Pistol Crossbow

[Timelord]

(11 November 2013, 19:19)Skvez Wrote:

(9 November 2013, 01:52)Timelord Wrote: Throw a teacup. It will be just as effective

Now you're being silly.
A crossbow bolt will do significantly more damage than a teacup.
Is a crossbow pointless - no. Is it as good as an AR 15 - no
Would an AR15 kill my attacker instantly 100% of the time even if I had one - no
A Crossbow (pistol or otherwise) is legal, I can own and practice with it.
Few fights are won in a single blow. If I can damage my opponent *before they close to melee range* I have a much better chance of winning the melee fight than I do if I just stand there like a prune waiting for them to close the distance.
The only other things you've suggested (hammers and bricks) have less penetration than a crossbow bolt, less range and are not as accurate.
Forget reloading, fire the pistol crossbow once then switch to melee mode (stick, knife etc).
The pistol crossbow should be considered as one piece in a defensive strategy including entanglement/ spike traps and a melee weapon.

(11 November 2013, 00:19)BDG Wrote: A BB from a catapult will do similar damage in a vital area and will transfer all of its energy in a non vital area.

Your mileage may vary but my crossbow bolts have a spiked end that penetrate better than a BB and I can aim the crossbow more accurately than I can a catapult, and I can fire it one handed holding my melee weapon ready in the other hand.

You don't seem to quite get it! It is not all about "penetration" in optimal conditions.... Why does a hammer or a brick score badly on penetration?? Why do you think they would need to penetrate? Why is "penetration" the only focus? Why is throwing a teacup any more ridiculous than using a weapon that has poor odds of achieving the objective AND in so doing, use up any valuable time/advantage you may have been able to capitalize on.. This is basically a question which comes down to -- Why use a poor to mediocre tool to do a limited focused job when you could select a different tool or tactical combination that is a of a better quality design and has better proven odds of the result you want and that it may not be restricted to specific scenario conditions to the same degree? This is your and your loved ones lives we are talking about here. There is more tactically to the situation than just one shot penetration ability and another weapon to hand. Some folk talk about historical examples where pistol crossbows were used with rapiers. What exactly do they know of this before avid preppers go off and try to emulate it? The crossbows of history make the type of modern examples being suggested look like toys... FACT! and poor quality, unreliable ones at that. Rapiers need a very high skill level to be proficient in or you will be severely disadvantaged in their use to your detriment. Having a (suitable & familiar) secondary melee weapon ready to hand is ideal and advisable BUT it still does not justify selecting a ranged weapon of poor successful probability.. A house brick or large rock is proven through history to work well as a short ranged weapon. It is also disconcerting and a deterrent. I am not saying it is a good choice, just that it is not particularly any less effective for those last few seconds of range. There are other choices. A light javelin has considerably more impact and kinetic energy dump than any crossbow bolt. A spear can reach out and touch people again and again without reloading/or not as is the case.. A small throwing axe is exceedingly damaging and an amazing mind changer, while still usable in the hand if caught by surprise before the change to primary melee weapon. Anything which arcs in flight down onto the upper part of an aggressors head/shoulders is a greater threat/deterrent and possible damage to the advancing aggressor. It also makes them try to block the objects arc, which in the case of them holding any kind of rudimentary shielding device - will not only cause them to block their line of sight, but will also open up their defence and complicate their immediate thought patterns. whether it hits or not it will still distract the aggressor and hand you a tactical bonus if you are prepared to capitalize on it. There are other weapons, these are just an example. The cheap commercially available pistol crossbows being discussed are all round poor. Not useless, just Poor. Yes they can penetrate in the right conditions etc etc, BUT they are no more suitable than that stiletto heel on a stick! Get a proper tool for the job, not a cheap modern imitation of dubious potential. This is not a game.. if it is, then the stiletto heel on a stick is just as valid.. That is my grounded and researched advice. Those with a bit of nounce might take it on board, for the wheel reinventors, then I wish you a safe journey. TL. out.

---

(15 November 2013, 18:37)Timelord Wrote:

(11 November 2013, 19:19)Skvez Wrote:

(9 November 2013, 01:52)Timelord Wrote: Throw a teacup. It will be just as effective

Now you're being silly.
A crossbow bolt will do significantly more damage than a teacup.
Is a crossbow pointless - no. Is it as good as an AR 15 - no
Would an AR15 kill my attacker instantly 100% of the time even if I had one - no
A Crossbow (pistol or otherwise) is legal, I can own and practice with it.
Few fights are won in a single blow. If I can damage my opponent *before they close to melee range* I have a much better chance of winning the melee fight than I do if I just stand there like a prune waiting for them to close the distance.
The only other things you've suggested (hammers and bricks) have less penetration than a crossbow bolt, less range and are not as accurate.
Forget reloading, fire the pistol crossbow once then switch to melee mode (stick, knife etc).
The pistol crossbow should be considered as one piece in a defensive strategy including entanglement/ spike traps and a melee weapon.

(11 November 2013, 00:19)BDG Wrote: A BB from a catapult will do similar damage in a vital area and will transfer all of its energy in a non vital area.

Your mileage may vary but my crossbow bolts have a spiked end that penetrate better than a BB and I can aim the crossbow more accurately than I can a catapult, and I can fire it one handed holding my melee weapon ready in the other hand.

You don't seem to quite get it! It is not all about "penetration" in optimal conditions.... Why does a hammer or a brick score badly on penetration?? Why do you think they would need to penetrate? Why is "penetration" the only focus? Why is throwing a teacup any more ridiculous than using a weapon that has poor odds of achieving the objective AND in so doing, use up any valuable time/advantage you may have been able to capitalize on.. This is basically a question which comes down to -- Why use a poor to mediocre tool to do a limited focused job when you could select a different tool or tactical combination that is a of a better quality design and has better proven odds of the result you want and that it may not be restricted to specific scenario conditions to the same degree? This is your and your loved ones lives we are talking about here. There is more tactically to the situation than just one shot penetration ability and another weapon to hand. Some folk talk about historical examples where pistol crossbows were used with rapiers. What exactly do they know of this before avid preppers go off and try to emulate it? The crossbows of history make the type of modern examples being suggested look like toys... FACT! and poor quality, unreliable ones at that. Rapiers need a very high skill level to be proficient in or you will be severely disadvantaged in their use to your detriment. Having a (suitable & familiar) secondary melee weapon ready to hand is ideal and advisable BUT it still does not justify selecting a ranged weapon of poor successful probability.. A house brick or large rock is proven through history to work well as a short ranged weapon. It is also disconcerting and a deterrent. I am not saying it is a good choice, just that it is not particularly any less effective for those last few seconds of range. There are other choices. A light javelin has considerably more impact and kinetic energy dump than any crossbow bolt. A spear can reach out and touch people again and again without reloading/or not as is the case.. A small throwing axe is exceedingly damaging and an amazing mind changer, while still usable in the hand if caught by surprise before the change to primary melee weapon. Anything which arcs in flight down onto the upper part of an aggressors head/shoulders is a greater threat/deterrent and possible damage to the advancing aggressor. It also makes them try to block the objects arc, which in the case of them holding any kind of rudimentary shielding device - will not only cause them to block their line of sight, but will also open up their defence and complicate their immediate thought patterns. whether it hits or not it will still distract the aggressor and hand you a tactical bonus if you are prepared to capitalize on it. There are other weapons, these are just an example. The cheap commercially available pistol crossbows being discussed are all round poor. Not useless, just Poor. Yes they can penetrate in the right conditions etc etc, BUT they are no more suitable than that stiletto heel on a stick! Get a proper tool for the job, not a cheap modern imitation of dubious potential. This is not a game.. if it is, then the stiletto heel on a stick is just as valid.. That is my grounded and researched advice. Those with a bit of nounce might take it on board, for the wheel reinventors, then I wish you a safe journey. TL. out.

You think a brick has less range than a crossbow bolt?? Again, a lack of understanding of ballistic properties. The key word is "effective" That is effective range! A cheap commercial pistol crossbow firing a lightweight bolt (as they are) will result in a projectile with low inertia and mass. The inertial energy will drop off fast as the bolt travels and so as the range increases, the bolt will rapidly lose its penetration ability. There is vitually no energy dump anyway. Throw a brick at someone and even though the range might not be as good, the effective range is what counts and the brick will lose very very little and will dump most of its energy in/onto the target. Bingo and don't people know this when they see one arcing through the air towards them. Same for the hammer but more focused and easier to wield. Also good as a back up if no time to bring the other weapon on target.. A ranged bludgeoning weapon would be far more efficient at immediately disabling or reducing the effectiveness of an aggressors ability than a cheap lightweight pistol crossbow bolt of dubious incapacitating provenance..