What modern calibers can pierce medieval plate armor? You know, in case I go back in time.

>>63924998 (OP)
>modern caliber
everything but .22lr and other small game calibers like it, unless it's point blank then it's free for all.

>>63924998 (OP)
A basic 9mm handgun will do pretty well against plate armor, except possibly the breastplates of suits from the 1600s (though those aren't really medieval anymore).

>>63924998 (OP)
9mm and up should get it done. You'd push it with a .38 special.

>>63924998 (OP)
All of them.
>>63925008
>modern caliber
>22lr
You have to go back.

>>63925040
>uhm yes of course 9mm is modern
>noooo .22lr can't be modern, it's barely older than 9mm that's not allowed
this is retarded

>>63924998 (OP)
Kek, the absolute state of mutt education.

>>63925040
yes, it is a "modern" caliber.
you do know that modern is quite a wide array, right? smokeless powder is modern, .22lr is a smokeless powder round, it's up to date to current firearm standard, that mean it's modern.
maybe you're the one that should go back

An old 50mm crudely shaped musket ball was capable of piercing traditional plate armor at close range from a rifle but then people started countering that with a protruded plate armor designed to deflect the bullet

>>63925045
Rimfire vs. centerfire is a massive technological jump.

>>63925048
Europeans aren't even allowed to say the word gun, don't pretend you're educated on what modern calibers would penetrate medieval plate in school you subhuman stain.

>>63925040
If it's a rim or centerfire cartridge it is modern.

>>63925055
dude... center fire exist since 1812 you fucking dumbass.

>>63925055
>developments in cartridges is bigger than dumping powder and shoving a ball after it with a stick
You are autistic.

>>63924998 (OP)
Like >>63925025 brought up, it depends on which plate armor. A 13th-century chestplate is going to be easier to penetrate than an early 17th-century chestplate.

>>63924998 (OP)
>medieval plate armor
10x harder than modern replica armor, which is chinese pot metal.

>>63924998 (OP)
00 buck, 12 guage

>>63925342
>17th century
>medieval
anon
>>63925365
Anon, medieval plate armor was made from mild steel. No, you're an idiot and wrong. Replica armor that isn't simply for display is universally always metallurgically superior.

Even some dogshit chinese stainless steel shit is going to btfo the absolute best made medieval plate armor. In fact, the cheaper it is the better it will likely do against bullets, since it will be overweight and probably some kind of quite hard (relatively) stainless steel.

>>63924998 (OP)
Harder to say than you'd think because only skalagrim with Indian repros and cucked guns has shot "historical" armor with handguns and rifles. A 50cal inline muzzleloader with hardcast bullets isn't the same animal as some 85cal 45" barrel 17th century arbequis shooting iron balls during the end of the armored lancer era.

2-3mm tempered carbon steel *may* be about equal to IIA, European soft armor sometimes uses aluminum or steel plates for composite construction afmor ratings on stab and spall vests. I could see 9mm ball bouncing off a modern production buhurt helmet but it might as likely just crack it from KE. Safe to say all center-fire rifle calibers and probably even .17hmr could punch through most 16-12ga steel from velocity.

.45acp, .40, and 357, and .44 I'd be on the fence on without someone shooting at a buhurt bascinet to show what happens. 3mm is 1/8" and the minimum thickness you find metal armor inserts and targets for light caliber applications. Backface deformation I doubt would be within spec to not be viewed as a "failure" but penetration is less certain.

>>63925040
>All of them.
>>63925053
>>63925055
>>63925045
22lr ftw
>>63925457
>skalagrim
straightintothetrashitgoes.jpg
Do you understand how regressive this asshole is to hoplology? He is the Starwarstheory of cold combat

>>63925057
I could be wrong here but aren't Europeans the onea that where both wearing the bullet proof cuirases and using the guns in the late medieval period?

>>63925392
>medieval plate armor was made from mild steel
No it wasn't you FUCKING RETARD. It was made of the same steel that weapons were, which was mid-high carbon. The entire reason that bluing because popular on armor is because an even flame blue is proof that the steel was properly heat treated and tempered.

>t. blacksmith

>>63925537
No that was the Turks. Easy to get them confused if you're on the streets of Berlin.

>>63924998 (OP)
Just shoot him in the dick.

>>63925568
Oh I didnt know. I am so sorry about your disability.

>>63925580
It's ok, some day you'll learn when the medieval era was.

>>63925537
It's useless to try to discuss history with americans anon, their country Is barely 300 years old

>>63925531
>Didn't read
I said his "test" is useless because he doesn't own any good guns and doesn't own any good repros.

Looking for real answers to OPs question I found other bubba ballistic tests.
Equally flawed is randomtacticallfaggot69 in a youtube short shooting a 16ga mild steel Indian hound skull bascinet with .380 and 9mm and it stopped them. No penetration, acceptable deformation.thrn 5.56 goes right though because duh
A useless waste tier, an Australian buhurt fighter shooting a tempered (2-2.5mm likely) spoleta great helm with 12ga 3" slugs and it penning one side with cracks and popping every rivet instantly. Because gay laws no pistol calibers or low power rifles to test beforehand.

But between those two extremes real plate armor being about IIA and maybe even IIIA is realistic until someone actually tests proper pieces of armor against proper firearms.

>>63925641
It's useless to discuss history with Europeans, because they are not allowed to learn it.

>>63924998 (OP)
EVERYTHING

>>63925377
Shop smart shop S mart.

>>63924998 (OP)
I dont think that armour is medevial, it looks 16th century to me

You'd probably be fine with anything until about the 1400s, then coverage and steel quality begin to become an issue but as long as its supersonic you're probably okay.

>>63924998 (OP)
Honestly, unless you plan to engage in a civil duel, I wouldn't worry about it. People tend to overestimate how common plate armor was in medieval times. Chances of engaging someone in panoply is even less so. A deft shooter can probably rout and obliterate entire line formations with a G19 + extra mags. After which anybody that's wearing a full suit has either turned tail or will get wiped by the conscripted farmers.

>>63925083
This is like saying revolvers have existed since the 17th century. Kind of, but not really.

>>63924998 (OP)
High Speed, Low drag.
220 swift
22-250
17 fireball/MkIV
204 ruger
17 hornet
5.7
MAYBE 17 hmr

even with polymer tips the energy transfer is going to blow right thru thin sheet metal (of any temper or metallurgy)

>>63924998 (OP)
>>63925008
>>63925025
>>63925034
The thickest medieval armors stand a chance of bouncing some common pistol rounds, or allowing only for a very shallow penetration past some degree of secondary protection such as a heavy gambeson. A great deal depends on exactly where the armor is hit, and if it's at a favorable angle.

>>63924998 (OP)
>poleax
>riding harness
This guy already lost.

>>63925643
It would be much simpler and less historically destructive to use equivalent test articles - thoroughly vetted blanks and candidate curves. There are plenty of metallurgists and craftsmen capable of making nearly exact replicas.

"It depends"

Late medieval and renaissance armour saw a lot of variation in both material and thickness. On one hand you have everything from basic iron up to hardened steel (and varying amounts of slag inclusions on top of that), and on the other hand the thickness often varied a lot within a single armour to maximise protection where it was the most needed while keeping the weight down (especially where that was the most needed), so your finger lames won't be as thick as your breastplate, and said breastplate will likely be thicker in the middle than on the sides. And of course just how thick they made the breastplate could vary immensely, going from "not that thick" in the middle of the 15th century to "anything from not that thick to immensely bloody thick" 150 years later.

Alan Williams made a decent attempt at starting to out all of that together into some manner of quantitative analysis in the latter chapters of The Knight and The Blast Furnace: https://www.mediafire.com/file/2lw9w2stunb6zyt/The_Knight_and_the_Blast_Furnace.pdf/file

And a quick look at hardness. Note the Italian suits falling off a cliff ca 1500, this corresponds to gilding becoming fashionable, and they couldn't get fire gilding and tempering to play nice with each other.

Making historically accurate armor is difficult and expensive. There are genuine historical reasons to test them against various contemporary arms, but there is little to no historical value in shooting them with modern firearms. Not to mention the sheer variance in quality and style there is within "plate armor".

Go buy that shit yourself if you're so curious.

>>63924998 (OP)
9mm will go through a stahlhelm, 45 will stove it in
Extrapolate

>>63925537
Yeah, they used to proof 16th century armor by shooting it with period flintlocks.

>>63925040
7.62x54r is a modern caliber

>>63925457
>iron balls
has it not always been lead?

>>63928908
>>63928927
based data poster

>>63925045
I was talking 22LR, not 9mm. I realize that zoomers are pathologically unable to stay on topic but this conversation is going to be painful unless you can, so either focus a bit or go back to watching brainrot.
>but since you brought it up, 9mm isn't particularly modern either

>>63925052
It's a smokeless loading of a semismokeless loading of a BP cartridge with a heeled bullet that's a carryover of C&B cartridge conversions that dates back to the 1870's, you fucking mong. Only in the third world is something like that considered modern.

>>63925067
>1887 rimfire case
>1887 outside lubricated heeled bullet
>smokeless powder
>IT'S MODERN TO ME
Fucking thirdies. Put your phone down and go get hit by a train.

>>63935110
Retard post.

>>63935143
Post gun and hand.
>you won't, and we both know why

>>63936781
Why?

>>63925392
>Even some dogshit chinese stainless steel shit is going to btfo the absolute best made medieval plate armor.
lmao

>>63925057
> the people who literally invented guns can't say that word
american "education" at its finest
europeans invented plate armor too, btw.

>>63938378
>Europeans
>Invented guns
Damn they really don't let you retard serf peasants learn history

>>63930773
>but there is little to no historical value in shooting them with modern firearms
Seems like it’d be quick youtube bucks
>”Who would WIN 10 King Arthurs or 1 Green Beret??”

>>63938386
"history" is something that you don't have in mutland. there are outside toilets in Russia older than your "country".

>>63938416
Doesn't help since you're a retarded subhuman who can't read and knows nothing about history.
>waaah but I am European that means
You're a serf with no guns, no rights, and no history.

>>63925093
>development in cartridges
>talks about non-cartridges

>>63938424
>N-NOOOOO AMERICA INVENTED GUNS
i genuinely don't use this often but
LOL MUTT

>>63938424
> no, you
said the jewish slave mystery meat who doesn't have the right to say "nigger" in public

>>63938559
But I do have the right to say nigger in public. You however would be arrested.
>>63938537
Damn, you're really fucking stupid. I guess it's true that every intelligent person left Europe for America, no wonder you're all weak, impoverished, and angry all the time.

>>63938571
> it is real in my mind
> i'm smart, strong, calm and rich!
uh-huh. all of us 4chin users are like that, didn't you know? and we have small army worth of guns in our basements.

>>63938667
Yes, that's right. That's completely normal in America.

>>63938743
yup, mental illness is completely normal in Murica.

>>63938758
Imagine not having a basement full of guns. Truly a deplorable existence that you think that of all things is unachievable.

I will pray for you.

>>63938537
>genuinely don't use this often but
>LOL MUTT
Somehow I doubt that fag.

>>63938537
>This retard actually thinks Europeans invented guns
It's astounding how every single thing Europeans think about Americans, is true of them. Truly a continent of the delusional and unintelligent.

>>63938537
He didn't say America invented guns you spastic.

>>63925040
The modern era began in 1500 and ended in 1945

>>63938416
>history" is something that you don't have in mutland. there are outside toilets in Russia older than your "country
Ohhhh nooooo we don't have 2000 years of petty blood feuds and ethnic cleansings causing regional strife and racism on a level we can't comprehend noooooooo

>>63939219
>racism
Don't be gay in front of the Eurotrash it emboldens them

>>63924998 (OP)
Bump

>>63925040
Point and laugh at this pedantic faggot

>>63925053

>>63935110
the modern era started in the 1600s
If OP had specified "post industrial era" or "information age" you might have had a point

Is every thread on this board a circlejerk for chauvinistic american retards?

>>63943081
>on the weapons board
>wtf people who own weapons are here?
Yes. Retard. Don't worry, we'll deport you soon so you won't have to be around Americans anymore.

>>63942787
Stop shrieking, take a deep breath, and start reading this thread from the top again. Try to see what we're actually talking about, and not what you want us to be talking about. When you've got a handle on things, feel free to come back and rejoin the discussion.
> you might have had a point
And you might have been straight, but here we are.

>>63925537
In some cases into the 19th century.
>>63928927
There's some conjecture that softer and more ductile plates were superior against musket and pistol balls.

>>63925055
There were center fire cartridges in military service decades before .22lr existed

English civil war era "bulletproofed" plate may handle buckshot at a distance and other wimpier pistol calibers but at point blank I'd think most modern guns have enough force behind them to punch through a mild forged steel.

>>63925342
> early 17th-century chestplate
>>63925457
>17th century arbequis
>>63932004
> proof 16th century armor

Lets talk a bit on when the medieval period end. There is four different dates used for that. In the English speaking world the fall of Constantinople in 1453 AD and 1492 AD for the both the end of the Reconquista & the first Voyage of Christopher Columbus. Over in France you have 1500 AD because its a round date and does not draw to the fact there is no date in France that can be linked to the end of the Medieval period. >>63938996 is a example of someone that thinks like that. Then you have German and other centurial Europeans saying its ends with the the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648 AD.

That last date is highly centered one people not wanting to put the wars of religion in the Early Modern era. To me that feels like a highly political reason, because the Great Turkish War (1683–1699 AD) did have a Protestant vs Catholic element to it at the start.

Honesty 1492 AD feels like a better fit then the other dates. Warfare started to enter a transitional period starting with the Hussite Wars in 1419 AD. Much of the social structures of the Medieval era were gone by 1492 and those that were with around would very slowly disappear.

>>63947228
>is a example of someone that thinks like that
I like the 1500 date because it sits nicely in the middle and is easy to remember, I don't see what's wrong with that. The end of the middle ages and start of the modern varies so much depending on who you ask like you showed that picking a clear date that sits in the right ballpark is fine.

>>63947228
>Entire thread operates on "medieval" armor viewed colloquially, conversation centers on the high middle ages and Renaissance for it's wider documented sources and extant examples
>"Acktually...."

>>63947822
>/k/ is full retards
Who'd thunk it

>>63926880
No.

Actually if I get sent back in time I want a .22 PCP air rifle with me. That way I can shoot at knights helmets and even though it won't pen, it'll give them instant tinnitus from the impact like that anon a couple years back who wore the metal cooking pot on his head and his buddy blasted it

>>63924998 (OP)
A basic shotgun used for home defence or a cowboy era revolver will do. That's why steel armour was abandoned.

>>63951088
Yes.

>>63926880
Yeah.

>>63951257
Maybe

>>63947822
>Entire thread is full of people pointing out retards posting non-medieval armor are retards
>akshually I'm retarded too
that's great dear try not to lick the window too hard

>>63951954
Can you repeat the question?

>>63925040
>still in widespread use
>still manufactured on huge scale
>still has new guns made for the time
>loaded with smokeless powder
Modern enough.