I tried my first longbow today and I have to say I don't think I can ever go back to a recurve.
I have been getting sick of left/right misses with my recurve and how touchy that I feel it is.
I feel like with my recurve if I try to grip it at all I miss left/right to a great degree because it simply does not like to be held.
This is the reason why all of the Oly archers use slings and even the barebow recurve archers use slings, I feel as though their sensitivity does not allow one to grip on the bow without it effecting the shot.
Well I tried out a friend's longbow and the first thing I noticed was how perfectly it fit in my hand.
The flat grip felt very natural and it felt like it was easier to hold stable at full draw with it and was easier to point the bow as well.
Another thing I fell in love with was how light weight it was.
It felt so natural and comfortable to hold and it did not effect my stability at any range even though it's about 3 times lighter than my recurve.
Finally, I was simply amazed at how quiet it was with no string silencers and a dacron string.
I don't think I knew how quiet a bow can really be even until I tried this longbow out.
With my recurve and it's padded limb tips, very high brace height, and 4 string silencers it is still not as quiet at this longbow with no silencers and a simple dacron string.
The speed was also greater than my recurve which was a surprise especially considering that it's a straight up flat stick and not a hybrid.
The arrows were obviously not tuned for this bow at all but I was able to nail close to the center of a 9" pie plate from 30 yards with ease.
My release felt much much cleaner due to it's longer length as well.
With that being said, I think I know why the best archer of all time (Howard Hill) shot a longbow.
The bow is just so pointable and deadly accurate and feels so natural in the hand.
Sure it has some recoil but I feel like it was nothing major and I felt like it was actually giving me feedback on each shot.
I wish that I would of started out with a longbow in the first place as it is VERY forgiving and feels so natural in the hand.
It feels great to shoot a bow that actually hits where I point it instead of having to hold the bow like a tea cup or let it practically jump completely out of my hand for it to shoot relatively straight.
Now I want to see how well it will shoot with tuned arrows and a fast flight string.
With that being said, I don't think I can ever go back to a recurve now.
Since I first shot a Hill style bow, I have said "there is just something about shooting a Longbow".
Hmmm...so how am I able to shoot about 50 different bows well?
DDave
wait till after shooting the longbow for a few months you pick up the recurve for fun and feel how much of a huge log it is,,,, and I love both but going from Longbow to recurve is easy its going back to recurve from longbow thats hard.
I have felt that way about longbows for many years now.
QuoteOriginally posted by damascusdave:
Hmmm...so how am I able to shoot about 50 different bows well?
DDave
I don't see being able to shoot all those different types of bows well unreasonable but I am a precision freak.
I can hit a tennis ball from 40 yards with my recurve within 12 or so shots usually (my best is from 50 yards) but it's too touchy for me, I wanted more precision and the longbow is giving me that.
I think my major problem with the recurve is that is requires such a light touch or else it is very very easily torqued.
My best shots with my recurve come when I let the bow jump out of my hand.
At close distances my accuracy was actually worse than my accuracy at longer distances as well.
I believe this is due to the fact that the fletching does not have much time to correct the torque compared to shooting at a longer distance when the fletching has more time to do it's job and correct the arrow in flight.
I also believe this is why recurves are shot in the Olympics since at 75 yards you can torque the bow slightly but with enough fletching that torque will be much more corrected by the time it hit's the target compared to a shot from say, 20 yards.
I have come to believe that archery equipment in general is extremely self-conscious. If you think about how touchy a bow is hard enough, regardless of how well you've shot it in the past, that bow will hear your thoughts and you'll start having consistency issues thanks to the now touchy bow. If that's not a self-fulfilling prophecy I don't know what is. Don't worry, that happens to everyone.
QuoteOriginally posted by BWallace10327:
I have come to believe that archery equipment in general is extremely self-conscious. If you think about how touchy a bow is hard enough, regardless of how well you've shot it in the past, that bow will hear your thoughts and you'll start having consistency issues thanks to the now touchy bow. If that's not a self-fulfilling prophecy I don't know what is. Don't worry, that happens to everyone.
^^^this.
You think you like a Hill bow with a B50 string? Wait till you shoot a well designed modern reflex-deflex bow with a low stretch string. You'll think both recurves AND Hills are obsolete. Try a Stewart Slammer, Toelke Classic Whip/Super D, Mowhawk Sparrowhawk or Black Widow PLX and then you'll have a rant. LOL
Well to be fair Byron and Hill and many others have talked about how forgiving the longbow is and it makes sense.
If you take the top limb of my recurve and apply even a slight pressure on it it will torque the limbs and throw the shot off which especially hurts close range accuracy.
Longbow vs recurve is personal preference in my opinion and is similar to gun preference.
Some people are really good shots with a .22 rifle but are terrible shots when it comes to a .30-06.
These personal preferences can be found in all aspects of life.
I like them all . I mostly hunt with one of my longbows but this year I picked up a Great Nother Ghost recurve . It has a longbow style handle with recurve limbs in a single piece bow .
It's a great shooter ( best of both worlds ) .
QuoteOriginally posted by forestdweller:
Well to be fair Byron and Hill and many others have talked about how forgiving the longbow is and it makes sense.
The recurves from Hill's day were a far cry from the recurves of today. Old recurves were nothing more than short longbows with carved tips. They were touchy and fragile. Things have changed a lot since then.
I build longbows for a living and have built recurves in the past. There are differences, sure, but not as much as you'd think. For the most part, it's just about personal preference and invested effort.
Finding one's own personal comfort and repeatable zone is paramount.
QuoteOriginally posted by KeganM:
QuoteOriginally posted by forestdweller:
Well to be fair Byron and Hill and many others have talked about how forgiving the longbow is and it makes sense.
The recurves from Hill's day were a far cry from the recurves of today. Old recurves were nothing more than short longbows with carved tips. They were touchy and fragile. Things have changed a lot since then.
I build longbows for a living and have built recurves in the past. There are differences, sure, but not as much as you'd think. For the most part, it's just about personal preference and invested effort. [/b]
I'm going to have to disagree with you. The recurve that I shoot has limbs that can easily be torqued. I can torque the limb just using my thumb and index finger.
I saw an advertisement of Hill standing next to a longbow and it looks similar to the one's being shot today. Byron also shot a mordern longbow and has talked about how unforgiving it is.
The guy's shooting aspirins out of mid air and has taken out a deer from 50 yards I don't think we can argue with someone that has that degree of accuracy.
The recurves comprise is instability whereas the longbows comprise is speed.
It's like choosing a gun what do you want? Accuracy or a faster shooting rifle that's more touchy?
Don't take my post's the wrong way Kegan I saw your bow's and you are obviously a great craftsman.
It's alright! Not all bows are the same. Sounds like you had a noodle, and now that you're clicking with your longbow that's all that matters!
Enjoy your shooting as that is what matters.
But be careful about drawing too many conclusions from this test. Your recurve was subpar because among other things mentioned "The speed was also greater than my recurve which was a surprise especially considering that it's a straight up flat stick and not a hybrid. " that is not normal. Hill style LBs are not known to be speed demons to say the least.
What works is what counts.
I think longbows are a lot like violin bows..perhaps more important than the violin itself when it comes to making the music the archer wants to make.
Like others have said wait till you try a d/r Longbows. The best of both a recurve and hill style longbow with no drawbacks.
Well then, you tried a bow for the first time today, and based on one day of shooting you are making all of these conclusions. I would almost think there is some trolling going on. Claims that a Hill style longbow being faster than a recurve. That is a hard pill to swallow. Not likely to see that often.
QuoteOriginally posted by pdk25:
Well then, you tried a bow for the first time today, and based on one day of shooting you are making all of these conclusions. I would almost think there is some trolling going on. Claims that a Hill style longbow being faster than a recurve. That is a hard pill to swallow. Not likely to see that often.
I've been shooting it for nearly a week and I still feel the same way about it.
It's definitely way more pointable, forgiving, and more accurate than my recurve especially within 30 to 35 yards.
As for arrow speed I'm going to have to say that using a Dacron string with no string silencers that it is slightly faster than my recurve which has a high brace height, 4 string silencers, and limb pad's.
Without any silencers nor limb pads on my recurve my recurve is going to be faster without a doubt but it's also going to be very very noisy whereas my longbow is already quiet to the degree that I'm comfortable with with no string silencers.
I still feel that the recurve has the advantage at 40 yards and beyond due to the heavier riser but within 35 yards the longbow is significantly more accurate and forgiving even with untuned arrows.
I believe that once I get used to the longbow and tune some arrows to it I can be just as accurate at the longer distances as well.
Also it is not a "Hill" style longbow it is a regular longbow that has VERY mild R/D. A Hill style longbow has zero R/D.
It's very similar in design/shape to the one Byron shoot's.
There's no trolling going on just my observations and personal experience.
QuoteOriginally posted by JamesKerr:
Like others have said wait till you try a d/r Longbows. The best of both a recurve and hill style longbow with no drawbacks.
I've never shot one but it seems as though there would have to be some sort of compromise going on for a heavily reflex/defelex bow to be as stable as one with a very mild amount to zero reflex/deflex.
I've heard some people talk about how a heavily reflex/deflexed bow can still be torqued.
I've tried a few longbows ,but could not get use to the thump up my arm and wrist at the end of the shot
QuoteOriginally posted by 1Longbow:
I've tried a few longbows ,but could not get use to the thump up my arm and wrist at the end of the shot
you didn't try the right longbows then,,, some you feel nothing at all, I like to call them the radical R/D longbows,, super fast, FF strings, and crazy reflex and deflex..
I personally get weirded out when I can't feel anything, I need the bow to speak back to me when it does its thing ;)