Suppose I should have explained better. Full suits of armor that were actually used during Medieval times has long since rusted or been destroyed in battle. Most Ceremonial armor is very heavily decorated,after all it is a show piece, and would not last 2 seconds in an actual battle(very thin metal because of the decorations.
These ceremonial suits were never actually fitted for anyone, but instead were made to make the Lord of the manor look good. A good comparison would be someone with lots of money who flaunts it by putting expensive furniture in their home for the purpose of "Showing off".
I had a good laugh when I went through Windsor Castle and saw the armor made for Henry VIII’s portly size.
I don’t recall Henry leading his troops into battle so the armor was no doubt ceremonial. Like Clinton, he was too busy with the ladies to bother about war.
Not to argue though I have seen in Germany, many suits of armor that were most obviously used, cuts, cross bow bolt holes etc. These were worn by relatively small people in the 5 foot to 5 foot 6 category. Armor was worn and is rather unforgiving in size in that it does not stretch. Ceremonial or not, it had to fit.
Can you document any of that? Actually, the "heavily decorated" stuff is generally fluting, bends and creases that stiffen and reinforce the metal plates, thus allowing for a thinner gauge of plate and lighter armor.
A lot of armor you see mounted appears smaller because it is on a rack, not on a person. Armor has articulation that expands and contracts with movement. Another thing is many people have seen Henry VIII's boyhood armor in the Tower and not realized it was made for him while still a youth.