31
Bows / Re: Bow Testing 2023 / 2025
« Last post by simk on December 13, 2025, 06:38:56 pm »found pics from the bloodwood build on the phone - that was probably from the start of the tillering process - the limbs pull straight later at fd.
Recent Posts
32
Bows / Re: Rule of thumb for stored energy
« Last post by Badger on December 13, 2025, 06:04:11 pm »This is an interesting prospect.
What's SEPDF?
Stored energy per draw force.
33
Bows / Re: Bow Testing 2023 / 2025
« Last post by simk on December 13, 2025, 05:51:18 pm »Yes Tuomo, do only trust your own numbers 
Maybe there will be another test in 2027. Next year I will have the visitors build a bow with me at the fair.
The fast bloodwood bow was pretty new. I dont even have a pic - passed it to the new owner right after the testing. The Yew/maple/bamboo was maybe shot 200 arrows. The fast yew selfbow was the same as in 2023....because I was interested in how much it lost.... a loss of 1fps is pretty good...the bow was regularly shot in these 2 years.
Willie: The laminated boloodwood semi-recurve had a similar profile like pics 1 & 2 - just less deflex aka set and was 64.5" ntn - the one on the pic is even shorter and the osage took clear set - nevermind, this is a fine bow to shoot.
The laminated yew maple bamboo was a classic asl longbow, 66"
The yew selfbow was from a natural deflex stave, somewhat 66" - its my personal selfbow
The next was a osage recurve this year, classic recurve, pretty pronounced and steep hooks, not mine, no pic.
Hickory backed bows always perform poor. Its a massive difference to the same bow backed with boo.
cheers
Maybe there will be another test in 2027. Next year I will have the visitors build a bow with me at the fair.The fast bloodwood bow was pretty new. I dont even have a pic - passed it to the new owner right after the testing. The Yew/maple/bamboo was maybe shot 200 arrows. The fast yew selfbow was the same as in 2023....because I was interested in how much it lost.... a loss of 1fps is pretty good...the bow was regularly shot in these 2 years.
Willie: The laminated boloodwood semi-recurve had a similar profile like pics 1 & 2 - just less deflex aka set and was 64.5" ntn - the one on the pic is even shorter and the osage took clear set - nevermind, this is a fine bow to shoot.
The laminated yew maple bamboo was a classic asl longbow, 66"
The yew selfbow was from a natural deflex stave, somewhat 66" - its my personal selfbow
The next was a osage recurve this year, classic recurve, pretty pronounced and steep hooks, not mine, no pic.
Hickory backed bows always perform poor. Its a massive difference to the same bow backed with boo.
cheers
34
Bows / Re: Rule of thumb for stored energy
« Last post by Aussie Yeoman on December 13, 2025, 05:14:59 pm »This is an interesting prospect.
What's SEPDF?
What's SEPDF?
35
Bows / Re: Common mistakes in deflex/reflex bows?
« Last post by Aussie Yeoman on December 13, 2025, 05:03:40 pm »Ah! I see. You mean #6 here? http://www.primitivearcher.com/smf/index.php/topic,73421.0.html
Or perhaps Post #13 in the same thread?
The D/R bows I've seen that are done well do seem to look pretty much dead straight when braced. I did some analysis of a couple and at full draw the bent limb looks to have the same degree and shape of bend as a straight bow with a ~7 inch brace. Doing that bit of graphics was pretty informative, because an elliptical bow at brace has very little bend at the inner limb. Which is something I probably didn't do well the time I tried.
Or perhaps Post #13 in the same thread?
The D/R bows I've seen that are done well do seem to look pretty much dead straight when braced. I did some analysis of a couple and at full draw the bent limb looks to have the same degree and shape of bend as a straight bow with a ~7 inch brace. Doing that bit of graphics was pretty informative, because an elliptical bow at brace has very little bend at the inner limb. Which is something I probably didn't do well the time I tried.
36
Bows / Re: Common mistakes in deflex/reflex bows?
« Last post by Badger on December 13, 2025, 04:54:33 pm »I was referring to the photos of bows in the other thread about bow shapes. I find that if the limb is straight at brace, I am in pretty good shape, but if it is still showing the dip from the deflex, it is under extremely high tension on the string and will twist itself into a knot.
37
Bows / Re: Common mistakes in deflex/reflex bows?
« Last post by Aussie Yeoman on December 13, 2025, 04:50:56 pm »Thanks Badger, always good to hear from you.
Had you meant to attach a picture or link to one?
Had you meant to attach a picture or link to one?
38
Bows / Re: Common mistakes in deflex/reflex bows?
« Last post by Badger on December 13, 2025, 04:28:21 pm » R?D is still my favorite, but not as extreme as shown in the diagram. I have built quite a few like those pictured, and I have had a very high failure rate. My biggest mistake is getting a hinge in the middle of the limb where it just suddenly appears. I believe my biggest mistake on those is trying to go for too much reflex. If the tips are level with the back, they are not too bad to tiller out, but they are a nightmare with a few inches of reflex. My favorite R?D design is more like an R&D with a semi-recurve. I use a very similar form to the one Gary Anderson used. Hard to beat.
39
Bows / Common mistakes in deflex/reflex bows?
« Last post by Aussie Yeoman on December 13, 2025, 04:09:14 pm »Hi all,
I'd like to get into deflex reflex bows, having made longbows and flatbows (straight and perry-reflexed) pretty much exclusively for almost three decades, with one or two recurves in the mix. I've been teaching bowmaking classes for about 15 years.
So I'm not new to bow making by any means, but only to this particular style. I've tried once or twice, but it didn't end well. I think the problem was in having the belly slat too thick, and/or trying to go for too much reflex, in the glue up.
I'd like to hear from the experienced, what common mistakes beginners can make when constructing and tillering this kind of bow. Maybe even some of the uncommon but important to know mistakes too.
Cheers!
I'd like to get into deflex reflex bows, having made longbows and flatbows (straight and perry-reflexed) pretty much exclusively for almost three decades, with one or two recurves in the mix. I've been teaching bowmaking classes for about 15 years.
So I'm not new to bow making by any means, but only to this particular style. I've tried once or twice, but it didn't end well. I think the problem was in having the belly slat too thick, and/or trying to go for too much reflex, in the glue up.
I'd like to hear from the experienced, what common mistakes beginners can make when constructing and tillering this kind of bow. Maybe even some of the uncommon but important to know mistakes too.
Cheers!
40
Bows / Re: The best shape for a reflexed bow?
« Last post by Aussie Yeoman on December 13, 2025, 02:02:57 am »Tuomo I really dig your D/R design. Would you be willing to share the parameters here?
I think a common issue with the R/d design versus a recurve is that they’re much harder to tiller. I assume this results in less even strain and a slower bow. Recurves are simple in comparison which may explain the difference by wood bow makers on average. I think it’s also easier to get more total reflex from a recurve than with a r/d bow. Seems like Fiberglass bows that can be designed so close to perfect are closer to what we’d see in a model versus real world averages.
Wooden laminates are easy. I make a R/D model with VirtualBow, find a correct taper rate for specific front profile. Then I make the laminates (3–4, each tapering 0.000, 0.002 or 0.004), after gluing I shape the front profile and after rounding the corners the tiller is usually very close to "perfect". For example, that 98# bamboo-horn-laminate, I made two tillering rounds, maybe 15 minutes total. Thats it.to not confuse the thread we might stay a bit closer to the topic. The simple () question actually seems: How and why does the sideprofile affect energy storage?
Although I said that string angle isn't the best parameter to describe energy storage, it is still quite good to tell something about energy storage... Here is braced and drawn profiles of three of those models, and draw-force curves with straight reference line.