Main Discussion Area > Bows

Chrysalling diagnosis

<< < (3/4) > >>

Badger:
  How much weight were you pulling on the bow in the pic where you have the long string on it?

RyanY:
I could be wrong but it looks like the handle section is narrower than the limb. If it is bending evenly then that area will be more strained than the wider portion of the limb. Looks quite narrow even if it is representative of preexisting bows.

Marin:
Badger: if I remember right I think it was pulling just under 20 pounds with the long string, maybe closer to 15.
RyanY: yeah the photos are bad. The handle section actually isn’t narrower than the limb in this case. These bows were more akin to D bows in overall profile, with the handle being the widest point. Also, the chrysal did not happen in the handle but closer to the mid section of the limb.
And you are right, this design is surprisingly narrow, especially compared to other California bows. I think it was most likely because it was often made from branches which were already narrow and had a rounded shape, though it is also possible it was made from larger staves as well. To give you scale, the handle of this bow is about 1.2 inches, or around 30 mm. Based this measurement off of a stave they found in the Coso mountains of Eastern California  a couple years ago, also made of juniper and also with a rounder cross section.

bradsmith2010:
maybe the photos were a little large when you loaded them,,

Marin:
Yeah not sure how to improve them. Are you suggesting upload smaller photos?

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page