Main Discussion Area > English Warbow
data on the Mary Rose bows/arrows
D. Tiller:
Just finnished an 80# warbow style composit out of hickory and sapelle. Works great but I think the Sapelle takes to much set. Will be trying something else next. Thing I think is interresting it feal like I'm stringing one of my lighter 27" draw length bows and its not so hard to bring it to full draw when you get into it. Sure feal muscles I wasnt aware I had before. Especially in the lower abdomin and just bellow the ribs and across my back. Good work out! Now to build up the muscles for my 90# bow!
David T
backgardenbowyer:
Well guys, I'm a bit wiser than when I started the thread but not much! A few weeks ago I met and talked to Pip Bickerstaffe at a Roving Marks shoot. He has a fair claim to have made more English Longbows than anyone else at present (though I'm not a fan of his standard mass produced bows) and he has certainly made quite a few MR replicas. He's also handled and measured some of the bows. Pip's view is that the dimension only make sense when you examine the wood and the larger longer bows are just the ones made our of wider grained and less dense yew. He also said that the arrows do indeed vary in length 31.5" being the most common, and that where arrows were found in sheaves there were always several lengths in each sheaf and usually the same proportion of shorter and longer arrows. Does this suggests that there might have been a variety of head types in a sheaf? Might a shorter (therefore stiffer) arrow with a heavier head be kept for short range direct shots and a longer lighter one used at distance? Well I don't know.
Thanks for all your comments.
It's all useful information but I'd still like to see the whole find measured, catalogued and published!
Stan
Hartung:
No need to feel sorry. I find it strange though that you’re promoting and selling Mary Rose replica warbows – which makes those dimensions public anyway - but refuse to give the dimensions of one or two of the replicas… I would understand it though if it was for professional secrecy that you deny any demand.
outcaste:
--- Quote from: backgardenbowyer on November 29, 2008, 07:39:09 pm ---Well guys, I'm a bit wiser than when I started the thread but not much! A few weeks ago I met and talked to Pip Bickerstaffe at a Roving Marks shoot. He has a fair claim to have made more English Longbows than anyone else at present (though I'm not a fan of his standard mass produced bows) and he has certainly made quite a few MR replicas. He's also handled and measured some of the bows. Pip's view is that the dimension only make sense when you examine the wood and the larger longer bows are just the ones made our of wider grained and less dense yew. He also said that the arrows do indeed vary in length 31.5" being the most common, and that where arrows were found in sheaves there were always several lengths in each sheaf and usually the same proportion of shorter and longer arrows. Does this suggests that there might have been a variety of head types in a sheaf? Might a shorter (therefore stiffer) arrow with a heavier head be kept for short range direct shots and a longer lighter one used at distance? Well I don't know.
Thanks for all your comments.
It's all useful information but I'd still like to see the whole find measured, catalogued and published!
Stan
--- End quote ---
I would suggest that even if these dimensions (larger bows) were made from average rpi English yew it would still give a bow of 140/50lb min. I also understand that the most common arrow length was 30.5 inches.
Just my opinion.
Cheers,
Alistair
stevesjem:
--- Quote from: Hartung on December 01, 2008, 03:20:05 pm ---No need to feel sorry. I find it strange though that you’re promoting and selling Mary Rose replica warbows – which makes those dimensions public anyway - but refuse to give the dimensions of one or two of the replicas… I would understand it though if it was for professional secrecy that you deny any demand.
--- End quote ---
As I've said Hartung, It would be wrong of me to give out information like this prior to the MR paper being published, If I did it may jeopardise my position and also cause me problems with doing my own research with the MR Trust. So you will just have to wait until the MR produce their document.
Steve
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version