Primitive Archer
Main Discussion Area => Bows => Topic started by: Dane on February 01, 2009, 11:16:21 am
-
Hi everyone.
This is the first bow I've built for this year, after about 9 months of doing any bow making at all, and it feels great to get back to making a bow.
The stave is red (I believe) elm from Connecticut, and was given to me by Jamie, at the 2007 primitive skills gathering, so it has been idle for about 20 months in my garage. It had significant reflex at both tips, and I was wondering how best to take advantage of the natural properties of the stave. I finally settled on another Holmegaard, one of my favorite styles of flat bows. I broke a few staves and boards trying to learn this style, and finally had some success with a maple Holmie I made last year, but it was way to tip heavy, although a really nice performer.
This time, I had no issues at all building it. No lifted splinters, for one thing, which happened mid limb on both limbs on the maple. Maybe I am better, or I was luckier, or the gods were smiling on me :) I did go with a very low poundage bow, as I wanted a nice easy shooter to get better at hitting what I am aiming at. This bow came in around 40 lbs. at 27 inches draw. That I actually targeted that weight and it came out there is a nice feeling. I think that a well tillered and performing lighter bow is preferable to a heavier one that isnt as efficient, or fights you in one way or another.
It performs wonderfully. No hand shock at all, and very "zippy" (no, not the pinhead, but it spits out arrows with authority). I am really pleased overall with it, but am not quite finished with it. I may have to do some adjusting to the tiller, but want to avoid that if possible, to keep the weight at 40 lbs. It looks to me like the lower limb is bending closer to the inner handle fade, but that doesnt seem to bother me or the bow. What do you folks think?
For finish, I plan to keep it simple, in the spirit of our Neolithic ancestors. More sanding, keep what remains of the camdmium (spelling?) on the bow back, as it looks pretty cool, and then a simple finish (maybe True-Oil, have a bottle but have never used it before). I dont plan to make a leather handle, or stain or paint the wood. If I do any graphics on the bow, it will be a very simple design, maybe a spiral on each limb just above the handle on the back of the bow with red ocre. I am leaning toward no decorations.
Overall, I really am happy with this, and it has given me confidence for a planned Egyptian self bow and a hickory Mohawk recurve I am going to get started on soon. Tools used to make this were a small adz, draw knife, spoke shave (that tool really worked great with this wood), farrier's rasp, and then lots of time with a cabinate scraper. More photos will be posted once I finish the bow and am confident it is ready for critical eyes. I will also post specifications, length, all that stuff then too.
Dane
-
Here are the pictures.
Thanks for lookking.
Dane
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
nice design,however it looks to me like both working limbs are only bending in the middle and they look
like they are hinging there
-
My understanding is that only the inner limbs do work on this kind of bow. The upper limbs dont bend at all.
Dane
-
correct,thats why i said the "working limb",the area from the fade to the outer limbs,the flat portion of the limb should bend completly.
in your pics it looks like the "working limbs" only bend in the middle.
the part of the limb the gets narrow and thick should have virtualy no bend.
when i look at the tiller of a holmie i take a piece of paper and cover the bows non working limbs and this gives a good view of just the working limbs
and makes it easier to see the tiller,not trying to be to critical of your bow just thought you wanted the truth,and thats how i see it i could be wrong i aint no expert.
-
I'm no jusge of a holmie's tiller but I also think some more bend into the fades would be appropriate, noy sure how long the bows is
but anyweight lost could be regained by piking it an inch or two. With that said if your happy with it and its not showing any frets
just shoot it and enjoy eh :) I like the idea of keeping it simple Dane, if ya want to darken some rub some powdered harcoal in it will stick in the
grain and make a nice pattern. Happy shooting eh :)
-
Sailordad, no offence taken from me. I misread you slightly is all, and see what you mean about more bend in the entire working limb.
I dont know. I have seen different interpretations of this design, some of which dont look at all like a Homie and more like a longbow, and some with really radical bends in some area of the inner working area. What is right?
No fretting thus far, no issues with weak hinge areas so far, and it really seems a smooth and fun bow. At about 15 yards, it buried the arrows in my block target about 4 to 5 inches, and I had to work to get them out. I may work on the tiller some more, maybe pike it a bit to shorten it, or maybe something else. That is why it is called in-progress, :)
Thanks Dana.
Dane
-
Dane, how long are those non-bending tips? They look awfully long to me.
Tru-Oil's gonna make a nice finish on that bow. She's very sleek.
-
Nice bow Dane. I have seen many different full draw profiles on Holmies and don't know which is correct. James Parker built a beautiful yew Holmie with a full compass tiller, even the tips bent a bit at full draw, I believe. We don't have an actual Holmgaard bow to compare with so its tiller is speculation anyway, I believe.
Whatever way it should be, You did a very nice job on your Holmie. Pat
-
Hey, Dane
From someone who has built many Holmegaard bows, I believe you've done a fine job on the tiller. Many people have difficulty seeing appropriate Holmegaard tiller. It's deceptive, because it only looks like a very small portion of the limb is working, and that is, in fact, true. The outer limbs DO NOT bend, and act as levers to increase cast and reduce string angle at full draw, thereby eliminating stacking. A bow, whose outer limbs bend, is only a Holmegaard shaped bow, and eliminates all the advantages of this design. What kind of unbraced profile does your bow have? How much set did it take? This is always a good indication of design and limb stress.
It is true that there are many interpretations of Holmegaard design, but I think you've done well in your's.
Oh, yah, picking the outer limbs will have little effect, because they're not bending. It's not like piking a conventional longbow, where you can increase draw weight by piking.
-
Thanks, Pat. Coming from you, that is a real compliment.
adb, I was hoping to get feedback from you. Your holmie build-along I have continued to visit, including when I made this bow.
The measurements for this bow are: 68" tip to tip, 14" non-working limbs, and about 16" working limbs (there you go, John).
The tips were around 4" right after unbracing. Now, it has settled in at 2.25" (tip2 photo) for one tip, and 1.5" for the other (tip3 photo). Is it possible to get a totally set-less Holmgaard?
Once I finish the bow, the beatiful yet subtle grain of elm will show a lot better. I had a nice little knot in one non-working limb, not a lot of character, but fun to let the configuration of the stave help define the bow as I worked on it.
Here are three shots of the bow I took just a few minutes ago, and one on the hood of my car right after unbracing it this morning. As for set, I am happy with what I have, and will I think just go ahead and sand and finish her. That means......I get to make another Holmegaard and try the next one with more bend in the working limbs. I expect to have finished photos up in the next two weeks, probably less.
Dane
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
Oh, forgot to say, I shot this new bow with Hillbilly's arrows, the ones I was fortunate enough to get during the Xmas trade. They performed perfectly! The spin as they hurried downrange was very satisfying, and they helped kill a few snowbanks when I missed my target. Snowbanks are probably more deadly than cougars and grizzley bears in these parts, :)
-
Looks Neet, Those Holmys are frustrating at times but they are liked by me.
-
All the work is being shouldered by a relatively short section of each limb. If the wood can handle it I guess that's fine (though I think it will eventually fail in this case), but I personally would make the non-working part of the limbs shorter to spread the load out a little more.
-
Thanks AKAPK. Gordon, I will take a wait and see attitude here, and see if the wood fails or not. I've only put about 50 arrows through it at this point, and hope to shoot it a bunch over the next few weeks and month and monitor the bending area. I think for a much heavier bow, this area would be toast. This is a 40 pounder, so a plinker of sorts.
It is all about learning, after all. Sometimes the lessons are painful, sometimes not so much. I'm sure it was the same for our neolithic bow ancestors, but for them, survival didnt mean going to the supermarket, so experimentation must have been way down on the list of things to do.
Dane
-
All the work is being shouldered by a relatively short section of each limb. If the wood can handle it I guess that's fine (though I think it will eventually fail in this case), but I personally would make the non-working part of the limbs shorter to spread the load out a little more.
I have been thinking about this, and wonder about the value of shortening the outer limbs. Since they act as levers, wouldn't longer be better than shorter? A longer lever lets you lift a heavier load, right? And wouldn't a shorter outer limb also put more stress on the working portion of each inner limb?
Any ideas there?
-
I'd suggest you need longer inner limbs AND shorter non-working tips.
Anybody got a wood stretcher handy? ;)
-
All the work is being shouldered by a relatively short section of each limb. If the wood can handle it I guess that's fine (though I think it will eventually fail in this case), but I personally would make the non-working part of the limbs shorter to spread the load out a little more.
I have been thinking about this, and wonder about the value of shortening the outer limbs. Since they act as levers, wouldn't longer be better than shorter? A longer lever lets you lift a heavier load, right? And wouldn't a shorter outer limb also put more stress on the working portion of each inner limb?
Any ideas there?
My opinion is that there is a balance required between the long non-bending tips and the working section. If you're happy with the set and performance and it holds together, I guess that's a good balance for you. Plus you can always tweak on the next bow and see if you like a different ratio better. My two cents...
-
I believe the logic in a holmgarde or any bow for that matter is the same, where the limb gets wider is should bend more, if limbs are paralell in width they should get thinner and bend more until they start to narrow and at that point stiffen up again. The front view of the holmie is telling you how to tiller it. I hate to say anything critical because all the work we do here is worth sharing but I also hate to see a new person think that is correct tiller. What would be the reason for leaving those mid outer limbs wide if they are not bending? There is no good reason. You just can't put that much bend in such a small area without destroying the wood in that area, it may not look bad but the wood has gotten weaker. Steve
-
Badger, is there really only one correct tiller for this kind of bow? If so, all Holmgaards have to look pretty much identical, or they would be considered a failure if they don't conform to that standard. Suppose a bow of any given style breaks some rule, and yet still functions for many thousands of arrows and years. Is it then a success, or an abberation?
All this is about learning. My first instinct is to keep it the way it is, and see how long the relatively sharp bend lasts; it is only wood, after all. But, I will re-tiller the inner limbs with a cabinet scraper, and then go ahead and put a finish on it and call it done. I will loose some weight by removing more wood, but that is okay in this case, since I am not hunting any critters. The speed from this design I think mitigates that a bit for decent cast.
I won’t touch the outer limb length, though. Since they are levers, longer seems intuitive to me, and as adb well points out, a Holmgaard-looking bow is not a Holmgaard. My next bow of this design, I’ll try different ideas. I have some maple and some hickory in stave form and some lemonwood and osage in board form, any of which I may use.
I wonder if there is an optimal ratio between inner and outer limbs, handle length, and fade lengths? Wood species of course has to play some role.
Wood stretcher, John? :) I think the Spanish Inquisition used those, but they are highly barbaric, and banned by most countries and The Hague.
Dane
-
Dane, I understand what you are saying about the use of stiff tips as levers. The problem with your implementation, however, is that the springs that propell the levers, i.e. the working limbs, are not up to the task. The high degree of set in your photos show that they are already breaking down. The other problem is that the advantages of longer and longer levers must be balanced with the performance cost of increased mass. It looks to me that there is a lot of unnecessary mass in the mid and outer limbs which will rob your bow of cast. There is nothing fundamentally wrong with a Holmgaard design if all aspects of the design are kept in proper balance in the implementation.
-
Dane, I am not trying to discourage you in anyway, it is a learning process, I probably screw up more tillers than anybody here. You asked is there is just one correct tiller for a particular design. I think the answer to that is yes, there is only one correct tiller that will match the front view of any bow. There are many tillers that will work without failing! I don't think any of us have built a perfect bow unless we just lucked out. But there is logic that goes into all designs. You have a wide outer limb right before it narrows that is stiff!! If it were very narrow I would say it was ok, but then your bending area would need to be much wider than it is now. I would just shoot the bow and enjoy it as I imagine it shoots pretty well, but we would be doing a disservice to any one new watching these threads to say that is correct, it is not correct. When you are tillering out a bow at the first sign of getting set you need to start getting more limb working, you had plenty of wood closer to the handle that could bend and you had plenty of wood near the spot where it narrows that could be bending, the width is there, if I were going to rework that bow I would simply shorten it a couple of inches and narrow that wide potion of the inner limb until it starts to flex a bit, i would then get the inner limb working a bit more, but the damage has allready been done. Steve
-
i'm impressed with this holmgaard! in some ways it reminds me of the radical build that tim baker did in tbb 4, except he did some wild things with horn and sinew. while i your working limbs look short, they look like they are bending smoothly through their bend. iwould be suprised if this bow isn't a sweet shooter!
-
Bearing in mind the sensitivity inherent in any budding bowyer, I think the holm may be one of the hardest designs to really optimiize, in terms of crafting, and this one left a lot on the table. Generally any bow project where your wood sets more than 2" start to finish, assuming good crafting, materials and moisture control, you probably should have started with more wood, or finished with less bow. Plus, you can just look at this one and see 2/3 of the limb slingin' around not toting any work at all.
The mass in the width transition has to be dead nuts on, or you negate the relative advantage of the design. And, obviously, one must design in enough wood on the inner limb to take the load. I've yet to see one I thought perfectly executed. I think folks would be better served building simple flatbows at first. In fact, I think simple flatbows demonstrate the holm design better in practice than the abrupt width transition, pronounced tiller of the arctypical projects.
But then I also think a fella should do whatever he's a mind to, and not pay too much attention to what's said about it. It takes longer that way, but you do come away with a sense of certainty, and fulfillment, by having "touched all the bases" all by yourself.
-
In this design I think the inner working limbs need to be wide enough, long enough, and each inch doing its share of the work, as you are doing a lot of bending in a relitively short distance. The non working levers need to be very low mass and bend only ever so slightly to let you know you have reduced the mass as much as possible. Actually my inner non working limbs do work a little, and you need to get the inner limbs working very quickly out of the handle but not so much to take set. I love holmies but have only made a couple and not perfect ones, but have one or two in the works. Kenneth
-
I finished up one last week I will try and post tomorrow. 60" nock to nock 65#@27". They make a nice bow especially when they are a little on the short side.
-
nice bow, dane! good to see some of your work again.
-
Badger:
" I probably screw up more tillers than anybody here. You asked is there is just one correct tiller for a particular design. "
I bet I have you beat per capita. LOL.
Dane, I don't think anyone has seen the tiller of the original Holmgarde but I don't know about that. LOL. I also have never made one of that design. Looks like you have plenty of limb for a 26 -27 inch draw. I'd say you did a great job on that. Well done. :) Jawge
-
I have recieved a PM from Dane, and he states he is very discouraged with some of the responses to his postings on this bow. Discouraged, in fact, to the extent that he may give up making bows, and certainly not posting anymore efforts here. I think as experienced bowyers, we have an obligation to encourage the efforts of new bowyers. I try to leave feedback in a first person context, stating: "If this was my bow, I might do this..." That way, the person recieving the feedback can either use it if it works for them, or disregard it if it doesn't, without feeling resentful or offended. I think, instead of saying something is not correct, we can say how we might make something better. Personally, I think Dane has done a pretty decent job of tillering this bow. The Holmegaard is a rather difficult tiller, and certainly not a beginners bow. Much contention swirls around this design, as to what is "right.''
As far as set goes, poor tiller is not the only factor. It is an important factor, but far from the only thing that will cause set. I recently finished a yew selfbow, 72" ntn, 50#@28". Nothing radical or demanding, but after finishing, the bow has 4" of set. The tiller is perfectly circular, with a bending handle and all portions of the limbs working. The problem was low density wood, and too much moisture. The stave was not as dry as I thought. Also, on a proper Holmegaard, I measure set at the end of the working limb portion only... not at the nock like is normally done. So, to me, Dane's bow does not appear to have more than the conventional 1" - 2" of set.
I also believe there are many ways to tiller a bow. Elliptical tiller, circular tiller, +/- tiller, symmetric limbs, asymmetric limbs... many options exist, but none are wrong. Some hard and fast rules do exist, but the fun thing about all this is, there are many interpretations.
I think we should applaud new members and their efforts, and offer feedback which is helpful, rather than offensive.
-
i guess i dont see how any post were offensive or discouraging.
he asked in his post what people thought.i gave my opinion as did others.
i dont believe in sugar coating as this will cause one to develop bad bow building habits.
when i post a bow and want feed back, i dont want it to be false info. i want to know the truth and assume thats what others want
when they post and ask questions about the bow they are building.
i figure creative people can deal with constructive criticism
-
I still believe we can all offer our opinions in a constructive manner. You may want to ask Dane why he feels discouraged. I think, for me, being told what I've just created is wrong, would certainly be discouraging. Being told how I might want to try something different next time, would be more helpful. I don't think this is about "sugar coating", it's about being mutually respectful. I don't think constructive criticism involves negative comments. I think Dane has done a decent job on a challenging tiller.
-
George your so very right about what constitutes a proper tiller, too many times I see folks comment that a bow isn't bending into the fades enough or
the handle is bending too much. Tiller can be very much a personal view and if the wood holds and the bow shoots well then it was a success. I believe some of us take this a bit to seriously at times. If it was all about performance I would still be shooting compounds. Each of us have our own reasons why we build bows, for some its to optimize performance for others their just happy to get a shooter, I think for the majority of us its a relaxing hobby and a way to challenge ourselves. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder eh.
If my comments were the cause for any disappontment on your part Dane, then you have my sincerest apologies my friend.
Dane don't give up building bows, that would be a shame and a great loss. You were happy with your bow until you saw some of the comments here.
No one was being mean spirited so no need to take it the wrong way, its obvious that you have talent and take pride in your workmanship as you should.
Go ahead and enjoy your bow, after all thats why you built it. Go forth and be merry eh :)
-
Dane, don't give up or leave.
The Holmgaard is a controversial design (check that paleo site), and some of that sort of controversial, theoretical discussion showed up in this thread, which is semi-unrelated to your particular bow, but hey, here it is. You inspired an interesting discussion.
Holmgaard's are a tough tiller. I'm still working on it myself.
-
That's a tough design - I don't think I could pull it off. I give Dane a lot of credit for trying it.
-
Hi everyone. Listen, I dont want to give an false preceptions about any of this. I do appreciate all your comments, and this is the reason this site exists, and is so valuable. If you know me, you know I am a bit emotional, but not necessarily in the way you may think. It takes me a bit of time to process information and then come up with a response or line of reasoning, and I guess I got a bit short circuited yesterday. I wasn't upset with any of you, but with myself. I took your comments to heart, Badger, and thought man, I am currupting someone with a totally wrong tiller. Arg. I have never seen anyone being told here they made a bow wrong. I get exactly what you are saying though, Badger, upon futher thought.
A long day, a six day week before that, and some nasty clients (I write resumes, and so deal with some very stressed, and sometime angry, scared clients who are out of work and running out of time), and someone being fired at work for incompetence, all contributed to how I processed your comments. And as Adam stated, I was really bummed out. I sat at work and kind of fiddled with writing assigments, and wondered how elm looks in the fireplace, and who wants my tools here, instead of turning out resumes. Dont tell my boss. :)
I'm feeling much better now. I have learned a lot, some of which I am not too happy about, but that is about myself, not all of you. Truth be told, if I get to make 3 bows a year, I am lucky, so many more failures and some successes are ahead of me. Part of why I thiink I gravitate toward the Holmgaard is that it is so difficult, and a challenge. the D bow doesnt seem to hold any glamour for me. That can change of course.
George, thanks. Adam, thanks. Finnish, thanks man. Everyone, thanks.
Okay, another truism. I am much better at building catapults than bows at this stage in my development. Here is my latest baby, nearly done now, a handheld machine which will have curved arms and follows the formulas set by Vitriviuan, an engineer who served under Cesear and Augustus. The brass plating is nearly done since I took these pictures. I'll share it, including video of me in a Roman getup, once I have some nice weather to cast the bronze parts so I can finish it up and get to testing. Winter weather is the big issues, as I am doing the casting outdoors and all we have is snow and sleet around here.
Have a great night, and I'll post some shots once the bow is really finished. I did work a bit on the tiller to get the inner arms bending more, but the wood seems sound all around, so I will see how long it lasts. If it beats the odds you all think it faces, hurrah. If not, there are more bows in the future.
Dane
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
John, Gordon, thanks. Dana, I know no one was being mean. I was being hard on myself. Better that being a slacker and not caring, eh? :)
All of you, good night. No more pity for me. I'm feeling much better. A screwdriver sounds good about now. Stay warm and see you around.
Dane
-
Dane, nice looking holmie. I had just posted a question about holmie tips; it's apparent I haven't checked out this site for a couple weeks. Also see where the debate continues over exactly what constitutes a holmegaard. Guess it will always be a little speculative since only parts of a couple originals still survive. It is hard to say if there was a set of blueprints and specs, or whether the thick non-bending outer section was only a result of a primitive man using primitive tools and scrapers, and naturally lifting the scraper up as he pulled it towards himself and the end of the bow limb. Either way, when we see one we know it ain't a longbow and it ain't a flatbow.
Nice job, Philip
-
Hey, Dane
Don't be so hard on yourself. You've made a very nice bow. Enjoy it! Make another.
Cheers.
-
Dane, on the plus side I would imagine your bow shoots very well just as it is. I tend to crowd my tillers as much as I can get away with. Very seldom do we actually optimize a bow to it's fullest we just do the best we can. Bow making is a learning process, just like any other trade, we start off as an apprentice of sorts and depending on how much we put into it advance as we go, some advance slow some fast, no biggy, the fun is in making the bows. When you look at the front view of a bow it will tell you the tiller shape it wants. Just something to think about as you are learning. Don't get discouraged dude or feel for one minute you don't belong here. We are all brothers here and try to help one another. We often don't agree on everything and thats part of the fun also. I make a lot of bows but have never considerd myself to be a master at tillering, I finaly just got to where I know what works and don't even try to be perfect anymore. Here is something to think about that may take you awhile to digest but just think about it while making bows and it will eventually start to make sense. The thickness of the wood determines how far it can bend without breaking or taking set, the width of the wood determines how far it will bend. The idea is to try and keep the stresses in the limb as equal as you can, For instance on a pyramid bow you would have straight lines from the fades to the tips, the bow would be the same thickness all the way down the limb and the width would allow it to form a nice circular tiller, If your limbs are straight on the sides say 2/3 the way down this would indicate a bow that should be tillered elypticaly, in other words the bend would gradually increase until the width started to taper and would require the thickness to be be tapered on this straight part of the limb as well. Any time you rough out a bow just study the front view and it will tell you just the tiller it is looking for. Hope to see more of your work on here soon, Steve
-
Nice bow. The working portion of the bow is short but they are bending smoothly. Well done
-
If I may give you some humble advice,
those stiff outer limbs look really wide, so the good effect of them is lost. Narrowing them would give alot more power.
since those limbs bend in a really short range, you can make them narrow them a little closer to the handle. It's like the fades on a rigid-handle bow, if you start making the fades thicker and keep the limbs wide, and just when the handle reaches it's deepest point, the handle starts to narrow up. This way you lose some inches of usefull bending-place, if you wan't to keep those places stiffer, you can narrow the handle sooner.
hope you got what I mean, being dutch it isn't really easy to say what you want to in english :p
glad you're back to bowmaking!!
Nick
-
Dane, I too have been working on a Holmie. I was glad to see your front view pic, your outer limbs are a bit wider than mine but then I am having problems with the "lever" portion wanting to flex sideways. I have not yet piked them but I believe this to be my only remaining option.
A question for you. Did you de-crown the stave? I did not initialy, and lifted a splinter in the handle. Rasping and filing the splinter down then carring that flat all the way out to the tips. I lost 5lb by doing this, but the bow still shoots well. Mine is made of Service Berry and is the second Holmie I have built, the first was a Vine-maple two peice take down.
Great job on your bow. I look forward to seing what you use for finish as I am thinking of wax or lard.
-
Dane
I know nothing about Holmegaard bows so I will not comment on the tiller. However don't get discouraged. Sometimes doing something that you love to do can suck at times. ;) Keep up the good work. I am looking forward to seeing the finished product. And in my opinion it is looking good so far.
-
Thanks, Marc, Rick, Majsnuff, and Nick (Holland? Welcome to the site, and your English is better than mine! I understand exactly what you are saying, and will keep that in mind for the next bow of this style).
I ended up deciding to retiller the bow, probably should have left it alone, though. It lost 15 pounds, and now shoots at a glorious 25-26 lbs. at 27" draw. I just put on the last coat of Truoil last night, and it is a pretty thing. I'll post pictures later today (new camera, so I have to download the software, etc).
This was a great learning experience, as are all bows. Being a glutton for punishment, I have started a sapling bow with tons of character (i.e. knots).
Majsnuff, no, I didn't decrown it, but didnt need to. It is elm, and the stave was wide enough that I simply removed the bark and left the surface alone.
Rick, if we both make it to the next Connecticut primitive gathering, I'll bring this bow. You will no doubt feel very strong pulling on this bow, :)
Dane
-
thanks dane!
you might consider piking and heattreating to compensate with the lost drawweight. you can get over 10pounds back if you do this...
goodluck on your sapling bow! I would love to see some pics, sapling bows are just awesome :)
greetings, Nick
-
Hey, nickf
You can't pike a Holmegarrd, and expect the # to increase! The outer limbs do not bend.
Dane,
It's too bad you retillered. I think it was fine the way it was, and you should have just shot it. No worries, however, I have retillered several bows, just to "make them a little better", and have regretted doing it. Live and learn!
-
'tis true, I really should have left it alone. It should still be a fun shooter, and I got to try out Trueoil for the frst time, wonderful stuff.
I had planned to take photos today, but chores got in the way. Next week. I can also try out a new staff sling I made, those are really fun toys.
Dane
-
Being a glutton for punishment, I have started a sapling bow with tons of character (i.e. knots).
Boy, I'll say, good luck!
-
This thread is a bit old, but for those who want to see, I retillered the Holmegaard. Although I thought it was a mistake reworking it, I am actually pretty happy with how it turned out. It still shoots really well, and I had a lot of fun testing it out. This bow, though I lost over 10 pounds retillering it, is one of my current favorites. It will make a good 3D bow, I think.
Dane
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
That looks great, I bet she is smooth as silk to shoot. Steve
-
dane,your bow is fine ,as others have stated no one knows how the original bow looked at braced and full draw .mere speculation in all regaurds.and as others have stated i dont think any harm was intended,only construtctive critisism.that and applied techniuqes are how we all learn. i myself have taken many critisisms about some of my bows tillers,what one likes another will not.all these guys mean good and all are great,you can learn from everyone here.keep building and making bows ,remember as long as you are happy with it ,thats all that matters....good luck on your next bow....robustus
-
Everything you said is true, and thanks. And thank you, Badger. She is smooth, a lot of fun, and I am very happy with the bow. When I release an arrow, it is almost like I can't tell it has left, if that makes sense. I'll be showing it off at a Thursday night shoot this week with some fiberglass guys.
The next Holmie will incorporate the lessons I learned from this one. And that is as it should be. I just wish I had a lot more time to work on bows instead of having a job and chores and bills and all that. Universal feeling though, eh? :)
Dane
-
I hear ya Dane we need more time for bows. This Holmie thing is a tough one to crack. I have made a couple of holmie simular bows that shot good but still bent in the outer limbs. I have been working off and on on one more like the one you made, heat treated hickory with 4 inches of reflex, after floor tillering and after getting it braced it was already bending more in one place than I liked and a bit shy on weight. Already running short on options was just pulling it a bit farther and farther till it made a tick sound at 26" I found where a small splinter was lifting. Guess I will sinue the inner limbs and retiller a bit to spread out the bend and maybe pike a bit as the bow is 70" now. Any way to make a long story short, this is a very difficuly design to get perfect but I think the potential rewards keep calling me back. I love the stackless draw and lack of handshock. Your bow is bending better now, and am sure you will enjoy it. Good luck on the next one. Kenneth
-
Hi Kenneth.
If you have checked out the discussion at Paleoplanet, perhaps what we have been calling the Holmgaard is actualy not correct. http://paleoplanet69529.yuku.com/topic/23167/t/Holmgards-Are-They-All-the-Same.html
The central argument in that discussion is that this design should be called the Möllegabet. Maybe just calling it a neolithic bow may be easier :)
At this point, how I think of this design is that you have a relatively small window to get everything balanced - tips, inner bending limbs, handle, and so on. I want to keep exploring this design, and see what else I can get out of it.
Aside from performance, it is a cool looking design.
Dane
-
Dane, we have a group that meets out at pasadena once a month. Last sunday I took my latest Holmgarde down with me to shoot. I was shocked at how fast the bow was when tested, It outshot my best boo backed bow. All the recent rain we had and the wide thin limbs went out of tiller on me but the performance was still way up there, quiet and no handshock whats so ever, I am really sold on the design. Steve
-
Steve, I wonder why this design disappeared in the first place? Or did it?
They really are wonderful performers. You have to work and pay your dues though, dont you? :) I think I am not done paying my Holmie dues, too :)
Dane
-
Dane, we have a group that meets out at pasadena once a month. Last sunday I took my latest Holmgarde down with me to shoot. I was shocked at how fast the bow was when tested, It outshot my best boo backed bow. All the recent rain we had and the wide thin limbs went out of tiller on me but the performance was still way up there, quiet and no handshock whats so ever, I am really sold on the design. Steve
Hey, Steve
Would it be possible for you to post some pics of your interpretation of the Holmegaard design?
-
Hey, nickf
You can't pike a Holmegarrd, and expect the # to increase! The outer limbs do not bend.
Dane,
It's too bad you retillered. I think it was fine the way it was, and you should have just shot it. No worries, however, I have retillered several bows, just to "make them a little better", and have regretted doing it. Live and learn!
Not sure how this can be right. Shorten a holmegaard and the string angle increases for the same draw irrespective of whether the outer parts of the limb bend or not. That means more energy in the same bow in my book. Secondly, I have piked a holmegaard, and the weight certainly went up, and then some!
Chris
-
Steve, I wonder why this design disappeared in the first place? Or did it?
They really are wonderful performers. You have to work and pay your dues though, dont you? :) I think I am not done paying my Holmie dues, too :)
Dane
Good post Dane! You're doing some really nice work. The retiller looks nice! These designs are so intriguing, and can be incredibly fast, smooth to draw, and still be relatively short. I see no other reason for them disappearing than the time it takes to make one. It takes a lot less time to make a longbow. ...and if you want a lot of arrows in the air...
I've tried a similar variation of a holmegård a couple of times. This one is perhaps a bit extreme, though it was educational. Making the outer limbs bend slightly is always good, as it tells you that you have removed any superfluos mass that's not doing any work. I think Badgers point is that if you presuppose that all the moving wood in a bow should be equally stressed, there is always just one perfect tiller for each front profile.
http://www.kviljo.no/bue/3tomholmegard/3.jpg
http://www.kviljo.no/bue/3tomholmegard/2.jpg
What I've found recently is that rather short outer limbs seems to make them quicker. Wonder what the optimal lenght-ratio between the inner and outer limbs are? Guess it varies with the weight of the arrows though. Longer outer limbs for heavier arrows, and shorter for lighter arrows.
-
Ivar, hi! Good to hear from you, and thank you for your words. At risk of sounding like I am blowing my own horn, I think I am getting better at all this. The catapult work couldn't hurt :) More care in the details also helps, including the finish. I didnt take any close ups of this bow, maybe I should.
I recall your own work in this design, and really admired it. I revisited it before I began this one.
Good questions about the limb ratio, and I have wondered that myself. Perhaps the best ratio is that which averages out different lengths and weights of arrows? What kind of game did our Neolithic Danish ancestors hunt? What else did they use the bows for? Skirmishes with other tribal groups? Ceremonial purposes, or maybe reglious rites? Perhaps you know more about that, considering your professional background.
Dane
-
Dane, thanks to the paleo planet link. I have not had the time to read it in its entirety but sounds intresting. I guess the holmie can be what a person wants out of it. I personaly am not so much into making exzact replicas so much as I try for optimum performance. What I know about the subject has all come from Tim Baker. A couple of pics of my curent project, it is easy to get too much bend in one place with this design, when you are trying to get a lot out of relitively small area. Kenneth
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
No problem on the link, Kenneth.
I didnt think this thread would last this long. Holmies do generated a lot of ideas and interest.
I like what you just showed! I will enjoy seeing more photos of the work as you progress.
Dane
-
Thanks Dane.Now I have to sinue the working part and re tiller to get more bend out of the mid limb. The splinter must have been from too much bend in one area, and the back might have been a bit over powered by the heat treated belly. I am going to be a fan of the heat treating, still retains four inches reflex after being drawn to 26", I would like it to be safe at 29" and hopefully end up in the upper fifty pound draw weight. Kenneth
-
Kenneth, you have a lot going on with this bow. Good luck with it all. This is going to be a high-performer, for certain. I wish I had suitable wood seasoned right now for another crack at the design. Soon enough, though. I'm going to pick up some quartersawn ash for an Egyptian self bow this weekend, I'll look around and see if there is something I can use for a board Holmgaard.
Dane
PS you don't happen to know how to fight with a quarterstaff, do you?
-
Dane good luck finding a good board, good luck also on the egyptian. Wish you had the stave leaning up in the corner in the middle pic. It is not seasoned and still heavy for shipping, but could be reduced and dried fairly quickly. I guess I don't know what a quarter staff is, must be like a big stick. Kenneth
-
On the quarterstaff, long poles that Robin Hood's men fought with. Just your screen name made me think of it. Little John was one of the chief Merry Men, wasn't he? Forgive me, just being stupid :)
Oh, thanks about the stave, but Im sure you will find a purpose for it.
Dane
-
Kenneth, I like my interpetation about the same as yours from the front view. I have had the best luck with that design over any of the others. Steve
-
Kenneth, I like my interpetation about the same as yours from the front view. I have had the best luck with that design over any of the others. Steve
Steve,
Would you be able to post some pics of your Holmegaard?
-
My camera has been out of order for a while but when my buddy stops by this week I will have him photo it. I seldom ever take pics anymore. I don't like to post them unfinished but I seldom ever finish them. Steve
-
Steve, meaning not put a finish on them, not not finish them to completion?
Dane
-
No finish, as in oil or clear coats, handle wraps etc, when I get bored I like to pick up unfinished bows and tinker with them. I never have a shortage of bows to tinker with. This bow I may drop to an even 50# and use it as a flight bow. Steve
-
Kenneth, I like my interpetation about the same as yours from the front view. I have had the best luck with that design over any of the others.uote]
Thanks Steve, I keep hoping to get one just right but it hasn't happened yet. If I ever do maybe I will see ya at the flight range. Kenneth