Can the average musket from the 1500s - 1600s pierce plate armour?

[Nizza Deutchsen Man]

Ive been trying for about a half hour  to find conclusive evidence that says musketshot could pierce plate armour, however I have not been able to find anything that is backed up. I have come across some yahoo questions that have answers that look like they'd make sense, but not have proper evidence to back it up. I am wondering if anyone knows a site or such that is reputable?

[Ad Bot]

[johnny tylenol]

probably not. the aerodynamics of a musket ball probably aren't that of a bullet, not to mention muskets likely dont give the projectile velocity comparable to a modern fire arm. thats just my thought anyway.

[Pie Crust]

I'm not sure about pierce but probably bend it with enough force to damage the user so it would be harmful eitherway.

[Legodude77]

The reason why people stopped using armor was because of the invention of muskets. The bullets may not pierce sometimes, but they'll leave a hell of a dent in your armor and your body.

[SeventhSandwich]

probably not. the aerodynamics of a musket ball probably aren't that of a bullet, not to mention muskets likely dont give the projectile velocity comparable to a modern fire arm. thats just my thought anyway.

I'm not sure about pierce but probably bend it with enough force to damage the user so it would be harmful eitherway.

I tried to take an interesting approach to solving this problem by using the required shear force for plate armor and comparing it to the force delivered by a 0.75" musket ball, but there's a much simpler explanation that forgoes all the unnecessary math.

The decline of plate armor coincides almost directly with the creation of more efficient muskets. Pretty much all sources seem to agree on that, with only minor disagreements over whether it was the wider usage of muskets or the growing efficiency of muskets which 'killed' plate armor.

The latter argument seems to be more popular, which implies that muskets could penetrate plate armor when both were still being used in warfare. Plate armor remained popular for a while longer because it was still a viable way to protect soldiers from swords and the like, which is how the battles would be fought after everyone had fired their shots.

So in short, historical evidence points to a strong yes.

[Cappytaino]

it doesn't have to pierce it. it's like a mace, as long as you can dent the helm and crack the skull in, it doesn't matter if you pierce the plate armor, they're dead anyways.

[WaterOre]

depends on the rounds fired, but unless you have Kevlar reinforcing that plate, you might as well not be wearing armor

it'll either give you a nasty hole or hurt like hell either way

[Jubel]

depends on the rounds fired, but unless you have Kevlar reinforcing that plate, you might as well not be wearing armor

it'll either give you a nasty hole or hurt like hell either way

medieval kevlar

[spideykong]

Even with todays Kevlar you can still break a bone/bruise really bad, right?

[Satan From Wreck-It-Ralph]

only if they dont have space plate armor

[Badger]

Regardless it will knock the wind out of you and give you quite a shock to the system

[ZombiLoin]

I tried to take an interesting approach to solving this problem by using the required shear force for plate armor and comparing it to the force delivered by a 0.75" musket ball, but there's a much simpler explanation that forgoes all the unnecessary math.

The decline of plate armor coincides almost directly with the creation of more efficient muskets. Pretty much all sources seem to agree on that, with only minor disagreements over whether it was the wider usage of muskets or the growing efficiency of muskets which 'killed' plate armor.

The latter argument seems to be more popular, which implies that muskets could penetrate plate armor when both were still being used in warfare. Plate armor remained popular for a while longer because it was still a viable way to protect soldiers from swords and the like, which is how the battles would be fought after everyone had fired their shots.

So in short, historical evidence points to a strong yes.

To add to this, it was the fact that as muskets improved, the armor had to be thicker to protect from them. Eventually the amount of armour needed to protect from a musket shot became so heavy that it was simply better to be quick and manouverable enough to not get hit all all, instead of take and block the hit.

[Harm94]

To add to this, it was the fact that as muskets improved, the armor had to be thicker to protect from them. Eventually the amount of armour needed to protect from a musket shot became so heavy that it was simply better to be quick and manouverable enough to not get hit all all, instead of take and block the hit.

and also that knights were disappearing off the battlefield due to loyal and money issues

I like to think of the spear as the common mans weapon. It's cheap to make, and easy to use. You just need a little bit of training to use, and with that you can field large armies of common when with spears in addition to your prized nights. I like to think of the musket as the replacement for the spear since you can take any young lad and train how to use the musket, line him up, and have hit shoot at a charging melee dudes. Should they get too close, he can use his bayonet, which functions similar to a spear.

Even with todays Kevlar you can still break a bone/bruise really bad, right?

Pretty much. In addition to Kevlar, armor has gone further with the inclusion of ballistic plates made of ceramic.

[SeventhSandwich]

it doesn't have to pierce it. it's like a mace, as long as you can dent the helm and crack the skull in, it doesn't matter if you pierce the plate armor, they're dead anyways.

I calculated the kinetic energy of a 0.75" musket ball fired at 120m/s to be 1639.08J, which is way more than enough to pierce plate armor according to multiple sources.

Javelins pierced plate armor too, and with substantially less kinetic energy.

[sir dooble]

It wasn't too uncommon for plate armour to be pierced.
Even bows and arrows could do it, especially when they got improved (e.g: English longbow).
The point of plate mail wasn't to give immunity to projectiles anyway. It was to defend against swords, letting blows glance off.
Knights got involved in the melee, where projectiles weren't being fired into. They weren't typically charging the enemy lines, unless flanking.