Today I tested several bows I have through the chrono. I found that as the arrow weight increases the speeds of these bows become very close, while with lighter arrows there is a much larger difference in speed.
I tested a fast flight Dye recurve 55 @ 28 and a Hill Wesely longbow 55 @ 28. I tested others but the draw weights were different. I have a spread sheet that computes momentum, kinetic energy and realative performance. I tested the bows with a 400 gr, 580 gr and 730 gr arrow. This is what I found.
Dye 400 gr 217.5 FPS, KE 42, MOMENTUM .39
Hill 400 gr 202.3 FPS, KE 36, MOMENTUM .36
Dye 580 gr 184.3 FPS, KE 44, MOMENTUM .47
Hill 580 gr 174.7 FPS, KE 39, MOMENTUM .45
Dye 730 gr 166.7 FPS, KE 45, MOMENTUM .54
Hill 730 gr 165.1 FPS, KE 44, MOMENTUM .54
It looks to me that bows that appear to be very fast with light arrows, loose their edge against other bows as the weight increases. Has anyone else found this to be true.
Gil
That's very interesting, Gil. Thanks for posting! I have to say I was a little surprised at the numbers on the Hill. Pretty impressive!
I don't have a chronograph, but I've seen that Hill-style longbows (American flatbows) perform a lot better with arrows from 10gr per pound on up. I just got a 7 Lakes in that absolutely loves some 800gr maple arrows I have.
I have found that a chrono is only good for comparing bows relatively to each other on the same day at the same time. Depending on light conditions the results can vary day to day. Not by much but they do. But relatively when you shoot bows against each other the results seem to come out the same.
I used to think I had some screamer bows but that was with a light arrow. I think there are a lot of advantages to a heavy arrow and those screamers don't seem to have much of an advantage as weight increases.
Just my opinion though.
I should have mentioned that both bows were using 8125 padded loop 12 strand strings.
Gil
Interesting results. Almost everyone that I have spoken to that has tested other recurves versus longbows has not had results nearly as impressive. My limited testing also hasn't produced such numbers, although most of the time testing was only done up to 12 grains per pound rather than over 13. I'm not familiar with the Dye recurve. Does it have exceedingly thing limbs? Were all of your arrows tuned well to your bows? I had a recent post pertaining to this topic and no one had data like this. I'm trying to understand what physics principle could explain this behavior.
Very interesting results,it must be a narrow deeep core limbs handle the heavier arrows better.I know my Hill's like heavier arrows better,they just seem to shoot better with them.
There was a recent post regarding performance of hill style bows. Gil did some testing awhile back, so I am bumping it to the top for some others to see.
An HH bow shooting 175 fps at 10.5 gpp and 165 fps for 13.3 gpp !!. And a speed loss of only 10 fps for an increase arrow weight of 150 gr/ 2.8 gpp is simply impossible!! Or maybe in Wonderworld.
in a crontroled trial (checked draw lenght, checked draw weight at DL and checked arrow weight) this will never happen, unless you shoot the Hill bow at 34" DL and recurve at 28"
You "HH bugged guys" are very funny when it comes to assess the performance of those bows... :biglaugh:
Something's off here. Were these bows shot by shooting machine or by hand? It's pretty easy to tweak chrono results when your shooting the bow by hand.
I think for a test like this to be really accurate it needs to be done indoors through tandem chronos with a shooting machine, so the human factor is eliminated.
I would guess the numbers will be argued back and forth without ever reaching any agreement. I think what it does show is that some bows are far more efficient than others until the arrow mass gets heavy enough to absorb more of the wasted energy.
It would appear that the less efficient bow "likes" a heavy arrow because more of its wasted energy is recovered by the arrow. The efficient bow also "likes" a heavy arrow - it just doesn't have to have one to perform well.
Don't get me wrong. I am very fond of my "D" type longbow and it's a very accurate bow for me, but the RER Retro I used to own with the same draw weight shot rings around it. I usually shot around 10 - 11 GPP. If I upped the arrow weight, the difference would probably decrease, but the "D" bow would never completely catch up.
Hybrid, that is an insult. He is merely telling us what his numbers were and you are calling him a liar. I have done lots of testing myself and I have tested my favorite Hill style bows, (the ones I keep) that have, on six different chronographs, that consistently came up with grain per pound numbers even higher than his. I have tested a number of them that had numbers lower than his as well,(the ones I sell or give away), some Hill bows are quicker than average and some are slower. Which is exactly why I check them out every chance I get. The bows that shoot the fastest are sometimes also the smoothest to shoot and that is the bow I want. I have however, tested super heavy Hill bows that did not like very stiff arrows. What I found with those is that the difference in cast from a light to a heavy arrow was closer, the cast with grains per pound was less and those same Hill bows were very accurate and forgiving. I was told the reason longbows do not lose as much speed with heavier arrows is because the ratio of the arrow weight to limb weight. The light tipped recurve target bows that I have had showed a much greater slow down with heavier arrows. On the other hand I have never seen a longbow pass the faster bow as the arrow got heavy, as this comparison shows as well. They get closer, but the order stays the same.
Maybe that point can happen, but that arrow would be too heavy to be practical.
I would be real happy with the 184 fps with the 580 grain arrow. That will give great penetration and more quieter coming off the bow. Adding the Dye takes Dacron string only, impressive.
We are lead to believe that a shooting machine will always get a faster arrow speed than a longbow shot by hand, not true. As Pope and Young discovered a longbow also shoots more accurately when held by hand than when held by a mechanical brace.
I find those numbers hard to believe.By no means I am saying those are not the numbers that poped up in the screen.But there is a proper way to shoot an arrow through the chrony.For example if you move the tip of the arrow right there in front of the chrony and release it will always show 10-15 fps faster.I had two different models and both said in the instructions you are suppose to shoot at LEAST an arrrows length from the beginning of the first sensor.Did you do it that way?
I would be surprised if he didn't stay the same distance from the chrono with each bow. That is the interesting thing, the diminished advantage of the recurve with heavier arrows, not the absolute numbers. I didn't do the test, but the mechanical equivalent of impedance matching may play a role.
The point here is the actual comparison.
Gil's test actually lines up with a recent Firefly test we did. We tested a Firefly hybrid longbow against a recurve. The recurve beat the Firefly with light 400-ish arrows. But with increasingly heavy arrows the Firefly eventually ended up passing the recurve.
So I find Gil's results very believable. Common thought for years has been the faster bow will always be faster, but I think we are starting to find that may not always be the case.
Thanks for testing and posting Gil! :archer2:
Yeah...It would make sense that the faster dry fire speed of the recurve would have the advantage on lighter arrows, and the longer length and maybe more massive longbow limbs could transfer more energy into the heavier arrow???? Beau
I like to see tests like this performed by members on here, but I also wondered about those velocities...??? We have 2 chrono's at out bow club and we frequently test various members bow velocities just for the fun of it..! My 51# Holcomb 59' Kodiak repro launches a 405 grain carbon at 188 fps at 3 feet from the chrono screen...which is o 2 fps faster than a friend of mines 52# 2012 Black widow recurve.....its one of the fastest recurves in the club in the 50-53# range......that's why the Dye 55#er at 217 fps really caught my eye...!!! Now I'm not calling anybody anything here, but if that's an accurate velocity, then its downright incredible...!!! Possible chrono error...???? who knows...??? I've seen some 202-203 fps stuff at 9GPP...!!! However, the gap closing at the heavy arrow weights is interesting.....just my 2 cents worth....john
I agree, Jack. Lots of incredible numbers posted on the internet. Those numbers may have actually popped on the screen, but that doesn't mean they're right.
A while back I tested a bow, got 165fps with a 10gpp arrow. A few weeks later someone posted 198 fps with the same bow, same gpp, and same dl. Now, I'm.now byron Ferguson,.but my release is no way causing a loss of 30+ fps.
I also find it interesting that the HH guys say HH style bows are better because they're more stable and then post numbers like 195 fps. Absolutely unbelievable.
In conclusion, ignore the absolute numbers people post online. The relative numbers in this test are interesting though.
Glad you agree Gringol. Im not trying to offend anyone on here, just perplexed by the high velocities pisted here...???? I have a nice Longriver Elk bow of Gus DelAgaffo which is 53# and a RD design...just cant match velocity with my recurves in the 47#-51# range....usually 6-8fps slower at the same gpp.....Hill or no Hill....just sayin'...curious???
QuoteI have found that a chrono is only good for comparing bows relatively to each other on the same day at the same time. Depending on light conditions the results can vary day to day. Not by much but they do. But relatively when you shoot bows against each other the results seem to come out the same.
He's not saying his speed numbers are 100% accurate, they don't have to be when just comparing bow A to bow B. The only thing being looked at here is the DIFFERENCE between bow A and bow B, which should be very accurate being both bows were shot at the same session under the same setup/conditions.
This comparison has been done several times with the same results. The heavy limbs of the Hill bow are not effected as much by the increased arrow weight. The faster bow will almost always be faster but the margin narrows as arrow weight increases.
This is why I never chronographed any of my hunting bows. Too many different readings from the different chrono's used.
I gauge how satisfied I am with my bows shooting arrows 9-10 gpp at 20 yds. When I release, and see how fast the arrow hits the mark...or how slow..will determine if the bow is a keeper for me.
When my Trad shop was open, I carried 7 lines of custom bows, we did a lot of shooting, testing and comparing. Never chronographing....the naked eye will tell you about your bows performance, especially out to the longer yardages. One bowyer told me his 55# bow would shoot a 540 grain arrow 193 fps.
We took the bow to the compound shop I use to work in, set up the chronograph and fired 5 arrows through. 540 grains...never exceeded 182 fps. That's 2 different machines, giving 2 different readings and quite sizable at that.
This is why I never chronographed any of my hunting bows. Too many different readings from the different chrono's used.
I gauge how satisfied I am with my bows shooting arrows 9-10 gpp at 20 yds. When I release, and see how fast the arrow hits the mark...or how slow..will determine if the bow is a keeper for me.
When my Trad shop was open, I carried 7 lines of custom bows, we did a lot of shooting, testing and comparing. Never chronographing....the naked eye will tell you about your bows performance, especially out to the longer yardages. One bowyer told me his 55# bow would shoot a 540 grain arrow 193 fps.
We took the bow to the compound shop I use to work in, set up the chronograph and fired 5 arrows through. 540 grains...never exceeded 182 fps. That's 2 different machines, giving 2 different readings and quite sizable at that.
Ah Joe, now you did it! I was hoping that one would end. You found it and I agree with you.
How the heck did you find this one from 2008.
I had a personal discussion with John Fasio about speed and chronos. His bows were some of the fastest. He told me he could flip guys out at the archery shop he worked by making his recurve bow shoot 230 through a chrono with fingers by the way he released.
The one thing out of all of this testing to me was that as arrow weight went up so did the bows performance efficiency, momentum and KE. But there is a limit to everything and diminishing returns in trajectory after a while.
Now if I get good cast with a heavier arrow out to 40 yards following Dr Ashby's broadhead study, I am good to go for what I do - hunt.
I am dropping out of this thread and the other. I have been in way to many of them over the years and it is a loosing battle. I also had a few with OL Adcock and as far as I am concerned there was no better in regard to speed, testing and skinny strings.
Even if guys use top flight equipment to test, I bet you a million dollars not one of the bow arrow combinations were tuned. I think that would also affect results.
I am running and hiding from these threads and any on momentum versus KE.
Thanks
Gil
PS - a friend and I tested hundreds of bows. We each shot the same bows and compared results between bows and when we shot. At the end of all of these tests we each found our favorite bow. He hates mine and refuses to even hold it. I hate his and when I shoot it feels like a slinky after the shot. Bow preference is purely subjective and they all perform very well for our needs. That is why they make all kinds. They are all nice.
Sorry Gil,
I am to blame from bringing this to the top. Thought some might like the info. Wasn't trying to start a battle or anything.
Hi Pat. No problem here. How did you find this one. I thought this would have been deleted long ago.
There is no battle here. I didn't even read through the threads, I know better, but I can imagine what these have been like.
I am kind of surprised if it would turn into a battle here on Tradgang. Usually there is much respect for the individual and opinions. Battles are what happen on other sites usually.
How have you been? I liked the hunt you went on for buffalo. I just sold a bow to someone in Australia. I would like to go one day. My dream is Africa but I don't think I will ever have the loot.
Using identical weight bows , pulled the same distance , arrows the same weight or using same arrow , one of these bows will be more efficient than the other. That bow will be the recurve. It will be faster than the longbow simply by its design unless it is a poorly made recurve.
As you up the arrow weight the numbers will get closer as each bow uses more of its efficiency against the increased weight of the projectile. At an extreme point they will become very close as each bow approaches maximum efficiency.
However the fastest bow to start with that has a higher efficiency rating will always be more efficient and faster than the bow that was slower. That is a fact of dynamics and physics that is not going to change.
God bless, Steve.
Have to agree with Steve here. The more efficient bow is the more efficient bow. The longbow in this case will never pass the the recurve, they may become closer but the longbow will not pass the recurve. The Laws of physics tell us that! Shawn
Hey Shawn and Steve. You are probably correct, and that may be what Gil's testing shows.
Hey Gil,
I was just using the search function. I remembered some old threads after someone posted about Hill chrono results recently. I have been pretty good and I am looking forward to some hog and deer hunting soon. DIY elk will be next year. I hope you are able to make it to either Africa or Australia. Those horses can really deplete your funds, lol.
Gil, I am not about to suggest that you are posting anything other than what your chronograph indicates. That said, you are getting readings in f.p.s. that are far in excess of what Blackie Schultz does in his bow reviews for Traditional Bowhunter Magazine. I will say again that it would be interesting if someone did a test on a number of chronographs to see which ones read the fastest and to test them in different indoor and outdoor light settings to see how much they vary individually.
Jim I don't take offense by this at all. I said in the other thread I thought it was a big waste of my time and money for me.
If you look at the beginning of this thread, I said I thought it was good for comparing bows against each other on the same day and that was it. I would get different results on different days with the same bows. The difference between bows would be the same proportionately.
Ol Adcock set me straight a long time ago. Back yard testing may OK for yourself to compare your own bows, but controlled testing like Blackie's is a real barometer for a standard performance index. But I bet even Blackie doesn't tune the arrow he is shooting to the bow being shot. I bet that skews the stats a little too.
I only looked at this thread since I was surprised it had my name on it. I didn't remember starting any threads lately. I didn't read this one or the other fully, because I avoid speed, chrono and momentum vs. KE threads like the plague.
At one time I had the need for speed. I had a head on car accident in 2001. I had to put the bow down for 5 years. Before the accident I shot heavy bows. After I wanted to find the fastest for the lowest draw weight I could find, since I had to shoot lighter bows. That is when I started all of this chrono stuff. In the end I found most bows perform well. There were a few that were above the rest. There were some low end bows that performed as well or better than some high end custom bows. I found that some high end custom bows had big differences in performance and how the bow shot between the same model of bow.
Now I am content with what I have and my only consideration for bow speed is the cast at 40 yards with the hunting arrow I have set up to shoot.
A friend and I did this for us. All we did was shoot and record the numbers in a spread sheet for us to compare bows against each other. That is it. The bows that were shot were all shot on the same chrono to compare them to each other. They were not meant to say that these are the standard to which others should compare their bows to.
The numbers in the other thread were shot on a different chrono in a archery shop. That is what we shot there too. I am tempted to break out my chrono and shoot that bow again, but I don't want to be drawn into the chrono thing again. It doesn't matter to me.
Here is what I said in my second post in this thread in 2008. I think everyone looks at the numbers and jumps it.
QuoteI have found that a chrono is only good for comparing bows relatively to each other on the same day at the same time. Depending on light conditions the results can vary day to day. Not by much but they do. But relatively when you shoot bows against each other the results seem to come out the same.
I used to think I had some screamer bows but that was with a light arrow. I think there are a lot of advantages to a heavy arrow and those screamers don't seem to have much of an advantage as weight increases.
Just my opinion though.
I should have mentioned that both bows were using 8125 padded loop 12 strand strings.
Gil