How much damage would getting shot by a medieval style crossbow actually do to you?
What would the comparable gun caliber be?
It could probably fuck you up. Also medieval thread
I think being shot by a crossbow would be more incapacitating than being shot by a gun.
>get shot in the arm with a gun
>wrap a shirt or something around the wound until you can get medical attention
>get shot in the arm with a crossbow
>have a fucking crossbow bolt sticking out of your arm on both sides
A crossbow bolt would likely go completely through an unarmored person assuming it was fired at close range and is of comparable power to medieval crossbows.
They were designed to be effective against armor after all.
According to this website, a medieval crossbow would fire a bolt weighing 1.25 oz traveling 138.7 fps.
A 9mm handgun fires a bullet weighing 0.262857 oz (115 grain) traveling 1300 fps.
A 30-06 sprg hunting rifle fires a bullet weighing 0.411429 oz (180 grain) traveling 2700 fps.
Since kinetic energy is equal to half the mass times speed squared, raising the speed of an object has a much larger effect on the kinetic energy of a projectile than raising the mass.
But math is shit so let's look at some practical applications. A hunting crossbow will fire a bolt faster than a medieval piece of shit.
>the bolt goes through the deer
>the buck died maybe 30 minutes later from blood loss because he has no hands to be able to bandage his wound
>a human getting hit by this may have survived since he would just bandage himself up to prevent blood loss
>around 15 feet shot
>270 yard shot with a 30-06 round
>buck dies instantly
>muh hydro static shock
Guns are absolutely superior. Crossbows and bows are only used by hunters to promote the idea of "fair chase".
People underestimate the power of a medieval crossbow and bolt. The crossbow became so powerful at one point that they had to increase the thickness of the bolt shaft just to keep it from shattering on launch. These 'heavy crossbows' became rather renown for staggering knights on galloping horses and in some cases dislodging them from said horse. It wasn't the fact that a bolt could pierce straight through the flesh, but the amount of force they had when connecting with armor or shields.
>How much damage would getting shot by a medieval style crossbow actually do to you?
How much damage would falling on a sharp stick actually do to you?
>What would the comparable gun caliber be?
What is the diameter of the bolt?
Hunters use broad head bolts that can't exactly expand inside an animal. I would imagine a bolt going straight through the animal would have better killing potential due to faster blood loss. It's not like deer can get surgery to stitch up their wounds.
Are we talking an armour piercing point, or a broad headed point?
Both are unlikely to kill you straight away, and both will cause you to be much less combat effective straight away. Most people aren't going to be doing much fighting with a bolt sticking through their gut or chest. A broadhead will cause you to collapse and die to blood loss faster, unless you're wearing armour.
You are more likely to survive the AP bolt since it probably won't sever an artery, but both are likely to kill you due to sepsis anyway, since antibiotics didn't exist and medicine a shit.
You can't really compare it to a firearm, they're completely different velocities, projectile weights, and kinds of projectile.
"Anyone yet unconvinced of the fallacy in using kinetic energy alone to measure wounding capacity might wish to consider the example of a modern broadhead hunting arrow. It is used to kill all species of big game, yet its striking energy is only about 50 ft-lb (68 Joules)-- less than that of the .22 Short bullet. Energy is used efficiently by the sharp blade of the broadhead arrow. Cutting tissue is far more efficient than crushing it, and crushing it is far more efficient than tearing it apart by stretch (as in temporary cavitation)."
The initial wound wouldn't be nearly as bad as a bullet but until you got the arrow out it would get worse and worse as your skin and muscles tried to slide over each other.
Removal would be tricky if it's a barbed head. It's actually better to push it out the back rather than pulling it out. You might also want to consider cutting the arrow out. Still, this depends on it being a barbed head, a stilleto head or a bodkin would be less damaging.
hunters use broad headed bolts to cause more interanl damage to the animal to make them die quicker. you don't want an animal to bleed out because 1) it suffers and 2) it can run away while still bleeding. you want to kill it as fast as possible, preferably in one hit.
if you don't you have to track it for longer. and you don't want a bear or wolf or coyote contesting your kill.
Enough to kill fast a person if the bolt impact in the chest or in the head/neck.
What poundage and draw length? You can't just say medieval crossbow. Average was 150-350#. Confirmed to go up to 1200# estimated to go up to 3000#. Usually around 12 inches.
Modern crossbows are 100-150-175# at 12-16 inches.
To be clear it's like saying how much damage a wwII firearm would cause. Isn't very clear is it?
>Usually around 12 inches.
Wait, if you are talking about medieval crossbows, I'm pretty sure the heavier draw weight ones only had a draw length of 5-6 inches or am I mixing it with english languages term of "power stroke" or such.
Yes other very important terms. Draw length is the distance from the bow to the trigger mechanism. Powerstroke is how far the string will move. This involves the "fistmele" (If I remember correctly). The fistmele is the distance between the string and the bow.
For example; a bow with a 12" drawlength and a 3" fistmele will have a 9" powerstroke which is how far the string will actually push the bolt. This applys to bows as well (if a little bit more inaccurately).
Also look up arbalist guild, http://thearbalistguild.forumotion.com
It's MUCH easier to follow a blood trail on an animal that's been shot through than it is to follow the blood trail of an animal that has the arrow/bolt/bullet lodged inside of it.
pretty sure most crossbows of that time could put out 40-60 ft lbs of energy (a high estimate, heavy compounds of today are doing 90+) which is less energy than a .22.
I think crossbows and bows gain its lethality from its ability to shoot broardheads.