Main Discussion Area > English Warbow

Gardner's mass theory and 100# + bows

<< < (2/3) > >>

FilipT:
I used the calculator when making my first warbow and it was really precise. I missed the mass by small number of grams/oz.

Badger:
  The reason it is off is simply because the formula was developed as a rule of thumb rather than an absolute scientific calculation. It was developed around 50# to 60# bows so I was actually pleasantly surprised when it didn't not run off more than I thought it might when getting into heavier poundage's.

JNystrom:
Seems like i'll do testing of my own! I have a elm bow, 72" and 110# at 28", it weights now 818g (28,8oz). It took set of 2" so maybe i should heat treat it and tiller it to 120# @30". Or just shoot it at 29" and 115#... Seems like the mass is about the same as projected with the mass principle without any elb reduction factor.

Badger:
I happened to read about warbows from paleoplanet, especially Jaro's, when i tumbled on this:
https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/paleoplanet69529/viewtopic.php?f=46&t=10628&p=10285#p10285

I guess this is the osage warbow you were talking about? Still some pictures left.

colin1991:
I'm the Australian chap that made that Osage warbow mentioned earlier.  The bow ended up coming in at 180# at 30" and its mass is in the vescinity of 1450 grams.  No idea what the mass principle says but it's near impossible to brace alone and i am yet to shoot it but the early weight is ridiculous.

Del the cat:
First a disclaimer... I don't use the mass theory.
BUT.
I'd have thought it should be nicely applicable to Warbows as they are virtually all working limb with no dead weight or add-ons like riser sections etc.
I really should weigh some and do the arithmetic, but it's just not my bag ("bag"= "lazy git"  ;D ).
An interesting tool and concept tho'  :)
Del

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page