Main Discussion Area > English Warbow

What is "Warbow"

<< < (29/30) > >>

Rod:

--- Quote from: SimonUK on June 20, 2007, 08:20:57 am ---120 lbs is still quite butch Alan.

Can I ask a slightly unrelated question... When measuring draw length, should it be from the back of the bow or the belly? I usually measure mine from the belly.

--- End quote ---

You measure draw length from the back of the bow because that is generally accepted as the limit of your draw, the arrow ferrule or barb coming at most to the back of the bow.

But you can measure it from anywhere you like, if you want to....  :-)

I generally measure tiller from the belly to the string of the braced bow, likewise brace height.
But not draw length.

Rod.

alanesq:
Just thought someone out there may be interested in this:

I have been pondering a lot on why there were 28" arrow shafts (and all manner of different length shafts for that matter) on the Mary Rose
I was interested in the idea that all the arrows were drawn to the same length and the points varied in length so decided the best plan is to give it a try for myself.
i.e. all arrows were the same total length and the arrows were all drawn tot he same distance from the pointy bit ;-)

so I have made myself a set of arrows which are based on what I know about the Mary Rose arrows and I am now using these as my main roving arrows



these shafts range from 28" to 31" but all arrows are drawn to 32"
all the cones are very similar in size
The longest point is a needle bodkin with total length 5.5"   (kindly donated by John Marshall)

I cant claim to have used the arrows enough to really report back on how well the perform but I can confirm they shoot ok and drawing the bodkins well onto my hand doesnt damage my hand or the bow

Rod:

--- Quote from: sagitarius boemoru on May 06, 2007, 01:41:36 pm ---For the purpose of this forum, warbow should be a single stave english style full bend bow of at least 90# or/and 220 yrds with Standart arrow.
Backed yew is acceptable as there are 16. and 17. examples of backing yew for bows, but not exotics and multilam bows.

Call me snobbish, but either its the thing or it is not.


J.

--- End quote ---

OK, then you're snobbish.  :-)

In the early period of military use it is likely that against the lightly protected and maille, a heavy hunting bow might have been quite effective. Draw weights will have increased in line with the necessity to project a heavy shaft further in the face of opposition as well as to keep pace with developments in protection.

If you want to put a very specific date "ante quem" on the English warbow then perhaps you can be so exclusive about draw weights.

Rod.

sagitarius boemoru:
Hahaha,that is your words actually. :D
Anyway - Hugh Soar mentions early 14. century archery militia in his book and in the account there is considerable variation when it comes to bows the lads brought with them.
Howewer, should any type of army be deployed as sucessively as english did, logistic structure must be established and part of that is supply of bows and arrows.
By 1340´ this already all seem to have been place, so "standartisation" of bows and arrows in terms of what crown buys and what not must have again be in the place.
Otherwise the development in terms of power progressed as the arms race went with at least two leaps. One at the point when this structure was established and I would suspect that is also time when hornnocks were universaly adopted and the other by 1400´when plate armour was more acessible to some.
I would also think that the bow itself wont seen much development past 1450´, though the arrow seem to have gotten more engeneering when anatomy prohibited further increase of drawweight. Also by 1450´italian armour got infanterised - which means the best protective garment became availble to professionall footsoldier and these are arrowproof to large extent.

There are tresholds at which the rig is or is not effective against certain types of armour. I would assume, in order to actually be winning, the english at least attempted to keep overall quality of both bows and arrows better than said treshold.
One does seem to be somewhere around 90# the other is around 125-130.



Jaro

Rod:
I thought that would get handed back... :-)
By the timer that the warbow becomes developed, Selby's figures for the Chinese bow are pretty much spot on, and the response that this is not relevant because they are composite bows is bushwah.

A serious warbow in any culture where defensive and offensive gear is well developed, the task is pretty much the same and so are the draw weights. The task ALWAYS defines the draw weight parameters.
What is interesting with the chinese gear is that although Selby gives a fair amount of information on draw weights, the information on arrow weights is rather thin, and one example translates to only abot 400 grains, which is more in target shaft country than that of a shaft meant to give a "great stripe".

I must get hold of Mr.Selby and see if he has more on Chinese war shaft weights.

Nonetheless, anyone interested in accuracy shoulod consider well the Chnises criteria for qualifying as a first class military archer, be it infantry or cavalry bows.

It bears repeating that the median for cavalry bows is in the 90lb to 120lb range, that for  infantry bows in the 120lb to 150lb range.
That these figures refer to composite bows has no bearing as an objection since draw weight is draw weight regardless and the task remains the same, near enough not to matter.
Seven layers of cuir bouillee is doubtless not so easy to penetrate when compared to plate of the lower qualities and however you look at it, there will always have been enough folks on the field without the most expensive gear even in the late 15thC.

BTW Jaro, have you noticed that one at least of the Viking bows in the Proceedings appears to be side nocked?

I agree with you about yew density. Mick James has a Boyton made of English yew, one that Chris made as a "crude" warbow with artfully raised wood around many pins, high enough to take your eye out, something of a masterclass in making an artform out of raised pins.

This bow is admirable "posing tackle", just the thing for Mick since it looks very "big" and draws only 65lb. I handled it recently and did not believe that it was  65lb until I weighed it.
It's of quite close ringed English yew, but if I hasd opicked it up blindfold I would have thought it overbuilt osage.

It was uncomfortablly heavy in the hand and I would have taken an oath that it only drew 45lb or so.
I did not have the opportunity to put it through the chronograph, but it put me in mind of a Bickerstaffe in osage that a chap has brought to Sherwood on a couple of occasions.
Both these bows pull with deceptive ease, being very elastic, both weight far more in the hand than any yew bow of mine, and my 56lb pieced yew clout bow is far more crisp to pull and probaby outshoots either by a considerable margin.

This just shows that density is not everything... I would get tired just holding either of these bows at arms length for any period of time.
It was amusing to see the owener of the osage bow shoot either of my yew bows, he was surpised both by the lightness of the bow and also by the crispness of the draw and the resulting cast.


When time allows I intend to get profiles of Mick's bows and add then to those already in my Photobucket collection.

You will find my 20lb Aldred Lancewood bow on there now, which is a good example of the narrow "peaked" belly style of sporting bow in a tropical heartwood, sooften mistaken in the past by those who know no better as the "proper2 longbow sectioin
This bow was in good original condition except that the horn nocks were missing and FRF was good enough to fit authentic replacement nocks.
The only draw back is that I will not risk shooting it, out of respect for it's age and almost perfect condition.
True it only has a monetary value of around £40, but it is virtually ireplaceable as an example of it's type and I would be gutted if it broke.

Nice ash bow BTW. And I thought you had said that ash would not make a warbow?  :-)
Certainly you would not bother if you had some yew to play with, but it is a perfectly acceptable substitute if you have nothing else and know how to make it.
Rod.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version