Re: [SCA-Archery] Re: Arm guard/English Longbow help!/Champions?
- As far as efficiency is concerned it all depends on the bow. Since you
mention modern bows on the line a top of the line recurve will
definitely be more efficient than a standard "D" longbow but a Martin
Vision will be more efficient than a standard run of the mill recurve.
Reflex/deflex limbs on the new longbows also make it shoot more like a
recurve with flatter trajectory and little to no stacking so fatigue
isn't an issue. In the end I think it still comes down to the person
Carolus Eulenhorst wrote:
>The efficiency of the limbs will give a slightly flatter trajectory, but[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>you are essentially correct in that the limb design makes little
>difference. However, as most modern recurves (and thus most recurves on
>the line) are built with some degree of centershot riser design, whereas
>few longbows are relieved, the shooting dynamics are far better for the
>recurve. The recurve design also tends to stack less giving better
>control over fatigue thus allowing the archer to maintain form longer.
>Thus, it is most common for a given archer to do better with a recurve
>than with a longbow. This does, of course, assume that the archer in
>question has a reasonable familiarity with both bows and the shooting
>characteristics of one is not too alien to him.
>On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 22:53:09 -0500 =?US-ASCII?Q?Laebeth_Curiel?=
>>Actually, the greater efficiency of the recurve limbs won't have a
>>do with how well the archer performs. If two archers with exactly
>>skill competed, one with a longbow and one with a recurve, they
>>the same. The efficiency of the limb design does not affect the
>>of the archer (except maybe if distance was the goal). I typically
>>better with my longbow than with my recurve.
>>In a timed end, does a hand bow have an advantage over a crossbow?
>>have thought so, too, until I watched a few exceptional crossbow
>>from Havenholde shoot timed rounds. They were every bit as
>>load/loose as any hand bow archer I've ever seen.
>The best thing to hit the Internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
>Surf the Web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
>Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!
>Brought to you YahooGroups Ad Free in 2003 by Medieval Mart
>Get Medieval at Mad Macsen's http://www.medievalmart.com/
>[Email to SCA-Archeryemail@example.com to leave this list]
>Yahoo! Groups Links
- I would like to point out that it is not possible to get a true recurve
out of a single piece of wood. Watch the movement of a "recurve" made of
a single piece of wood and you will find that the movement of the limbs
is shifted but still contained within the main body of the limb. A
laminate recurve (whether of period construction or modern materials)
will show the movement to consist of both the spring action of the limb
(same power source as in the longbow) and the rotational spring of the
tips. This is the difference between a non-working recurve which is just
a longbow with bent tips and a true working recurve. In order to get
this rotational spring, it is necessary to join two layers of material
(can be two layers of the same wood or materials with different
elasticities, only changes the efficiency) with differential radius
curves. This is a fundamental change in the power delivery and will make
a tremendous difference in the performance of the bow. Add to this the
fact that the change in construction moves the flexible part of the limb
away from the grip and allows stronger, less flexible material to be used
for the riser yielding the ability to make a much deeper cutout resulting
in a greater degree of centershot construction. This, in turn, allows a
much more efficient flight of the arrow with less energy being put into
bending the shaft and more into moving the arrow. There are additional
benefits to be had by shifting from self bows to laminate (even if of two
layers of the same wood) but that gets further away from the matter at
hand. The fact that both constructions existed in period means that this
is a valid comparison.
On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 14:49:47 -0400 Siegfried Sebastian Faust
> Which means what you are really comparing, is 'traditional' versus________________________________________________________________
> bows ...
> Not Longbow vs. Recurve ... realize that the definition of a recurve
> just that it has bent tips, and a longbow doesn't.
> Often a terminology thing that people get caught up on.
> So you will have people shooting modern laminate construction with a
> shelf cut out 'longbows', and people shooting a bent wood single
> So, I myself will conceed the 'traditional' vs. 'modern', that
> modern has
> some advantages.
> But not that the 'longbow style bow' has accuracy issues compared to
> 'recurve style bow'. Yes, the recurve has a few things going for it
> limb speed/etc, but nothing that affects accuracy to that much of a
The best thing to hit the Internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
Surf the Web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!