Main Discussion Area > English Warbow
Del's MR Copy
badcolesonbad:
--- Quote from: Del the cat on January 21, 2012, 08:25:33 am ---This is made to approx dimensions of one of the shorter Mary Rose Bows. It's 90# at 28", but it's been taken to just over 29" (see the pic of it on the tiller)
74" ntn 76.5" overall.
I don't want to take it too far due to some serious knot filling work I've done on it. The Yew was cut from an English country estate by a tree surgeon November 2010.
I've been training up for about 2 weeks and can get it to full draw now, I hope to get a pic of me at full draw tomorrow
Below is the worst filled knot, a big squarish void, filled with yew dust/epoxy mix to provide a stable foundation to drill and peg with 4 pegs of Yew.
Below shows a similar knot on the other limb, these knots go from the centre of the belly out to the side, they never appeared on the back at all, lower right of the knot you can see a small pinch, this seems stable and doesn't worry me too much as it's on the belly. The great thing about this bow is the clean back, with just the one big pimple left proud, see last two pics.
The full build story is on my blog (google 'bowyers diary' to find it)
Del
--- End quote ---
No one can believe it when I show them pictures of huge knots like that in a bending bow, let alone such a heavy bending bow. Its a nice bow for sure. I'm jealous.
bow-toxo:
[quote author=CraigMBeckett link=topic=30201.msg407851#msg407851 @Bow toxo
The guy I built it for wanted 28" draw. I'm sure it would come back further. I tested it on the tiller to 29", with those two big bad knots I didn't want to risk it further unecessarilly.
I'm drawing it as far as I can! :'( I'm not a youngster anymore... >:(
Del
[/A reasonable assumption unless the shorter arrows were fitted with long bodkin heads and the arrow drawn past the shoulder of the bodkin, as was demonstrated by Alanesq and is, I believe, mentioned on his site.
Craig.
[/quote]
Instructions of the period were to draw an arrow to the barbs, or the shouldering of the head, and such a counter intuitive act seems to me pointless to attempt.
CraigMBeckett:
--- Quote from: Yeomanbowman on February 29, 2012, 07:32:01 pm ---
--- Quote ---A reasonable assumption unless the shorter arrows were fitted with long bodkin heads and the arrow drawn past the shoulder of the bodkin, as was demonstrated by Alanesq and is, I believe, mentioned on his site.
Craig.
--- End quote ---
I'm trying to think why there would be very long bodkins fitted to the shorter shafts. I'm aware they were used for fire arrows but they couldn't be over-drawn. I know Alan and respect his analytical mind but never subscribed to his theory on this. Common sense, to me, would dictate that a longer shaft is a far easier and cheaper way to achieve a longer draw length if that was the aim. What are your thoughts on the theory?
Jeremy
--- End quote ---
Sorry not to have responded earlier Jeremy, but have not visited this site for a while, time spent on other things.
As for my thoughts on Allan's idea, I too have my doubts as to the idea but, ignoring anything to do with spine as it did not seem to enter into the medieval archers thoughts, I can think of at least one reason the idea and that is to maintain a "standard" length, so they could fit in arrow chests/barrels that large stocks were both stored and moved around in and also would fit within the "standard" arrow bag such as found on the Mary Rose.
Erik,
I believe you put far too much store into the few written documents that mention anything to do with archery especially as the few that there are were written for the aristocratic hunter who bought his own expensive equipment and was using it to hunt with, not the soldier who used what he was given. I would also suggest that far from being "counter intuitive" drawing an arrow to a set distance, one that ones muscle memory is familiar with is instinctive, drawing to any other distance is counter intuitive, so if presented with a arrow the shaft of which is short but the cylindrical shaped head of which is long enough to allow a full length draw the intuitive thing to do would be to pull it to full length.
On another tack has your book been published yet? Don't bother answering I see from Amazon it is ans that they only have a few copies left. Well Done.
Dell,
I think I have already congratulated you on this bow, if not I apologise for my tardiness and do so now.
Regards
Craig.
bow-toxo:
--- Quote from: CraigMBeckett on July 30, 2012, 11:24:57 am ---
--- Quote from: Yeomanbowman on February 29, 2012, 07:32:01 pm ---
--- Quote ---A reasonable assumption unless the shorter arrows were fitted with long bodkin heads and the arrow drawn past the shoulder of the bodkin, as was demonstrated by Alanesq and is, I believe, mentioned on his site.
Craig.
--- End quote ---
I'm trying to think why there would be very long bodkins fitted to the shorter shafts. I'm aware they were used for fire arrows but they couldn't be over-drawn. I know Alan and respect his analytical mind but never subscribed to his theory on this. Common sense, to me, would dictate that a longer shaft is a far easier and cheaper way to achieve a longer draw length if that was the aim. What are your thoughts on the theory?
Jeremy
--- End quote ---
[
Erik,
I believe you put far too much store into the few written documents that mention anything to do with archery especially as the few that there are were written for the aristocratic hunter who bought his own expensive equipment and was using it to hunt with, not the soldier who used what he was given. I would also suggest that far from being "counter intuitive" drawing an arrow to a set distance, one that ones muscle memory is familiar with is instinctive, drawing to any other distance is counter intuitive, so if presented with a arrow the shaft of which is short but the cylindrical shaped head of which is long enough to allow a full length draw the intuitive thing to do would be to pull it to full length.
Regards
Craig.
--- End quote ---
I believe they were written to describe the archery of the period whoch was practised for war by virtually every man in England. Don't forget that aristocrats were still in combat forces in Tudor times and only barons or scholars were exempt. Intuitive has to cover tho distinct lengths of arrows, and ovedrawing a barbed arrow would not have been thought wise. Barbs were vertically up and down and draw was specified "to the barbs or the shouldering of the head"
Otherwise, thanks.
Erik
tannhillman:
Hi,
I have only just seen this topic and wanted to jump back to the start and concur with what Dell said about English Yew re: "Those who say it isn't suitable have never tried it, or haven't the patience to find a good bit" This myth about English yew not being any good for making longbow/warbows really is a bugbear of mine. I have made a good number of selfbows out of English yew, including heavy warbows and I have worked some great yew with ring counts up to 100rpi, and with ring counts quite often in the region of 60 rpi. From my own experience I can say that this myth is simply just that, a myth that is repeated by people that have not experienced in working with English/British yew.
I used to work as a forester and a tree surgeon, and have always taken an interesting in tree growth rates and how they vary in relation to a number of factors including low ground water, shallow infertile soils, restricted daylight, impacts due to regular cutting - coppicing/pollarding for example. Theses are all factors that will restrict the growth of yew (and other tree species) whether that be here in blighty or somewhere outside of the UK!
Cheers >>>-------------->
Iain
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version