Crossbows v. longbows

b0rsuk · 02-08-2021, 11:58 AM

And here's a dessert for you, a 960 lb draw weight medieval crossbow vs a 150 lb draw weight modern crossbow.

Tod's Workshop - 960lbs crossbow vs 150lbs crossbow - TESTED!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ghoVmc12vEs

Because as we know "crossbows are very powerful", one of the most enduring history myths.

Anyone up for an argument about relative merits of longbow, crossbow, and a staff sling?

Quoth · 02-09-2021, 11:29 AM

Not many people can use a longbow. Hardly anyone from horseback, you need to stand. Most crossbows are a compromise between re-cock time and power. Most rapid shooting or for horseback are less powerful than many bows, not just longbows. Muskets often less powerful, but no strength and almost no skill compared to a bow. Then like two people crossbows or Arbalests https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arbalest there were bigger blackpowder weapons, sometimes also called an arbalest, mounted on a tripod. They took longer to load and needed at least two people to move them.

Most crossbows were short range weapons without much power. But on the other hand the ancient Romans had a sinued powered siege weapon that could fling the equivalent of a fence post through a stone wall. It looked a little like a giant crossbow.

OtinG · 02-09-2021, 12:38 PM

I think the long bows were mostly for long range, rapid fire. When first introduced, long bow troops stood out of the range of fire from an enemy army and showered down a rain of destruction on them from the sky. This could decimate an army well before they were within range to attack.

Shorter bows were more suited for calvary units who could ride in fast, shoot rapid fire and fairly accurately since they were at close range, then retreat quickly. These tended to be made from laminations of various material to give them greater strength.

Crossbows were mostly for unskilled soldiers as they were easier to aim and shoot, but they lacked the rapid fire capability and strength of standard bows and long bows. It took great skill to shoot long bows and shorter bows, and those troops were harder to train. Crossbows were for lesser skilled troops and not as effective in general.

02-08-2021, 11:58 AM	#1
b0rsuk meles meles Posts: 109 Karma: 163588 Join Date: May 2008 Location: Persepolis Device: Pocketbook InkPad 3	And here's a dessert for you, a 960 lb draw weight medieval crossbow vs a 150 lb draw weight modern crossbow. Tod's Workshop - 960lbs crossbow vs 150lbs crossbow - TESTED! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ghoVmc12vEs Because as we know "crossbows are very powerful", one of the most enduring history myths. Anyone up for an argument about relative merits of longbow, crossbow, and a staff sling? Last edited by issybird; 02-09-2021 at 12:19 PM. Reason: Leave relevant bits.

02-09-2021, 11:29 AM	#2
Quoth Still reading Posts: 14,011 Karma: 105092227 Join Date: Jun 2017 Location: Ireland Device: All 4 Kinds: epub eink, Kindle, android eink, NxtPaper	Not many people can use a longbow. Hardly anyone from horseback, you need to stand. Most crossbows are a compromise between re-cock time and power. Most rapid shooting or for horseback are less powerful than many bows, not just longbows. Muskets often less powerful, but no strength and almost no skill compared to a bow. Then like two people crossbows or Arbalests https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arbalest there were bigger blackpowder weapons, sometimes also called an arbalest, mounted on a tripod. They took longer to load and needed at least two people to move them. Most crossbows were short range weapons without much power. But on the other hand the ancient Romans had a sinued powered siege weapon that could fling the equivalent of a fence post through a stone wall. It looked a little like a giant crossbow.

02-09-2021, 12:38 PM	#3
OtinG Old Gadget Guy Posts: 1,913 Karma: 6854865 Join Date: Jun 2018 Device: Oasis 3, iPhone 13 Pro Max, iPad mini 6, iPad Air 2020, Alexa Devices	I think the long bows were mostly for long range, rapid fire. When first introduced, long bow troops stood out of the range of fire from an enemy army and showered down a rain of destruction on them from the sky. This could decimate an army well before they were within range to attack. Shorter bows were more suited for calvary units who could ride in fast, shoot rapid fire and fairly accurately since they were at close range, then retreat quickly. These tended to be made from laminations of various material to give them greater strength. Crossbows were mostly for unskilled soldiers as they were easier to aim and shoot, but they lacked the rapid fire capability and strength of standard bows and long bows. It took great skill to shoot long bows and shorter bows, and those troops were harder to train. Crossbows were for lesser skilled troops and not as effective in general.

Advert