Anyone can shoot through armor???

A fun but not historical test, since a modern bow combined with armor obviously doesn't match at all.

Armin sent the bow to me and since I only otherwise shoot historical bows I immediately started changing it to something I could use.
After the bow was rebuilt it now works pretty well for me and the way I do archery but with amazingly much power.
My 100 pound traditional bow shoots a large wooden arrow about 12 cm. into one of my target plates.
But the Onida bow and the small surface iron arrow shoot 40 cm. into the target plate!!!
Then I tried on my not authentic 2 mm. armor helmet (which none of my regular bows can shoot through) The iron arrow went right through and it was fun to shoot,
So I made a quick video.

It has never been a historical test, I say that in the video
and I made it clearly funny, (rotating jump shot on in remote-controlled skateboard)

This bow did not exist in history (that type of materials and fine mechanics did not exist)
Armor is of unknown quality and without ring armor or gambeson underneath
I used a rather random metal armor, since this test could not be historical anyway, I did not think it made sense to spend large resources on destroy an authentically made historical armor.
But my traditional bows and arrows I can not shoot through this test armor.

Is the title wrong or wildly exaggerated?
Maybe a lot and maybe not.
Can everyone shoot through armor with this bow?

If you calculate the moment of force that is transferred with a heavy and only 5mm. metal arrow transferred from a modern bow with exchange, then it is quite high compared to even a powerful war bow with a much larger wooden arrow.

So what will a test on real authentic historical armor show?
I can't say with certainty, but I think that especially if some spend a little longer trying to find the ideal metal arrows and exchange in the bow to fit.
So maybe it's possible that everyone can actually shoot through real armor or some can.
But I can't know.

Can we learn something historical from this?
Definitely not the bow.
But the metal arrow might be interesting to test properly sometime,
of course metal arrows would be very expensive historically but compared to the price of a knight then a single backstopper arrow that could stop a knight???

An anti-tank missile is also very expensive, but not compared to the tank it can destroy

Thanks to:
Armin Hirmer for sending me the bow.

Sincerely
Lars Andersen

[jakubjanota]

What we noticed in he beginning of early modern period is that as firearms got more effective, armor was upgraded as well. Armor could then withstand shots from contemporary firearms. Only later the firearms got so powerful that making armor resilient enough to withstand said firearms felt redundant and people mostly stopped using armor made to withstand a shot from a firearm. We would see the same process with bows. So if bows got stronger, the armorers would accomodate for it by making the armor thicker.

[VectorBlade]

Biggest issue I see here: Tod’s test used armor that was made as close to historical standards as possible. Lars here is using costume grade armor that’s paper thin and not heat treated and hardened. This is the equivalent of cutting through soft fruit and claiming it’s the same as a human skull. I would wager that a historically made breastplate like the one Tod used would protect just fine against Lars’ setup here.

[edim]

First HUGE issue is that the armor Lars used is costume grade. The steel is paper thin and if I had to wager what it is, it's probably some kind of mild, stainless steel.
The one in Tod's video was an accurate replica of a historical breastplate. An actual historic breastplate of that period would have been 1.5 to 3 mm of medium to high carbon steel that in case of the really expensive knight's armor would have also been heat treated to make it even more resistant. A breastplate like that could withstand a hit from a contemporary FIREARM!
Winged Hussar's breastplate could withstand a shot from a 1600's pistol and even a MUSKET! The only "bows" that could match that energy were siege crossbows that had hand a hand crank mechanism to pull the string bc it had draw weight approaching 1000 lbs, and contemporary armors could, in favorable conditions (high quality steel, not a "point blank" shot) withstand that...

[simonspacek]

There is one point missing. Whenever new weapon was introduced, new armour soon arrived. So if people would use this type of bows, other people would find a way to upgrade armour to stop it. Maybe two layers of steel would work, maybe higher sloping would be the answer, but they would figure it out.

[jordicl]

you should get in contact with todd, so you get to shoot historically accurate armor with this bow and steel arrows and see if it withstands it. I don't think that armor of yours is thicker than a beercan. Even if it's a compound bow and the arrow is made from steel, that draw weight seems too small to do anything to a proper armor.

[dylanl]

Tod’s tests involved a series of experts in their own areas.

This testing replaces expertise with deceptive practises.

[quizasproximovez]

There's a reason that Tod's Workshop took the amount of time and money they did on their tests.

They had historically accurate armor of legitimate quality from reputable craftsman.

That breastplate turned away musket pistols.

There is no comparison between Lars' tests and the ones done by the good boys at Tod's Workshop because we literally have no information about the breastplate used. But based on it being penetrated by an Oneida Eagle at max 75lb draw, regardless of the arrow weight or design, the apparent flex when the target is moved even slightly, and Lars' own admission that he didn't know how it was made + the deliberate omission of the steel's gauge... Probably dubious quality.

[youraveragebinchicken]

All I really learned from this test is that costume armour can deflect longbow shots.

[MacAirgead]

There's a huge difference between trying to shoot correctly made armor with a Longbow and trying to shoot through modern costume armor with a modern bow.

[rockmcdwayne]

In Visby, Sweden we saw a dude shoot some 120lbs bow at a hardened steel chestplate and guess what? It hardly left a scratch on the surface of the metal. You need pretty substantial force to dent hardened steel as it really dont want to do it, on most cases it cracks before it bends. The type of metal we are talkin about matters a lot. In this particular video we see massive denting in the armor so its clearly not a hardened steel.

[alvaroasi]

2:30 Historical arrows where ticker, double tapered, heavier and have specific heads for each kind of target... ¡And manufactured under budget concerns! then, a full metallic shaft was not possible by budget nor technology, the work mostly with wrought iron instead of steel.

[nahiro]

One point I did not see mentioned yet is, that the arrows will not break after impact. The advantage of wooden arrows is that they often break on impact. Thus they can not be shot back. (Also the cost of making hardened steel arrow shafts would be an enormous investment for the amount needed.) Those pricey arrows would be fired from one side to the other like hot potatoes.

I would love to see this tested properly as a what-if scenario. Other comments mentioned the rest of the requirements for that.

PS: Also love the way this community just goes right into: Allright productive criticism here we go.

[PrismaticaDev]

I think this video plays in to the "medieval people were all stupid" stereotype.

We can assume with confidence that arrows with metal shafts were tested during the period but for whatever reason were not adopted as the norm. Most likely it still wasn't enough to penetrate *real* armour, or if it could it wasn't reliable enough to warrant sinking precious metal resources or extra time in to. Also consider that arrows were a long-range tactic in warfare so you'd just be throwing money at the opposing army.

[jesuizanmich]

I get shooting metal darts out of a compound bow is a fun idea (afterall, modern arrows are basically tubular darts already). However, it feels like the video is still being disingenuous. It kinda disses on the historical community by stating that Lars and "anyone" can shoot through armour while Todd and his "very strong man" couldn't. Sure, it has a short disclaimer at the end of the video and one hidden in the description, but still, this could have been presented from the start as a fun idea inspired by Todd's armour tests.

Todd's "lockdown longbow" tests show that you would need at least a high poundage modern compound crossbow to replicate the energy a 160 pound
longbow imparts on medieval war arrows.

I'm pretty sure this quality of armour would have been penetrated by the 160 pound bow too... Todd's group put a lot of effort and resources replicating the quality of historical armour whereas this test shows you can shoot metal darts through cosplay armour with a modern compound bow.

[randylee]

Did this guy shoot through a keyhole? And spin shot through the eye hole? That is beyond impressive.

[claudiusii]

It would be also good if we could see in the description the characteristics of that breastplate, e.g., what is its exact composition, thickness, etc.

[ftornik]

If the historical armorsmiths had same steel that was used for arrows, they would also use it for the armor they made.
Considering that they could also test their products, and that the customer pays for quality, they would simply make armor appropriately thicker, to the point when again, a bowman can not shoot through it. Napoleonic era cuirasses were tested against contemporary guns. Surely they were much heavier than cuirasses of 14th-16th century knights/armored cavalry (and much more cumbersome), but they were made to stand contemporary weapons.
What never fails to amaze me, are assumptions of such "testers" that armor would not evolve with weapons. Surely, you might get a short term advantage and win a couple battles, but then it would soon be over.
Also, armor-piercing arrows would hardly kill anyone, unless they hit the vitals. The wound would be painful and hard to heal, but not instantly lethal and stopping. At displayed distance/conditions the knight would most likely get to the bowman and kill him.

[ThalesWell]

2:44 The timing of this narration is so funny. Historical archers definitely jumped up while twisting.

[AdamCeladin]

Amazing Test Lars! With Steel throwing knives i can penetrate chainmail armor as well

[adymasuaribinmustakip]

Dang I felt bad for ancient men who broke their shoulders, back bones to defend their country just so some guy penetrate some plate armor with 50lbs bow