Are crossbows useful in any way, form, or shape in this age?

>>28697857
They're only useful if they have a Slide Fire stock. Otherwise, the rate of fire is too low.

>>28697857
Faithful reproductions of Medieval crossbows would take a little more skill to use but are probably far more effective in use than modern target/hunting crossbows. Besides, they look proper and not like some kind of tactizombie mall ninja abortion that begs for death. If you get a crossbow, get an authentic-ish one like OP Pic with a nice heavy draw and go have yourself some fun.

File: download (5).jpg (10KB, 301x167px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 301x167px

>>28697857
They can easily penetrate soft ballistic armor. Ballistic plate. not so much.

File: crossbow-3 (1).jpg (41KB, 600x378px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 600x378px

>>28698028
Ahh seige crossbows... that 1200-3000 lbs.
>Mfw people think medieval bows topped out at the modern 150-175.

>>28698096
Even 300-400 pounds is pretty decent for a crossbow really, but if you're getting a big arbalest with a craneqin then go aright ahead and fuck everyone's shit up la familia nostra.
Modern crossbows are made for soft squishy little manlets with no muscle tone and wood allergies, they're just as bad as the muzzleloader muskets with polymer furniture and marinekote.

File: rps20151023_113121.jpg (33KB, 1288x258px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 1288x258px

>>28698162
Ya, I'm slowly making my 3rd crossbow. It will use a 175lb prod. However if I feel the need for mo'powah again I left space so I can stack up to 3 loose bound prods. Will need into Gafa, windlass or cranquin though.
>Mwf cant afford Todds stuff..

File: ts_img_hunting-crossbow_350x234.jpg (8KB, 260x174px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 260x174px

>>28698222
>Drooling... Todds stuff...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WEOeZTV9wiA1250lb windlass crossbow
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_ovVTHpgLg350lb crossbow using belt an claw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GozSx3PMO6814 century munition grade crossbow
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zjYQEyC4m10450lb craunquin hunting bow
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kP8bqIgd5roGastrophetes or greek belly bow
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=se_N8CrooPYBalasrino or assassins bow
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iIkxyjVu9gc350lb Munitions Grade bow with Gafa
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tk5drua6sK411 century hunting bow
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r-8DQYLjHJE12 century crossbow

>>28698096
Wait, I thought we were not talking about balistas?

File: lockplate-001.jpg (71KB, 420x251px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 420x251px

>>28698330
We're not.

File: Fig. 75 - The Windlass Attached To Crossbow.png (181KB, 574x809px) Image search: [Google]

181KB, 574x809px

>>28698742

>>28698222
Damn you make medieval crossbow replicas, that's awesome

File: Crossbow carbonexpress_supercoil_13.jpg (78KB, 1000x666px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 1000x666px

>>28697857
>Are crossbows useful in any way, form, or shape in this age?

One of the easiest ways to get an idiot-proof silent projectile weapon without a single background check or otherwise.

Modern broadhead hitting anyone not wearing a rifle plate in the lungs is pretty much certain death unless they get immediate triage (and not even then sometimes depending on what else is hit), and a crossbow is piss easy to learn how to shoot compared to a compound bow.

Of course it's role is taking a single, quiet shot - so besides hunting, it is a tool of premeditated murder and not wanton killing. Get someone to stand on the X and shoot from a predetermined position where you know you will not be seen. Besides a "click" and the sound of the bolt flying, not much else to give away your position.

However it is already known that the farther away you are, the more likely you are to miss, and a bolt is lighter than an arrow, and thus more prone to be thrown off course (even though the poundage getting thrown on a Crossbow is almost always greater than a compound bow). This gets back to more obvious tenets of trying to commit a crime: If someone is going to do something like this and commit themselves to the consequences of the act, then they want to be certain they get the job done.

Easiest way to do that is to get up close and personal. Why else is .22 cal such a popular caliber for clandestine murder? Because it's so easily suppressed, and at point blank range can typically penetrate a skull.

More to the point, the role of the crossbow besides doing shit like that is that it's an easy way to take part in bow season without learning how to shoot a bow.

>>28699202
>what is myth for $500
Most crossbows are quite loud.

>>28699202
Modern crossbows just shoot arrows though don't they. Also
>crossbow
>quiet
TWANG

>>28697857

I'd say there have been improvements. Medieval crossbows tended to have very short power strokes (the distance between the string at full draw and braced, or undrawn, position of the string). More power stroke means more projectile acceleration. This was also why medieval crossbows were built with massive draw weights (i.e. to get the same power as a conventional bow while having a shorter power stroke, they increased draw weight). I've heard a 300# crossbow is roughly equivalent to a 70# bow.

Modern crossbows have significantly longer power strokes. Reverse-draw crossbows are the most extreme examples (e.g. a bow with no brace height, so its entire draw length translates to power stroke). Modern bows and crossbows pick up even more efficiency through limb weight/composition/travel and cam geometry.

I can't give a hard and fast comparison of a 1500# medieval crossbow to a 200# modern one say, but a modern crossbow will outperform a medieval crossbow of the same draw weight.

File: Crossbow silencer.jpg (15KB, 300x225px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 300x225px

>>28699266
>>28699296

Jesus if you're that concerned, put some fucking kush balls on the string. Compared to the report of a gun, it's minuscule. No, it's not totally silent. From 50 yards away, I doubt it'd draw much attention.

>Modern crossbows just shoot arrows though don't they

It would need to be pretty long to accept a 28+ inch long arrow. But even with the shorter bolts you can put weighted inserts in them to make the bolt heavier and change the ballistics of it.

The pope banned them for a good reason -- they're too dangerous!

>>28699296
Less of a TWANG and more of a THWACK.
Too much tension to vibrate.
Watch;
>>28698267

File: nationalcrossbowassociation.png (590KB, 659x462px) Image search: [Google]

590KB, 659x462px

>>28697857
Yeah they're great for standing up to the tyrannical government in King's Landing. It's nuts how Joffrey isn't even Robert's trueborn son, where's the fucking birth certificate? Also I'm pretty sure he worships R'hllor, night is dark and full of terror my ass. Anyway The North Will Rise Again! Juck Foffrey!

Any tests involving carbide, depleted uranium or simular tips???

There are times when I take my crossbow out instead of the rifle.
When I have a job clearing feral animas around buildings.
The property is smaller than the danger trace of a rifle big enough to kill the pests I'm contracted to reduce.
The pests have been spooked by fuds blasting away at any thing that moves.

A crossbow is a nice alternative to a compound.

>>28699915
No tests on exotic materials.
Lots of tests on different shafts and broad heads.

If you want to use a crossbow against body armour you are out of luck, no crossbow will go through a plate, a good, small and sharp broad head may go through soft armour.
One inch single bevel two blade heads will go through a 00's soft vest.
Google crossbow v ballistic vest.

>>28697857
>Are crossbows useful in any way, form, or shape in this age?

not really.
even in a SHTF situation, thinking of it as a reusable projectile weapon, I imagine a slingshot would be more useful due to weight, were and tare on the projectile, reload time, ect.

>Have they improved compared to the middle ages significantly?
for hunting, probably
for use against an enemy in full plate, I doubt it.

>>28700225
>reusable projectile
Reminder that you can't really use sticks for strong bows/crossbows.
You either break the crossbow or a the sticks can't take the force and break which can pierce your hand.

>>28700895
by reusable projectile, i mean you might be able to pull the bolt out of a deer carcass and reuse it as long as it didn't shatter.

depends on how available certain woods are, and the tools to work with them. you might be able to build new bolts if you are good at crafting with resin, hardwood, and thread.

all in all probably not worth it, why I say a slingshot is probably a better option in almost any situation. you are not going to be taking down a deer with a sling shot but you can survive on squirrels

>>28698222
Nice trips
How hard is it to make your own crossbow? It doesn't look very complicated mechanically.

>>28701086
Mechanically they're dead simple, but just like any good bow, you'll need the correct proportions, materials, and construction techniques to make something that doesn't snap, shatter, or fall to pieces the moment you try to use it.

File: Pin_lock_-_fully_cocked.jpg (642KB, 2560x1440px) Image search: [Google]

642KB, 2560x1440px

>>28701086
Not really hard. I would recommend a skain-lock for anyone's first time. A lever pushes a pin through a hole trolled in the stock. The string sits in a notch cut into the stock. Dead simple...

File: Crossbow-13th-century-side.png (21KB, 2899x364px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 2899x364px

>>28702903
...The one I'm making that you replied to will be a rolling-nut lock. Its the most common type of medieval crossbow. Here is the plan used for that one. It's self explanatory.

File: R0040 Crossbow Wooden_03_LRG.jpg (107KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 800x600px

>>28702903
Another skain-lock picture

File: rps20151123_191402.jpg (54KB, 542x960px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 542x960px

>>28700895
This will work in a 175# crossbow. Only compounds have that issue. Is literally the cheapest hardware store softwood.

>>28698962
>>GOTTA RUN FAST!

>>28703131
What about fiberglass tent pole sections? I've accumulated a fair number, and I was pondering on their suitability for bolt material. Is there any kind of formula or rule of thumb regarding bolt length/weight vs. draw weight?

>>28698267
More youtubers like this?

>>28698028
Compound bows are much more efficient and faster than classic bow. Medieval crossbows are just horrible with their parasitic mass and inefficiency. 400 vs 140 fps nuff said.

can you make improved armor piercing bolts with tungsten carbide instead of steel or somethin

>>28699202
why ARE bolts lighter than arrows? Why not just give them a solid core to make them heavier since they're shorter?

>>28699266
>>28699296
>implying anyone is going to give a fuck about firing a crossbow
It's not 100% silent, but it's also not loud and distinct enough to bring too much attention.

File: CrossbowBolt.jpg (37KB, 1309x303px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 1309x303px

>>28699202
>bolt
Modern corssbows don't use bolts, they use shorter arrows. A bolt is a very short and heavy projectile that is supposed to hit hard at close range (so it can penetrate armor), but loses it's energy very quickly at longer distances, kinda like slugs.

Pic related is how modern bolts look like

>>28697857
More accurate than bows.

>inb4 no they are not because of more vibrations

They are less accurate themselves, but they are shouldered and the positions you can shoot them in makes them more accurate overall.

Bows can only be shoot standing or kneeling if they are short enough (well you could shoot them prone, but it's going to make them less accurate, not more) while crossbows can be shot in virtually any position (even blindly from behind a cover) and with a support to stabilize them even more.

>>28704613
Why would a heavier projectile lose energy quicker than a lighter one?

Take 2 bullets identical in dimensions, one is platinum, the other is aluminium.
Both are at the same velocity
Which one do you think is affected the most by friction relatively?

Slugs lose energy quickly because they're not aerodynamic.
Has nothing to do with the weight, aerodynamics influence energy loss.

>>28705128
Why would a heavier projectile lose energy quicker than a lighter one?
Because as I said, bolts are also much shorter and often lack any fletching, and that does influence their stability during the flight.

>>28705193
Fletching has nothing to do with weight.
Shortness has nothing to do with weight.

Give me an actual reason why a denser (heavier) object loses energy quicker than a lighter one.
You can't because denser objects are relatively less affected by air friction than lighter less dense objects of the exact same dimensions.

>inb4 debating semantics.

>>28705251
>Give me an actual reason why a denser (heavier) object loses energy quicker than a lighter one.
There is none and I never said there is. I said that bolts are both shorter and heavier, I didn't say the weight is the sole reason why it loses its energy quicker.

What is wrong with you?

>>28705699
>I didn't say the weight is the sole reason
Yea but you did say it is A reason while in reality it's not the reason a bolt loses energy quicker.

>>28705754
>A bolt is a very short and heavy projectile that is supposed to hit hard at close range (so it can penetrate armor), but loses it's energy very quickly at longer distances, kinda like slugs.

I really never said it's because of weight. If you understood it like that, I'm sorry, it's not what I meant.

File: Medieval-Crossbow-Bolts.jpg (18KB, 736x247px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 736x247px

>>28706567
>>28705754
>>28705699
>>28705251
>>28705193
>>28705128

Arrows actually lose energy faster than bolts, due to friction (arrows are larger) and also largely due to flex. Arrows need to flex because archers paradox, which absorbs a surprising amount of energy. Bolts should not flex.

File: 1452760718436.jpg (69KB, 920x380px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 920x380px

>>28703496

>>28706721
Sort of.

Bolts lose less energy slower over small distance, but have more rapid energy loss as range increases. The result is that bolts shoot more flat then drop quickly past a threshold, while arrows shoot a long arc from start to finish.

This is why crossbows were never used as long range bombardment weapons, while longbows were. By the end of the arc, the bolt had lost all it's energy, while the arrow was *gaining* energy due to it's superior weight and gravity (arrows shot during bombardment were fired at a 45 degree arc and came in from above)

None of this matters in modern applications, because nobody shoots 8 ounce pile point arrows from 120lb longbows today. The only thing that matters in a modern sense is poundage and how skilled the shooter is with their weapon of choice.

>>28698162
You do realise that most people in the middle ages were quite short, don't you? Why the random manlet comment?

File: 27fe7472d3d0afc5969c212a8e0f5b50.jpg (39KB, 736x487px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 736x487px

>>28704029
He's not a YouTube, Todd is a manufacturer. He's just demonstrating some of his products.
http://www.todsstuff.co.uk/index.htm

Have these though;
Medieval Style 100 Pound PVC Crossbow with Skane or Pin Lock for under $10;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qU_tc1CWIrU Introduction
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQQjY-EOvdM&index=2&list=PLmZjohx-3PZkLsnEJ8kQpyI1rNL-Kr2SK Part 1 of construction.

And a discovery channel style episode on crossbows, note it does have several errors but it gets the job done in a entertaining fashion.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1WDXdKCe-yw&index=6&list=LLu1yuWzxWaj-nHNJCJQm0zg

>>28699345
>Shoot someome with arrow
>AAAAARGH THERE'S A FUCKING ARROW IN ME!


So silent.

>>28707799
Question: if i wanted to make a crossbow whose job is to pack as much punch as humanly (material-y?) possible while still being man-portable (in the same way a M2 is man portable, you can only fire it from a fixed position but you can still physically haul it around by yourself) what design choices should i implement? Ratcheted pulleys for cocking? Multiple limbs?

>>28707871
Big and with a Windlass. Also, it's been done for hundreds of years, no need to make a super snowflake one.

File: 52b16170018469554ab853e7d1dcad64260a4628_r.jpg (77KB, 570x382px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 570x382px

>>28707871
Multi-axle lock, with delrin nut (Steel reinforced) and delrin socket reinforcement. Near-frictionless hardened sears on trigger and nut. Hardwood laminate or solid delrin tiller. Steel pin by prod cutout to prevent splitting. Bow-irons instead of bridle, for strength. Maybe lead or steel insert in butt to reduce backlash. Delrin sheet on top with groove for bolt and for string to glide on. As long a power stroke as you can handle... 16-20 inches (This will make MASSIVE difference..

Prod is more complicated. You could loose-bind multiple prods together steel or fibeglass and shrink wrap them with rawhide, plastic or fiberglass. Or you could have one custom made.
I wouldn't go higher than 3000lbs which is what the payne-gallowey bow was estimated to be originally. You could go higher but... I wouldn't because reasons.

For spanning cranquin or windlass. Could also use a modern come-along winch with a steel cap welded on for crossbow butt. that would be cool

Lots of kush balls.

This is only for a medieval style one though... you could always go reverse draw or compound.
see;https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WEOeZTV9wiA1250lb but x3 in power with a much longer power stroke.

>I said delrin but you could also use abs or nylon. Any high-stength, self lubricating industrial plastic. Or horn for authenticity. if your rich.

>This is my dream bow that will never happen... hold me, might need to make 3d model to numb the pain.

>>28708810
>modern come-along winch
Yea, thought of that (called it "Ratcheted pulley" in the first post because i didn't know the name)

Also, is the 3000lbs limit reason related to the material and structural properties of the crossbow or those of the human body?

All in all very interesting, thanks.

File: Fig. 72 - Finished Crossbow.png (166KB, 574x809px) Image search: [Google]

166KB, 574x809px

>>28708965
The 3000lbs limit is due to the payne-gallowey bow. Let me explain.

>Sir Ralph Payne-Galloway liked crossbows. He wrote a book, called book of the crossbow in 1903. Now back then old stuff was a little easier to get a hold of. He go an ORIGINAL medieval crossbow (400 years old in 1903) and fixed it up, it weighing in at 1200 lbs. However it had remained FULLY SPANNED FOR SEVERAL HUNDRED YEARS. as you can imagine, it lost some of its springiness, as it has been estimated to originally been about 3000lbs.

So back to the limit, 1200lbs is the proven siege bow limit with 3000 being the estimated limit for a shoulder fired medieval bow.

So you could go higher... but there is no telling what could happen, and why or If they stopped at that. Remember this was ONE surviving tested example.

>Pic related, a picture from the book. If you want any more info from it I have the .pdf.

File: Medieval-Crossbow-15thC.jpg (40KB, 640x419px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 640x419px

>>28709378
More stuff... those siege bows, indeed most medieval crossbows usually had a draw-length of 10-12 inches and a power-stroke of 9-5 inches. The power-stroke is how far the bolt is actually pushed. This is the main reason crossbows are much less efficient than a regular bow (about 30' for a medieval warbow). So a much longer power stroke would GREATLY increase power, almost more than increasing the draw-weight.

>>28707799

>Shoot someone with a gun
>They go flying into the next zip code, fall down immediately and die - just like in the movies!

Or they do the exact same thing and just scream "I'VE BEEN SHOT" instead.

>>28697857
They're great for poaching, in my experience.

Anyone ever made a crossbow from an old car leaf spring?

File: Crossbow trigger.jpg (58KB, 398x267px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 398x267px

>>28711104
A ballista, maybe. bolt one of those to a log and see how long you can just hold it up.

>>28703496
......

File: 2013-058.jpg (45KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 480x360px

>>28711104
No but I've seen many pictures. It's quite common.

>>28698028
You are a fucking moron. Stop posting.

File: PhotoLibrary-8703.jpg (122KB, 750x562px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 750x562px

>>28712129
>>28711104
Here's a better one.

File: 110.jpg (127KB, 800x1067px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 800x1067px

>>28713241
I think this one too.

File: dads simple as fuck trigger mechanism.png (22KB, 1315x562px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 1315x562px

>>28702903
my dad made a crossbow with a similar mechanism once. except it was made like a giant trigger, pulling the pin down into the stock.

Nocrossbowz here.
So what is the effective range accuracywise?

Would a crossbow be suitable for home defense?

>>28713794
You could probably kill one person with a crossbow easily though they might not drop right away. Be prepared to pull out your melee to finish the job.

>>28709378
So it is more of a superstition kinda thing where going above 3000 lbs may anger the spirit of the crossbow and cause it to malfunction in such a way that it kills the user?

PRAISE THE OMNISSIAH! 40K IS FOR REAL!

>>28714127
If a 3000 lbs crossbow breaks while you are aiming it you will probably die. The string will slash your skull open.

File: 20160128_213405[1].jpg (2MB, 2192x2791px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2192x2791px

What's the effectiveness of a crossbow if it shoots bullets instead of bolts?

>>28715042
Aren't bolt and bullet synonymous in your source?

File: 20160128_215600[1].jpg (3MB, 2322x3310px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2322x3310px

>>28715129
Nah mate, it shoots musket balls.
Source btw: Richard Middleton - The Practical Guide to Man-Powered Weapons & Ammunition.

(search it. 4chan keeps telling me the bitly link is spam)

>>28698162
Anything above the 90 pound draw weight for crossbows had a hand crank to pull it back.

>>28715189
Actually 175 lbs is the standard limit.
Dude I a fucking skeleton, you a cripple or something???

File: ts-img-anatomy-15-16thC-stonebow-400x313.jpg (33KB, 400x313px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 400x313px

>>28715042
Dude, geezer lost his eye with one of those. Lead and clay balls are the traditional ammunition. Used for small game, now we use pellet rifles instead. wear eye protection. Don't shoot at something hard.

>>28697857
really interesting topic OP

medieval crossbows were for siege combat, made to fire through small windows and able to have immense power to penetrate plate metal

modern crossbows are generally for hunting, and so are not very powerful; but certainly more efficient
very few have winching mechanisms for instance, and most have a "long draw+fire short arrow" type arrangement

now it would be entirely possible to use modern technology to make a medieval-style crossbow, and if done it would be terrifying

imagine two regular arms, two lateral arms; compound bow draw, super thick polymer string, tungsten head bolts, double gear winch, steel frame, 1000 pounds

>>28713794
Yes, as is boiling oil.

>>28715284
Wow I just realized how badly I need this.

>>28715420
talisman used to make some winch driven single arm crosbows at 200-300 pounds

Excalibur comes recommended by a lot of folks in the states, some of their crossbows run at 280 pound draw and boast fairly impressive FPS
also cheaper

given the choice I'd take a suppressed carbine in .45 or something, because the speed of a follow up shot, the lack of moving parts, etc etc

but if I lived in a nogunz hellhole, a crossbow would be great
criminals love them because there is no ballistic evidence and no recognizable noise

>>28714697
Or worse, the whole limb might break, spring back and nearly decapitate him.

Crossbow making is no joke. Start with something small, then try something bigger once you have enough experience

>>28715507
It's actually harder to get a crossbow than a gun in Poland.

And by harder I mean impossible. Hell even our olympic crossbowman who managed to get silver in world championship is not allowed to own a crossbow, he has to practice with guns/in other countries.

>>28716182
What the shit why?
I've heard San Marino sells them openly btw.

>>28716246
>What the shit why?
Because it's listed as an "especially dangerous device", on par with full auto, supressors, weapons chambered in .50 or anything bigger and of course fucking body armor.

>>28716274
Yeah, but has there been a precedent? Was some polish aristocrat shot with a crossbow, or some civil uprising like the scythes one, or is this law for no specific reason?

>>28716356
>or is this law for no specific reason?
The specific reason is that some idiot with no idea about weapons at all thought it sounds dangerous.

>>28715279
That's an "atypical" crossbow design though and maybe the author used normal crossbows.

Also I want a crossbow with an extremely long power stroke, I don't care how wide or long it becomes.

File: 1451172287636.jpg (969KB, 1283x2157px) Image search: [Google]

969KB, 1283x2157px

>>28698742
>mfw I own this book
>mfw it has full scale drawings of every part
Proper prints would be much nicer but still.

>>28697857
Crossbows have surprising levels of penetration in addition to being remarkably quiet. Not silent, but quiet. The length of the shaft means there's more weight behind the tip so penetration is very high for what amounts to a slingshot on crack.

>>28699202
>silent
Theyre louder than a suppressed .22
>short range
A total noob should have zero issues putting 10 consecutive bolts in a pie plate at 50 yards with a modern scoped crossbow. A bolt carries lethal energy to several hundred yards and is accurate enough to reliably hit a human torso at 100 yards.
>bolts lighter than arrows
Exact opposite. A 20" crossbow bolt with a 100gr broadhead is about 550 grains. A 30" carbon arrow with a 100gr broadhead is about 350 grains.

A modern crossbow can fling a 500gr bolt to about 430fps. The best compound bow might maybe break 330fps with an ultralight target arrow with an 85gr field point.

File: crossbow.jpg (669KB, 1897x1070px) Image search: [Google]

669KB, 1897x1070px

can anyone help me identify this crossbow? bought it at a fleamarket for 20 bucks. the only markings on it are a sticker saying its 150 lbs.
i want to get a new string for it cause the one on it now is frayed as shit on one side. it didnt come with any arrows either so i have no idea what size to buy.
if anyone can tell me what it is or what its a knockoff of it would be helpful.

>>28704105
They arent though.

Theyre typically about 125gr heavier, and at the extreme ends of the spectrum nearly 3x the weight while being about 8" shorter.
>example
20" bolt. Piledriver shaft, brass insert, steel crescent nock, 175gr Magnus broadhead. Total weight of appx. 715gr
>vs
28" arrow. Gold Tip Ultralight shaft. Easton Medalist capture nock. Packaged Gold Tip insert. 85gr field point. Total weight appx. 285gr.

>>28713630
A modern scoped one of good repute is deer-vitals accurate to at least 70 yards.

>>28717442
You should take it to your local archery range so they can check it in detail for you. If the string is frayed it probably isn't safe to shoot until you replace it.
Any other markings on it?

>>28717669
nah no other markings was hoping its was common pattern crossbow seems pretty old at least a decade probably more. wasnt planning on shooting it anyways cause ive got no bolts. going to an archery place is a good idea but i dont really have any in my area except for chain stores like basspro. dont think the guy working retail would know anything

anyone know if modern crossbow stings universal or if theres some measurements i should be taking to buy the proper sting?

Can't remember from where but I remember reading about examples of medieval crossbows before, and one design was described as having a metal barrel arm was used to launch stone/lead projectiles. Anyone know anything about this?

>>28717788
Metal barrel which*

File: 5.jpg (35KB, 680x429px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 680x429px

>>28717788
Its called a slurbow.

>>28717425
>Theyre louder than a suppressed .22
You can add silencers to the bow string if you want it quieter.

>A total noob should have zero issues putting 10 consecutive bolts in a pie plate at 50 yards with a modern scoped crossbow

This is actually a historical fact. Not entirely sure if it holds up today but historically, anybody could use a crossbow proficiently.

>Exact opposite. A 20" crossbow bolt with a 100gr broadhead is about 550 grains. A 30" carbon arrow with a 100gr broadhead is about 350 grains.

There was this myth that the gun was adopted by most armies because bullets and powder were lighter than crossbow bolts. Crossbow bolts had to be made heftier than arrows to keep up with the strength of the crossbow.

>>28713794

From someone that already used classic-age/medieval age weapons for home defence:

If we are talking about flesh target aim for their feet,they will be litteraly pinned down to the floor screaming in agony for having a fucking bolt passing throught their feet.

Funny story one of them had a dumpster top for whatever might be the reason,one of the bolts went throught that thing and fucked up is shoulder.

Try to get a Chi-ke-nu if you want something more "easy" to fend off a lot of people.

>>28707750

not really, they had an average height of 5'7" or so instead of a modern average height of 5'10"

People only got really short as a result of the industrial revolution and urbanization leading to people getting most of their calories from potatoes and sugar.

Granted, that's if a famine didn't hit during childhood, and plenty of people never even made it past 5 years old, but adult height wasn't that much shorter all things considered. examination of Towden skeletons shows a level of physical fitness that was on par with professional athletes, not that that helps much when you're being summarily executed by angry Yorkists.

>>28718971
>If we are talking about flesh target aim for their feet,they will be litteraly pinned down to the floor screaming in agony for having a fucking bolt passing throught their feet.
Or, if you live in the real world, you're either prepared to use deadly force to defend yourself and aim centre mass or you DON'T FUCKING LOOSE YOUR ARROWS.

>>28719167

Oh sorry I forgot to add what followed up:

> I take a warhammer
> Hisbonesbegone.jpg

>>28713794
yes, surprisingly so.

Crossbow bolts aren't nearly as deadly as bullets but they tend to be more debilitating. Having an arrow through a muscle basically pins it in place. As long as they don't pull it out the bolt will plug the wound, limiting bleeding. Be careful with hollow shafts, though. Those can siphon the blood right out of someone.

Since a crossbow is incredibly low tech, you could make one at home with some tools, some PVC piping, and bits of scrap metal. No licenses required. Police have recognized this kind of thing is nearly impossible to regulate so it usually falls under "Other Weapon" categories with little to no rules regarding it's possession and use.

Keep in mind that making a crossbow requires practice and skills so like >>28716138
said, start small.

Rate of fire is pretty bad for a crossbow but you can fix this with repeating crossbows. Keep in mind that repeating crossbows tend to be weaker than normal ones. The Chu-Ko-Nu is a basic design you can make at home if you want.

>>28713794
They were the home defense weapon back in the day, since you could store it loaded (almost) indefinitely and put a bolt into someone in under a second.

So yeah it is suitable, as long as you don't miss that 1st shot (or have more pre-loaded crossbows)

File: 26304499_1_l.jpg (10KB, 650x380px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 650x380px

>>28719745
>Rate of fire is pretty bad for a crossbow but you can fix this with repeating crossbows
It's actually ok with a goats foot lever. Not bow-tier obviously but you should be able to shoot every 5-7 seconds even with a 350 lbs one, which is roughly equal to a 70+ lbs bow.

>Keep in mind that repeating crossbows tend to be weaker than normal ones
They are awfully weak, may fail to do any significant damage even against someone is plain clothes.

You can't cheat physics, it's going to be just as weak as it is fast. It was common to use them with poison as then even one weak shot might be lethal.

It does have a psychological advantage though, no matter how weak they are it's pretty scary to be shot at every 1-2 seconds.

>>28719876
>It's actually ok with a goats foot lever. Not bow-tier obviously but you should be able to shoot every 5-7 seconds even with a 350 lbs one, which is roughly equal to a 70+ lbs bow.

But not enough to stall a rush. Maybe enough for an inna woods scenario or if your foes are cowards but you'd need something to keep them from bum rushing you.

>It does have a psychological advantage though, no matter how weak they are it's pretty scary to be shot at every 1-2 seconds.

What if you take the first shot with the full power crossbow and then follow up with the repeating crossbow? Under the right circumstances a group of opponents might not realize the follow up shots are weak.

>>28720252
>But not enough to stall a rush
Well you shouldn't be doing that with a crossbw, especially if you are against multiple opponents.

>Under the right circumstances a group of opponents might not realize the follow up shots are weak.
Could work, but not for long.

The best option would be to just have a huge stockpile of pre-loaded ones, at least for home defense scenario. There are records of knights/noblemen with henchmen carrying a cart full of pre-loaded crossbows.

>>28716182
haha aw shit

god bless poland, such a cool place
there are so many poles on 4chan now

>>28707697
Unless the air that it's flying through magically gets denser at longer distances, how do you figure that the bolts suddenly start losing more energy?

Also, how do arrows "gain" energy after they've left the string?

thread deserves a bump for gold star quality

>highest grade of lesbian

>>28713794
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WEOeZTV9w

maybe this

>>28723040 <me again

His latest videos on air powered arrow launcher is germane to this discussion aswell

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jcTdRGaFldw

I'm quite interested in making my own crossbow. I'll probably start when I get my hands on an adequate workshop. Won't happen in the near future though.

>>28697857
>Are crossbows useful in any way, form, or shape in this age?
They (and bows) are quiet and, therefore, have been used in the modern age to kill stealthily.

>>28697857
Crossbows are sill used by the military in China if I recall correctly, for sneaky beaky operations.

Also, they are still used to establish zip lines and to hunt/collect samples from fish or other critters living underwater.

>>28697857
>Are crossbows useful in any way, form, or shape in this age?

If I shoot you with one you'll die, so yes.

>>28698267
this guy is the Joerg Sprave of crossbows, he's demented
>and awesome