Primitive Archer
Main Discussion Area => English Warbow => Topic started by: Mo_coon-catcher on January 13, 2017, 06:04:09 pm
-
I've got a black cherry stave that is very straight with only 2 knots and 1.5" reflex. It's 83" long. right now I have it taken to a 1.5" square until I fully decide what weight to go for with it and whether or not to leave it full length.
Which leads to my question, what's a good max weight I can possibly push Black Cherry at that length?
I'm leaning towards leaving it full length and go for 100-120# at 32". Unless those with more experience with Black cherry warbows says otherwise. If it blows, it blows. I have lots of cherry staves and would like to see what it can take but still be able to shoot it, if it holds. Now that I'm done with school I should be able to get this one finished fairly quickly compared to the first one.
Kyle
-
1.5" might be slightly too narrow to push it beyond 100lb, but I've never worked black cherry. I'd have been inclined to make it around 40 or 42mm wide, get it braced nice and early and see what the wood tells you to do as you monitor set and shape. 40mm is my personal minimum with something like ash when going much over 100lb, and I don't think cherry is quite as forgiving as ash, so wider is better.
As it stands, aim for something like 90lb and keep it full length. If you get it tillered to 90 or so, you can then chop it down to about 78" (if the tiller of the bow and the set allows it) and you'll bump it up by about 10-15lb.
-
I just took a measurement in millimeters to see what I've got to work with, I've got between 45-48mm in the center half of the stave. I left a bit of wood around my lines I had marked at 1.5"z I can leave it full width and clean it up when I shape it out, so I should have about 44-45mm if I'm careful shaping.
Kyle
-
Beautiful! Go for about 42mm which is plenty big enough, and plan to take the sides down quite a lot during the process. You may well end up around 38mm but it's always nice to have the option of more width, especially early on.
With that size, and some careful work (don't spend too long arsing about on a long string if you can avoid it) you should be able to get pretty much any weight the timber allows you to.
Good luck!
-
Awesome! Thanks for the tips. I'm gonna try to get it roughed out in te morning if it's not raining.
Kyle
-
I've never seen one hold together over 45#.
-
My experience with cherry is wide and thin not narrow and thick!
It will be interesting to see what happens with this one :)
-
Take your first full draw in slo-mo. ;D
Cherry is brittle and I would not expect good things from a 100# in any design.
-
It'll be one where I'll be glad my tree has a LONG rope on it. But I saw it mentioned on the English warbow society page as being a good wood, but it didn't go much into details on design other than saying it outperforms other woods in target weight long bows. Maybe that'll be the case with heavy. If it holds up to the poundage and design. We'll see once I get it shaped out and the rain and ice quits.
Kyle
-
I just chased a ring down on the stave. it was a PITA but worth it. I nicked the back while cleaning the bark off. By the time I finally got a clean ring, I uncovered some pin knota and a big nasty looking knot. Then removed them fully along with some pitch pockets by the time I got it to a single ring. I'm very glad I have a goose neck scraper. There is no way I would've had a clean back without it.
Kyle
-
Here's a few pictures of what I got roughed out. It's 83" long, 44mm wide 9" each way from center then tapers to 25mm wide tips. The thickness is 1.5" center to 1.25" at 9", then tapers to 7/8" tips. I gave it a shallow rounded belly for now. It has one knot left in it, I guess two, both showing only the belly side and one will disappear after one or two more rasping sessions. The bigger one is going away pretty quickly too. The link at the tip is from a branch it split from. Those dark patches on the back are the stained scars from knots in the back that went away when chasing a ring. I feel like it's ready do put a long string on and see where it's at.
So how's it look?
Kyle
-
Put a hard hat on when you draw it. ;)
-
That big kink at the end of one of the limbs is a problem. With yew you wouldn't even bother thinking about it, but cherry isn't quite as friendly...
Luckily you've got lots of length so if it gets as far as the piking stage, make sure you only take it from that end, to bring the kink closer to the nock. Tiller accordingly, so that you don't need to tweak the other limb to balance it.
Nice looking stave other than that though. Best of luck, I hope this one works out!
-
Interesting Mo and wish you the best of luck.
-
Thanks, I'm excited to see how this price of wood accepts being bent. I'm still waiting for the weather to clear up so I can set the tiller tree back up. It's been rainy and foggy for the last week so I havnt had a chance to set it back up yet.
Kyle
-
BC does not like being highly stressed, it will chrysal if you look at it sideways. Keep the belly as flat as possible if you want any chance of a durable bow.
-
That type kink is reason I threw away one hazel longbow some time ago. Kink was so severe that when put on tillering tree, it was impossible to align tips in same horizontal line without making limb (without kink) much weaker so it matches the one with the kink. In the process, bow lost tens of pounds surely.
-
Mo....I made a flat bellied 64" sinewed bow once with only 4" of reflex that eventually got compression chrysals on the belly even after thousands of shots.It's wonderful sweet shooting wood as commented about but does not like being stressed or put into a more stressful design as mentioned.Flatter profiled bows should last longer.Still got some 68" premier looking staves yet that will get a flatter profile finished look when made into bows.
Because of it's lighter mass density to avert from any hand shock a flat bellied long D bow in a flatter profile should work for you.I'd probably at least rawhide back it too.Just my two cents anyway.
-
Mo....I made a flat bellied 64" sinewed bow once with only 4" of reflex that eventually got compression chrysals on the belly even after thousands of shots.It's wonderful sweet shooting wood as commented about but does not like being stressed or put into a more stressful design as mentioned.Flatter profiled bows should last longer.Still got some 68" premier looking staves yet that will get a flatter profile finished look when made into bows.
Because of it's lighter mass density to avert from any hand shock a flat bellied long D bow in a flatter profile should work for you.I'd probably at least rawhide back it too.Just my two cents anyway.
You were lucky it lasted that Long Ed. I remember telling you when you were making that bow that it would chrysal
-
Not to side track the intended subject thread here but yes Marc my evaluation of black cherrys' ability has changed and I can be a hard head.....lol.Chrysalls are insidious and heart breaking.Once they are started it's all over even if laminated over with some other denser material or even sanded away and retillered.If it's design is the same it'll happen again.Best to just start over with a less stressful design.
Guess this comment is still about the woods capabilities.I feel it is a good bow wood yet though but not at the top of my list.
-
I finally got around to getting it to bend. I think I've got it ready to brace up. I've pulled the tips far back about 7" from the back of the bow. With the long string I was using has it pulling 100# at 25". I know the tiller will shift a bit when going from long string to full brace. But any one see anything that needs a bit of tweaking before bracing and pulling further?
Thanks,
Kyle
-
The other day I got it braced up and started pulling back. The first time on the tree I only pulled it up to about 20", about 70#, and checked for any signs of damage. Every thing looked good, no splinter, set, or fretting. So back on the tree and I started to inch it on up to 100#. To me nothing in the bend stood out, but apparently the price of cherry didn't want to take the stress, as soon as I touched 100# i got a nice bang and a bunch of shrapnel. Atleast it made it back to a 25-26" draw before letting go. I've got several more stages of similar length and straitness. So I'll tweak the design a bit with some paper backing to see if a liitle extra help in tension will let it survive. If not I'll keep tweaking to see how heavy I can push cherry until it quits exploding.
I did manage to get a video of the failure, it was definitely worth videoing. I'll see if I can get it off my phone.
Kyle
-
Rats, that's a bummer! Sorry it didn't work out.
You can see from your recent pictures that it's doing an awful lot of bending in the middle of each limb, and none in the handle or tips. I tend to find that when tillering something I'm not sure about getting the whole thing evenly stressed as soon as possible is a good way to avoid potential failures. The handle definitely could have been working a lot more, to help distribute the strain.
Regardless, it'll be interesting to see if you can get it to work with a different stave. Good luck!
-
Thanks for te advice. I see what you mean now that I have it pointed out. I wonder if I had the handle bending appropriately and the tips too if if would've held up for the extra 7" of draw it needed. On the next try I'll get the tiller a bit more rounded and get it a bit closer to full draw weight before bracing. See if that reduced strain will get closer.
Kyle
-
I agree with Will about getting those stresses evened out early.
If your working with a wood you know, your experience can allow you wait for that center to come round.
When aiming for a heavy draw weight but not knowing if it can handle the stress, every inch of the bows needs to be doing its bit!
-
Sorry... but it beggars belief!
Here's a summary of the story so far:-
Ask for recommendations regarding wood.
Everyone says, it isn't suitable and will fail.
Bow fails.
Now some people start poring over the subtleties of the tiller ::)
Del (slaps forehead and exits stage left)
PS. I'm just try to save Mo Coon catcher getting lured into wasting his time having another go with unsuitable wood.
-
Now that's the summary I been waiting on!! ;D ;D
-
Subtleties of tiller?! What?!
That's like telling somebody a yew bow won't work, and when they make it with the wrong section and tiller a hinge into it and the bow breaks going "yep, told you so."
Two people said they didn't think it would work. Others have offered suggestions on how to make it work. That's a long shot from "everyone says it will fail."
Jaro has written on black cherry "It might be worth experimenting to see how good it is in tension to make a low stressed warbow design, as longbows in sporting weights (around 50#) made from this wood, outshoot everything else - including laminates."
-
Well, I wasn't tryin to start an argument and generally avoid saying "I told ya so", but 100# is hardly a low stressed war bow. Moreover, just because only 2 people posted that it wouldn't work, it might still ring as a consensus if all were polled.
I'd like to point out that nobody is telling anyone what to do, but when he asked our recommendation he kinda was wanting our opinion. Jus sayin.
And if anyone else starts a cherry bow build and asks "what do you think?" I will hold to my convictions that it is not a proper bow wood. Brittle, prone to chrysal and likely to fail before completion. I'd almost take odds on that bet.
-
Perhaps I'm stubborn, but I've always believed that if a species of wood can make a 50lb bow, it can make a 150lb bow if treated properly ;D
The majority a few years ago said hazel would never go above 50lb, and yet two bowyers took it to 160lb when they completely reversed the cross section. Same with holly, and a fair while ago with ash. You still get people today insisting ash needs heat treatment and a heavily trapped back to make a decent bow, which is fundamentally incorrect! It's about trying new things, and seeing what happens.
If nobody pushes the boat out and gets crazy, we'd all be sat reading the same out of date rubbish on forums doing nothing new ;)
-
True enough, have fun!
-
Perhaps I'm stubborn, but I've always believed that if a species of wood can make a 50lb bow, it can make a 150lb bow if treated properly ;D
The majority a few years ago said hazel would never go above 50lb, and yet two bowyers took it to 160lb when they completely reversed the cross section. Same with holly, and a fair while ago with ash. You still get people today insisting ash needs heat treatment and a heavily trapped back to make a decent bow, which is fundamentally incorrect! It's about trying new things, and seeing what happens.
If nobody pushes the boat out and gets crazy, we'd all be sat reading the same out of date rubbish on forums doing nothing new ;)
If a good 50# bow can be made from a particular species of course a 100# bow can also be made, that is fairly obvious. It is simply a question of scale. Wood is wood and knows nothing of what fancy pants bow it is. The wood simply reacts to strain. If you keep that strain without the woods limits you are within its limits. Take it over and either you will get excessive set or an explosion.
Nothing new under the sun.....things can be rediscovered but you are mistaken if you think any of this stuff is 'new'. Are you saying that ash doesn't act better with heat treatment and trapped back? If so I would suggest you are wrong. ;)
-
Are you saying that ash doesn't act better with heat treatment and trapped back?
Nope. I'm saying it's not necessary to make a good bow. Some people insist you HAVE to do it, to make an ash bow work. This is incorrect :D
There's been quite a few discussions amongst a particular American reenactment group recently about hickory making a good bow. Any good bowyer knows it's an excellent bow wood, but all these reenactors are buying super cheap hickory bows made by terrible bowyers who use a yew cross section, and complain when it takes excessive set and fails. A lot of them consider themselves "experts" and insist that hickory DOES NOT MAKE A GOOD BOW.
It's the same as saying a cherry bow will NOT make a warbow when it just needs the right approach, like all woods. Remember when Ryoon made a poplar warbow? Anyway, I believe we agree - you said it very succinctly with "It is simply a question of scale. Wood is wood and knows nothing of what fancy pants bow it is. The wood simply reacts to strain. If you keep that strain without the woods limits you are within its limits. Take it over and either you will get excessive set or an explosion." This means that black cherry will absolutely make a heavy bow, provided it's treated properly.
I look forward to seeing further attempts, because it's a really good bow wood, so with the right cross section (and tiller - this is important, surprisingly...) it should make a brilliant heavy bow :)
-
Why don't you do it Will? It would seem appropriate for its staunches defender to realize its greatest potential. No reason for us to continue to scoff if/when you pull it off. And then you can jump from the theorist camp to the builder. Let's stop all this meaningless gabbing about what it can do and show us what it did do.
"Really good bow wood" sounds like hogwash to me, but then I've been blessed to work with some of the best.
-
I don't think I've ever seen a black cherry tree, let alone staves of it ;D
Quite why people on a bow making forum are so negative about somebody trying to make a bow I don't know, but it's pretty disappointing.
I guess everybody just wants to see an endless stream of yew bows and nothing else. 2 people still counts as "everyone" right? ::)
-
By the way, it was Jaro and not me who documented that black cherry outshoots other bows of the same weight. He's got more experience with making bows from unusual timber than pretty much anybody else who's ever posted on these forums, so if it's "hogwash" you should let him know ;D
-
Are you saying that ash doesn't act better with heat treatment and trapped back?
Nope. I'm saying it's not necessary to make a good bow. Some people insist you HAVE to do it, to make an ash bow work. This is incorrect :D
There's been quite a few discussions amongst a particular American reenactment group recently about hickory making a good bow. Any good bowyer knows it's an excellent bow wood, but all these reenactors are buying super cheap hickory bows made by terrible bowyers who use a yew cross section, and complain when it takes excessive set and fails. A lot of them consider themselves "experts" and insist that hickory DOES NOT MAKE A GOOD BOW.
It's the same as saying a cherry bow will NOT make a warbow when it just needs the right approach, like all woods. Remember when Ryoon made a poplar warbow? Anyway, I believe we agree - you said it very succinctly with "It is simply a question of scale. Wood is wood and knows nothing of what fancy pants bow it is. The wood simply reacts to strain. If you keep that strain without the woods limits you are within its limits. Take it over and either you will get excessive set or an explosion." This means that black cherry will absolutely make a heavy bow, provided it's treated properly.
I look forward to seeing further attempts, because it's a really good bow wood, so with the right cross section (and tiller - this is important, surprisingly...) it should make a brilliant heavy bow :)
Well that's a bit of a stretch. I don't know who has ever said that BC is "really good bow wood" but they obviously haven't made many BC bows. I made several longbows, along with a few other different styles, many years ago out of BC and I can tell you it does not like a round belly. Can you say chrysal, chrysal, chrysal really fast 3 times? With the right style of bow it can out-shoot many others if you make both bows to the same physical dimensions. The problem here is many other wood species can be made smaller.
I've known Jaroslav for a long time and I would be hesitant to say he has made more bows out unusual wood than most others
I cut a couple of fairly large BC trees many years ago, I specially selected the trees for cutting after many hours of looking at different trees. Most of that wood is still sitting in my storage shed, I'm sure you can all guess why from my opinion of BC
-
I guess everybody just wants to see an endless stream of yew bows and nothing else. 2 people still counts as "everyone" right? ::)
Still misquoting me I see... at least you admit to having no experience of what you speak. Never seen a black cherry tree... huh?!? At least the parameters of your professional opinion are no longer in question.
-
Not sure I quoted anybody. I said I guess. That means "I think" ;)
As for my "professional opinion" I made it very clear in my first comment that I'd never worked with black cherry. It's right there for you to look at :)
I have however made a large number of meane wood warbows from wood that a lot of people told me wouldn't work. That's where the fun is for me, instead of reading "expert" advice on wood that SHOULD fail, and just deciding never to try it. We wouldn't get very far in life if we only stuck by what certain people told us.
-
I don't know who has ever said that BC is "really good bow wood" but they obviously haven't made many BC bows.
Jaro did. It's on the English Warbow Society and reads "as longbows in sporting weights (around 50#) made from this wood, outshoot everything else - including laminates."
I've known Jaroslav for a long time and I would be hesitant to say he has made more bows out unusual wood than most others
I think it's fair to say Jaro has an excellent reputation for pushing woods to very heavy weights. He was one of the first to take ash and plum to around 160lb, and is somebody I would trust if he says BC makes good bows. This coupled with the fact that as Mike said "it's a matter of scaling up" tell me that BC will make a warbow.
I could be completely wrong, but my general point here is that if you don't try, you don't find out. Just because people say it can't be done, doesn't mean it can't be done. There's plenty of proof of that in bow making.
-
A few points:-
1. Its 3 people who have said BC is unsuitable throughout the thread. Mullet, Stringman and Marc StLouis. Others have implied the wood was unsuitable.
2. The whole point of this site is personal experience not second or third hand experience (which is why I offered no opinion of the suitability).
3. Without pictures it didn't happen, so claims of "large numbers of meanwood bows" are about as impressive of me telling of the time Kylie Minogue stayed over ::).
Del
-
Unlike you, I don't have a blog. Therefore I don't need to photograph all of the bows I make and sell. I just make them and sell them.
Whether Derek chooses to believe what I say (in a thread in which he offered no opinion in the first place except to summarise a thread for people who are already reading it, and then tell the OP not to bother wasting his time trying to make a bow) really, really doesn't bother me too much. Can't think of a nicer way to put that I'm afraid.
I'm out. To the OP - don't be put off. Please keep trying, 'cos if there's a warbow in BC you'll be the first to get it out as everybody else thinks it's pointless! Just like they did with holly, hazel, willow, plum and apple before people made them into warbows too ;D
-
I suggest you put us all in our place and make a 100# black cherry war bow from your own expense and time then.
-
Perhaps Jaroslav was using a wood other than NA BC. In any case I would have to agree that it should make a warbow with the right design, keep the belly flat and the stress low. How long it will last is another thing.
-
I'd also like to see a 100# willow bow. You then could slather me with butter and call me "Shiney" cause I'd be shocked!
I guess it is worth pointing out that among us peers there are many interpretations for what is a good bow. It follows that "good bow wood" also has a variety of perspectives. Moreover, "really good bow wood" may not be reserved by some for the top of the class like it is with me. Under this false assumption I reckon this post has been driven into the ground with posts that are not even on the same footing.
So in an effort to get us back on track, I would not recommend using BC for a high weight war bow and here's why: it's fickle characteristics make it an unlikely survivor. (not for newbies.) Poor compression strength make perfect tiller mandatory. (can you say chrysal?) Requisite oversizing is not always feasible and makes for an unweildy bow. (Yes I did see Ryan's poplar bow - first hand- it was neither durable nor comfortable to shoot.)
-
I posted the willow bow a while back in a thread on the main page about willow as a bow wood. I think it's 95lb, but what's 5lb amongst friends, Shiney? ;D
-
I am shocked. Wouldna believed it. ;D
-
I posted the willow bow a while back in a thread on the main page about willow as a bow wood. I think it's 95lb, but what's 5lb amongst friends, Shiney? ;D
That's 86#'s.
-
So, if not a warbow, then what would be a good design for something like black cherry?
(I have a stave of a wood with a similar reputation, that has been in the warm box for almost too long, and needs to be tillered out soon)
-
I posted the willow bow a while back in a thread on the main page about willow as a bow wood. I think it's 95lb, but what's 5lb amongst friends, Shiney? ;D
That's 86#'s.
Oh. Ok, what's 14lb between friends :D
-
So, if not a warbow, then what would be a good design for something like black cherry?
(I have a stave of a wood with a similar reputation, that has been in the warm box for almost too long, and needs to be tillered out soon)
I wouldn't use it. Far too many better bow woods out there, but that's JMHO.
-
It seems like the heavy black cherry bow is nothing to pursue with much hope for it working. But it'll still be fun to toy with from time to time. I have lots of black locust and hickory for making hunting weight stuff. And with cherry being fickle on even light bows. I don't mind breaking a few over time to see what it would finally take to make it work. I think it'll be fun to see just what it does take. I might make one my MoJam progect this year. Last year I exploded some cedar, might as well explode some cherry this year. Someone has to cause a little store with an exploding bow.
Kyle
-
Just worked some black cherry for the second time last month. Even with great tiller and a perfectly flat belly it is still quite soft for what I thought was a pretty good board I picked out. I wouldn't think a bow of comfortable dimensions could be made for warbow weight. Uncomfortable dimensions? Absolutely. As for my poplar bow... perhaps its time for an update to say the least. ::) :-X
-
One thing I remember when I started out and read the bowyers bible was what Tim Baker ( I think) said when ever he heard someone say a particular wood wouldn't make a bow. He would immediately go out to prove otherwise!
This doesn't mean he thought every wood was suitable but if you don't try, you wont know for sure.
My advise would be to select your best stave of BC, give it a flat belly, keep it long (80in) and heat treat.
Don't try for more than 100lbs and aim for a even tiller, making the whole length work right from the start.
Give it your best effort and be patient.
Then my Friend you can be the one on this forum to say I told you so whichever way it turns out!
-
Never ceases to amaze me how Wills argues the toss and likes to create drama on here. ***Gets Popcorn*** You go girl! :-* :-* :-*
-
This last one was about 80" NTN with the belly having a shallow curve making it comfortable to hold onto, and the widest parts were 1 3/4 -1 7/8" then tapering from there. I checked the peices after exploding and there were no frets yet, it broke in tension before they appeared. But it was only pulled to 25", so who knows, they might have appeared if I got it back 1 more inch. The next go I'll glue on a backing of paper and see if that'll help the tension issue. In addition to getting the middle moving a bit sooner. Even if it explodes or frets, it's only a peice of wood and an afternoon worth of time. Better spent exploding a preice of wood than watching tv. Plus it was pretty fun watching it explode, I don't see that too often. I'll give it another go once I get the bows for people caught up. I wish I could get the video up. I figured it wouldn't hold so i videod it bending on the tree.
Kyle
-
It might be worth avoiding a "normal" taper and opting for something similar to the MR shape. Keep it as wide as possible for around 20 to 30cm each side of the center then taper gently (almost none at all) down to a point say 8" from the tip. Then do a much more drastic taper to finish the tips. This keeps the bow wide and stable for a lot longer, which for any uncertain timber is always nice!
I have a feeling you'll get it working, but as meanewood mentioned, get the whole thing really even from the start. If what people are saying is correct and it likes to chrysal you don't wanna give it any opportunities to do so!
-
Mooncatcher, if you still have the broken pieces would you mind weighing them?
As for black cherry, I don't think of it as a very reliable wood but I do like it for elb flight bows. I only use it for lighter weight bows like 35# or 50# and that is because its light weight allws me to mainatin decent demensions and not have to be too narrow. I also find it to be naturally low in histerisis. Last year I made about 5 white oak backed cherry to settle on 2 I felt were ELB flight bow quality. Both bows tested out very good.
-
There might be a couple chips missing. But I've got atleast 99% of it sitting in my room. What would be your preferred units? I can do grams and ounces. I don't think I've got a grain scale that goes high enough.
Kyle
-
Ounces or grams would be fine
-
Sorry I havmt got those numbers to you yet. I've been in the hospital the last couple of days after a head on collision. and am not allowed to bend over. So it might be a few more days until I can get the peices off the floor and weigh them. I might have someone do it for me this weekend.
Kyle
-
Sorry to hear that. Hope you recover soon! Cheers- Brendan
-
Sorry to hear that, take care of yourself!
-
Yes, hope you have a quick recovery.
I hope you weren't distracted looking at potential trees as you were driving. I do that all the time in order feed the habit!
-
I finally weighed those peices. It's was 1025.6g with all the peices I could find.
Kyle
-
If the bow would have been an arc of the circle tiller bending through the handle evenly I think you had almost enough mass, but not enough for the stiff center you were showing.
-
The worst part was that te areas mentioned were the places I was going to rasp to drop the weight to bring it around more. I was sort of mimicking the yew bows I was shown by John at MoJam in getting the handle to moving towards the end f the draw cycle. The next one wil be bend more evenly early on. Along with being on the long string to a bit further in the draw so the inital brace will be a bit closer to the final weight I'm after. Think it's worth a thin backing like flooring paper to assist in te tension or try to get it to work as a self bow. Atleast at the distance I had it pulled, there were no frets before the tension failed.
Kyle
-
Personally I'd go with a backing. Get a working bow out of it first, then remove the backing and see if it holds, then make one without.
Your tillering process would work fine for yew as it's such a forgiving wood, but with these funky meanewoods you have to be so careful to spread those stresses early and evenly.
The long string is a bit of a controversial one as well - many bowyers who make superb heavy bows don't use long strings, especially not for a 100lb bow. Something that light can be floor / vice tillered to begin with, then braced as soon as possible.
If you watch Ian Sturgess' recent video you can see the process clearly. It's a case of ensuring perfect tapers and watching the mass, getting the bow virtually finished before it even sees the tillering tree. This minimises set, and drastically reduces the strain put on a bow early on, while many other bow makers drag it down on a long string to see where the problems are - by which point those problems have already damaged the bow.
However, all of that said, with unknown woods and unfamiliar draw weights a long string does keep things safe, at the risk of having a lower performing bow. I think for what you're doing (at this stage just trying to make the thing work!) a long string is wise, but perhaps only to brace height. Provided the bow is fairly even at brace height, you should be able to see almost all the problems with the tiller from the full brace shape.
-
It's a case of ensuring perfect tapers and watching the mass, getting the bow virtually finished before it even sees the tillering tree.
Will, I agree with getting the bow close to finished before bending it much. How close do you like to get yours before stringing?
-
As close as possible!
For example, I just finished up a 50lb self yew, and it was on the tiller for about 10 minutes entirely. I took the stave down to the finished bow size straight away, establishing all the tapers, rounded corners and fitting the horn nocks, braced it and checked it looked ok at brace and when I was happy I took it to about 20" I think. Some tweaking here and there and it was taken to 28", sanded and ready to sell.
I'm nowhere near experienced enough to pull that off with a heavy bow yet, so I'll take much longer on stuff over about 120lb, but the process remains the same.
I used to keep the staves huge for ages, drawing them on a long string over and over again, checking with circles drawn on the PC and so on and it just always resulted in disappointing bows. It also doesn't seem remotely "medieval" which is where my interest lies. I can't imagine thousands of bows being tentatively drawn on long strings, they'd have been cut out according to ratios depending on the timber quality, finished up and checked at the last minute I reckon.
-
...
The long string is a bit of a controversial one as well - many bowyers who make superb heavy bows don't use long strings, especially not for a 100lb bow. Something that light can be floor / vice tillered to begin with, then braced as soon as possible.
If you watch Ian Sturgess' recent video you can see the process clearly. It's a case of ensuring perfect tapers and watching the mass, getting the bow virtually finished before it even sees the tillering tree. This minimises set, and drastically reduces the strain put on a bow early on, while many other bow makers drag it down on a long string to see where the problems are - by which point those problems have already damaged the bow.
However, all of that said, with unknown woods and unfamiliar draw weights a long string does keep things safe, at the risk of having a lower performing bow. I think for what you're doing (at this stage just trying to make the thing work!) a long string is wise, but perhaps only to brace height. Provided the bow is fairly even at brace height, you should be able to see almost all the problems with the tiller from the full brace shape.
Will raises some interesting and very fair points which I've mused upon on my blog.(In a non argumentative, non critical way)
In the interest of politeness (as I've quoted him) here's a link to the post:-
http://bowyersdiary.blogspot.co.uk/2017/02/emilys-return-and-musing-on-tillering.html (http://bowyersdiary.blogspot.co.uk/2017/02/emilys-return-and-musing-on-tillering.html)
I think the main point is that thre isn't really much difference in the tillering techniques and that any method done well will produce a good bow and any method done badly will result in failure.
Del
-
Del, I struggle with the elb style more than others simply because I have made a lot less elbs than I have other bows. In recent years my elbs have improved mainly because I changed the process. I now do as others have suggested. I shape the bow how I figure its going to look, my tapers and approx. mass etc before I start bending. Always surprises me how close it comes to finish weight even before bending.
-
Del, I struggle with the elb style more than others simply because I have made a lot less elbs than I have other bows. In recent years my elbs have improved mainly because I changed the process. I now do as others have suggested. I shape the bow how I figure its going to look, my tapers and approx. mass etc before I start bending. Always surprises me how close it comes to finish weight even before bending.
Yes it's an interesting subject, and it's down to what works best for the individual.
Being pragmatic, to get from stave to a good finished bow means a certain amount of wood must have been removed from the right place. Does it matter how and when it was removed as long as the wood wasn't overstrained during the process?
I reviewed that video that Will mentioned and the process wasn't far from what I do except in the detail of finishing tips. The key similarity is that in my video series I say that with a warbow once it's braced it's very close to being finished, which is why you need to get it braced and bending evenly very early.
I don't see that it makes much difference whether this is done by long string by making by numbers/eye or flexing it on the bench (it's V difficult to floor tiller haeavy bow). I'm not sure why eith method should strain the wood more than any other unless it's by the inexperience of the bowyer.
I think it's all much of a muchness until you get to character staves... not sure that Wonky Warbow I did could have been done by making it first and then putting it on the tiller.
We all get a bit obsessive and tend to end up discussing whcih end oth the boiled egg should be cut off, this seem even more so on the warbow forum.
Hopefully I may get some other insightful comments (like yours) on the blog post.
Del
-
I think the difference is whether you are going for a particular weight or maximum weight. I think this works better for warbows because you're going for maximum weight(within reason). If you have a decent piece of wood and make both sides the same they are probably going to bend equally. A quick look in the early tiller will tell you that. After that it's just pull until you reach your draw length and then read the scales. If you are going for a particular weight you have to monitor it all the way and make sure you don't overshoot your weight.
For one it's a surprise attack and the other you sneak up on it.
-
Couldn't agree more ;D
I figured I didn't need to specify that because we're in the warbow section, but I absolutely agree that if aiming for a specific weight, getting the bow virtually finished before bending is incredibly risky. I certainly couldn't do it, and I don't know many who could.
My comments about over stressing are, as Del said, more to do with beginners struggling to "see" problems by drawing the bow until they're obvious. I guess the more bows you make, the earlier you see the issues, and the less you stress the bow by looking for them, or something like that.
I would say as an addition however that unless the stave is VERY unusual, the process should still work. Even something with uneven reflex, knots, dips, twist etc can be taken to 99℅ before ever seeing a bowstring. In fact sometimes it's better to do that with unusual staves, as your eye can be given a complete run-around trying to see the right bend on a long string, whereas if you have confidence in your roughing out process, you can trust that the bow is even and correct before you brace it.
-
As I said before, BC is finicky wood. Great with the right design but not so good when strained too much. I made a short highly strained sinew backed BC recurve many years ago. It had so many chrysals after finish tillering that it looked like a jigsaw puzzle. I pretty well quit using it after that experience
-
Ah, chrysals are just a bit of decoration :D
I've got a 110lb elm bow that I shoot constantly with chrysals over the entire belly. Still only got an inch or so of set and shoots nicely! It's those big single ones sitting in a hinge that complicate things...
-
Ah, chrysals are just a bit of decoration :D
I've got a 110lb elm bow that I shoot constantly with chrysals over the entire belly. Still only got an inch or so of set and shoots nicely! It's those big single ones sitting in a hinge that complicate things...
Unless you are making the bow for someone
-
Very true. That is frustrating.
By the way Marc, have you read/experimented with the Scandinavian form of heat treating, known as malming or "maelming"? I've started looking into it, as it was Daniel posting on PP many years ago who first mentioned it. He said it took a 160lb elm bow up to 210lb, and the process involves heat treating with pine resins, taking up to 10 hours.