Dr. Ed's interview in TBM was so far over my head that i can even start to explain it!
never mind the fact that im 16 and from Alabama, but if he would put it in laymans terms, people could understand it a lot easier.
i might go back a read it slower adn TRY harder to understand what hes sayin. but im not positive i can.....
great article though, (from the parts that i understood...)
If you thought that was bad...Dont even go near the forum....
Those WERE layman's terms.
Hey Traditional only no kidding.That was like reading something that alomost seemed as if it had nothing to do with anything.I don't think there were really any answers,just more ??????????????????? bd
I just look at the pictures. They are worth a thousand words, and the captions summarize the important stuff.
im afraid to go to the forum!
if those were the lymans terms, then where did he go to school again???
i had to do that, (readin the captions) cause i didnt get the other stuff all that well....
You can always ask questions here. There are a number of people here who might able to help.
Trad Only: I may be telling you something you already know, but if you can, get the Traditional Bowyer's Bible... all three volumes. Available from 3 Rivers, Amazon, etc. Lots and lots and lots and lots of articles on every facet of trad archery, and, at least to these old eyes, understandable. I hope i don't get jumped on here, but just about every magazine article I've read since I started shooting in '05 was either in some sense a rehash of similar material in the Bible... not to say it was lifted, just the same subject represented or involved new technology that is against this crusty old so and so's trad religion. Don't get me wrong... this is OK. They have to fill magazines with material... every issue... issue after issue, or we wouldn't have the magazines and if we didn't have the magazines, how would we study the ads every issue?
Dick in Seattle
Dick -- Did you actually read the article in question before you made this declaration? It has NO relationship to anything in the Bibles, and I've read, and own, all three. I have to agree with Tree Man. Trad Only -- at least you're interested and trying!
I just got mine the other day and so far only read Asbells which is always first,probably why I buy it and skimmed threw Asbys but thats all I have to do unless I was going after them big buffs. Thats not to say I don't find Asbys data interesting so far I've gathered shoot a heavy arrow, more FOC is better,cut on contact 2 bladed heads are the ticket and I like the looks of those SB heads. I'm already doing most of this so its easy to swallow.
I hear what you are saying Dick (Most Articles)
Everything I read from Ashby seems to boil down to a few very concise conclusions that he has drawn from his experiences. Basically all he is saying is that a heavy, skinny arrow, with high FOC, two blade bh with a single bevel that is properly tuned to your bow is the deadliest arrow out there. While I cannot argue much with him I can only get to the part about the two blade head. For the game I have hunted and killed, moose, caribou, whitetails and black bear, sharp, three or four blade heads on the arrows he describes are very efficient.
Jacob, I think Dave did about as good a job as can be done of putting the 25 years of study information in about as simple terms as possible. It's not a simple topic, and can't be boiled down to a couple of catchy sound bites.
Since you're in North Alabama, perhaps we can get together sometime, during one of my Stateside visits. If you're truly interested in understanding them; and we can work out a way get together sometime; I'd be happy to try and explain the study results first hand.
The Updates are, indeed, very detailed, and far more complicated reading than Dave's summary in TBM. That's intentional. They not only give 'the results', they delineate the specifics of each set of testing parameters and the precise results of each.
The Updates are not intended to provide results in lay terms, but rather to expand the understanding for those technically inclined. They are also there to provide enough detailed specifics, and the theory behind them, to permit any other person who wishes to do research on arrow terminal performance a basis permitting direct comparisons with whatever results they might obtain.
If the Syudy results are presented in a simplistic manner, without supporting methodology and results, they become nothing more than opinion. What is truly complex can only be distilled to its basic components without losing its integrity.
"Making what is intrensically complex into something too simple merely reduces it to the point it means nothing to anyone" - Dr. Canterbury, Physicist, Mathematician and Engineer; Project Trinity
"It's cheap and looks good. Who's gone'na care if it works?" - Homer Simpson
Ed
ps: For what it's worth, my education is totally the product of what America's public schools once offered to everyone ... before 'political correctness' replaced 'student correctness'; and the 3-R's were force to take a backseat to the new R - 'student's rights'!