The weight of Terminators in T:SCC confirmed

[Thanas]

Here's a crazy idea - could there be climbing spikes that extend out the feet of a Terminator when necessary? That could hold down the rear foot of the Terminator in the above pictures. I suppose ideally they'd stick out forward and down, out the ball of the foot.

No, since we never see Cameron and/or another terminator dig in...also, it would possibly immobilize the Terminator. Not something positive to happen in a fight.

[charlemagne]

No, since we never see Cameron and/or another terminator dig in...also, it would possibly immobilize the Terminator. Not something positive to happen in a fight.

It would also destroy their shoes, and we haven't seen Cameron going through lots of pairs

[MKSheppard]

This makes no sense, really. It's so totally wrong.

[MKSheppard]

To elaborate further, typical human bone density is about 1,600 kg/m3.

If the Terminators use Ti-6Al-4V alloy for their endoskeleton, that has a density of 4,429 kg/m3. And obviously, it has to be beefed up in various methods compared to a human skeleton's bones - because I have the actual US Military specifications for Ti-6Al-4V armor; and in order to have a V50 ballistic limit (50% don't penetrate) against .30 caliber M2 AP rounds (M1 Garand) at near-point blank, you need about 0.700 inches of thickness.

Overall, this all adds up to a pretty significant endoskeleton mass penalty; because we can't build them to the same exact specifications as a human skeleton (0.0070625 m3 or so), and get away with a 31.27 kg endoskeleton versus a 11.3 kg bone skeleton for a 180 lb human.

Otherwise, Terminators would be easily destroyed by sustained gunfire, and we've seen terminators in all the media timelines walk into hails of gunfire, and still function as combat units.

[Anguirus]

Well, we haven't actually seen endos surviving heavy machine gun fire, just 9 mm and 5.56 mm. I'm not sure we've ever seen them shrugging off AP rounds either, and we know for a fact that heavy .50 cal rifles and "phase-plasma" future guns can take them out.

The mass may also be brought down by the fact that Terminators don't actually have very much blood, and they don't need muscle mass (it's merely to facilitate the disguise).

[Peptuck]

Well, we haven't actually seen endos surviving heavy machine gun fire, just 9 mm and 5.56 mm. I'm not sure we've ever seen them shrugging off AP rounds either, and we know for a fact that heavy .50 cal rifles and "phase-plasma" future guns can take them out.

It should be worth pointing out that the Tech-Com resistance does maintain working machineguns; the berserk Terminator in Dungeons & Dragons was carrying what looked like an M249, and since they wouldn't keep weapons around like that if they weren't useful....

Hell, even Derek's sidearm was a Desert Eagle, though that didn't do much more than make said Terminator flinch at point-blank range.

[Singular Intellect]

Bubble boy :

There is still sound in space in Battlestar Galactica despite going as far as including newtonian physics. That does not mean the writers actually intended such a thing. You will never hear Adama complaining how loud Cylon Raiders can be.

That's because sound in space is completely impossible without some significant medium to transfer it.

Suggesting heavy Terminators is not even remotely appealing to impossibility, it's appealing to common sense and simple science.

Superpowered beings performing feats that are physically inconsistent is a common style over substance fallacy in TV or movies. Are you going to argue that Peter Parker weighed a ton too for sending a kid flying with a push in the first movie ?

Red Herring. We're not talking about Spiderman fantasy, are we?

Or how about every single person saved by last second dramatic catch while falling from great height in any movie or tv show ? Are they made of unobtanium too ?

Again, irrelevent.

The point stands that, mathematically speaking based on simple physics, arguing heavy Terminators is a very sound and reasonable argument.

Thanas himself has provided the proof that the makers of the show intented heavier than human counterpart Terminators, something I had already figured out. Ironically his reference tends to also blow away the whole 'resistance would use weight scales to detect Terminators' arguement; 20% additional mass is not exactly something that wouldn't be noticed.

The 20% figure provided is, bluntly, grossly inaccurate. If I were to hazard a bet, I'd say the number was simply plucked out of thin air as opposed to really thought out.

As my calculations showed, even those who argued things like 50% relatively heavier Terminators were making a generous concession, knowingly or otherwise.

Once again it all comes down to what kind of evidence should be discarded. Appealing to authority figures on the actual subject does not magically make the evidence invalid; all that does is potentially make it easier to decide which conflicting evidence to dismiss under suspension of disbelief.

[Singular Intellect]

To elaborate further, typical human bone density is about 1,600 kg/m3.

If the Terminators use Ti-6Al-4V alloy for their endoskeleton, that has a density of 4,429 kg/m3. And obviously, it has to be beefed up in various methods compared to a human skeleton's bones - because I have the actual US Military specifications for Ti-6Al-4V armor; and in order to have a V50 ballistic limit (50% don't penetrate) against .30 caliber M2 AP rounds (M1 Garand) at near-point blank, you need about 0.700 inches of thickness.

Overall, this all adds up to a pretty significant endoskeleton mass penalty; because we can't build them to the same exact specifications as a human skeleton (0.0070625 m3 or so), and get away with a 31.27 kg endoskeleton versus a 11.3 kg bone skeleton for a 180 lb human.

Otherwise, Terminators would be easily destroyed by sustained gunfire, and we've seen terminators in all the media timelines walk into hails of gunfire, and still function as combat units.

One should point out that flesh covering should be taking into account as well, as it additionally functions as a means of absorbing damage.

But one must admit that even modern heavy concentrated automatic fire from multiple attackers seems to impart mostly superficial damage to Terminator endoskeletons (ie: T-800 engaging S.W.A.T. at Cyberdyne).

[Thanas]

Thanas himself has provided the proof that the makers of the show intented heavier than human counterpart Terminators, something I had already figured out. Ironically his reference tends to also blow away the whole 'resistance would use weight scales to detect Terminators' arguement; 20% additional mass is not exactly something that wouldn't be noticed.

Really? That only has a fit female up to 72 from 60 kg, or 84 from 70 kg on a male (assuming we use the 20% limit, which is the highest Zach was willing to go. As I have argued in my posts, a 10-15% weight limit is way more probable). I for one would hesitate to say that a person weighing 10-20% more than the average male would immediately be picked up by weight scales, especially not when we are talking about bulky males. To be honest, there is a difference, but IMO that difference is not high enough to immediately arouse suspicion, no more than a fit athlete weighing more than a normal person would arouse suspicion. Unlike the 100% weight increase.

The 20% figure provided is, bluntly, grossly inaccurate. If I were to hazard a bet, I'd say the number was simply plucked out of thin air as opposed to really thought out.

You can of course argue that it is plucked out of thin air, but then we would have to fall back to Zach's first statement, meaning that "Terminators in our world weigh only slightly more than similarly sized human". Which once again blows a hole in your argument. So no matter in what manner you interpret the statements, the working assumption of the writers is that Terminators do not weigh more than 20% (and that is the highest estimate) than human beings.

And that's it. End of discussion.

As my calculations showed, even those who argued things like 50% relatively heavier Terminators were making a generous concession, knowingly or otherwise.

Once again it all comes down to what kind of evidence should be discarded. Appealing to authority figures on the actual subject does not magically make the evidence invalid; all that does is potentially make it easier to decide which conflicting evidence to dismiss under suspension of disbelief.

Yes, and for the purposes of discussion, the 20% figure is canon. In the end, we can always dismiss the various inconsistencies in lifting etc. as clicheés.


About the armour: We do not know the material they are built out of. That said, any comparison to modern armour is a bit moot.

[Singular Intellect]

Thanas himself has provided the proof that the makers of the show intented heavier than human counterpart Terminators, something I had already figured out. Ironically his reference tends to also blow away the whole 'resistance would use weight scales to detect Terminators' arguement; 20% additional mass is not exactly something that wouldn't be noticed.

Really? That only has a fit female up to 72 from 60 kg, or 84 from 70 kg on a male (assuming we use the 20% limit, which is the highest Zach was willing to go. As I have argued in my posts, a 10-15% weight limit is way more probable).

And just what do you base this on, aside from arbitrary dictation?

I for one would hesitate to say that a person weighing 10-20% more than the average male would immediately be picked up by weight scales, especially not when we are talking about bulky males. To be honest, there is a difference, but IMO that difference is not high enough to immediately arouse suspicion, no more than a fit athlete weighing more than a normal person would arouse suspicion. Unlike the 100% weight increase.

The weight scale idea is stupid for more than one reason; they have far more effective means of detecting Terminators, which is dogs. Furthermore the first Terminator movie clearly showed an infiltration unit immediately went into offensive action as soon as it entered a resistance cell. At that point a weight scale is useless, unless one would suggest teams out in the field should be carrying one instead of more useful supplies.

The 20% figure provided is, bluntly, grossly inaccurate. If I were to hazard a bet, I'd say the number was simply plucked out of thin air as opposed to really thought out.

You can of course argue that it is plucked out of thin air, but then we would have to fall back to Zach's first statement, meaning that "Terminators in our world weigh only slightly more than similarly sized human". Which once again blows a hole in your argument.

What part of a mathematical equation do you think yields to personal opinion? I've shown how much a Terminator should weigh in order to perform certain feats.

What the 'actual' weight of a Terminator is officially declared as is irrelevent to this point. I've already stated more than once that the official position can dictate what evidence can be tossed; I'm pointing out that the math by itself can't be disputed.

So no matter in what manner you interpret the statements, the working assumption of the writers is that Terminators do not weigh more than 20% (and that is the highest estimate) than human beings.

And that's it. End of discussion.

Yes, there's a canon statement that defies physical science. No one is disputing that; however we're free to find out how badly it's flawed all we want and free to discuss it as well.

As my calculations showed, even those who argued things like 50% relatively heavier Terminators were making a generous concession, knowingly or otherwise.

Once again it all comes down to what kind of evidence should be discarded. Appealing to authority figures on the actual subject does not magically make the evidence invalid; all that does is potentially make it easier to decide which conflicting evidence to dismiss under suspension of disbelief.

Yes, and for the purposes of discussion, the 20% figure is canon. In the end, we can always dismiss the various inconsistencies in lifting etc. as clicheés.

Yes, a position I had been pointing out for some time now...various amounts of evidence has to be dismissed.

[Thanas]

Thanas himself has provided the proof that the makers of the show intented heavier than human counterpart Terminators, something I had already figured out. Ironically his reference tends to also blow away the whole 'resistance would use weight scales to detect Terminators' arguement; 20% additional mass is not exactly something that wouldn't be noticed.

Really? That only has a fit female up to 72 from 60 kg, or 84 from 70 kg on a male (assuming we use the 20% limit, which is the highest Zach was willing to go. As I have argued in my posts, a 10-15% weight limit is way more probable).

And just what do you base this on, aside from arbitrary dictation?

The mere fact that that Zach has discussed T:SCC for over a year and that I have had discussions with him for about eight years? Aside from that, you are of course free to dismiss my interpretation, but I think I should know the intention of the writers a bit better than you at this point. Zach said somewhere between 10-20%. The mere fact that he didn't say 20% is an indicator that there is not a fixed scale for this, only that there is an upper limit which may or may not be reached by every model.

And I do not think you have such a stellar record with guessing the intention of the writers, considering that your first position was "It is obvious that the writers take great pains to show us superheavy Terminators." Funny how that turned out.

I for one would hesitate to say that a person weighing 10-20% more than the average male would immediately be picked up by weight scales, especially not when we are talking about bulky males. To be honest, there is a difference, but IMO that difference is not high enough to immediately arouse suspicion, no more than a fit athlete weighing more than a normal person would arouse suspicion. Unlike the 100% weight increase.

The weight scale idea is stupid for more than one reason; they have far more effective means of detecting Terminators, which is dogs. Furthermore the first Terminator movie clearly showed an infiltration unit immediately went into offensive action as soon as it entered a resistance cell. At that point a weight scale is useless, unless one would suggest teams out in the field should be carrying one instead of more useful supplies.

Way to not address the point. Also, the infitration unit only went into offensive action when it was found out. Seriously, do you really think that "find resistance. blow shit up" is the only purpose of infiltration units? Don't you think that it would make far more sense for it to, you know, infiltrate the base first, find out where to do the most damage, get information and then call for reinforcements/blow things up? The scales could also be placed outside a bunker, if necessary, with a booby trap that goes off when a certain weight limit is breeched.

[Singular Intellect]

And just what do you base this on, aside from arbitrary dictation?

The mere fact that that Zach has discussed T:SCC for over a year and that I have had discussions with him for about eight years? Aside from that, you are of course free to dismiss my interpretation, but I think I should know the intention of the writers a bit better than you at this point. Zach said somewhere between 10-20%. The mere fact that he didn't say 20% is an indicator that there is not a fixed scale for this, only that there is an upper limit which may or may not be reached by every model.

And I do not think you have such a stellar record with guessing the intention of the writers, considering that your first position was "It is obvious that the writers take great pains to show us superheavy Terminators." Funny how that turned out.

I said it was obvious that the writers intented heavier Terminators than their human counterparts, which your authority figure confirmed. Just how much heavier was not something I specifically argued about, since I wasn't sure to begin with but I suspected 'quite heavy'.

My only concrete 'superheavy' arguement is made by the math.

The weight scale idea is stupid for more than one reason; they have far more effective means of detecting Terminators, which is dogs. Furthermore the first Terminator movie clearly showed an infiltration unit immediately went into offensive action as soon as it entered a resistance cell. At that point a weight scale is useless, unless one would suggest teams out in the field should be carrying one instead of more useful supplies.

Way to not address the point. Also, the infitration unit only went into offensive action when it was found out.

Yes, by a dog whereas it's been established dogs can identify Terminators at range.

Seriously, do you really think that "find resistance. blow shit up" is the only purpose of infiltration units?

Any Terminator attempting to infiltrate a camp that utilizes dogs...yes, that would be it's only option.

Don't you think that it would make far more sense for it to, you know, infiltrate the base first, find out where to do the most damage, get information and then call for reinforcements/blow things up?

That would only be possible in a camp where there were no dogs, metal detectors, weight scales, password checks, close observations of unknown persons, etc.

The scales could also be placed outside a bunker, if necessary, with a booby trap that goes off when a certain weight limit is breeched.

Gotta feel sorry for the poor bastards who are carrying their injured comrades on their backs...

[Thanas]

The weight scale idea is stupid for more than one reason; they have far more effective means of detecting Terminators, which is dogs. Furthermore the first Terminator movie clearly showed an infiltration unit immediately went into offensive action as soon as it entered a resistance cell. At that point a weight scale is useless, unless one would suggest teams out in the field should be carrying one instead of more useful supplies.

Way to not address the point. Also, the infitration unit only went into offensive action when it was found out.

Yes, by a dog whereas it's been established dogs can identify Terminators at range.

Still did not address the point, I see.

Anyway, a weight scale is quite easy to carry and unlike a dog, it does not need rations, nor does it get sick etc. Dogs are fun and all, but you have to care for them.

Seriously, do you really think that "find resistance. blow shit up" is the only purpose of infiltration units?

Any Terminator attempting to infiltrate a camp that utilizes dogs...yes, that would be it's only option.

Dodging the question here...again, I see.

Don't you think that it would make far more sense for it to, you know, infiltrate the base first, find out where to do the most damage, get information and then call for reinforcements/blow things up?

That would only be possible in a camp where there were no dogs, metal detectors, weight scales, password checks, close observations of unknown persons, etc.

So why were you arguing that the weight scale idea is stupid if you use it yourself right here?

The scales could also be placed outside a bunker, if necessary, with a booby trap that goes off when a certain weight limit is breeched.

Gotta feel sorry for the poor bastards who are carrying their injured comrades on their backs...

LOL for the visual "Hey Bob, we almost made it - oh cr"*boom*.

But of course, nothing prevents them from notifying command. They do have radios, for example. Also, weight scales could be planted in areas where noone would walk. Like mines. Or just in places were no injured have to be carried. I would imagine that connor has some of those planted around his command center iirc.

Still, the whole discussion is moot anyway, since the terminators are clearly not heavy enough to set off those bombs.

[Singular Intellect]

Still did not address the point, I see.

What point? That weight scales would be next to useless for resistance camps? That's clearly been established; a infiltration Terminator will open fire upon humans the moment it has access to the camp. This was established in T1 and in TSCC when a Terminator went bad and the first thing it did was go on a killing spree.

Anyway, a weight scale is quite easy to carry and unlike a dog, it does not need rations, nor does it get sick etc. Dogs are fun and all, but you have to care for them.

And weight scales are pretty pointless because they require the object being weighed to be precisely on it, and requires a Terminator to be right in the middle of the humans trying to use this detection method.

Seriously, do you really think that "find resistance. blow shit up" is the only purpose of infiltration units?

Any Terminator attempting to infiltrate a camp that utilizes dogs...yes, that would be it's only option.

Dodging the question here...again, I see.

I answered the fucking question, moron. Unless a Terminator is able to bypass your normal detection methods, like say looking like a trusted individual or mistaken for an ally, it's only option will be to commence killing once it enters the camp.

Don't you think that it would make far more sense for it to, you know, infiltrate the base first, find out where to do the most damage, get information and then call for reinforcements/blow things up?

That would only be possible in a camp where there were no dogs, metal detectors, weight scales, password checks, close observations of unknown persons, etc.

So why were you arguing that the weight scale idea is stupid if you use it yourself right here?
[/quote]

Because I'm pointing out that infiltration units just want into resistance camps in order to wipe out as many humans as possible, and a weight scale is the only detection method I listed there that eliminates the useful advantage of ranged detection.

If Terminators are heavy, weight detection is the worst way of trying to detect them compared to other ranged methods.

If Terminators are relatively normal mass like humans, weight detection is rendered useless.

Still, the whole discussion is moot anyway, since the terminators are clearly not heavy enough to set off those bombs.

In other words, weight scales might work as booby-traps for heavy Terminators, but are significantly inferior to other detection methods I've listed. Which is my point.

-Dogs spot Terminators at range
-Verbal passwords obviously have range
-Metal detectors have range, but would likely be nullified by the other sources and accuracy
-A weight scale requires a cooperative Terminator to be standing precisely on fucking top of it

Guess which one of those methods would be the worst detection method? Heavy or not, weight scales would be next to useless as a detection method except for special circumstances that managed to get a Terminator precisely on top of it.

[Thanas]

Still did not address the point, I see.

What point? That weight scales would be next to useless for resistance camps? That's clearly been established; a infiltration Terminator will open fire upon humans the moment it has access to the camp. This was established in T1 and in TSCC when a Terminator went bad and the first thing it did was go on a killing spree.

When it is detected. What part of that did you not understand?

And weight scales are pretty pointless because they require the object being weighed to be precisely on it, and requires a Terminator to be right in the middle of the humans trying to use this detection method.

Not if, for example, you have a plank over the entrance that breaks when being under pressure for certain weight. And what prevents the resistance from weighing any recruit, if only for medical purposes. An infiltration unit would have to muster that.

Because I'm pointing out that infiltration units just want into resistance camps in order to wipe out as many humans as possible, and a weight scale is the only detection method I listed there that eliminates the useful advantage of ranged detection.

And you say that based on the only evidence we have - namely that of Terminators who were caught. Clearly, any agent in WWII that was caught and killed a couple of guys before being taken down had kill a few soldiers as his primary mission. How fucking dumb are you?

[Venator]

Just to jump in briefly with another idea...

What if Terminators (at least the infiltrator models) had some of their mass in the form of the liquid metal used in the T-1000 (and T-X if you want to bring in Terminator 3)?

Have the liquid metal flowing through a system of tubes (much like the human vascular system); if the Terminator has to lift someone, send it to the feet and lower legs. Need to punch the wall (or another Terminator)? Run it into the arms to add momentum.

Of course, I can't substantiate this anyway and there's no evidence of it in the various scenes of scenes of T-888s being destroyed, but it's just another idea to consider.

[Anguirus]

How exactly would that change the mass and density of the whole?

[Braedley]

It doesn't change the mass or density of the termi as a whole, but it would be enough to shift the centre of mass. I was considering this as an option to solve the leverage problem, but it became pretty evident (at least to me) that it wouldn't do enough. The centre of mass would still be out in front of the toes when lifting a person by the neck. Mind you, the whole thing's possible if there's some invisible wall right behind the victims.

[Thanas]

The problem with that idea is that we have seen Cameron's skeleton...and she is very, very skeletal. To go with that idea, where would the pumps be installed? Furthermore, this would likely weaken the structural integrity of her joints (who would have to be hallow) and that is not something you'd want to do in a Terminator.

[Starglider]

If the Terminators use Ti-6Al-4V alloy for their endoskeleton, that has a density of 4,429 kg/m3. And obviously, it has to be beefed up in various methods compared to a human skeleton's bones - because I have the actual US Military specifications for Ti-6Al-4V armor; and in order to have a V50 ballistic limit (50% don't penetrate) against .30 caliber M2 AP rounds (M1 Garand) at near-point blank, you need about 0.700 inches of thickness.

Nice attempt Shep but I'm afraid this isn't relevant. The terminators are made out of 'Hyperalloy'. This could be any of a variety of nanostructured metal-based materials that have physical strengths one to two orders of magnitude above the best current alloys. Wong et al like to dismiss these from hard science debates on the basis that they've only been made in tiny laboratory amounts (e.g. monocrystalline iron) or computer simulations (most of the exotic nanocomposites) - regardless of whether that has any merit, this is a setting in which 'liquid metal' T1000s and nanite-injecting T-Xs exist, so I think allowing Skynet the much more primitive nanotech needed to make very strong and light armour isn't a stretch. As a side benefit, this helps (slightly) with the plausibility of the 'plasma weapons'. Most of these super-strong nanotech materials have no exceptional ability to resist heat - indeed their complex molecular structures often denature very easily under heating - which makes a concentrated thermal pulse a very energy-efficient way to defeat them compared to oversized armour-piercing rounds. This would fit in with Skynet trying to develop more heat-resistant materials to build its units out of and the use of thermite to completely destroy downed terminators.

[Peptuck]

If the Terminators use Ti-6Al-4V alloy for their endoskeleton, that has a density of 4,429 kg/m3. And obviously, it has to be beefed up in various methods compared to a human skeleton's bones - because I have the actual US Military specifications for Ti-6Al-4V armor; and in order to have a V50 ballistic limit (50% don't penetrate) against .30 caliber M2 AP rounds (M1 Garand) at near-point blank, you need about 0.700 inches of thickness.

Nice attempt Shep but I'm afraid this isn't relevant. The terminators are made out of 'Hyperalloy'. This could be any of a variety of nanostructured metal-based materials that have physical strengths one to two orders of magnitude above the best current alloys. Wong et al like to dismiss these from hard science debates on the basis that they've only been made in tiny laboratory amounts (e.g. monocrystalline iron) or computer simulations (most of the exotic nanocomposites) - regardless of whether that has any merit, this is a setting in which 'liquid metal' T1000s and nanite-injecting T-Xs exist, so I think allowing Skynet the much more primitive nanotech needed to make very strong and light armour isn't a stretch. As a side benefit, this helps (slightly) with the plausibility of the 'plasma weapons'. Most of these super-strong nanotech materials have no exceptional ability to resist heat - indeed their complex molecular structures often denature very easily under heating - which makes a concentrated thermal pulse a very energy-efficient way to defeat them compared to oversized armour-piercing rounds. This would fit in with Skynet trying to develop more heat-resistant materials to build its units out of and the use of thermite to completely destroy downed terminators.

That would also help explain why the epidermal layer as observed thus far in SCC is so resistant against heat, if it was some kind of heat resistant semi-biological material (though the exact physics or biology required to make something of that composition yet still look and act enough like human tissue is way beyond me.) After all, Cameron does strip off Vick's epidermal layer in Dungeons & Dragons and stands right next to the subsequent fire with no ill effects, and doesn't show much indication of burn damage after her SUV got firebombed.

[Starglider]

That would also help explain why the epidermal layer as observed thus far in SCC is so resistant against heat, if it was some kind of heat resistant semi-biological material (though the exact physics or biology required to make something of that composition yet still look and act enough like human tissue is way beyond me.) After all, Cameron does strip off Vick's epidermal layer in Dungeons & Dragons and stands right next to the subsequent fire with no ill effects, and doesn't show much indication of burn damage after her SUV got firebombed.

Normal human cells die very quickly if raised to a temperature above 45 degrees C. However some bacteria can survive and reproduce at temperatures up to 121 degrees C. I suppose it's not too implausible that Skynet had access to DNA sequencing databases and could do the biochemical simulations needed to engineer human-like tissue with similar temperature resistance, which would help a lot with avoiding visible burns. We already know that terminator organic sheathes regenerate much faster (and with no visible scarring) compared to human skin. This wouldn't improve the protective value of the organic layer against plasma weapons though - I doubt anything you could do with a thin skinlike layer could, otherwise Skynet's large vehicles would be coated in plasma-absorbing plastic films.

[Winston Blake]

This could be any of a variety of nanostructured metal-based materials that have physical strengths one to two orders of magnitude above the best current alloys.

In fact, by strength-to-weight ratio, we already have armour materials that are one to two orders of magnitude above steel:

Dyneema and Spectra are gel spun through a spinneret to form oriented-strand synthetic fibers of UHMWPE, which have yield strengths as high as 2.4 GPa and density as low as 0.97 kg/l (for Dyneema SK75)[5]. High strength steels have comparable yield strengths, and low carbon steels have yield strengths much lower (around 0.5 GPa). Since steel has a density approximately equal to 7.8 kg/l, this gives strength/weight ratios for these materials in a range from 10 to 100 times higher than for steel. Strength to weight ratios for Dyneema are about 40% higher than for Aramid.

Note that 0.97kg/L = 970 kg/m^3, whereas Shep's number for bone was 1600 kg/m^3.