Primitive Archer
Main Discussion Area => Bows => Topic started by: DanaM on November 18, 2008, 07:31:34 pm
-
Thought I would see if I could start a lively debate(arguement). Wondering how many of you think a recurve is inherently faster than a straight bow?
Please explain your reasoning for or against. I haven't made a recurve yet beyond flipping the tips a little so I will reserve my opinion.
-
I can't help but notice that a huge amount of flightbows are longbows and pyramid bows with superlight limbs
Zander
-
My experience is pretty limited. But I think it is hard to compare. Logic would say a recurve would probably be faster. But I think a well designed flatbow would shoot better than a poorly designed recurve. Not to mention wood selection. However all variables equal ie. wood choice and good design and build. I would then guess that the recurve would be faster. That sounds like a politicians answer. ;D
-
If the working limbs are the same length, mass and material, brace heights are equal and the tips are the same distance in front of the handle, I can't think of any reason that a recurve would shoot any faster. But I'm no expert on archery physics.
-
from my experience in the several of each i have made and shot i believe that a recurve shoots faster, but it doesnt have as much to do with the flipping tips making it faster. Its easier to draw a recurve because of the bow "lengthening" when its drawn, and since its easier to draw you can have a heavier bow at brace compared to a straight bow. if that make ssense? for those who dont understand the idea behind a recurve i'll explain the best i can and hopefully someone else will chime in that explains better than I.
a true recurve has the string touching the belly of the bow. the point where string touches the belly to the other place the string touches the belly is say 60 inches, when you draw the bow, the string comes off the belly and touches only at the tips making its say 66" long. so as you would know .... if you take a bow that it 50 lbs and 66 inches long and cut 3 inches off each side, it will gain considerable poundage...same think applies for a recurve just only in reverse. so its not that it really "shoots" faster but instead allows you to theroetically draw a heavier bow which in turn shoots fasts.
if you tied the string to the recurves of the bow and didnt allow the string to pull off the belly it would shoot the same speed but be harder to draw. make any more sense?
also with working recurves you also add into play the idea of more working limb than a static recurve and that will also add speed because its working mass not dead mass.
basic physics i suppose, once you get it, it makes lots pf sense i swear...lol I am by no means claiming to know it all, but ido understand how it works. so for my vote, i say " a properly built recurve of the same weight and wood of a long bow will shoot faster than the longbow" - Ryan
-
Hmm, you got me thinking Ryan. I wonder if the string coming tight on the belly during the release and thus abruptly shortening the effective length of the limbs (levers) somehow allows for a more efficient transfer of energy.
-
I would have to go along with Gordons answer on this one. It seems that how far the tips are in front of the back of the bow has more to do with it than recurve or not. I believe on the average a recurve will have a bit more speed but when bows are really peeked out they seem to peek out at about the same place. Recurves store more energy than straight bows but straight bows can be more efficient in putting the energy back into the arrow, What we call d/r bows or hybrids seem to take the best from both worlds and in my opinion stay pretty close to the top. Lately I have been doing work with straight but reflexed bows and find them to be about the same speed. I guess time will tell if anyone ever gets a wood bow up to 200 fps with a 10 grain arrow and 28" draw. Both recurves and d/r bows have gone over the 190 mark allready. In the modern bow world the present speed champions are the longbows with recurves just a little behind. I know a guy up in Washington who builds modern recurves who just might bring the title back to recurves as he is very close right now. Our primitive bows have done very well competing against the best of modern bows. Steve
-
steve,
i thought for the longest time that flight bows just was not in the same ballpark with my selfbows....
i apologize as i find your posts to be pretty darned interesting!
the recurves i make seem to be more..."sensitive" to heat and moisture and by keeping the tips light and fast, sometimes they just go off track sometimes, so i then ake them thicker and they slow down.
so, i just flip the tips and leave it at that, plus they are easier for me to make and TRUST giving and selling them off ya know...
anyway, keep us informed about the "duel on the sands".
jamie b.
-
Good responses guys, My own thinking on the matter is that a well designed flat bow with with some added reflex and kicked up tips is
not only easier to build and tiller properly but also easier to shoot therefore more accurate. With recurves if their overly long I have to believe the extra mass at
the ends of the limbs negates any performance gained from the recurves. Been reading up in the TBB on this subject and I found it interesting that the MOJAM
tests showed that a Pecan board long bow out shot all comers. Also find it interesting that the front view profile of a bow should dictate the tiller and hence the mass placement. Too often I find myself commenting on someones tiller that it should bend more into the fades but this is not always the case.
I'm looking at buying a chronograph just for my own little experiments, speed is not everything but a chronograph may help me comprehend some of the theories better.
Anyone have a recommendation as to a chrono or they all the about the same? Looking at the one in 3 Rivers for $118
-
Dana I bought one from a dealer on EBAY. It was about 75 bucks brand new in the box.
-
I think Pappy and some others at Twin Oaks did an experiment one time with recurve arrow speed and found that the recurve did not increase speed with more recurve in the tips but not sure of a straight up comparison with a long bow. Clearly, the recurve draws easier thus allowing for more accurate shooting, but something else to consider is the degree of center shot.
If we compare store bought longbow and recurves the recurve will be center shot. If the bow is center shot the arrow will have less archer's paradox to go through. The more lateral movement the arrow has to go through the slower forward acceleration of the arrow. So if you compare two bows with the aforementioned specs being the same you would also have to consider the degree to which the bow is center shot. All things being equal I think they are close but since a recurve is never built quite the same I think you'll find that most recurves shoot faster.
Jimmy
-
Horse a piece Dana. My fastest bows to date have been deflex reflex longbows but I still like the Shootability of my recurves. To me its more about making a short length bow that shoots like a longer one.
-
Recurves in a short bow=good, recurves in a long bow=bad does that kinda sum it up ???
-
Recurves put more stress on the mid-limb. Therefore, the mid-limbs of recurves tend to be wide and flat....a very efficient design. I think it's this efficiency that might give recurves an edge overall.
I've read a couple engineering articles that show that working recurves store more energy than straight bows, but only with perfect materials...and we all know that wood is not perfect.
And I agree that recurves are best for short bows.....it reduces stack. Long bows don't stack, or they shouldn't anyway.
-
speed is not everything but a chronograph may help me comprehend some of the theories better.
And that my firend is the important part of these threads. It isn't as important that we find out which bow is really faster, but that we learn. A good discusion with open minds goes a long way. Comparing styles can be a lot like comparing weights...... real difficult. It would be easy to say that a heavier bow will outshoot a lighter one, but it isn't always true. >:D I think an ugly efficient bow will outshoot a pretty inefficient one, but that is as brave as I dare get.
-
Justin you got iit right I do believe, I'm happy with the bows I've been building they shoot an arrow well enough
to take deer and they are durable. But lately I've been trying to apply Steve's mass theory and reading Tim Bakers chapter in TBB 4
has gotten me thinking more on the subject of efficiency and performance. I like working on Character bows and they are more finicky they also can be optimized
to some extent.
ps most of my bows are pretty darn ugly so you would like them Justin :D
-
A long bow is more accurate for me to shoot than a recurve...and to a point, the longer the better. To get the most from a recurve I believe you have to go short; for me, 60" with 6" static recurves. That puts a lot of stress on the working portion of the limb...theoretically shortening its life. With lots of practice, I can shoot a recurve pretty well...or at least I think I can until I shoot a long bow again.
Probably my favorite bow style is a 64" to 66", relatively narrow osage with a moderately crowned belly and narrow tips, pulling about 55#@26".
-
what does stacking mean? I constantly hear about stacking, but have yet to comprehend what it means.
-
Stacking is when a bow suddenly becomes harder to pull back. All bows get harder to pull as you pull back....but stacking is a sudden change....making it seem like the bow cannot be pulled back further without breaking it. A bow with a "smooth" draw has no stack. Most people like bows with a smooth draw.
-
Stacking Means that the further you draw the bow the more pounds per inch it gains.. The shorter the bow the more it stacks.. For example A 68" bow will gain 3# per inch of draw weight from 26 to 28" and a shorter bow lets say a 58" bow will gain 4# from 26" to 27" of draw and then gain 5# from 27" to 28".. Ok I hope this helps.. If not maby sombody better with words might jump in..
-
Patrick we must have been typing at the same time..lol.
-
Yep ;D
-
so is that why i hear that longbows that are full compass are easier to draw?
-
Dana,my fastest bow, undoubtedly,was a 64 ",osage recurve,I made a few years ago.It was tillered 58#@27",held 2" of reflex ,with 6" curves.I had to string it with a bow stringer,but with it's early weight,and it's "opening up" character,it did'nt lack much staying up with a 55# glass bow. It was built from the cleanest peice of boisd'arc I'd ever seen,which I cut off a deer lease I was on at the time.I gave it away to a church auction fund raiser. God Bless
-
Dana I just restored a blackhawk hornet that was slower than The holmgaard I just finished, i would say that recurves just more work and noisier unless its a Hupa or Hoopa style with recurved tips which are about3 feet long. Don't matter to me I like to shoot whatever and like wachin how the arrow flight goes to the target.Fun.PK
-
I hope we never find out the real answer to this thread, 1/2 the fun is trying to prove it one way or the other. I have had a lot of shorter staves that just needed to be recurves, I love shooting 60" or shorter recurves. My typical bow is a 62" r/d bow or a 64" straight bow but lately I have been falling for the elbs at about 68". Finding they can perform just about as well as anything else. Steve
-
Most people leave much more mass on the tips of a recurve than is needed. I personally have never seen or heard of a straight bow shooting as fast as a recurve. I know I've never done it. I have seen some impressive numbers from straight limbed bows but only when they have been drawn to a longer draw length. With the same power stroke and the same draw weight a recurve will shoot faster.
Also I don't believe a working recurve is faster than a static recurve. There are a couple of things that work against a working recurve. First the outer limbs have to be wider and that slows a bow down through air resistance. Second, it's a fact that a bows performance is improved when the outer limbs are stiff and inflexible
-
Other than just esthetic's, I can't see putting the time and trouble in making a static re curve. I feel if you are going to make a re curve, make it a working re curve. I believe that a working re curve, all being equal, is slightly faster than a straight bow. But then again, I am not an experienced Boyer like you guys. But it just seems to make sense to me if you have essentially two little bows, to add to the main bow, it should be faster. Re curves are not as easy to shoot as long bows, but once you get used to them, they are great. Just my opinion, and like I said, I am not an accomplished Boyer. Oh, and while I am at it, what the heck is a " Perry " reflex ?
Wayne
-
Great discussion guys, and talk about varied answers, sounds like a good topic for the Bowyers Bar eh :)
I guess I need to start making a few recurves to see for myself. I don't believe that just because a bow has recurves
its necessarrily faster than a straight bow. All bows must have the proper design to be efficient.
-
Dana.........just buy a "Chrony" brand....they are simple....and dependable too......I have had one for years....and just bought another one for the sake of having a spare.....It works great from Bows...paintballs....to my 7.62 X 54 Russian
-
Stickbender, Perry reflex is basically when a core is pre-tillered enough to bend evenly, then glued up to a backing with even forced reflex. The glue line holds the reflex, and it also apparantly takes some of the compression stress from the belly. It's named after Dan Perry (an occasional poster here) who set some flight records with bows made this way.
-
I feel a shootout brewing!
Predictions;
Classes, straight bows ( no reflex) self or backed 176 182
reflexed longbows, self or backed 182 190
recurves, self or backed 182 190
elbs, self or backed 172 180
Shot from a machine, 28" draw, 8 strands fastflight type string, 10 grs per pound arrows
-
many here are classifying reflexed bows as straight bows. i'm thinking the definitions should be better defined. to me, a reflexed (perry) or an r/d bow is a type of recurve following the definition of bending the limbs forward wether it's the tips or the whole limb. a working recurve or duo-flex (wilson recurve) is one of the fastest recurves followed by the static. working recurves can be problematic because they have a tendency to pull out after a 1000 or more shots but store a great deal of energy because of their uncoiling effect. the longer the statics, the more leaverage is applied equaling more speed if the tips are made correctly. unfortunately, the longer the static to more difficult it becomes to line the tips up with the grip. longbows or straight bows are easier to shoot because their very design is less critical of release. r/d bows store a tremendous about of early energy and are a hybrid of both designs. to me, their main drawback is that they are one of the most difficult designs to tiller properly. on average i get between 15-20fps more from a recurve when compared to a straight bow at the same poundage. i'm using some of the bows i've made in the past. one is my favorite 3d bow. it is a straight osage selfbow measuring 64" long and draws 55#@28". it shoots a 600gr. arrows around 155-160fps. my most efficient is a bamboo backed osage static that draws 52#@28". it had 5" statics and shot the same arrow 172-175fps. of course all of the above is my opinion but the numbers i got tell me all i need to know about bow designs.
-
Hillbilly;
thanks for explaining that for me. I keep hearing about it, but never knew what it was.
Wayne
-
I did forget to ask if the distance of draw would be the same for a straight as opposed to a recurve just seems to me that a recurve has less distance to Pull that string back.Hmm
-
According to the experts, which I am not, Speed of an arrow is dependent on the speed of the string as it is dry fired. So a bow that returns to brace height from full draw will be faster. Also a lower brace height will propel arrows faster from an increase in energy transfer from string to arrow. Most flight bows are straight with super light tips allowing the fully drawn bow to snap back to brace height faster. A recurve will usually have a higher brace height and relatively heavy tips, if you count the size of the recurved tips. Also flight bows shoot super light arrows. A flight bow shooting a standard 500g hunting arrow gives poor performance.
I think I read that in TTBB IV.
-
Mech, your recurve bow would have dome in the mid to high 180's with a 520 grain arrow. For the most part thats about the top of the chart, there may be an exceptional bow pop up here and there but thats basicaly about as fast as they get. I get about the same from my best r/d bows. About 184 being relatively common place. I use 2" reflex behind the handle. I don't like how skinny I have to make the tips to hit the 190 mark and am for the most part content to hit the 180's. Steve
-
I went around and around on working or static recurve with my last osage. The dilemma for me is that for a working recurve you have to have enough wood bent that it will work yet not lose its recurve over time. As others have stated, thinner is better yet thinner bends more and will begin to lose its curve. Where is that fine line between too much wood and not enough? I think osage is the best bet since it holds the form best, but even my osage bows that are straight with the last 6" slightly flipped loose set over time. A longer bow might be better since the ends won't have to work quite as much in at full draw. I think nonbacked hickory or hackberry would definitely have a shot life span.
-
Seems like in the end the performance between the two styles are fairly negligible, no doubt working recurves are a
thing of beauty, but if not executed perfectly they wouldn't be worth the effort. Static recurves would be easier it seems and also up
the performance and shootability in a short bow. This discussion also makes it apparent to me that just because
a bow has recurves it doesn't automatically make it a rocket launcher. Lots of variables to consider ???
-
I ant much into speed but I do flip the tip on most of my bows,it dose make them smoother to draw and seem not to stack as much as a straight bow of fairly short length.Say 58/60 witch is what most of mine are. Badger 180 would be great for me ,most of mine are in the 150s to low 160s.I think a lot of that is my short draw 25/26.I know I can see a lot of difference in the same weight bows
50@28 will defiantly shoot harder and I would guess faster than say 50@25 or 26.The recurves are sweet looking and shooting bows but for me to much trouble.I tend to overbuild most of my bow,I guess that comes from the early day of blowing most of the first ones up and just ant got over
that yet,don't know if I ever will. ;) ;D
Pappy