Main Discussion Area > Bows
Growth rings
PEARL DRUMS:
Arvy, Is there a difference between 4 rings of early wood a 1/16" thick and 8 rings a 1/32 thick? It's still the same amount of early wood either way, right?
organic_archer:
It’s all about the early to late wood ratio in my opinion. Thin ringed osage makes fine bows, provided it has a decent ratio. I always rawhide back them… not because they need them to stay together but because it gives a hard layer of protection to keep thin rings from taking a deep enough scratch/gouge while hunting to violate them.
Del the cat:
I'm skeptical about the whole thing... maybe it makes a difference, but the variation in timber possibly makes it irrelevant.
I see it lkie having a sandwich... if you have two thick bits of bread with a nice thick slice of beef between is it any better than 3 thin slices of bread with 2 thin slices of beef?
Damn, why am I hungry now? ::)
Del :)
George Tsoukalas:
I like my steak medium well and my rings medium. :) Jawge
Selfbowman:
Pearl I think there is a lot happening in the early wood during the drawing of a bow. I think this is the sheer point for the wood. I also think that it may compress some too. I think that when there is no evidence of belly fractures set might be happening in the early ring. To your question about amount of rings I will say the ideal rings are in my opinion is three 1/8” late rings and two early rings 1/16 or thinner early rings. This balances the sheer if it happens and gives you a even ratio. Also the rings would have same thickness thru out the bow. This is all my opinion and can’t prove any of it. Just common sense to me after lots of bows and info from this site. None Of this is important unless you are chasing speed. Bows with set are still good bows just not super bows. Finding those ideal ring staves is like looking for a needle in a hay stack though. Happy bow building to all.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version