible in one direction than another and have quite different properties from a traditionally quilted example.
My own thoughts about this type of thing is to look at the historical garments and go off of that. Should improvements want to be made, one must start with the real stuff first. Why reinvent without first exploring the real thing? |
All good points about possible negative qualities of using rope. The flexibility being better in one direction could be useful though ? Wouldn't the tube like construction of some gambison have this feature also but possibly less extreme than using rope ?
The rope could be used as just the core on which to wrap material that is more resilient but would add a tough fibre in the middle.
Just repeating some off this as a design question but I have to concede that the traditional materials and the way they where put together was almost certainly superior to my imaginings.
The multilayer linen quilted types of gambison were probably the most protective and expensive kind ?
Just wondering how the ones using tubes compared to other kinds of patterns in protective qualities and were there different periods when one or the other was in fashion ? Or maybe we just don't have that much detailed knowledge about it?
You can easily give up your freedom. You have to fight hard to get it back!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Axel Pettersson
Location: Göteborg, Sweden Joined: 04 Apr 2006
Posts: 14
|
| Posted: Thu 02 Aug, 2007 12:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
A quick note on the hanwei gambeson.
I have it, and it is really useless as stand alone protection.
If you are practicing HEMA though, it works great as practice wear, it is tough, light, has the medieval look if you care about that and is great for ringen/wrestling practice in particular, its a european Gi more or less. It also works fine using a s a base for adding joint protection etc.
|
|
 |
|
Hugo Voisine
|
| Posted: Fri 31 Aug, 2007 11:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hi there,
I'm bumping this old topic just to say that 1) I liked those articles very much and 2) that I just received the new "zuparello" from Revival.us.
I already own the Revival Clothing linen gambeson, which I'm wearing every week for WMA practice under my mail shirt, for a couple of months now. I wanted to compare it to the new Revival.us offering, and see if this new product would make a good, less expensive replacement.
Well, I've not tried it yet in WMA practice, but from what I have seen, I think I won't get disappointed. The zuparello is very comfortable and well-cut, covers well the most vulnerable areas (neck and wrists) and seems pretty though. It is lighter and less padded than the R.C. gambeson, but, as we say in computer programming, this is a feature and not a bug.  Comparing the two is a bit like comparing apples and oranges...
Overall I think it's one of the best economical choice on the market.
Here's a picture : http://i216.photobucket.com/albums/cc168/hvoisine/gambison1.jpg
« Que dites-vous ?... C'est inutile ?... Je le sais !
Mais on ne se bat pas dans l'espoir du succès !
Oh ! non, c'est bien plus beau lorsque c'est inutile ! »
|
|
|
|
|
Sean Flynt
|
| Posted: Mon 17 Sep, 2007 9:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
More on rope as padding. I did a little reading over my leave and had a "duh!" moment. Padding the tubes isn't sufficient. To defend against thrusts, the padding must be the same thickness throughout. In other words, the stitching goes through the full thickness of material(s). Otherwise (as with rope) the "valleys" between the tubes would be defenseless. So, one could use rope padding for shock absorption in a modern sparring garment since thrusts must be pulled and couldn't penetrate the material anyway. But such construction would be out of the question as genuine armour.
-Sean
Author of the Little Hammer novel
https://www.amazon.com/Little-Hammer-Sean-Flynt/dp/B08XN7HZ82/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&keywords=little+hammer+book&qid=1627482034&sr=8-1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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
