The Armour Archive

Greetings,

I've been out of the loop for several years and am just getting back into the swing of things. I will be participating in the SCA and am going for a mid 12th century poulain, or children of the crusaders persona. Because of this I realize I need mail. I've never worked with mail before and have never really researched it. I've read through the last 6 months or so of topics in the forums. I'd like to make sure I understand the pros and cons of each system.

So as I see it there are three kinds of mail
Butted, Riveted, Welded

~Butted mail in SCA use has limited use because it moth-holes fairly easily for body armor. However, aventails can be made from Butted as heavier is better, and it does not seem to moth-hole as badly. I can see why this would happen for machine cut the "><" in the join would allow the the links to slip through each other. Is this problem as pronounced in saw cut mail? My understanding is that it is much smoother, and my brain would say that moth holes should be less in saw cut mail. You also tend to need to use a heavier gauge of steel because the weight of the rings tends to pull the rings apart. The advantage of butted is that it is relatively cheap and easy to put together, mend, and tailor.
~Riveted mail is the most used historically. It is much lighter and stronger than butted. The reason it's lighter is that you use a smaller gauge. While harder than butted to make and repair, a pair of pliers and a wire cutter should be most of the tools to work with riveted.
~Welded is the hardest to work with, you need a good selection of tools, but it provides the strongest mail, and conversely can be made the lightest.

There are two main types of metal to make rings out of.
Mild Steel and Stainless Steel
~Mild is the common and closer to period but it rusts.
~Stainless it alot shinier and not period, but it does not rust. Also, it can be harder to work with, especially in riveted mail.

Finally there are two main styles - flat or round. Neither is period, but round look closer to period than flat.

Do I have all that correct? Any of the basics I'm missing?

Thank you very much.
Adelaisa

There are a few factors in butted ring durability.
Tailoring, AR or aspect ratio, cut, and material.
For butted galvanized wire 14guage 3/8 or 16 Guage 1/4 holds up well.
A half mile spool from tractor supply runs about $45
Cost is another big factor when I started I could sell a shirt for 350 made watching hockey.
things have changed over the years...

Now I can buy a rivited shirt from icefalcon for under 300.

Often when chainmail starts to fail its at the base of the arm holes.
Usualy they are to tight in the sleeve and the garment pulls apart when struck.
There is also a lot of jewelry, decorative, and light weight costume mail on the market.

usafaus wrote: ~Butted mail in SCA use has limited use because it moth-holes fairly easily for body armor. However, aventails can be made from Butted as heavier is better, and it does not seem to moth-hole as badly. I can see why this would happen for machine cut the "><" in the join would allow the the links to slip through each other. Is this problem as pronounced in saw cut mail? My understanding is that it is much smoother, and my brain would say that moth holes should be less in saw cut mail. You also tend to need to use a heavier gauge of steel because the weight of the rings tends to pull the rings apart.

. . . harder than butted to make and repair, a pair of pliers and a wire cutter should be most of the tools to work with riveted.

Welcome and well come, Adelaisa. You've covered a lot of it.

There's a trick you can do with pinch cut which while it slightly alters the look of the ring, does not impair its function in the mail weave in the least: instead of butting the ends point to point ><, butt them facet to facet, horse one point in slightly with your pliers as you twist the link closed, so they end up (here rotated 90 degrees) more /\\/ instead. Then the links can't do the Chinese puzzle trick and pass through. Does what saw cut does. Something you may find that's between the two is shear-cut, sometimes offered as machine-cut, usually looking about like // or |/.

The heavier wire gauge comes more into play in better resisting being bent open by hits and getting the moths. Butted mail of a good Aspect Ratio for armor, the range of AR4 to AR6 being particularly favorable, survives best placed over something resilient, and gets battered apart most when hammered against something solid like the side of a helmet. 16ga wire works better at the small-AR end of the range, because there's just not as much wire there to resist with. 14ga is not so sensitive. Riveted really blossoms around 18 gauge, and riveted needs to use ungalvanized wire for your health's sake, as breathing vaporized zinc is noxious -- you can get a twitch and you're about guaranteed to feel icky and have a monster headache. To find ungalvanized 18ga locally, you are likely going to have to look for .048" or so wire at a welding supplies place -- 1008 or other mild-steel welder wire. They do not deal in gauge numbers, so go in there looking for a diameter.

Riveted mail also needs something like rivet setting tongs to set the rivets with, and suited to either round rivets or triangular ones; there is a small difference in what the tongs need, or can use. In making riveted, a heat source is wanted to normalize the links, but this is less a thing in fixing up, as the links for the job should already be normalized. Welder wire will need to be normalized, definitely, perhaps before you even go to coil it, as welder wire is springy and won't take a 90-degree angle; it will snap. It'll do a curve.

.048 wire will make riveted mail 5/8 the weight of 14ga (.080) wire in the same link size, for fifteen times the strength of the fourteen gauge butted. If you can limp along on ten times the strength, you can use skinnier welder wire yet, for an even lighter shirt.

16 gauge galvanized electric fence wire is cheap and available, plus it doesn't rust--except at the end cuts, and this takes a while. Cutting with a saw or shear cuts helps retain links compared to pincer cuts. For SCA use 1/4" to 5/16" inner diameter works well, and makes rings of generally historic diameters. (Cheap material costs, but lots of time needed)

For the mid-12th century, most of the mail likely would be made of alternating rows of solid, punched rings (washers) and round section riveted rings with round rivets. The closes commercially available riveted mail is often sold as "Roman" mail, which used a similar construction, but will require extensive re-tailoring. This will also require labor to keep it rust free. (More expensive, and still requires labor to reshape the hauberk)

Welded stainless will last the rest of your life. It's the most expensive option, but if tailored properly won't require any of your labor.

Konstantin the Red wrote: In making riveted, a heat source is wanted to normalize the links, but this is less a thing in fixing up, as the links for the job should already be normalized. Welder wire will need to be normalized, definitely, perhaps before you even go to coil it, as welder wire is springy and won't take a 90-degree angle; it will snap. It'll do a curve.

Thank you for the information. Am I understanding correctly that any riveted metal will need to be normalized (heated)? I understood that was the case for stainless, but wasn't aware that mild needed heated as well. If that is so, then I will have to go with butted, having no shop, nor space to set up a shop.

Thank you,
Adelaisa

When I was making my riveted maille I just used a propane torch in my living room to normalize the rings. no shop space required. I strung a hundred or so onto a loop of wire, heated up an inch or so at a time to red hot till i'd got them all, then put them on top of a flipped over pot to cool off without burning anything. Also, you will only need to normalise them if you are scratch building the rings. if you opt to buy indian made ready to rivet rings, which i'd recommend, then all you need to do is put them together.
time wise, with the indian rings it took me a couple months of casual evening work to build the sleeves for my yushaman. it took me 3 months to build 1/3 of a sleeve making everything from scratch.

Wire work hardens. With round wire, you'll only need to normalize the area that's been flattened for riveting.

You would be advised not normalizing, welding, or any heat treatment with galvanized steel.
It will off gas the zinc, and breathing metal fumes of any type should be avoided.
As well as galvanized smelling funny and rubbing off gray grime.

Rebar tie wire works well for riveted maille (it's annealed mild steel) - most home DIY stores carry the stuff.

The thing with the rings made in India is that they are flattened pretty heavily. If historical accuracy isn't a main concern I would agree, but I think its worth the effort to make them yourself either way. If riveted maille is the only goal, go with the Indian stuff. Trying to get an historical look, go with some good old home made rings.

Once I get priority projects completed to get myself out on the field again, I'm undertaking this project as well, hand making everything (oh the horror of being ocd when it comes to being historically correct ).

"Home made" doesn't equal "historical looking". The only way to make mail that looks like an original sample is to acquire an original example and try to replicate it as closely as possible.

Sorry, when I mean home made, I mean do it yourself.

Same argument applies. How can anyone make authentic-looking mail without an authentic example to copy?

Most historical mail has a little bit of variability in terms of wire and link size, so if you're using the same wire and link size throughout it's going to look slightly "off" compared to the real thing. I'm guessing that historically drawing iron wire to close tolerances and having a mandrel that was exactly the same diameter across its entire length just wasn't a thing they really cared about.

Other than that the *big* things with modern riveted mail are:

1. On flat ring mail the links are too flattened. This makes the holes easier to punch, but on the real thing the flattening was less pronounced.

2. The overlap where the rivet goes is overly large. This also makes the holes easier to punch and gives you more area to work with, reducing your scrap rate, but this wasn't exactly how the originals looked.

3. The overlap on the rings is flat on the modern stuff and in historical mail this isn't always the case.

4. A lot of the modern stuff isn't tailored properly in order to fit as wide a range of people as possible.

Everything I listed here are shortcuts to keep the cost down and most of the stuff being produced is kinda-sorta close to the original thing, but not quite. They're using a little die to flatten the rings in the modern riveted mail and I'm sure that in period this was more like "guy with a hammer who's really, really good at it due to repetition."

So the modern stuff is a little bit off, but it really depends on how much that bothers you.

Ok. I really do appreciate everyone's feedback and feel that I am at the point of making an informed decision.

So I understand that pretty much whatever I do it's not going to look right. But that being said, pretty much no one else is going to have authentic mail either. So they goal then would be to make it look as good as I can. Do to my circumstances I have to purchase my rings premade and then assemble them. I am in the middle of the Alaskan wilderness and the one thing I have is time. Access to a shop, or even a quiet place to work is what I'm lacking. Even if I could get someone to purchase propane or mapp gas in Fairbanks, my getting it and a torch up here would not be good. The PTB would definitely frown on that. Also, the walls here are REALLY thin, so hammering rings flat - again - not an option.

From what I can find online, I can either go with premade butted round rings, or india made flat riveted rings. Honestly, knowing that no matter what it's not going to look 100% and I'm heavily leaning to putting it under plasticlamellar.com armor I'm leaning towards the butted in mild steel. For whatever reason the look of stainless just bugs me. Well maintained mild steel so much less so. This all started as trying to find a project to work on this winter when I'm trapped in -70 temperatures. I've realized I'm not quite at the point where I am interested in commiting the $$$ and time to a 100% kit. I would however, like a 70% kit. In the last five years I've only armored up once - I had a blast, but I'm not 100% sure yet. If you know what I mean.

So, once again, thank you for the information. I'll be posting the in I wanna be forum for some more advice.

Thanks!
Adelaisa

Based on your circumstances I would suggest a project involving smaller links (say, 4-5mm) and made from alternating rows of butted links and washers. You'd need a supply of suitable washers. Seastrom has what you'd need at a reasonable price. It would take longer to assemble but, as you said, you have plenty of time. Here is a sample that I made a few years ago. It isn't as tough as properly-riveted mail but it can stop a solid knife thrust. It looks good and nobody else would have anything similar due to the time needed to make it.
It was made using:
a bag of small washers http://www.seastrom-mfg.com/washerdetai ... 702-476-30
a spool of 1.2mm wire
a screwdriver (the wire was wrapped around its 4mm shaft to make links)
side cutters
pliers

No noise. No workbench. I did a little every night while watching TV. Make it entirely from butted links if you can't get the washers. It would take twice as long to assemble and won't be as tough but it still looks good.

One little nitpick on your overview of mail, while welded may technically be stronger, it's a moot point because both welded and riveted rings are more likely to break on a part of the ring that's not the joint. The weld may be stronger, but both are stronger than the surrounding material.

Yep. Though that is only true with mail that has been riveted properly. The Indian mail usually fails at the join.

Mild steel maille in small rings looks absolutely delicious-- keep it nice and polished and you'll absolutely love it.

Dan Howard wrote:Same argument applies. How can anyone make authentic-looking mail without an authentic example to copy?

THIS.
As much as Dan and I sometimes go back and forth, since our research findings clash, this is just absolutely DEAD on the money.

Once again, thank you for all the help. One more question. We've been talking about wire gauge being 14 or 16. I'm looking at rings on ringlord.com and this is what is says.

Mild Steel 16g
Wire Dia.: 0.062'' 1.6 mm
Sold by the lb
16g SWG = 14 AWG

So for our purposes does this spec out to being 16g or 14 gauge. I'm pretty confused by the SWG = AWG and can't find any answers on which system ya'll are talking about.

Thanks!

http://www.theringlord.com/AspectRatio.pdf

You'll find this useful. Usually, when most people talk gauge on here, they mean SWG. To alleviate confusion, a lot of people use the inches or mm measurements.
16ga (SWG) - 0.062" - 1.6mm
14ga (SWG) - 0.08" - 2.0mm

And get mischief done to them by typoes in the process, Keegan.

Adelaisa, the numbers of Steel Wire Gauge (for ferrous wires including stainless and galvanized) and American Wire Gauge (for nonferrous, electrical wires and wiring) have no relationship. AWG's real measure is the amperage it can efficiently carry -- not losing too much energy as heat radiated off the wire. It happens that an AWG number two numbers lower (fatter wire) than a given SWG gauge number means wires of fairly similar diameter through the gauge numbers in the teens, but it's only a coincidence.

The Ring Lord dot com lists their wires rather oddly, mixing use of gauges in a fashion that sort of makes sense for makers of mail only, and the method has its minuses. Keep a table of gauge numbers around, keep the wire diameters you're going to use most memorized, and use gauge as little as possible, I would suggest. While it makes a convenient verbal shorthand in conversation, always always always determine the wire diameter of the links you're ordering, and know their AR if you want to branch into the chains/jewelry weaves, as some work best with the links of particular proportions, or ratios. Don't let anything else creep up and trip you.

What that "16g SWG = 14g AWG" is for is for a mailler who is using steel wire with brass wire accents/contrast material, and wants to use wire that's at least close to the same thickness.

Everyone else in the world uses metric. Can't imagine why.

Because America, okay, that's all the reason we need. 'Murica.

Joking aside, though-- If you're looking at TRL their 16g 1/4" (metric 1.6mm/6.68mm) makes a pretty tough maille, as far as butted goes. You can beef it up to 14g 5/16" (2mm/8.31mm) and it will be stronger, but also heavier and if you go any higher than that it starts to look kind of... chunky, I suppose. Not as smooth, fine and fluid.

Sounds good. So I reckon I'll be going with the .062" wire for a nice smooth maille that will withstand the rigors of combat, and also be a good practice for me.

Thanks for the help all.

(Now to go do it...oh wait...look shiny things on the internet! )

Some of which are mail. Relevant, doncha know.

1/4" is 6.35mm. No idea where that 6.68 number came from. Measured link ID from springback?

As he said he was looking at The Ring Lord, I gave him the measured ID that they provide as opposed to mandrel ID.

If I might be so bold, here is what you are looking at. Sorry for the unfinished pics but these are the only ones I have access to at the moment.




This haubergon is 2mm X 8mm ID woven out of SS. It is almost finished now and weighs in at 29 lbs. When its finally done it will probably weigh around 35 lbs. It protects alright, and has held up remarkably well under combat but is very heavy.



This shirt is 1.6mm X 6mm woven out of galvi. It weghs here around 11 lbs and finished should weigh 22 - 26 lbs. It doesn't provide any protection and isn't as robust as the other shirt. Still kinda heavy.

I've gone round and round about the weight and I'm now I'm looking into making riveted mail. For SCA combat the weight/protection rating is very far from ideal, even for me who is a big and burly dude.

PS: I used the score'n'break method to make the cuts which work very well IMO. Both shirts were tailored for a 52" chest. I have the patterns broken down section by section if you want. And see Konstantin I reworked them using the Trevor pattern.

AwP wrote:One little nitpick on your overview of mail, while welded may technically be stronger, it's a moot point because both welded and riveted rings are more likely to break on a part of the ring that's not the joint. The weld may be stronger, but both are stronger than the surrounding material.

Yes, the links often break somewhere other than the joint, but welded wire can be spring temper, while riveted is only work hardened from annealed. The only difference it might make is after a while (a couple of years of SCA combat) you'll have several dozen riveted rings to replace. Whether that's from bad riveting or from the rest of the ring failing is arguable. While most of those failures are due to bad riveting, bad welds are really easy to catch during manufacture, and the few of us who do welded mail in the "historic" ring sizes usually do slightly smaller link IDs for the same size wire.

How can anyone make authentic-looking mail without an authentic example to copy?

I agree. Something as generic as, "is flat ring or round ring more authentic?", the answer is yes. The ring style varied from culture to culture and possibly even maker to maker (or even item to item by the same maker). The only way to make sure you're close is to have a sample available (doesn't have to be in person. It can be from a catalog or online) from the same time and culture that you want to emulate. If you want an earlier period (which is when full mail was really popular), you'll find that we don't have much laying around due to close to a thousand years' corrosion. Depending on how nit-picky you want to get, you can try contacting Eric D. Schmid, who is likely the most knowledgeable mail expert. He can point you in the right direction. Honestly though, I'd just try to find a nice, high detail photo of a mail sample or piece from the same culture and era that you're trying to personify and experiment until you have something that is close enough for your taste.

thunderbolt wrote:
This haubergon is 2mm X 8mm ID woven out of SS. It is almost finished now and weighs in at 29 lbs. When its finally done it will probably weigh around 35 lbs. It protects alright, and has held up remarkably well under combat but is very heavy.

This shirt is 1.6mm X 6mm woven out of galvi. It weghs here around 11 lbs and finished should weigh 22 - 26 lbs. It doesn't provide any protection and isn't as robust as the other shirt. Still kinda heavy.

I've gone round and round about the weight and I'm now I'm looking into making riveted mail. For SCA combat the weight/protection rating is very far from ideal, even for me who is a big and burly dude.

PS: I used the score'n'break method to make the cuts which work very well IMO. Both shirts were tailored for a 52" chest. I have the patterns broken down section by section if you want. And see Konstantin I reworked them using the Trevor pattern.

Hmmm.... Now you've got me thinking. So are you saying that the lighter one provides no protection because it's smaller/lighter or because it's a smaller ring size? If its because it's lighter how will switching to riveted mail help? As riveted is lighter yet?

Or are you stating that with sca style fighting mail isn't that useful period and so go with as light as you can get away with and still maintain the look.

And yes please I'd love any help on patterning - which was another reasoning was going for butted - in theory it'll be easier to fix if I mess something up.

Thanks,
Adelaisa
(who might be going back to the drawing board)

Adelaisa wrote:Or are you stating that with sca style fighting mail isn't that useful period and so go with as light as you can get away with and still maintain the look.

This... Well that's not entirely true. I have heard it said that flat link mail does dissipate blows but I have no first hand experience yet. What I can say is that the 14g (2mm) shirt is as protective as 12 oz leather which is what my first kit was made out of. On the other hand the 16g (1.6mm) shirt was about the same as a padded gambeson in terms of blow protection. In all the tests I did it seemed that the thicker guage/smaller ID combo protected the best with the type of mail I was making and my skill level at the time. Where my mail really shined protection wise is the areas under the arms, over the shoulders, and the bare joints on my hips. And the way it moves with you in the lists can't be matched IMHO. That said, most SCA heavies I've talked to say that mail is a flashy talberd and needs real protection underneath like zoombang. Remember mail was slash and stab defense, not bludgeon defense.

The weight really didn't become an issue until I had finished the "shirt" portion and started on the "legs" portion. While my war belt keeps the weight well distributed around my body, the realization that I was almost out of steel and still had a lot more to go was daunting. I started wearing my chain as soon as I finished the shoulders portion so that I could get used to the weight gradually as I added sections so it's not like I had armor shock as I traded in my 12 lb leather kit for a 30 lbs shirt but it is a lot of weight. In the end I guess it depends on how much load you want. I'm a big guy and consider myself rather strong (kinda like a dwarf and most definitly like my Viking ancestors) and I'm looking at alternatives. I know that if I weave a flat link riveted shirt in the 15 lb range I'm going to get a lot faster.

Here are the plans I used based on the Trevor Baker shirt. Again this is the only pic I have access to at the moment. When I get home I'll update it. I know for a fact that the numbers on the sleeves should be 45 on the shoulder reduced down to 36 otherwise the numbers are good. This should get you started anyway.



And Here is the Trevor site again:
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/trevor.bar ... r/mail.htm

**Just For the record I count rows as primary rows and connecting rows so every row facing left is one and the ones facing right are connecting rows and not counted.

Remember mail was slash and stab defense, not bludgeon defense.

This isn't entirely true. In the automotive world, the heavier the car is for a given suspension, the softer the ride. The same goes with padding. Mail by itself isn't good for blunt force, but it was rarely used by itself. It was often used in conjunction with padding underneath, with the maille lending weight (like the body of a car) and the gambeson (the suspension) or arming cap providing the padding. Mail wasn't the solution, but a part of the solution.

-Ben

Atlanta Armory wrote: If you want an earlier period (which is when full mail was really popular), you'll find that we don't have much laying around due to close to a thousand years' corrosion.

There are plenty of earlier examples. Museums have drawers full of mail that are in their reserve collections and will never see the light of day. The amount of mail that makes it into catalogues and books is miniscule compared to what it actually available.