Main Discussion Area > English Warbow
What is "Warbow"
sagitarius boemoru:
Here is the bow in question.
Its 100#/31´´ (or it was). When we shot it, Rob eventuelly got something like 230 yrds with it, while I got only around 5 more with old Marc bow made of hornbeam.
As you can see the shape is nowhere to the yew bow. Its quite narrow, thin, the tips and the last 1/3 of limbs are made to be light as possible. It also works well if made relatively short, I think this bow is just about 73´´ long.
My shooting buddy does not care about character, only about the density of material, so most of his bows look like this.
I have couple of staves of the same ash, some of them prefectly straight.
The two big waves past and down handle make me think of MR "black bow" with its banana shaped mid section. (Must have been somebodys favorite bow, brought from home.)
Jaro
jb.68:
--- Quote from: J. D. Duff on May 23, 2007, 10:24:29 pm ---In all fairness, we all enjoy the subject of English Warbows, but there is a big difference in the degree of personal investment from member to member. Some of us want to 'build 'em and enjoy 'em,' and others will invest years of their lives researching and recording data. If Jaro, or Stratton, or Stretton don't want to take a carefree 'whatever' attitude toward this subject like Dave or others want to, perhaps that's because their personal involvement goes far beyond 'hobby.'
J. D. Duff
--- End quote ---
Hmm I guess that was back at me.. ;) JD I'm with you there, that is what I'm saying, but when someone comes on and says that "this is and that isn't" I find that it is more likely to put off the people who are here to find out stuff, due to the fact that they feel excluded. I'm aware that there must be a definition of what a warbow was and that there are people who shoot replicas of these and that there are others like myself who shoot laminated replicas.
Please don't for a minute think that this is just a hobby to me, I have been shooting for about 7 years now, longbow for the last three and now warbow (sorry laminated replica warbow :P ) for about 6 weeks. I shoot at least twice a week, sometimes three (work permitting) I have under Steve's guidance made a bow and intend to make more.
I got into shooting from a historical point of view and have read a lot of stuff but there are still people here who know much much more than I do or probably ever will know I respect them alot for that, so if my post seemed to imply that I didn't then I'm sorry but all I'm saying is are we not (for the purposes of this forum) getting too hung up on a name?
Anyway I'm off shooting now, while it's still sunny. ;D
All the best
jb
duffontap:
jb.68,
Not just at you. I was trying to address the fact that we have different degrees of interest and differences in purpose. Jaro is an example of someone who wants to help beginners understand precisely what an English Warbow was--be it Yew, Ash, or Elm. Jaro also makes some fine laminated bows but he is careful not to call them authentic replicas. He is not telling people they can't have fun or shoot laminated bows--he is trying to promote good understanding and an accurate definition of the warbow.
I think every one of us would be building and shooting 150# Italian Yew replicas if we had the time, money and ability. We all know what the ultimate would be. Most of us are using inferior Yew, white woods or laminates and that's fine. But there is a difference between a sport that has descended from Medieval warbows and historical research and replication.
Three proposed categories:
1. Historical Replica Warbows: Yew, Ash and Elm bows with MR type sections, horn nocked (side-nocks being the most accurate) and capable of reaching perscribed minimum distances with replica arrows.
2. Historically-Styled Warbows: Warbows of any wood or combination of laminates that meets the above criteria.
3. Recreational/Sporting Warbow: Bearing some strong similarities to authentic replicas (section, tiller, length, etc.) but made of any materials and to any weight with no performance requirements.
J. D. Duff
ChrisD:
Hmmm. Don't discussions move along fast when you go away for a few hours - like to bed and then to work? Must be the different timezones.
Now where was I.
Oh yes - turning a bow into a pike. Well I know I've never seen any evidence of that either - but I'm mindful that absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence. I only threw it in as an idle thought.
Re the linen strings - reading between the lines, it doesn't look like you've seen one either J.D. Of course we all hear about things such as Glennans 120lb bow with a broken string which might well have been linen and is the kind of happening I'm thinking of. I certainly won't be using a linen string on any replica bow of mine in a hurry and I shall be surprised if I see any anytime soon. Having said that, my compliments to anybody who can make a linen string work for a long time with a big bow for any amount of time and I look forward to seeing it for myself. I won't speak for Pip - he's a good correspondent and his e-mail is on line anyway - but his approach is very much that of a materials scientist and is worthy of serious consideration
As for the longevity of bows - I've spoken to people who reckon a yew self bow is can be 'shot out' after about 600 shots. Even Hardy quoted about 4000 shots in his original book and my lighter yew bow was shot out after less than a 1000. Thats not to say it doesn't work - its great and its reached a stable level of performance and I love shooting in it. I got 190yd with a 1000grain arrow today for example - but its only about 75lb at 30 inches these days after warming up and it started life at 90 (the arrow is 33inches long btw). I'm afraid just don't buy the idea of 100000 shots out of any wooden self bow without deterioration in performance.
On stockpiling of bows and prices I have a couple of comments. Huge numbers of staves were imported to a country with a pretty small population by todays standards and likely demographics favouring high numbers of children who never made it to adulthood and of course lots of people who never became archers as well those who did having to be encouraged to practice. Archer armies were always hard to raise and maintain. That means that the actual numbers of bows in use at any one time would have been a fraction of what was being imported ergo they didn't last long. If you argue the stockpiling route - it means they needed to be stockpiled because they didn't last long in battle. Either way, it looks more like they got 'shot out' pretty smartly unless you go for a more modest drawweight with a little less stress. Then they'd last longer. For sure J.D your shorter bows are a good draweight - but then they would be being shorter and the Mary Rose bows tend towards the 80inch mark. On cost a bows price was held at between 1/2 a week and a weeks pay for an archer depending on the type of bow. Not too pricey given you could get docked that for minor offences.
Final point. We love to say that these things were designed to kill armoured men at long distance. I suppose that must explain why sooo many survived to be pummelled to death in the hand to hand phase at Agincourt or captured and then slaughtered in a massacre. The bottom line is that there were lighter arrows and heavier arrows with the lighter ones used at longer distance for causing chaos, killing lighter armed combatants and causing havoc with horses. The heavier ones would have been used at shorter distances. Now given that a Mary Rose replica arrow with a short type 10 on it weighs in at maybe 2 1/2 oz, its safe to say that you could get that to 200yd with a reasonably light bow (by the standards of some opinions - it'd still be about 100lb at 32 ins). We don't even know what kind of fletchings were used but you can bet they would have been aerodynamically efficient. I also know about discouragement of shooting at less than 220yds etc etc King Henry VIII blah blah blah. Well who said anybody practiced with war arrows? I don't - I shoot 230-240yds too - mostly to addle the brains of my club colleagues - but with lighter arrows.
All that brings me to the point I'm trying to make - which is that the idea of the 'chainmail penetration test' employing minimums is a really good one and is the way to go.
ChrisD
PS I know I'm being a heretic here - it just happens to be what I think.
PPS JB is right, it should be about enjoyment chiefly
SimonUK:
Just to change the topic very slightly - does anyone know if there are warbows in Native American culture? If so, what were the draw weights?
Or are they one and the same as hunting bows?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version