Author Topic: MR sidenocks  (Read 33536 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Kviljo

  • Member
  • Posts: 487
  • Archaeologist, Antitheist
MR sidenocks
« on: June 10, 2007, 11:48:45 am »
I'm wondering if anyone here have experimented with side nocks on 100#+ Mary Rose lookalikes?

It seems like everyone is using 17-1800 century nocks on these bows.  - which is far from archaeologically correct.

This is probably because fastflight is prefered as string material, which isn't compatible with sidenocks.
If this isn't the case, I would like to hear how one can combine fastflight with side nocks. It seems to work better with linnen and timberhitches though.

Perhaps some lucky ones have seen the preserved horn nock too, or have got some measurements? It would be interesting to hear it's outer dimensions and the size of the notch. Also how thich the horn is, and if it has the same thichness all way around. Does the notch go through the horn, so that the wood would be visible from the outside? There are two pictures of it in Bickerstaffes and Soars books, but they don't say too much about it.

I'm asking because I really want sidenocks on my longbows, but also because I think it is quite dishonest to use regular modern nocks on bows we would like to call english war bows.

SimonUK

  • Guest
Re: MR sidenocks
« Reply #1 on: June 10, 2007, 01:50:01 pm »
I saw a picture of the Mary Rose nock somewhere online, but I can't find it now. It was a lot simpler than the nocks we see on many of our bows.

But I was under the impression that ?? all of the bows had horn nocks. There was a lighter colour to the tips of the bows, suggesting something had been there before it degraded in the water. I thought the suggestion was that the string groves were cut through the horn and slightly into the wood, helping to keep the horn in place.

People in these forums were suggesting that the nock was cut only on one side of the bow... is that true?

I can't help you with info on 100+ bows. I use self nocks on both sides of my 65 lb bows and they seem to work fine. But I have a feeling my tips are still too wide (and heavy) so that's why I get away with it.

Offline Yeomanbowman

  • Member
  • Posts: 283
    • warbowwales
Re: MR sidenocks
« Reply #2 on: June 10, 2007, 02:26:55 pm »
I've not had the bottle to try side nocks yet :-[, but I agree that really they should be used on a self warbow replica (I have now been shamed into remedying this situation ;D).  The slots are indeed cut on one side only, one nock on the left and the other on the opposite side.  The top nock is on either side that will make strining easier.  I have heard a theory that the string can have a noose at one end instead of a double timber-hitch.  One of the pros is that the stress is more evenly distributed around the nock, as opposed to a front nock.
Cheer,
Jeremy

Offline markinengland

  • Member
  • Posts: 698
Re: MR sidenocks
« Reply #3 on: June 10, 2007, 03:41:13 pm »
I've read that a side nock is easier to string but I can't understand why this would be the case.
With opposed side nocks the point at which the string naturally lays alongside the edge of the bow would give a natural spine friendly handle and nocking point. I wonder if this would by chance be aprox 1 inch above centre on a warbow?
Mark in England

Offline Kviljo

  • Member
  • Posts: 487
  • Archaeologist, Antitheist
Re: MR sidenocks
« Reply #4 on: June 11, 2007, 07:51:05 am »
As far as I know, all MR bows have had horn nocks, but that may not be the case with older bows. I believe the Ballinderry bow, which is 10th century, didn't show signs of having horn nocks, even though it is pretty much the same size as MR bows.

Jeremy, wouldn't that self-tightening "knot" work just like a timers hitch? - although that may actually work with fastflight and sidenocks! I'll have to try that.


My bet is that they had to use one large sidenock because the string was to large and the limb tip to narrow to cut nocks on both sides of the tip.

duffontap

  • Guest
Re: MR sidenocks
« Reply #5 on: June 11, 2007, 11:54:34 am »
The best article I've ever read on the subject was in Primitive Archer about ten years ago.  It was called 'The Enigma of Side Nocks' and was written by Roy King.  You can buy the issue from PA for $3. 

              J. D. Duff

Offline D. Tiller

  • Member
  • Posts: 3495
  • Go ahead! Bend that stick! Make my day!!!
    • Whidbey Island Soap Co.
Re: MR sidenocks
« Reply #6 on: June 11, 2007, 04:28:44 pm »
I'm having trouble picturing these side nocks. Can someone post a picture of some? Is the top notched on both sides of the bow or just one? Is the bottom nock only notched on one side? I'm getting confused here!  ???
“People are less likely to shoot at you if you smile at them” - Mad Jack Churchill

Offline markinengland

  • Member
  • Posts: 698
Re: MR sidenocks
« Reply #7 on: June 11, 2007, 05:05:15 pm »
I think there are some drawings of side nocked native american bows in TBB. Maybe even a picture.
Mark in England

Offline Kviljo

  • Member
  • Posts: 487
  • Archaeologist, Antitheist
Re: MR sidenocks
« Reply #8 on: June 13, 2007, 03:26:09 am »
I'll have to order that issue JD. By the way, did Bickerstaffe say anything about the nocks?
He should have every possibility to experiment with close replicas sice it seems he has seen the nock.

Here's the original, and incredibly a replicated nock that they fitted to an original bow.




The single side nock is placed on the left side of the upper limb. And on the right side on the lower.

duffontap

  • Guest
Re: MR sidenocks
« Reply #9 on: June 13, 2007, 10:35:17 am »
As far as I know Pip hasn't experimented with them.  He did tell me not to use them because you have to tie the string to both ends. 

                   J. D. Duff

The back issue is vol. 8 issue 1.  It costs $4--I thought it was $3. 

http://www.primitivearcher.com/mm5/merchant.mvc?Screen=CTGY&Store_Code=002&Category_Code=BIUS

Offline Kviljo

  • Member
  • Posts: 487
  • Archaeologist, Antitheist
Re: MR sidenocks
« Reply #10 on: June 13, 2007, 11:42:48 am »
Okay. Perhaps they didn't bother to make spliced loops because the strings didn't last that long anyway?

Although I'm quite convinced that Yeomans selftightening loop will work nicely together with sidenocks and fastflight. Not completely honest to the archaeology that either, but a little closer at least.

Thanks for the reference! Think I'll order a set while I'm at it. :)

duffontap

  • Guest
Re: MR sidenocks
« Reply #11 on: June 13, 2007, 12:08:12 pm »
I'll put together a list of magazines that have English Warbow articles in them.  There are probably 15-20.

            J. D. Duff

Offline Kviljo

  • Member
  • Posts: 487
  • Archaeologist, Antitheist
Re: MR sidenocks
« Reply #12 on: June 13, 2007, 01:23:46 pm »
Ahh, that's Great JD! :)

Rod

  • Guest
Re: MR sidenocks
« Reply #13 on: September 07, 2007, 10:33:53 am »
I don't think that the case for sidenocks has been proven as yet.
Having said that, a side nock, like a flush nock should be easier to string than the later type of sporting bow nock with  it's pronounced flare below the string groove.
What is probably essential to make a side nock secure is either a smaller diameter string loop, or the use of a hitch at BOTH ends.
I think Simon Stanley has recommended the latter.
Rod.

Offline Yeomanbowman

  • Member
  • Posts: 283
    • warbowwales
Re: MR sidenocks
« Reply #14 on: September 07, 2007, 04:30:42 pm »
I think it helps if the string groves cut through the horn slightly and grip the cone of the wood.  This is even more vital if using natural non-waterproof glues, as with MR bows.