WTS: Bascinet with peak

[AgeOfCraft]

This helmet will be good protection for your head!
Bascinet with peak, dates back to the 14th century and was one of popular Italian helmets with open face. Spring tempered steel, 2mm(12 gauge), hidden face protection, chin strap. Price $445. Details here

[Caius705]

In my experience, 2mm is closer to 14 gauge than 12 gauge. And you might consider offering closer spacing on the bargrill to be ACL and SCA compliant.

[AgeOfCraft]

The main requirements are:
- thickness steel should be no less 14 gauge
- steel should be not ​​of light alloys
This helmet corresponds all requirement, information about historical compliance you can find here

[brucer]

What caius is trying to tell you is that the bar grill you have on this helm is not compliant with any rule set of the larger medieval combat reenactment groups out there. It my be period correct but nobody is going to purchase it for ACL or SCA combat as is- they will have to replace the grill to make it legal (and safe) to use.

[AgeOfCraft]

Can you show me appropriate bar grill?

[GunnarUlfson]

Here is our Marshal Handbook for the SCA.

http://www.sca.org/officers/marshal/doc ... ndbook.pdf

Section VI part B covers helms.

3. Face guards shall prevent a 1 inch (25.4mm) diameter dowel from entering into any of
the face guard openings.

Hope that helps.

Gunz

[AgeOfCraft]

But this helm used only with chainmail and complete face protection is about like here

[Steve S.]

It is an interesting question. I don't think, but am not sure, that SCA marshals will allow maille to serve as a "cover" for gaps in the helm greater than 1".

I could be wrong on that, though.

I'd be leery of allowing butted maille to serve in that role - a thrust might punch right through the maille.

Anyway, if you want to sell grilled helmets into the SCA market you'll probably want to stick with the 1" rule.

Steve

[Caius705]

I wouldn't worry about using it, personally. Riveted or welded mail would be easily strong enough. The problem is that I'd catch hell from marshals constantly, since it's not a style they're used to seeing, even if it's a safe design.

[AgeOfCraft]

Alot of helms with peak are using now successfull, without any question to face protection. And it so difficult to pierce chainmail when underneath chain mail will be this hiden protection. In combination it's strong protection. About marshals, they should apply rule to hidden face protection with chainmail and it meets the requirements.
If there are marshals, it will be interesting to listen them point of view

[Steve S.]

Alot of helms with peak are using now successfull, without any question to face protection. And it so difficult to pierce chainmail when underneath chain mail will be this hiden protection. In combination it's strong protection. About marshals, they should apply rule to hidden face protection with chainmail and it meets the requirements.
If there are marshals, it will be interesting to listen them point of view

Will the eye slots themselves admit a 1" dowel? It is difficult to tell from the picture.

Steve

[schreiber]

Alot of helms with peak are using now successfull, without any question to face protection. And it so difficult to pierce chainmail when underneath chain mail will be this hiden protection. In combination it's strong protection. About marshals, they should apply rule to hidden face protection with chainmail and it meets the requirements.
If there are marshals, it will be interesting to listen them point of view

The question isn't whether it's safe. It probably is.
The question isn't whether the rules apply. Technically they do: the rules state that no face opening shall allow a 1" diameter dowel to enter the helm, they state that bars should be 3/16" diameter unless the cross braces are less than 2" apart.

The question is whether or not marshals will allow this loophole to go out on the field. And it is a loophole - the intent of the rule is that only rigid material will be used. Sure, you could put 1/16" diameter maille on the face and that would technically meet the letter of the rules - but not the spirit of the rules.

There are conventions and standards for building SCA helms which aren't written down.
Some examples:
Nobody makes 16 gauge helms. That's the rule: 16 gauge. But everyone is wearing 14 gauge or thicker.
Nobody makes bargrills out of 3/16" bars. Everyone uses 1/4".

If a fighter wants a guarantee that he'll pass the inspection, he's going to wear a helm that's 14 gauge or thicker with 1/4" bars. He's also not going to wear something that deviates a lot from tradition. And he's definitely not going to walk up to the inspection line wearing a helm that has 2" gaps in the bargrill with maille covering it.

I do agree that this configuration is probably safe, particularly if it's really thick riveted maille. But the issue is that individual fighters aren't going to risk getting kicked off the field. So we're not trying to tell you the helm isn't any good. We're trying to tell you that you won't sell that many of them.

Another thing I'd like to mention is that the bottom bar should probably come down lower. Another of the rules is that the bottom of the helm needs to descend one inch below the wearer's chin. Helmets that have the bottom bar even with the rest of the bottom of the helm probably don't descend far enough. Fighters that have really long necks (like me) have a particular problem with this - I've gotten kicked off the field even though my bargrill descended 1" below my chin, because there was enough room to fit a weapon up there and stab my chin.

So yeah, it might be nice if the marshals always followed the rules and changed the rules when the rules needed to be changed. But that's not the way it's done in the SCA - tradition means as much as the written rules. Probably more in some cases.

(Which I suppose is what happens when your biggest fighting event was founded by one of the world's preeminent anarchists. )

[Ironbadger]

Age, please understand.

We are not trying to be mean and find faults or nitpick your work out of meanness.

We are in fact, trying to help you to sell here on the archive, because you do very nice looking work.

The question of whether your helm as shown meets all the technical requirements is only part of what we are looking at in these comments...
It won't sell if SCA fighters believe they will have trouble getting it on the field in the US, in an SCA event.

Thats not us being snobbish- Its us telling you, based on our experience, why it will not easily sell.
The advice is intended to correct the issues so the helm can pass easily and potential buyers can be confident they are getting what they need.

I for one, and I believe most of us, would really like to see helms from you that will pass the SCA requirements and encourage you to offer more for sale here on the archive.

We really are trying to help, because we like seeing good work from new people.

I've changed this post in an effort to hopefully make it more clear to a non english speaker.
(I may have failed...But I hope it helps.)

-Badger-

Alot of helms with peak are using now successfull, without any question to face protection. And it so difficult to pierce chainmail when underneath chain mail will be this hiden protection. In combination it's strong protection. About marshals, they should apply rule to hidden face protection with chainmail and it meets the requirements.
If there are marshals, it will be interesting to listen them point of view

Will the eye slots themselves admit a 1" dowel? It is difficult to tell from the picture.

Steve

[Gethin]

Hi there Age-
First off, I really like the helm. Is this based on a specific helmet? I have seen other versions like yours, and wondered what is based on.
I think the basic problem is that most people here are S.C.A. oriented. Some may play a little B.O.T.N but most of your possible costumers are S.C.A.
To your question about a marshal passing the bargrill (face protection), here is my background: I have been a combatant in the S.C.A. since 1984 and served as a marshal for over 15 years. At this time, I am a regional marshal responsible for an area over 6,400 square Km (although most of it does not have active groups) and about 100 fighters.
The basic answer is that I would not allow you helm, as is, on the field. The reason is the S.C.A. rule set is specific as to what can cover the face for protection, and what the maximum distance between bars can be. It gives me no discretion in interpretation. The S.C.A does not have a hidden face rule.
There are helms that use a maille drape to cover the face, but this is for looks. The bargrill beneath is the actual protection.
Please do not think that I am speaking badly of your helm. It just does not meet the rules for the S.C.A. I wish you the best in your business.

[AgeOfCraft]

Alot of helms with peak are using now successfull, without any question to face protection. And it so difficult to pierce chainmail when underneath chain mail will be this hiden protection. In combination it's strong protection. About marshals, they should apply rule to hidden face protection with chainmail and it meets the requirements.
If there are marshals, it will be interesting to listen them point of view

Will the eye slots themselves admit a 1" dowel? It is difficult to tell from the picture.

Steve

yes, eye slots between peak and hidden protection no more 1"

[AgeOfCraft]

thanks everybody for advice, we rely on your experience in SCA and in future we will use your recommendations for this item.