Kristophe
Provost
Posts:77
 |
| 02/19/2007 6:33 PM |
 Alert
|
Rules:
b. Rigid material is required to cover the wrist bones (both points), the back of the hand, and the back of
the fingers and thumb (including knuckles). The weapon or parrying device may provide part of the
protection.
Just a quick question - assuming one is using an early period hilt (ex: http://www.darkwoodarmory.com/pix/0688.JPG) that would basically mean gauntlets for proper hand protection yes? Something similar to:
http://wmasupply.com/Default.aspx?tabid=134&ProductID=379
Thanks for the clarification.
Kristophe
|
|
|
|
|
Chrestien
Free Scholar
Posts:47
|
| 02/20/2007 4:52 PM |
Alert
|
Yes, that is exactly what that means.
And even with a Schiavona or English Basket-hilt you would still need a rigid demi-gauntlet.
-- Monseigneur Chrestien de Valois, KCTM |
|
|
|
|
warwick
Provost
Posts:119
|
| 02/20/2007 10:08 PM |
Alert
|
Demi gauntlets should be enough with a swept or double clam, correct? But an open guard, such as a simple sidesword guard, would require full gauntlets?
|
|
|
|
|
Chrestien
Free Scholar
Posts:47
|
| 02/21/2007 5:39 PM |
Alert
|
Probably not.
The entire back of the hand and wrists must be covered with rigid material.
The demi would protect the wrist and back of the hand, but the fingers to the inside (and a little to the outside) of the knucklebow are still exposed. Back during the Sidesword experiment someone got that exposed little finger hit and split the bone.
I am looking at this hilt for reference:
http://www.darkwoodarmory.com/pix/0604.JPG
Because I have one like it sitting next to me.
-- Chrestien
|
|
|
|
|
warwick
Provost
Posts:119
|
| 02/23/2007 10:00 PM |
Alert
|
I own full articulated steel gauntlets and have tried to fight with them and it's not good - you lose so much mobility and fine control - not to mention they barely fit in a typical swept or clamshell guard. Guess I need better gauntlets?
|
|
|
|
|
Alvarro
Too many posts...
Posts:301
|
| 02/24/2007 12:44 PM |
Alert
|
I suspect this will be the biggest pain in the butt part of the new rules. Rigid hand protection that is useable with good form is a tricky, and frankly un-period. Sigh.
For purposes of hand protection only, and only for cut n thrust, would mail gauntlets be suitable? It's not rigid by definition, but it is good enough to stop injuries from steel. ...Wouldn't use it for heavy, but it works out of the SCA for hand protection. Not that I bother. 
For anyone interested in doing cut n thrust, and worrying about what to do for hand protection, I reccomend wisby style guantlets like these: http://www.merctailor.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=24&products_id=44
Or go to Armour Archive and check out some of the patterns. I'm gluing hardened leather plates on an old pair of gloves in the wisby pattern, myself.
|
|
Prudence. Temperance. Fortitude. Justice. |
|
|
godvonrav
Provost
Posts:81
|
| 02/28/2007 5:36 PM |
Alert
|
| EBAY!!!!
http://cgi.ebay.com/WISBY-FINGER-GAUNTLETS-sca-larp-leather-costume-armor_W0QQitemZ300084835048QQihZ020QQcategoryZ82161QQtcZphotoQQcmdZViewItem
|
|
Don Godfrey von Ravensburg
|
|
|
Chrestien
Free Scholar
Posts:47
|
| 02/28/2007 6:25 PM |
Alert
|
Those look pretty good. My only question would be if they provide rigid protection on the two points of the wrist. It is difficult to tell how much overlap there is between the hand pieces and the forearm pieces.
Thanks Godfrey!
-- Chrestien
|
|
|
|
|
Alvarro
Too many posts...
Posts:301
|
| 03/01/2007 12:18 PM |
Alert
|
| That's the usual style of kydex gauntlet used in heavy, with the additional of the finger bucklers to protect the fingers. They work great. Maybe a bit overkill, but... |
|
Prudence. Temperance. Fortitude. Justice. |
|
|
Kristophe
Provost
Posts:77
|
| 03/01/2007 5:03 PM |
Alert
|
Actually, I think by the rules those leather gauntlets fail.
RABC's state 1/4" waxed leather is classed as rigid. A rule of thumb is that 1oz of leather is equal to 1/64" thickness so those gauntlets are 10/64's but need to be 16/64"s to pass. Even with the finger bucklers attached they'd still fail for lack of proper back of hand protection.
|
|
|
|
|
warwick
Provost
Posts:119
|
| 03/01/2007 11:16 PM |
Alert
|
Just tried my steel demi-gauntlets that fit over a leather glove with steel plates that cover the tops of the fingers. When I grip the handle of my sword it leaves the meaty part of my palm (the chunky bit under your thumb) exposed. Plus the tightness of the grip seperates the plates on the fingers to the point that you can see the leather underneath. All this in a swept-hilt or clamshell. It didn't feel too bad for mobility, but I suspect the exposed palm bit would fail it?
If so this is going to be a really hard armour requirement to fulfil and still be able to manipulate your blade in a respectable fashion.
|
|
|
|
|
Mat
Provost
Posts:123
|
| 03/04/2007 4:08 PM |
Alert
|
Chainmail between (or under) the plates might help, set over a leather glove? Plates can only do so much.
I forsee an insane amount of heavy-type sidesword guards or uber-ringed basket hilts. You can only protect so much! I mean, when you look at period armor, the areas that aren't covered with plates generally have chain mail attached to the arming doublet in those spots. |
|
Git-r-dun! |
|
|
Samauel
Free Scholar
Posts:58
|
| 03/04/2007 4:39 PM |
Alert
|
So, when the rules were written, was there an existing gauntlet that would be functional for our needs, or was the whole intent to make the rules in such a way as to be impossible to do this? I have not heard of many useable finger gaunts that would be suitable for C&T. At least anything that is period looking. I'm going to try and work with Blackdiamond Armory (Jeff and Sven) to see what a functional gaunt would be like. This really bugs me though, because we have a situation here that we require something that hasn't been invented yet.
So, if I sound a little annoyed, sorry. I have been looking at various gauntlets that are on the market, and I don’t want to get into a situation where I end up paying 900.00 for a pair of gaunts, or buy set after set of gaunts I can’t use, or go through trial after trial of half assed something or other.
|
|
|
|
|
MollyModine
Provost
Posts:134
|
| 03/13/2007 10:16 PM |
Alert
|
I know it's not period, but has anyone looked into police/swat riot gear?
I mean if we could get into a molded Kevlar glove that might be the modern answer for protection. |
|
Molly Modine, Hafoc
Cadet to Monseignor Prospere de Montsegur
Thorn of the Sable Rose, Argent |
|
|
Chrestien
Free Scholar
Posts:47
|
| 03/14/2007 11:21 AM |
Alert
|
Those may work, however, the ones I have seen would not:
http://www.approvedgasmasks.com/gloves-dominator.htm
These do not have joint protection on the fingers. And it is questionable whether they would be 'rigid' enough.
http://www.galls.com/style.html?style=TE383&assort=general_catalog
These are a bit cumbersome, but we have used them for longsword. Agian I have not inspected them with regards to the joints for C&T
-- Chrestien
|
|
|
|
|
godvonrav
Provost
Posts:81
|
| 03/14/2007 9:13 PM |
Alert
|
| http://www.darkheartarmoury.com/stealth_gauntlets2.htm |
|
Don Godfrey von Ravensburg
|
|
|
jgreywolf
Hai Gioco?
Posts:680
|
| 03/21/2007 8:41 AM |
Alert
|
There is no requirement to cover the palm of the hand with rigid material.
From Page 15, Section 2.6.5.b:
"Rigid material is required to cover the wrist bones (both points), the back of the hand, and the back of the fingers and thumb (including knuckles). The weapon or parrying device may provide part of the protection."
More than likely ones sword will only provide protection for the index finger, the rest needing some other form of rigid protection. Since it is only the BACKS of the fingers (knuckles) that are called out here, there is no need to cover the "webbing" between fingers, or any other portion of the hand that is not called out in the rule. Theoretically you could get away with no rrigid protection on the index finger (assuming it is over the quillion), as the sword guard will most likely protect that particular digit from a cut.
Which is another good point to bring up. The rigid protection is intended to protect from a cutting blow only, not a thrust. So even earlier period "sidesword" guards will provide some measure of protection there...
Yes, you will look funny wearing a gauntlet that covers all fingers on the right hand except one, but in theory this is acceptable under the rules.
|
|
Justin Greywolf (SCA: Ramon Diaz de la Vega)
Director
Old World Martial Arts - Teaching Historical Italian Swordplay in the Pacific Northwest |
|
|