Warbow FPS?

[mullet]

I agree People are not 1957 Cadillacs.

[mullet]

Del, one thing you are not considering is the bullets used in war are Full-Metal jacketed. They very seldom expand.

[llkinak]

I hunt hogs with my .44 Mag with 300 grain bullets

So, having fired more than a few .44 mags myself I have to ask:  Were you flung backwards when you touched the thing off?  Lets take that a step further.  I have a .416 Remington Mag, I don't recall having been knocked to the ground when firing it.  I don't think anyone is debating that an arrow might move a body part, or that the person wearing the armor which deflected it would not notice it at all.  (Then again, there are plenty of folks who have been shot in a vest with pistol ammo and not known about it until after the fight was over simply due to the adrenaline kicking in.)  What I'm saying is the arrow isn't going to knock anyone off their feet or push them backwards. 

[adb]

Comparing arrows and bullets is ridiculous. They will cause death by different methods. Small high velocity projectiles (bullets) kill by vital organ interruption, but part of the equation is kinetic energy (ft/lbs). The impartation of that energy to the target (animal, etc.) has an effect, mostly shocking the central nervous system. But the shock effect alone does not kill. I've seen deer shot in the ass with a 338WM run away, not to be recovered.

Arrows, on the other hand, are much different. They kill by vital organ interruption as well, but purely by hemorrhage. The amount of kinetic energy transferred to the target is negligible. Getting hit, even by a 1/4# war arrow @ 170 fps, would get your attention in armour, but the amount of kinetic energy would not kill you. And armour penetration, as has been shown over and over, is only possible at very close range... 20-30 yards. War arrows are no different, they killed by hemorrhage by hitting vulnerable areas, and were devastating to unarmoured horses.

I have shot a vast number of WT deer through the chest with my 300WM, and not ONE of them was knocked off its feet. Some didn't even show any sign of being hit. Most bullets were a complete pass through. The only devastating, knocked off their feet results, were head shots, but for a whole different reason... massive trauma to the CNS.

[Del the cat]

A very fast cricket ball delivery is 100mph the ball weights 5.5 oz it is thus roughly comparable in energy to a warbow arrow The arrow is a bit faster but lighter.

Arrow, say 180 fps 0.25 lb that gives 2025 doesn't matter what the units are as I'm being consistent with the two calulations.
Cricketball say 146 fps 0.34 lb that gives 3623
I could work it backwards and come up with the cricket ball speed needed to match the arrow's energy... but frankly I can't be bothered, and no amount of arithmetic will actually change the facts!

So the cricket ball has more kinetic energy! It will transfer it better without wasing energy punching a hole in you but it still won't knock you over... yes it will hurt, break ribs etc, but not knock you over.
Our perception has been distorted by Hollywood.

An arrow is specifically designed NOT to knock you over.... but to penetrate!

Anyhow it's easy enough to test, get a few bags of sand and stack 'em up. Shoot it and see what happens.

For our transatlantic cousins:-
A baseball weight and speed is V similar to the cricket ball 
Del

(@abd   Well said! They say an arrow strike is more like a knife/sword thrust whereas a bullet is a blunt brute force impact.)

[WillS]

Well, there's only one way to find out...

Who's up for being a guinea pig?

[adb]

No need. I've killed many deer with bullets and arrows. Most deer are much heavier than humans. Seen the effects of both with my own eyes.

[WillS]

Ah, but were the deer wearing period accurate armour? If not, your tests are irrelevant 

[adb]

Good grief, Will... you're missing the point. 

[WillS]

 

[Josh B]

[quote author=Del the cat link=topic=39000.msg580674#msg580674 date=1383671086
The shot can't possibly hit you with any more force that the recoil of the gun (according to that nice Mr Newton)

Del
[/quote]

On the face of it, newtons law would seem that simple.  And if you figure in all the applicable data it still stands.  However you are overlooking many important variables in your formula.  Just to name a few, weight of the firearm, energy bled off to cycle action(autoloaders), ergonomics of the firearm just to name a few.  These factors are all important to the equation.  I will use the .50 bmg as an example as its the most powerful caliber I've shot.  The recoil imparted to the shooter in a thirty  pound rifle is roughly 80 ftlbs, admittedly, that's over four times the energy to the shooter than most people can stand.  At the other end however, the .50 bmg is delivering well over 12,000 ftlbs of energy.  That will not only knock you down, but usually scatters you for several yards whether you are wearing body armor or not.  So its ridiculous to even try to compare firearms to bows.  Oh and to the .25 acp energy...I can tell you from personal experience that a .22 lr in the thigh will knock your leg out from under you as if it was hit with sledgehammer.  Josh

[Josh B]

I had to take a break for supper.  So to continue.  Obviously that full 12000 ftlbs is not transferred to a soft target like the human body.  90 percent or better is carried on through with the projectile.  Also the more dense bone or more resistant materials struck equal more energy transfer.  ADB has mentioned that he hasn't knocked a deer down.  Most of the time that will be the case with well placed shots.  The bullet only contacts soft tissue and light rib bones.  Put the same bullet through the shoulder blades and spine...its a whole different result.  But as has been mentioned this is pretty much irrelevant to archery.   KE is pretty much a non factor with arrows so I'll put the brakes on here and go on my merry way.  Josh

[kevinsmith5]

Ok, in the 15-16th century there appears to have only been about 5% of an army that had plate armor and not maille or jacks....so this seems to apply to some comments made here.


http://www.currentmiddleages.org/artsci/docs/Champ_Bane_Archery-Testing.pdf

[Del the cat]

Ok, in the 15-16th century there appears to have only been about 5% of an army that had plate armor and not maille or jacks....so this seems to apply to some comments made here.


http://www.currentmiddleages.org/artsci/docs/Champ_Bane_Archery-Testing.pdf

And presumably even fewer horses...
Del

[Atlatlista]

Right.  And these are well-trained horses that we're dealing with, but you probably don't even have to inflict that much of a wound on them to lead to behavior that seriously disrupts whatever the rider has in mind.  The horses on my farm bolt if they hear a loud noise, and they're pretty docile plow horses.