"What's for dinner tonight?" "Chicken!" "What was the condition of the chicken before you cooked it?" "Well... tested?" "As long as you washed it properly." - a conversation between Tod and his wife at some point, I'm sure.
@magnuscharette11323 жыл бұрын
Legend has it that with crown bolts, a skilled hunter could sharpen the fletches and light the bolt on fire, and with a single shot could gut, cook, and carve a bird…
@htmn47123 жыл бұрын
It’s a shame that the fire will extinguish itself the second it lets loose from the crossbow.
@OrinFinch3 жыл бұрын
@@htmn4712 that's were the skill comes in mate
@ademetal3 жыл бұрын
Todd's wife: Why does the chicken have holes in... No, nevermind, I know why.
@mikurusagawa68973 жыл бұрын
Imagine going to the kitchen to prepare dinner and seeing that your husband nicked the chicken and is shooting it with a crossbow. Well at least it's cheaper than the GoPro ;)
@MollymaukT3 жыл бұрын
Mrs. Todd "Well, chicken is out, pork for dinner it is" *opens fridge* "Well bollocks he took that too"
@robertwright79373 жыл бұрын
"You've ruined Christmas!"😄
@AnotherDuck3 жыл бұрын
At least it's tenderized!
@tods_workshop3 жыл бұрын
Having watched this back, some of the energy of the shot was spent 'collapsing' the pork joint and moving it out of the way rather than penetrating. Whether this was enough to significantly alter the outcome I don't know, but I suspect the test would be worth repeating with beastie with a thinner hide such as a deer, but any hunters out there let me know your thoughts. Another point is about Gaston Phebus and his pictures. Medieval artwork is often constructed to tell a story rather than to be literally correct so some of his pictures squeeze all the action into an unfeasibly small area, however others do not and with relatively slow projectile speeds of very rarely above 180fps/55m/s very close shooting would be required.
@fangorn12993 жыл бұрын
Hi, nice video. I have however a small objection about the first test. I don't think that the amount od feathers was realistic. I think that there should be more overlap And also the small isolating feathers could play a role. It Is possible that it would still go through
@SirBoden3 жыл бұрын
I grew up hunting with a bow. If you put a small hole through most small furry critters they will run off and hide. If you break bones they don’t go as far. Mace heads against birds, no hide to worry about, would definitely break bones. Birds and furry critters are a lot tougher than you think. Shooting something and having it fall dead on the spot is really only consistently possible with modern hunting equipment. Against a boar… 🤣😂😅 you’re gonna need to run and climb a tree if you bounce one of those off it’s head. Having a spear would help getting out of the tree.
@Squad23jta3 жыл бұрын
The chicken could be considered flawed as it was a gutted animal, plus its a domesticated animal and not something you would hunt. Would the bolt act in the same way against a goose or swan that was alive, with internal organs, blood and not having been frozen in a freezer? Just wondering for the sake of science. 😁
@gauthierlebout46253 жыл бұрын
Hello Tod! About the chicken, I think more feathers might be required (but don't know if it will change anything). But, more importantly, the ckicken was gutted (so had less mass and so less ability to be squished and to give back the energy) and it maked it structurally weak. And second, this chicken seemed to come from a Intensive livestock, those chicken are super week and soft compare to wilds ones (the meat and the bones are concerned). It's a bit like shooting with a warbow an arrow againt a wrongly, modern made, brestplate (and we know it gives false result). Nice video, I love the dragon warhammer I bought about a year ago on your website!
@skyvenrazgriz82263 жыл бұрын
So it is just a matter of distance right? How far do you need to get away to not penetrate?
@MartinGreywolf3 жыл бұрын
A thought occurs - perhaps this bolt doesn't prevent penetration, but rather the overpenetration. Use this, and it's less likely it will bury itself in large game (or a nearby hill) so deep you'll need a shovel to get it out. It looks like a small cash loss at first, but if you are someone who hunts a lot, that cost will add up over time. Perhaps a test of Amazing Flying Mace versus Mother Earth is in order.
@SuperFunkmachine3 жыл бұрын
There also not going to get lost if the hunter miss's there mark and the deer flees, a pointed bolt can be carryed away in to the under growth and lost before the dogs can chase down the blood trail.
@kooroshrostami273 жыл бұрын
on the other hand, will you actually kill big game with this if it doesn't penetrate deeply? Is this crown bolt really gonna kill a bear or an elk or something like this? I'd say not reliably, unless you hit the head. It's probably gonna cause massive traumatic injury and internal bleeding, but might not kill anytime soon. Those seem to make most sense to hunt medium game with.
@paulwilliams82783 жыл бұрын
also, arrows and bolts in many of Tods tests break after several shots. I imagine the flying mace will hold up a lot longer in use, so that can also reduce cost over the long run for a hunter in the time period. Less equipment costs, less loss in usable meat, less time spent retrieving bolt from animal/environment.
@henripoisot21193 жыл бұрын
Yes maybe like hunting bullet compared to military ones
@DH-xw6jp3 жыл бұрын
Sounds like the logic behind a modern judo point.
@foolwise47033 жыл бұрын
I would really think that the drawings in the hunting books are depicted as close range because that is so much more convenient to draw, not because it represents the actual distances.
@Dustypilgrim13 жыл бұрын
In the sixties (when bow hunting was still legal (UK) or the authorities turned a blind eye) my grandfather used 'thumpers' as he called them, for Rabbit, Hare and Squirrel , and other smallest game, as well as game birds. Often the thumpers were DIY and composed of no more than a used, reversed, .303 cartridge case 'secured ' (primer expended) over the naked end of the arrow/bolt. His aim was generally to stun/disable then get in quick and neck them or apply the priest. His bows/crossbows were home made and of far less poundage than you would be used to . There may well have been varied results, but his pot was never empty and he had zero legal bad marks for illicit 'gamekeeping.'
@cheyannei59833 жыл бұрын
Bows are quite a bit different than crossbows. Tod is looking at the historical usage of these crown bolts for hunting as they were known to be used for hunting with crossbows. A Manchu war bow is closer in energy and projectile weight than anything your dad would have made. Look them up!
@AsukaLangleyS023 жыл бұрын
Sounds beta
@seraphinpanlion91013 жыл бұрын
@@AsukaLangleyS02 what?
@Matt_Alaric3 жыл бұрын
Bowhunting has been illegal in the UK for hundreds of years. Sounds like your grandfather was a poacher. ;)
@euansmith36993 жыл бұрын
"... or apply the priest." There's a phrase redolent with two-fisted, working class history.
@mattjax52073 жыл бұрын
Has to be said when with friends and the question "who would you want to share a dinner party with?" comes up, I always think Todd would be an epic guest.
@Steve_Coates3 жыл бұрын
Given the way he treats dinner he'd make a better guest than host. To be fair his pork roast will be well tenderised.
@joshuahamblin5373 жыл бұрын
As a man whos entire life revolves around hunting i would say that the bolts you have here are for stunning/dispatching small game, requiring very good accuracy I would say that you would have to be incredibly accurate to kill deer with that projectile as a good head or neck shot would be required. You would also have to be able to approach large wary game to very close proximity, I'm not saying deer cannot be killed with it but certainly there are far more efficient ways that no doubt hunters in history would have been well aware of. As for boar i would think that bolt would bounce off, causing a painful impact site but leaving a very annoyed and aggressive quarry to deal with. Even today wounded boar shot with large bore rifles are dangerous to hunters, beaters and dogs. Thick skinned quarry is best dept with via deep penetration projectiles or weapons (boar spears or sticking knives spring to mind regarding weapons) and doing damage to major organs. Anyone who hunts or stalks deer and boar will know how far adrenaline will take wounded game with substantial injuries to vital organs so i cant see hunters in the past using anything but deeply penetrating bladed heads on arrows, bolts, spears or knives to dispatch large game efficiently. I am very much interested in history and i cant say I've ever seen depictions of blunts being used on anything other than small game or butts, in fact the opposite seems to be true with pictures of oversized blade swallowtail heads being used and arrows deeply buried in deer and other game. In conclusion never underestimate how aggressive and dangerous large game animals can be when wounded and how easily game an be lost when wounded or injured with poorly placed shots or inadequate projectiles. By small game i am referring to game birds, waterfowl, rabbits, hares, otter, fox, possibly wolves. Accuracy of user would be the main factor that would limit this projectiles effectiveness.
@lukeorlando48143 жыл бұрын
I’m no hunter. So enlighten me. If you shot something like an elk in the head with that, would it not stumble for a few seconds and run off? I was under the impression they are all skull and very little brain to damage. And a boar would you not just make it very angry and you just spent your shot at close range.
@gustavchambert70723 жыл бұрын
@@lukeorlando4814 little brain or no, Im guessing there wont be very much left of the skull around it after being hit by one of those bolts. That's ALOT of energy, most of which will go straight into the skull. You can see from how it bounces off the pork that it loses most of its energy in the impact. I would hazard a guess that when it comes to headshots, those things are far, far more effective than regular hunting bolts. A normal broadhead actually needs to hit either the spine or brain to kill the animal quickly (I suppose a major artery would work ok too), and as you said: there is a lot of skull and not alot of brains. The crown bolt though will just crush a fist-sized or bigger part of the skull, and likely fracture most of the rest. Even if the brain miraculously isnt turned to mush it will likely cause major concussion. It may even snap the neck, at least for smaller variants of deer. Im guessing even a boar would fare pretty badly though. Yes, they have very thick skulls and skins, but this is essentially the equivalent of a hard blow with a five-kilo sledgehammer. If that hits centre of the skull, Id huess its lights out, even for a boar.
@gustavchambert70723 жыл бұрын
I agree, a headshot would likely be necessary to kill anything larger than a roe deer. I suspect most deer, even elk will have their ribs broken if hit side on. The problem is that even if that punctures a lung they will almost certainly run for miles, so a broadhead for bloodloss is just much more effective. As for boar, Im pretty sure you can kill one with these. The problem is that you have to hit them in the head, which is just too hard with a crossbow with this kind of bolt. Most likely you will miss, scoring either a glancing blow or breaking some bones. Which like you said wil just result in a hundred or so kilos of really, really pissed-off pig looking to literally rip you a new one. That said I think that if you could pull of the headshot, it might well be the most effective way to kill a boar, it's just not a reliable enough method, making it less safe overall than a spear. What we really need is Tod testing this on a pigshead.
@rttakezo20003 жыл бұрын
I would concur. I've bow hunted (not crossbow) for many years and have used blunt head arrows for small game, but, would use conventional tips for anything more than a few pounds.
@squarewheels24913 жыл бұрын
Medieval hunting was not like modern solo hunting. Nobility used a type of persistence hunting. They would use dogs to harry the boar or deer until it ran out of stamina. The noble would then confront it from close quarters. They used spears originally but I would imagine as Nobility got more divorced from individual martial strength, they started using crossbows like this. Made it safer to have a bunch of crossbows.
@stevemackelprang84723 жыл бұрын
Having hunted all manner of small game with a bow, I'd say a blunt ( which I used ) delivers all the energy to target, while a pointed projectile will often simply shoot through, so you don't get the hydrostatic shock of a blunt, nor the hemorrhage of a broadhead. Blunts work fine for small game, but would be inadequate for anything much bigger than a rabbit.
@darrellparfitt59083 жыл бұрын
This may have more to do with the lengthy tradition of specialized blunted weapons for sporting throughout the middle ages. We have pictures of them being used for shooting practice. It's pretty easy to see them being used for sporting war games as well.
@MrBottlecapBill3 жыл бұрын
@@darrellparfitt5908 Yup, any bow of reasonable power will usually still penetrate small game, even with just a blunt shaft. The dude on Hunt Primitive does it all the time. He has a video of it somewhere on his channel. Usually he's using stone points though. Honestly living flesh is fairly weak on most animals especially close to but not on bony areas where the flesh can't stretch as much to absorb energy.
@AngDavies3 жыл бұрын
One of these bolts has comparable weight and speed to one of the captive bolts they use to stun cattle etc. A direct shot to the head definitely could put down a larger animal, which may have been the intended use. The head is a small target, but bigger than the heart, and comparable to the lungs, which is what you'd need to hit to score a fast kill otherwise, so not too out there. Edit: apparently pigs are notoriously difficult to stun with a blow to the head, so perhaps more for deer
@darrellparfitt59083 жыл бұрын
@@AngDavies Should work on Bambi.
@MajorMalfunction3 жыл бұрын
The reason for blunts, especially for rabbits, is a point will go straight through the rabbit, and it'll bugger off down a hole to die. So long dinner. And your arrow will go scooting off into the grass never to be found again. These days we also have heads with spring-loaded wire splines to reduce the penetration and also grapple the grass if you miss.
@irrwitza73 жыл бұрын
A tehory: Perhaps we need to look more closely at the medieval hunting party for the development of blunt bolts. A hunt was also a major social event at that time, especially when nobles took part. Wouldn't it be possible that the bolts were not meant to kill the animals but only to wound and weaken them, so that hounds could be used to track down the escaped but weakened animals to prolong the hunting experience as much as possible? I can imagine how exciting it was to chase your prey in the forest, to finally catch it and finally to kill it. A well-aimed shot with a sharp bolt, at any rate, would certainly kill an animal quickly.
@HandleMyBallsYouTube3 жыл бұрын
At least in Finland blunt tips were historically used in hunting squirrel for their furs, the idea being that you don't want damage the fur itself if you mean to sell it just like Todd mentioned in the beginning of the video.
@irrwitza73 жыл бұрын
@@HandleMyBallsKZfaq Yes, that makes sense. A damaged fur is worth less than an undamaged one. And in a time when every coin counted, people were careful to sell as good quality as possible. Thank you for the information.
@Chasmodius3 жыл бұрын
Yes, we should never forget that many of our ancestors were cruel, bloodthirsty a-holes! To be fair, so are many of us, it's just less socially-acceptable now.
@jorenbosmans80653 жыл бұрын
Interesting theory. And this one doesn't exclude the idea that it was Also used to preserve the fur in more commercial hunts. One group might have seen the other one use it and think it was a good idea for their use
@darrellparfitt59083 жыл бұрын
It's possible one reason for the preference was so your drunken noble guests were much less likely to kill each other with crossbows.
@emknight843 жыл бұрын
Growing up Archery Hunting in New Hampshire I was always told the purpose of Blunts was for the recovery of the arrow that you shoot at small game. If you shoot a regular field tip or a broad head at a bird or rabbit they punch right through and get buried in the soil and foliage. Now you've lost a valuable arrow and have less to continue hunting with. As always great content. Keep up the great work.
@cheyannei59833 жыл бұрын
Native American hunting bows were also relatively lightweight, with war being done with clubs and weapons of that nature. Unlike a crown bolt, a blunt and 30-45lb draw light bow isn't going to have spectacular energy--it's entirely possible it'd damage the skin less. I don't hunt, but I had a longbow and made some blunts, so I don't particularly see how it wouldn't damage the skin.
@RoPo-fv5tm3 жыл бұрын
I love the knight vision still with the arrow in it :D
@ArkadiBolschek3 жыл бұрын
Todd: "Maces! Lovely chunks of nastiness!" The maces: :) :)
@adam-k3 жыл бұрын
Why do I think that they didn't use 850lb crossbow to hunt chickens?
@kevadu3 жыл бұрын
For real, even if hunting bows that heavy existed I would think it would still depend on exactly what they were intended to hunt. Who would want to deal with the hassle of a windlass if they didn't need to?
@DjDolHaus863 жыл бұрын
@@kevadu If you were after small game then a powerful crossbow definitely wouldn't be the weapon of choice but to take down a boar with blunt force trauma you need all the power you can get, the added complication of the windlass probably wasn't a factor though as this would be the preserve of the rich who could afford a servant to do the annoying bits for them. For small stuff then a lighter, goats foot drawn crossbow would almost certainly be preferable.
@rumblechad3 жыл бұрын
I also don't see anyone successfully hunting anything wild at such close range. As someone who has duck and goose hunted I don't see how you would lug a crossbow that close to them before they take off flying.
@skepticalbadger3 жыл бұрын
They used it in order to create instant chicken soup.
@patdavis63833 жыл бұрын
Todd to Mrs Todd. "Change of plan, soup for tea tonight dear, not roast."
@Steve_Coates3 жыл бұрын
Have you never tenderised meat with a mallet?
@jm93713 жыл бұрын
Guest: "Thanks for having me over for diner Tod... How come the chicken is smashed to F*?" Tod: "I shot it at point blank with an 850lb crossbow....."
@ScottKenny19783 жыл бұрын
He's preparing it for chicken soup!
@tomyorke34123 жыл бұрын
Mrs Tod must love you raiding her fridge all the time for shooting targets XD
@Chasmodius3 жыл бұрын
As they were willing to perform their tests on living animals, I'm sure that skilled hunters of the time had a pretty good idea of what draw-weight bow and style of arrow would be appropriate for which game -- something that's a lot harder for us to test humanely.
@thechumpsbeendumped.77973 жыл бұрын
Is a yapping Chihuahua a viable substitute target for a wolf? Asking for a friend.
@davidlarson2423 жыл бұрын
for this purpose, always
@ericbrown67833 жыл бұрын
Never
@DH-xw6jp3 жыл бұрын
Maybe comparable to rat honestly.
@stitchjones71343 жыл бұрын
Try a slingshot with ice cubes. Evidence melts away.
@johanrunfeldt71743 жыл бұрын
The Chihuahua has a bigger ego than the wolf, so it may be more dangerous.
@davidarcesolano83753 жыл бұрын
Damn, those maces are gorgeous
@euansmith36993 жыл бұрын
I'm surprised at how dainty they are. Having been raised on weapons in movies and fantasy art, those maces look tiny; tiny, but very, very deadly.
@QuantumHistorian3 жыл бұрын
I like the smiley face on the middle mace at #1:41 :)
@jonathanwessner34563 жыл бұрын
You should have used some pork ribs, see what damage is transferred into the animal. Sure, it bounced off the skin, but, could it crack the ribs, or the skull?
@jonathanshaltz77503 жыл бұрын
And maybe a bag of oranges, to simulate lung tissue?
@ihcfn3 жыл бұрын
@@jonathanshaltz7750 No need for a high tech fleece backstop ;-D
@jobdylan57823 жыл бұрын
*breathes in* WITH THE NEW AND IMPROVED HIGH TECH FLEECE BACKSTOP
@noraye25003 жыл бұрын
My Paul Harrell community brothers!
@adamwrightus3 жыл бұрын
we tracked you easy
@kencoffman71453 жыл бұрын
The use of these bolts for hunting also explains the need for hunting hangers. The blunt force stuns the target enough to allow the hunter time to approach and dispatch. Your stuff is always the best!!!
@lukesheridan46233 жыл бұрын
there's a bit of a gap between animals with tough enough skin and animals that will be killed by this bolt
@jonathanwessner34563 жыл бұрын
I am not so sure about that
@euansmith36993 жыл бұрын
Well, I guess the fact that Armadillos are not endemic in Europe, points to those little armoured critters filling exactly the niche this bolt was designed for. Leading to them being hunted to extinction. 🤔🤨😂
@MichaelMacGyver3 жыл бұрын
So, what we'll be calling on is good ol' fashion blunt force trauma. Horsepower. Heavy-duty, cast-iron, piledriving punches that will have to hurt so much they'll rattle his ancestors. Every time you hit him with a shot, it's gotta feel like he tried kissing the express train. Yeah! Let's start building some hurtin' bombs!
@Raz.C3 жыл бұрын
Mickey? I thought Mr. T killed you!! edit - Ps: I'm sorry you had to go 7 hours before someone recognised you!
@rafaelbogdan93073 жыл бұрын
That pic of men practice shooting and dogs fetching back the bolts is absolute gold.
@MyMy-tv7fd3 жыл бұрын
having seen endless pigeons, crows, etc taken out with .177 and .22 airgun pellets, I cd have told you that the energy rqrd to knock down a chicken is not going to require a 'flying mace' - a flying pencil wd suffice, but the off switch for birds is the spine or head. Accuracy is paramount. Even more so with pig, they will just tank the bolt shots except to the head.
@LolTollhurst3 жыл бұрын
None of this is used in hunting, since it's both easy to fail with horrible consequences for the animal as well as time inefficient. Birds are shot with small shot loaded shotguns and boars are taken with double lung shots. Anything less is unethical.
@TheExalaber3 жыл бұрын
@@LolTollhurst That was not necessarily the historical approach to hunting.
@robertcowley-yamamoto48803 жыл бұрын
@@LolTollhurst You know nothing about hunting apparently. Airguns for hunting birds is incredibly common all over the world
@Slash-XVI3 жыл бұрын
@@LolTollhurst I'm curious about the boar case. As someone who has no hunting experience: what do you mean when you say double lung shots? are these just two shots hitting the lung are or do you have to hit each side of the targets lungs? How quickly does this actually stop the animal? Do they drop dead almost immideatly (in the most common case, I guess there are variation based on the individual case)? Does hitting the heart make a significant difference?
@SuperFunkmachine3 жыл бұрын
@@redrider7730 If .22 ratshot worked with suppressers...
@sam_barris3 жыл бұрын
Finally! A ranged attack option for enemies vulnerable to bludgeoning damage. Bravo, sir. :-)
@darthkek19533 жыл бұрын
Necromancer Lich, surveying his skeleton army : "that man's about to ruin my entire battle plan."
@tomvandongen80753 жыл бұрын
"My reflexes are nothing like that of a deer" LIES!
@mikurusagawa68973 жыл бұрын
Truth, average Tod has much quicker reflex ;)
@Eddythebandkid3 жыл бұрын
Since I started smithing I told myself “I will never buy another knife or sword again.” But maces, maces are a different story….
@andrewsock62033 жыл бұрын
Hi Tod. Great vid 👍👍 If you look at a crown bolt it looks the same as the safety tip used in jousting in medieval days. The tip was designed to not penetrate armour on both lance and bolt. As far as I know the crown bolt was for common people to use wile hunting because it could only kill small game and not penetrate armour. The deer were the kings deer and if you were caught with sharp points you would be charged with poaching or worse , planning a murder. The law remains today in some places with deer hunting like Canada. If your caught out in the woods with broad heads you will be accused of deer poaching, even if your just stump shooting. If you have a deer licence and it’s deer season you will be fine to carry broad heads. I see the art showing men shooting at deer with crown points but maybe that is to scare the deer away from crops or simply target practice that was legal through a loophole of being legal to shoot blunts. Or maybe they hit the deers head then run up and finish it with.a sword or spear. To kill a deer would have to be a head shot with crown bolt and very very heavy bow. Most hunters would be young boys with light bows and blunt points. The rich hunters would have the fancy heavy bows so it was not as common to see I would think. From my experience with archery if all kinds, blunt tips work good for A- legal defence from accusations. B- they don’t get lost as easy going under grass or roots. C- they require no maintenance or sharpening. D- they don’t get stuck in trees or targets. E- they have a slightly larger impact face than a sharp does, so it increases chance of hitting small game. F- puts all the energy from the bolt into the target when a sharp goes right through without delivering energy. If you shoot a rabbit with a sharp, the bolt passes through and the rabbits may run down there hole where you can’t reach them and die. If you shoot a rabbit with a blunt it transfers all the energy and knocks the rabbit silly with a hear stoping punch and the rabbits won’t be lost down a hole or something. It won’t scurry far. That’s the main reason for blunts.
@roberthill55493 жыл бұрын
Mrs. Tod's Workshop: "Oh, my favorite. Grass-seasoned blunt-trauma chicken."
@squelchstuff3 жыл бұрын
Tod, your videos are never boaring... until mow.
@daaaah_whoosh3 жыл бұрын
I love the idea of shooting a crossbow, then having your dog retrieve the bolt. I might have to try that some day
@ethanpeeler31473 жыл бұрын
When my lab was still with me he would do that for me.
@mikewilson82653 жыл бұрын
There are a number of modern options like this for bows and crossbows for hunting birds and small game animals. I have both plastic and metal screw on heads for my bow. I will now always refer to them as flying maces.
@nudl3Zz3 жыл бұрын
kinda hjoped you woul shoot an actual mace but I guess that would be more of a Jörg thing :-D
@razorwork13 жыл бұрын
Oh fk I just spat out my tea haha!
@anthonyhayes12673 жыл бұрын
I'd be surprised if he hasn't by now
@nudl3Zz3 жыл бұрын
@@anthonyhayes1267 he hasn't made a mace launcher
@extrasmack3 жыл бұрын
Flying mace eh? I'm delighted by how Todd still find bits of kit that I'd never even heard of previously. Love when I learn about new old tricks on this channel. So it's essentially a metal "bunny buster." Aka the medieval version of those rubber blunts we often top our fedders with. Looks much more brutal than the modern equivalent. Judging by the tip I'd venture to colloquially dub it the flying meat tenderiser. It looks an awful lot like the head on a meat tenderiser mallet. Great vid, Todd!
@MonkeyJedi993 жыл бұрын
I have reliable second-hand accounts of two of the most unusual deer hunting techniques. One was a man who was extremely sneaky. He was a traditionally trained Yaqui hunter and Marine Vietnam veteran. He would walk up to calmly grazing deer, rapidly slice the jugular and step away so the others could panic, and his target would bleed out in a minute or less. Another was a family friend who hunted deer by jogging after one until it gave up (usually after three times of running and pausing) and lay down, then he would dart in to control the head, cut the neck arteries, and jump back to let it bleed out. This man was a poacher feeding his three kids on what little money was left after paying alimony.
@generoush38233 жыл бұрын
Those blunt points started to appear in archery in the 1960s because most small game do not have large arteries for broadheads to be able to kill them effectively but blunt force trauma works. Its not designed for large game and to save the skin, its just to take small game since slicing cuts dont work when the animal has small veins to bleed.
@zerentheunskilled3 жыл бұрын
I suspect that if you wanted to kill an animal with this bolt and keep the hide intact, you would probably do your best to hit it in the head or neck. You are probably most interested in the hide on the body, so caving it's skull or breaking it's spine is would be what you are after.
@lukehook72783 жыл бұрын
Sorry bud but when hunting you want to aim for centre of mass, a head or neck is too small a target and if you're off by even a couple of inches you either miss or worse blow off the animals jaw or snout and they go running for the next few days until they starve. You lose your dinner, they have a horrible death.
@Zarkonem3 жыл бұрын
@@lukehook7278 Your absolutely right, when your using a hunting rifle or a broadhead arrow that is designed to pierce. You aim for center mass and go for the heart or rupturing the lungs. But this is a blunt weapon not designed to pierce. If you aim for center mass, the best you can hope for is a couple broken ribs, very painful and debilitating, maybe possibly fatal down the line, but not incapacitating. A deer or boar with a broken rib will have their adrenaline kick in and they will barely feel it while they run as fast and has hard as they can into the brush. I agree with Zaren that a headshot is likely the best for this particular bolt.
@stefflus083 жыл бұрын
Hunting ethics was probably not high on the list in this particular period.
@lukehook72783 жыл бұрын
@@stefflus08 true but recovery of what you spent time and effort hunting was
@lukehook72783 жыл бұрын
@@Zarkonem to be fair I should have also said that I don't believe that these bolts would have been used on anything but small game. Considering the acess to broadheads at that same time, I don't see a hunter choosing one of these blunt bolts over a broadhead to try and down a deer much less a boar
@AveryPowers773 жыл бұрын
Awesome stuff as always! Would love to see you continue your "boiled" leather series if possible. Trying different recipes and layering would be very interesting! Thanks for all the content
@GrandDungeonDad3 жыл бұрын
As a bowhunter I think this bolt design makes more sense for use on small game and smaller furbearers like mink and otters and beavers. You hit a rabbit with one of these the blunt force alone would kill it same with any other small animal and many of them would likely not be penetrated by it. Rabbits in particular have extremely loose skins.
@nevisysbryd74503 жыл бұрын
"Chicken dinners" _Wait, I thought no stunt chickens were harmed in the making of these videos_
@tamago31319923 жыл бұрын
Press like first and then watch the video, it's gonna be fantastic
@TheBaconWizard3 жыл бұрын
"My reflexes are nothing like that of a deer" but far more graceful!!
@euansmith36993 жыл бұрын
Seeing Tod cranking up the windlass at the start of the video, my excitement level peaked! "How do you like your pork? Tenderized?"
@Sutorenja3 жыл бұрын
what we all WANT to know is: what would it do to a dude in armour?
@antharon13 жыл бұрын
some time ago, joerg speave was investigating case in germany. Deer was shot with 3D printed mace bolt. Shot penetrated skin and went deep into animal, fell out and left huge channel that caused quick bleed-out of the animal. Acused man claimed, that it was training arrow, that his daughter shot from her training bow and deer jumped right into shot. But pretty clearly it was shot from high--powered hunting crossbow. Take a look at that, it is very nice video.
@exoterric3 жыл бұрын
3rd ineffectual cup of coffee in hand I lumber sleepily around the house then "Ooo a new Tod Vid" and instantly I perk up.
@StacheMan263 жыл бұрын
An alternative explanation, for those game animals it can penetrate, is that a crown bolt was the medieval equivalent of a hollow point, something intended to cause the maximum amount of trauma possible in one hit so you didn't have to waste time and energy chasing down a wounded animal.
@thehellezell3 жыл бұрын
If my wife caught me in the kitchen with a whole chicken while I was making fake skin and plumage by taping feathers to piece of paper so I could test a tiny mace with it she would have me involuntarily committed. Happy to live vicariously through you, Tod.
@seedmole3 жыл бұрын
Seems that the real benefit is not that it doesn't penetrate, but that it won't put as many holes in the pelt as a multi-bladed arrowhead would. Once a blunt head makes it through the skin, it poses no possiblity of continuing to cut up the pelt, while a sharp bolt could create any number of cuts and holes once it's lodged in a body.
@darthkek19533 жыл бұрын
Kitchen Tod : "dinner's ready, love." Wise Wife : "no need pet, I phoned for Chinese."
@pavementsailor3 жыл бұрын
Excellent video and excellent comments, as always.
@30035XD3 жыл бұрын
I would assume those were used to kill game for their skin without damaging it. Think about foxes, otters, etc. Also probably shot from weaker crossbows.
@darrellparfitt59083 жыл бұрын
They also had endless amounts of time to experiment. This allowed them to do things like invent aerodynamics without knowing any of the math.
@30035XD3 жыл бұрын
@@darrellparfitt5908 exactly.
@MrBottlecapBill3 жыл бұрын
And never shot from point blank range lol.
@fambofambo79403 жыл бұрын
Ilove tods work and methods!
@RobinWildlife3 жыл бұрын
"a clutch of maces" is not a phrase one hears that often (which arguably is probably a good thing...).
@NathanDudani3 жыл бұрын
Absolutely a good thing
@lutzderlurch78773 жыл бұрын
Maybe a similar reason as the crescent pointed arrows you tested a while ago: prevents the bolt that missed or went through the target, from burrowing as deep into the brush, ground or sticking into a tree, being lost forever
@montesweet44133 жыл бұрын
Weirdly entertaining lmaoo idk if I'm the only one but I feel like playing Skyrim after watching this 😂
@daredemontriple63 жыл бұрын
Hey Tod, I had an interesting thought the other day when I realised how many of your videos are shot on nice sunny days (ideal for lighting I suppose) but hardly representative of our rainy little island. I wonder how rain would effect the range of bows/crossbows. Of course the bowstrings getting damp would be a huge factor, And though archers could carry spares to change, crossbowmen would have to just be very protective of theirs. The other thing though is just the pure interaction with the rain. Surely the rain would slow the bolts/arrows in flight and would that be significant for long range shooting? What about if the ammunition itself got damp?
@stuartmonteith70793 жыл бұрын
A farmer I knew back home used a crossbow to hunt rabbits and possums, he two pot glued .270 casings on the bolt to do basically the same thing, it works a treat.
@SharkByteOfficial2 жыл бұрын
These look like they would devastate plate armor with a high pound windlass... or at least feel far worse than an actual mace strike
@tando62663 жыл бұрын
I have to imagine that with this you are either aiming for the head (bad idea) or you are aiming to lame the animal (break or dislocate a shoulder) then finishing it once its down. I cant see you going for critical mass as a non penetration shot will do little to the animal in the short term, and it will just run off. Its definitely not ethical hunting by modern standards, but I don't doubt its effectiveness.
@shinobi-no-bueno3 жыл бұрын
Don't underestimate the physical and psychological damage of blunt force trauma. People often fall over when hit in the body unexpectedly, multiply that by the power of the bow and an impact point much smaller than a fist and you have a devastating punch that I reckon could drop quite a few different animals.
@tando62663 жыл бұрын
@@shinobi-no-bueno Yes people do that, animals do not, they ether fight for flight. A sudden blow to the rib cage would bolt basically everything, and even if you bruise a lung its a long wait before that inhibits a prey animal on the run. (Im talking deer and wolves, not small game)
@tristanholderness42233 жыл бұрын
with the chicken, I suspect the fact the cavity was empty would have made it much easier for the bolt to penetrate. Had the cavity been filled with organs, as it obviously would have been for a live chicken, I think the chance of penetrating would have been much less. Obviously getting hold of an un-gutted chicken isn't especially easy, but filling the cavity with chicken livers, and sausagemeat to fill any gaps, then sewing the cavity shut would probably give a better analogue
@antimon053 жыл бұрын
Things I love hearing: "A clutch of maces"
@darthkek19533 жыл бұрын
A quiver of wenches. Is that right?
@THEFORGO103 жыл бұрын
When I read flying maces for hunting, I immedieately thought throwing a morning star like a tomahawk to a deer, good thing I was wrong
@shawn68603 жыл бұрын
Todd, you need to launch maces from crossbows! I am sure it is not historical, but some guy must have thought "This mace would hit harder if I launched it from this crossbow.. or better yet from this here ballista.."
@cwxdaf1523 жыл бұрын
"there's the chicken for tea, and we're going to shoot our bolt in it" Tis the British way.
@spamstabber3 жыл бұрын
Pig skin is incredibly tough, I'm a butcher and cutting pig skin is pretty much the fastest way to ruin a knife edge, outside of hitting bone. We even started using Stanley knives to score the skin on roasts in the end.
@greghenrikson9523 жыл бұрын
You are supposed to attach a bag of old breadcrumbs and spices to these bolts. That way when the bolt goes through, it smashes out the innards and replaces them with stuffing.
@Shitballs694203 жыл бұрын
I think a big benefit of the blunt force would be the ability to strike the skull of something and put it out that way, just like a sledgehammer.
@loupiscanis94493 жыл бұрын
Thank you , Tod
@maciejfyrvellsikorski3 жыл бұрын
1:40 I love that the middle mace has a cute little smiley face on it :)
@bernhardglitzner49853 жыл бұрын
I love how the middle one of the cudgels has a small smileyface at 1:39
@IIDASHII3 жыл бұрын
Bow hunter here. Given how this test went, I'm thinking that perhaps the crown bolts were meant to be a bolt that imparted a lot of energy without getting lost or killing a bystander. Speaking from experience, a broadhead shot from the ground at close range will blow through an animal and won't necessarily come out at the same angle it went in. It could keep going for quite some time. That could be very dangerous with people hunting all around.
@DjDolHaus863 жыл бұрын
You sure made that chicken regret its career choices
@rickyricardo35513 жыл бұрын
One thing I would like to note about bolts against bird feathers especially larger birds like geese and turkey.The down of these birds has enough protection to stop certain shot size 12ga loads , example number 7 and number 8 shot is able to be completely stopped by turkey down and even a larger shot size like number 6 shot is only capable to around 25yards and even then over half the pellets lose a chance of penetrating. So I truly believe that at distances of maybe 5 yards or more the bolt would have little to no chance to penetrate.
@pauladams18293 жыл бұрын
Perhaps for smaller game smoother headed bolts were used or perhaps a leather pad put on the front of the bolt?
@bn444 Жыл бұрын
Crown Bolts: when you want to start tenderizing your meat before it's even dead.
@thefeatheredfrontiersman81353 жыл бұрын
As always excellent work Todd!
@00coyote803 жыл бұрын
It could also be that in the artwork, they couldn't depict realalistic distances. I've grown up in the woods and people don't typically get that close to wildlife.
@rokka71883 жыл бұрын
In Finnish context, where the crossbows were relatively same, light though packed a punch (Their looks are also are of early crossbows of Europe, when they were made of metal, I believe laminated wrought iron and mild steel, sort of 'composite', being forge-welded), according to sources, people had to keep it around their hip, rather than shoulder because of the damage it would cause. There's this one picture, but yes, they shot squirrels from high up trees/bit of distance with those blunt head bolts, from the hip. Rabbits also and so on, though hell no deer and hogs I haven't heard anywhere. Not sure about birds even with those. Just small mammals mostly, and if the shock and blunt damage didn't kill them, a hunter would go up to them wring their necks. There were also blunt head arrows, with bows more so being used and the Finnish tribes were known for being big exporters of fur, especially squirrel, not sure if it was exactly way back in Roman empire times, but for quite a while to say the least. So probably was quite a lucrative business. And as mentioned before, I doubt they would use this for anything bigger than a fox/swan, or even a rabbit.
@eiskalteshandchen90363 жыл бұрын
What would have been interesting to me is the question how heavy would be the injury on bones or how much muscles may be damaged so the prey is struck.
@bossel3 жыл бұрын
Not a flying mace, but a pommel with a shaft, the only logical development of pommels to end them rightly.
@ericv003 жыл бұрын
Enjoy picking out the bits in your dinner, Tod!
@knutzzl3 жыл бұрын
I would hazard a guess that the deceleration of a sharp bolt is slower than that of a blunt bolt, so the blunt would deliver its energy faster? Counter to that i will say the bouncing back is energy not spent on the target. In the old pictures the shooter and the target both need to be in the picture.(you could say im wrong on that but than look at te video Tod did with Capwell, thay show pictures of Agincourt where the French ad English are 3 meters apart...) Like in Tod's duck hunting video, if you miss the bolt is easier to retrieve.
@Stroggoii3 жыл бұрын
What amounts to punching a boar from 10 feet away sure sounds like a good idea. It's not like there's centuries of accounts of them consistently tanking arrow, spear and bullet wounds to thoroughly fuck you up before they die.
@Erikreaver3 жыл бұрын
I would say that it makes sesne, since at least around my parts, boar has been a classical hunting trophy for ages and even though a few small holes in the pelt can be mended pretty easily and hidden in the hair, it is still a blemish. Now the question from me is if that would be enough to put a boar down! I would imagine one would need to crack the ribs and puncture the lungs, or shatter the skull, and given the triangular nature of it, oooh, I do not know! Either way, even just the skin is remarkably tough, and I do have to make a boar-pelt cloak one of these days! Pigs and boars are such wonderfully tanky creatures! I still miss my little pet piggy who passed away on Valentine's.:( Cheers for the vid, Tod! Beautiful maces, too!
@bokkenwielderful3 жыл бұрын
For small game I've used a bolt about 40 grams sent at 75 mps, the head about 17mm diameter Vantage Point Archery brand small game blunt. And I've had a complete pass through (a skunk) and several more that penatrated half way through. I haven't shot anything terribly tough, but at the size of skunk or raccoon, I would expect to need either a weaker bow or accept damage to the pelt.
@wilsoncalhoun3 жыл бұрын
I don't know about historically, but most people use some kind of bludgeon, stump, or judo tip nowadays because field and blade points will pass right through small game animals never to be seen again. Hell, there are at least as many gimmicky accessories meant to help find a lost bolt or arrow as there are patent methods to make your ammunition fly better.
@zincoleo13 жыл бұрын
There are modern blunt broadheads used for fishing and bird hunting
@robinbiddlecombe92023 жыл бұрын
Said "Boarskin" several times without a slip, Well done :)
@IeshiAke3 жыл бұрын
I like how the mace at 1:39 has a little : ) on the wedge
@Zarkonem3 жыл бұрын
I feel that the idea of the "flying mace" bolt is to make sure you get a head shot. If you take a mace to the shoulder it'll hurt, if you take a mace to the chest it'll hurt, maybe even break ribs and the like, but it wouldn't kill you outright. If your hunting game, you don't want to hit it with something and then it run off into the woods, you want to hit it and be done.
@Zarkonem3 жыл бұрын
Addendum to my statement above. It's been noted by several people that these were likely used mostly for small game, things like rabbits and waterfowl. In which case a torso shot would likely destroy their internal organs and incapacitate them immediately without causing too much external damage. This said, my statement still stands for something bigger, but you would probably use a different type of arrow for that as well.
@brianreddeman9513 жыл бұрын
I used to scare off rabbits with my crossbow using target tips (these were blunt). The down side to blunt tips is they bounce off hard soil where I live. Lost several bolts into cactus patches. Oh and I wasn't trying to scare off the rabbits. I was trying to hunt them...I'm terrible at crossbow hunting. This is why they invented the pellet rifle and the .22 😄
@arozin67733 жыл бұрын
Recovering bolts from cactus patches sounds like a very painful experience.
@brianreddeman9513 жыл бұрын
@@arozin6773 Yes, considering that some of those patches are 5-10 meters square and up to a couple meters high? Noooo... Those bolts are lost. :)
@blackdeath4u3 жыл бұрын
Great video! I use my 175 lbs recurve big game crossbow for small game with a very heavy cut down aluminum arrow with a 125 grain blunt tip, hare mostly. At super close range, itll blow right through and wreck everything. At a proper 30 meter and up distance it will mangle all the bones and wreck the pelt. ( i dont keep the pelt so I dont mind. I'd like to but not currently able to process it) 50 or more meters, which i wouldnt shoot unless in a survival situation as i'm a bad shot, should keep it intact IMO
@bluelionsage993 жыл бұрын
As to all the people opining that getting real close to a wild animal seems improbable - you are probably right. But those crossbows were not cheap. I can totally see the upper class having animals brought in next to the and released, or be pinned, or tied or surrounded by keepers, etc so they don't have to go sneak up on their prey.
@ssholum3 жыл бұрын
My two cents: when bow hunting, you are unlikely to strike the animal in a place that will instantly drop it (for deer, there's a small target for its heart and a slightly larger area where it will be traumatized enough to stop and die where it is, anywhere else will take a while before it bleeds out and it will run). My guess, based on what it did to that chicken, is that the crown bolt would cause _more_ damage to animals with thinner hides, keeping them from running as long as they would if they were shot with a sharp bolt or arrow. Or perhaps it would break bones to accomplish the same. Either way, my take is that it's probably preventing the animal from running very far from where it was shot.