LR - Sheild musings (was true fighter experience, (was I shoulda known)) baron at
Fri Jul 28 13:47:37 PDT 2000

All of which points to reasons to carry a heater shield.  
Remember, you're not restricted to one shape, and there 
must have been some reason for all those guys in period 
to have shields pointed on the bottom, when the Romans 
had carried rectangles.

I love my narrow shield; it's 2' across the top, and 
three feet down the middle, and with the flick of a wrist 
I get the same coverage that somebody with a 2'x3' 
rectangle gets, and at about 2/3 the weight.


- Galen of Bristol

Quoting Sluggy <slugmusk at>:

> Padraig Ruad O'Maolagain wrote:
> > This is why I have gone to the 24x42 inch shield - you wouldn't 
> > think a lousy six inches of shield could make that much of a 
> > difference, but it does, especially for those of us over 6 feet tall.
> The biggest complaint I have about shields in general (and mine in
> particular) is carrying weight. Once a shield reaches a certain minimum
> weight for safety, every unnecessary ounce adds to my discomfort in
> weilding it.
> According to the online version of the sheild standards,
> a shield should weight a minimum of 1 pound per square foot of area.
> This is considered a guideline rather than a hard rule, but I would
> certainly treat it as a rule. The idea is that the shield have enough
> inertia to absorb the force of the blow.
> Thus, a 24x36 shield would have to weigh at least 6 pounds to be legal.
> A 24x42 shield needs to weigh 7 pounds. (The easiest way to calculate
> the area of the shield is to multiply shield width times height in
> inches and divide by 144. This gives you the square footage of the
> shield).
> My shield, made of 3/8" plywood with aluminum channel and garden hose
> edging, a steel basket and a leather strap with a buckle, weighs in a
> little over 8 pounds, 33% heavier than it legally needs to be.
> If I were to add 6 inches to the bottom of it without changing the
> construction, it would probably gain another pound or so and still be
> about 28% over the requirement.
> Now, if I were to narrow it some to compensate with the added
> length....  A 22x40 would only add .11 square feet to the size, thus
> only a couple of ounces, but I would gain 4 extra inches of vertical
> protection. 
> What would be the real effect of narrowing the shield by only 2 inches? 
> I could also lighten my shield several ways. I could replace the leather
> strap and buckle with nylon. I could use aluminum or suitable plastic
> instead of steel for the basket. I could lose the aluminum at the edges,
> but that extends the life of a shield significantly. I could pad the
> edges with something lighter than garden hose, maybe rawhide (would
> probably look a little less mundane, too). 
> The 3/8" plywood mine is made of is just about as thin as I feel would
> be safe for plywood, at least of the cheap grades. Maybe marine grade
> plywood could still be strong but run a little thinner? Marine plywood
> might be significantly less prone to warping in the seemingly inevitable
> dampness of the springtime events...
> Then I could take and old bowsaw blade and put it on the edges of the
> shield to grab swords and put in a window covered with plexiglas to see
> through, aluminum foil covering and maybe a photo strobe to blind my
> opponents and a stun gun wired to the bolt heads on the outside...
> Well, maybe not all that, but I think playing with the dimensions is
> still a good idea....
> Sluggy!
> -- 
Go to to perform mailing list tasks.

More information about the Loch-Ruadh mailing list