Primitive Archer
Main Discussion Area => Bows => Topic started by: Tom Dulaney on April 09, 2017, 07:42:31 am
-
I recently found a somewhat acceptable piece of Juniper that apparently only has 2 tiny knots on the belly, which may be removable (this stave is very wide). The back of the stave, on the other hand, has "grooves" or "dips", similar to what is called "musclewood". I'm not exactly sure what to do. This is a thick stave, and I think I could shave the "grooves/dips" off the back. Do you think this is a good idea? I am going to be backing the bow with sinew anyway (trying to make a short Ishi-type bow.)
I look forward to your advice. Thanks for taking the time to read this.
-
I used a pressure washer on my american hop hornbeam aka musclewood. It worked like a charm.
-
I used a pressure washer on my american hop hornbeam aka musclewood. It worked like a charm.
Interesting! Thanks for the quick response. I guess this is a go-ahead to just shave the "muscles" down, eh? My hope is that I this stave is thick enough to both shave off the little grooves AND take it down to a single growth ring. Even though I will back this bow with sinew, I want to make as high quality a bow as I can. Sadly I don't have a pressure washer.
Does anyone have advice for making this type of paddle bow?
-
I misread that first post. I thought you were having trouble removing the bark from inside the grooves.
If a smooth back is your desired result, you should have one with several courses of sinew applied. I don't think you need to take the ridges off unless you want to. If you decide to take them off, just make sure you don't violate the ring that will be the back of the bow and it should work out.
-
OK guys, this is bad.
As usual, the spiteful wood gods have dealt me a perilous fate. I checked and there were cracks on this stave that I had to eliminate by violating the growth rings. Now this bow stave will be reduced from about 35 to 32 inches. What an insult to human dignity. I am about to literally go blind from rage right now.
So now my bow will have a severely violated back, and I will have to give it an industrial-strength backing of sinew to compensate for this materials inherent inferiority. Not only with the growth rings be violated, there is likely to be an area near one nock where there will be a transition from sapwood to heartwood. Should I just chuck this stave in a bonfire; and pretend it's feeling the delicious pain that I want it to feel as it is consumed by flames, or should I try giving it a very thick backing of sinew, and just accept the fact that I am not going to be able to produce exactly what I wanted, no matter how hard I slave, slave, slave away?
-
Thanks! It worked over here. Swimming in flawless staves.
-
Alright I had a Defcon level 1 meltdown. I'm feeling seriously defeated here. What is the point of even trying anymore? It doesn't matter what my skills are if the wood just isn't going to be what I need it to be. I would like your opinion, PatM. Should I back this stave or chuck it?
-
It doesn't matter what your skill set is until you realize the one universal truth behind dealing with staves.
The wood is in charge, period. It makes all the major decisions. If you try to disagree with it, it will prove you wrong by deciding not to be your bow.
All the bowyer can do is delicately make suggestions and encouragements. The stave will never be what you need/want it to be. It will be what it is. It doesn't have much choice. You are the one that will have to bend and reshape. If you're the type of person that needs that control and like to force the wood, be way more specific while selecting staves. If you search for the stave that is already what you need it to be, you can avoid a lot of frustration. There's every bow you can imagine, growing in every forest out there. If you can't get what you're after with what you've got, it's time to take to the forest to go "stave shopping".
With regard to your current dilemma, if you can't take the whole back down to one ring it's survival is questionable at best. If you've reached this level of frustration already, perhaps now's not a good time to put effort into a "maybe". Good luck and remember the best attribute a bowyer can have is patience.
-
Start a new one I say.
-
I think you are all wrong. the sinew is going to take all the stress anyway. Make the back smooth, apply sinew and tiller the belly to get the curve you want.
-
I really don't know enough about Juniper to state an opinion here. I know that whenever I've had a ring violation backed or not, the bow always fails. Bear in mind I've never laid a really thick sinew backing over a violated back, so Jim could very well be right. I know there's an "art" to ring violation (decrowning and such) but I don't know enough about it to state an opinion.
I do completely agree with Dakota about the wood being the boss. This has always been my experience with no exception.
As for the frustration you're feeling, I can say without question that whenever I have gotten that frustrated with a piece of wood it has never become a bow.
-
I would normally agree with you Jim. I take thing too far in attempts to save a stave from the fire but this is only 32 inches.
-
Yikes 32 inches? Thats way to short and thats coming rom someone who likes short bows. I agree if your this frustrated already i would find some other stave that won't make you more.
-
The wood is in charge, period. It makes all the major decisions. If you try to disagree with it, it will prove you wrong by deciding not to be your bow.
All the bowyer can do is delicately make suggestions and encouragements. The stave will never be what you need/want it to be. It will be what it is. It doesn't have much choice. ...
Beautifully worded...
I would only add... "when in doubt, don't" :)
The dips and ridges should have been simply ignored and the back left alone... it was a problem creation exercise from trick one ::)
How it escalated from "use a pressure washer" to "I guess this is the go ahead to shave down the back" I have no idea :o
Sorry if this sounds harsh, but the old saying keep it simple is a good start point.
Del
-
Yikes 32 inches? Thats way to short and thats coming rom someone who likes short bows. I agree if your this frustrated already i would find some other stave that won't make you more.
U sure? Do you think the little bow in this pic might be 32 inches? I have seen some really little bows in old Indian pictures, I think a lot of modern bowyers like to super size their bows.
(http://www.primitivearcher.com/smf/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=26146.0;attach=46355;image)
-
P.s. guys thanks for the advice. I think I will continue shaving wood off the back of this bow since I heard Ishi violated growth rings with an axe anyway so it will just be more historically accurate that way. We will see how this bow turns out because I have a lot of sinew and it is a small stave after all. Maybe I will post pics. (-_)
P.s.s. somebody here said "muscles" act like grain violations, anyway. My gut instinct was to take this stave down to a nice flat surface for the sinew.
-
Okay so I went back down to the forest on my grandfather's property and picked up the other half of the log I split. This time I chopped it down on the back, and I now have an identical stave that is just 37.5 inches long. The back is still likely to be violated unless I chase it down to one growth ring, but it will be sinew backed regardless. What do you think about this length?
-
If you gotta do it then you just gotta do it! Good luck! Yes that's a better length in my opinion.
Of course, the bowyers that made those bows had mucho experience and probably started with the best stave they could get.
You will learn something for sure.
-
For a sinew backed yew or juniper bow, you can for sure violate the back, and shape it how you want.
-
Yikes 32 inches? Thats way to short and thats coming rom someone who likes short bows. I agree if your this frustrated already i would find some other stave that won't make you more.
U sure? Do you think the little bow in this pic might be 32 inches? I have seen some really little bows in old Indian pictures, I think a lot of modern bowyers like to super size their bows.
(http://www.primitivearcher.com/smf/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=26146.0;attach=46355;image)
I agree that many make their bows longer than necessary. but having made some short bows (one 33", and two 43"). I've learned that I was expecting too much from them. I tried to get them to normal draw lengths of 28" but at draws that far being that short it doesn't matter one bit if the wood could take it or not. String angle becomes your main enemy. and your bow will stack no matter what, which hinders performance.
Secondly, the wood for short of bows usually won't take long draws and will get set. If you design it right and use suited materials it may not. Large amounts of set is usually an indication your wood with that design won't meet your expectations, either that or you stressed it too way too much during the beginning phases of tillering. the two 43" bows got a large amount of set and the first one broke at only a 23" draw (it also was sinew backed and merely 20 lbs). For the sake of durability and assurance I now know to play it on the side of longer than not. Again the hard lesson I had to learn is that the wood is in charge. I had this idea that I could make any design out of any wood, and if I was skilled enough in tillering I could make it work. Turns out I was wrong. There's quite a bit good tillering can do, but it won't make a design the wood can't take.
Last of all, I wanted to mention the native bows you shared. Do you happen to know the intended poundage or draws for them? maybe that small one is a child bow? No doubt they were successful for their purposes, but you have to keep in mind that the native American draw is far different from the Mediterranean draw. pulling a native American bow like that to 28"+ inches will most likely damage or break it. You can get a 42" bow pulling 60 lbs at 22". But You would be stretching your luck to think you could get that at 28". Trust me I didn't want to believe this but the wood has been telling me otherwise.
-
My Tribe, Hanis Coos, and many in Oregon made short bows, 34-36 inch range. The one Steve Alleley claims to be from a Western Oregon tribe in TBB1 or 2 I think it's 1 I believe is ours. Those Modoc bows you have there in the pic are probably a bit longer? These were definitely shot with a different kind of draw. Here's one I made quite a while back, I violated the back to shape it like I wanted it and put down one thick layer of sinew. http://www.primitivearcher.com/smf/index.php?topic=40212.0 I don't know about violating all the way to the heartwood, it just makes me shudder to think about but hey.
I've recurved all of the ones that I've made. The highest poundage was a yew bow with one layer of sinew, real short but I'll have to find my notes for draw length and weight. I left it in a hot car and it broke while stringing after probably 500 shots. Kind of wish I would have done two just to see what happened. Either way what you have is going to be a very short draw, but pretty awesome when it's done. I've found that shooting these bows instinctually is the best way for me, and that out to about 25 yards they can be pretty accurate if you practice. Worst case scenario you end up with a crossbow prod. Looking forward to seeing what you come up with.
-
For a sinew backed yew or juniper bow, you can for sure violate the back, and shape it how you want.
100% agreed. I have done it a good few times.
Tom - I think you need to learn how to relax and take things as they are....all this talk of 'swimming in rage' doesn't strike me as the best mindset for making a bow. Chill Winston ;)