Breastplate Sizing

[SteelWeaver]

I was wondering how to determine the width of the top part of a breastplate.

I'm trying to make a breastplate in this style (which my youunger, shorter, smaller brother bought from Eric Dube a few years ago)


This one was my first attempt (my second attempt at a breastplate)


When I tried it on and moved about vigorously (I call this "testing") , I noticed that the middle part of the breastplate was too wide, as it had caused linear bruising on the sides of my pecs.

I paid more attention to the width of the middle part on my third trial, but I'm still unsure it's the correct width because I haven't had the chance to test is out in the field yet.



How do you determine the max width of the breastplate between the arms, on which measurement do base this?

I thought about going for nipple distance less 1-2 inches, is this similar to what you do?

Thanks!

[Pitbull Armory]

Hi there, Just put both arms straight out in front of you like your water skiing, measure from arm to arm, and subtract 1.5 inches from both sides. That should get you close.

Take care

Pitbull

[Mac]

Steel,

The problem is not that the breast plate is too wide at the top. It is that it is sitting too close to your body at the top. In order to move your arms freely, there must be sufficient distance between your upper chest and the upper breastplate to allow your shoulder to travel forward unhindered. My rule of thumb is that there should be a space between the outer edges of the upper breast and the wearer's chest of about the thickness of the wearer's fingers.

This is how I measure the width of the upper breast.
-bend your arms 90 degrees at the elbows
-grab your right elbow with your left hand and vice versa
-let your upper arms be horizontal
-get someone to measure the distance between your arms at the point where your chest ends and your arms begin (this is the insertion of the pectorales)

This measurement is the widest solid breastplate you can wear. If it were 1/2" narrower, it would be a little more comfortable. If the breast is to have movable gussets, the total width (including the gussets) may be about 1" wider than the base measurement.

Beware the temptation to keep making the breast narrower until the bruising stops. This only leads to the steel "wife beater" tee shirt. A quick look at real breastplates will convince you that this was not the authentic solution. If our ancestors could wear wide breastplates, so can we.

Mac

[Pitbull Armory]

Hi there Mr MacPherson, Thank you for sharing that info. It is nice to hear how a professional does it. Do you mean the breastplate is supposed to sit on the hips only and ride above your shoulders? I dont see how else the upper part could float.

Thank you sir

Pitbull

[Milan H]

Mac,

If I'm reading your description right, the edge of the BPs arm insets should be about 1/2 to 3/4s of an inch off the chest. The center of the BP can be basically as close as comfortable though. This gives the pectoral room to move under the breastplate, while maximizing width.

Would this be correct?

Cheers,

[Mac]

Pitbull,

Most of the weight should still be on the shoulders, although some will probably come to fall on the hips, especially when the wearer bends to the side. The trick is to not let any of the weight fall on the structures which have to move.

It comes down to a question of how to keep the breastplate *forward*, rather than how to keep it *up*. The breastplate will always tend to fall back upon the upper chest. If it is allowed to lie on the lateral aspect of the pectorales, they will be badly bruised when the shoulders are brought forward. (by "lateral aspect" I mean where the muscle inserts to the shoulder) (edited for clarification)

As I see it there are three ways around this.

The first is to shape the breastplate so that is rests on the bellies of the pecs. By this I mean the thick part of the muscle which lies at, or just above the nipples. This part of the muscle does not move around with the shoulder like the lateral part, and can much better bear the pressure of the breastplate.
I think that this is the heart and sole of breastplate design in the 14th and 15th centuries.

The second way is put some padding between the upper breastplate and the sternum. A piece of dense foam about the size and thickness of the wearer's palm, glued to the inside of the breast, just below the neck will usually do the trick. There *may* be some historical justification for this if we assume that the arming doublet performed this function. I have used padding like this many times, and it works just fine, but I have always felt that it is a dirty kluge.

The third method is to use a collar to keep the upper breastplate spaced away from the upper chest. This is, of course, the typical 16th century solution, and it works surprisingly well. It really comes into it's own with those wide gusseted breasts. I sometimes wonder if this is the whole reason they did it that way.

Mac

[Mac]

Mac,

If I'm reading your description right, the edge of the BPs arm insets should be about 1/2 to 3/4s of an inch off the chest. The center of the BP can be basically as close as comfortable though. This gives the pectoral room to move under the breastplate, while maximizing width.

Would this be correct?

Cheers,

That's basically it. But, as I was saying above, it must bear against the body somewhere, and best if it does not try to bear against any "moving parts".

Mac

[Pitbull Armory]

Mr MacPherson, Thank you for clarifying that for me, I see what you mean exactly and will keep that in mind as I shape my Breastplates from now on.

thank you

Pitbull

[Aussie Yeoman]

Mac,

just one more one the width of BP's.

When measuring for the width, as you mentioned, is that inclusing the material for the rolls, or should one ass another 1/2 to 3/4 inch to each side so that the FINAL measurement is the one you prescribe?

Dave

[Mac]

Aussie Dave,

That's the final width of the upper breastplate. Any additional width you will need for hems (rolls) will have to be added to that measurement.

Mac

[Konstantin the Red]

... rather than assed to it. Hee Hawww!

[Indianer]

Hello everybody,

i know this is an older thread, but it is still relevant. Perhaps, can someone add a photo to this thread which shows the point on historical armour - maybe an edited one to highlight things?

Grateful and deeply in debt, Indi

[Konstantin the Red]

KUDOS TO INDIANER FOR THE POTENTIALLY VALUABLE RESURRECTION!

[Len Parker]

Down a bit there's a side shot of a kastenbrust showing the gap between plate and chest:http://www.tforum.info/forum/index.php? ... 01&&page=3

[Indianer]

Hello there, many thanks for the reference - i put it in the photos below:

Kastenbrust.JPG (73.94 KiB) Viewed 829 times

Mac, what you pointed out below is true here:

Most of the weight should still be on the shoulders, although some will probably come to fall on the hips, especially when the wearer bends to the side. The trick is to not let any of the weight fall on the structures which have to move.

The following does not seem so easy though:

(Mac:) It comes down to a question of how to keep the breastplate *forward*, rather than how to keep it *up*. The breastplate will always tend to fall back upon the upper chest.

The breastplate is not fastened, so it stands off pretty far. But if it was pulled towards the chest, there are two reflecting spots that draw my attention, perhaps they make the plate keep a distance to the (Mac:) bellies of the pecs?

The first is to shape the breastplate so that it rests on the bellies of the pecs.

Kastenbrust_frontal 2.JPG (31.44 KiB) Viewed 836 times

Is that assumption correct? Best, Indi

[Mac]

Indi,

I think that what you are seeing in that pic is more about the lighting in the room than about the shape of the plate.

This pic shows (approximately) where I expect this breastplate to make contact with the wearer's pectorals.



Mac