In 1968 I was 12 and an avid slayer of ground squirrels with my 35# Indian recurve. By 1972 I had progressed to deer hunting with a brand-spankin' new Howatt 45#er, (emphasis on hunting, not killing, I didn't actually take a deer with a bow until many years later).
As I recall, the average bow draw weight in those days was somewhere in the 40s and a 50-55# bow was considered a heavyweight. I don't think I'm way off on this, just look at all the old Bears, Wings, Howatts, etc on the auction site that are in 40s.
Nowadays, it looks to me like the average draw is somewhere in the mid-50s.
What are your thoughts on what has been gained or for that matter, lost? Also, what factors have contributed to this evolution? :campfire:
Compound bows are probably more prevalent and advanced than they were before. Some of it could have to do with competing against that the weight of those contraptions.
I think it is more of a revolution than an evolution. Bow weight were once much higher. My other thought is that the average bowhunter isn't a trad bowhunter. Those who have chosen to stay traditional work at it more and build those muscles up. Not just another weapon in the tool bag.
Well according to Wikipedia (which never lies!) longbows were upwards of 200#. Somehow I doubt we are working up to those weights again. :)
"Many men in medieval England were capable of shooting bows from 670–900 N (150–200 pounds) — deformed skeletons of archers have been studied, revealing spur like growths on their bones where the over-developed muscles pulled."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longbow
Doug, I was not really exposed to bows much as a kid. There were very few deer here in the late 50s and early 60s and hardly anyone deer hunted at all. I do agree with you that a few decades ago, a bow over 50# was considered "heavy". Like you said, the majoritiy of used "vintage" bows you see for sale from the 60s seem to be in the 45-50# range. I think that when the compound gained popularity alot of folks found they could go up in draw weight and those higher weights kinda bled over into the stickbows. When I first tried a stickbow in the late 70s I was shooting 80# with a compound so I tried to start off with a 76# recurve. Not too much success there! Mike
My first bow other than my kid bow back in the 50s was a 45# Bear Grizzly. Try though I might, I never shot a deer with it. In 1968, my armament and targets were somewhat different :scared: ; they shot back!
I shot compounds for a couple of years in the 70# range, but quickly tired of them and went back to recurves and longbows. I was younger then, and shot stickbows in the 70# class, but now that I am old and bald, 55# is real comfortable, and does the job as well as my heavier bows did.
QuoteOriginally posted by myshootinstinks:
In 1968 I was 12 and an avid slayer of ground squirrels with my 35# Indian recurve. By 1972 I had progressed to deer hunting with a brand-spankin' new Howatt 45#er, (emphasis on hunting, not killing, I didn't actually take a deer with a bow until many years later).
As I recall, the average bow draw weight in those days was somewhere in the 40s and a 50-55# bow was considered a heavyweight. I don't think I'm way off on this, just look at all the old Bears, Wings, Howatts, etc on the auction site that are in 40s.
Nowadays, it looks to me like the average draw is somewhere in the mid-50s.
What are your thoughts on what has been gained or for that matter lost? Also, what factors have contributed to this evolution? :campfire:
Pope in 'Hunting with the Bow and Arrow' suggests using nothing below 60lb (I think).
Dunno 'bout that Tom...... :readit:
From Hunting with Bow & arrow. By: Saxton Pope
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Drawn to the full length of an arrow, which was about twenty-six inches, exclusive of the foreshaft, his bow bent in a perfect arc slightly flattened at the handle. Its pull was about forty-five pounds, and it could shoot an arrow about two hundred yards.
This is not the most powerful type of weapon known to Indians, and even Ishi did make stronger bows when he pleased; but this seemed to be the ideal weight for hunting, and it certainly was adequate in his hands.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'd say 40-45 in the day. Today mid 50's
QuoteOriginally posted by myshootinstinks:
Dunno 'bout that Tom...... :readit:
From Hunting with Bow & arrow. By: Saxton Pope
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Drawn to the full length of an arrow, which was about twenty-six inches, exclusive of the foreshaft, his bow bent in a perfect arc slightly flattened at the handle. Its pull was about forty-five pounds, and it could shoot an arrow about two hundred yards.
This is not the most powerful type of weapon known to Indians, and even Ishi did make stronger bows when he pleased; but this seemed to be the ideal weight for hunting, and it certainly was adequate in his hands.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry I meant in the how to build a bow chapters.
I'd have a look but I'm way too lazy.
Were just a lot stronger now a days. I thinks it's all the steroids they pump into the chickens and cows. :D
Lots of heavy bows back then also. I shot up to 80# up until a few years ago, now I shoot 60-64# but if I wanted I could still pull and shoot 80#. I know a few people older than my 58 years that still shoot heavy bows.
Danny
Perhaps age is a factor. In the 60's most of us learned from the previous generation which was aging and just begining to bow hunt in mass.With this older archer going into the woods lower pondage bows became the norm. Ever try to find a '68 Kodiak in 65 pounds? As we "Boomers" { I hate that cliche'} progressed in our hunting careers we began pulling heavier and heavier bows. In my 30's I hunted with 80 pounds. Now WE are the aging generation. At 53, my body reminds me every day of the folly of my youth and 80 pound longbows, preferring low to mid 50 pounders. Look around you. The average age of contributors here and the other sites is getting older. At 3-D shoots the average age must be 40 +, particularly at the Trad events.
The more I think about it,I definatly think age is a factor. Get the next generation to abandon their X-Box's and MP3 players, get them into the woods in mass and you will see an increase in the average poundage again.
John
I can say that in the 7 years we have been selling bows, they desired weight has gone down every year. Best selling bows now seem to be in the 40s. It is getting hard to sell bows over 55 lb. Bows of 60 or more hang on the rack forever.
I think that carbon arrows have contributed to this too. Experts say that if you switch to carbons from aluminum or woods, you can drop 10 lbs in bow weight and get equal or better penetration. They say the absence of the noodle action of carbon makes them far more efficient.
As one who was there, I can offer this information: At Bear Archery....anything over 55 pounds was Special Order. At my archery club, the guy shooting the really heavy bow had a 57# Ben Pearson...which he only drew to about 26"; he drew his target bow to 28". I use a 49 pound bow for years and shot through most of my game. The most popular hunting weight from Bear, Ben Pearson and Wing was 45#. Take it for what it's worth. The compound brought the heavy bow concept mostly since the let off allowed it more easily. And yes....there were a few who shot heavy bows, but as a percentage they were quite small.
Also you guys who read about the 200 pound bows of the Olde English Archers. A great amount of those bows were recovered on the Mary Rose when it was raised. Saxton Pope made exact copies of a few of them and the heaviest he could get was around 80 pounds. Seems that the weights always get heavier as the tale is told. Not surprising.
Starting with Saxton Pope who made exact copies of an English longbow recovered from the war ship "The Mary Rose", and then through many great hunting archers who followed, hunting bows of heavier weights than you describe were normal and ran a common theme tracing back to their traditional archery roots. This debate was openly discussed in publications by both target archers and hunting archers going back many generations. I for one have hunted with 65pound longbows going back for decades based upon the writings and teachings of the original old time hunting archers who got this thing going in our country, such as Pope. I for one think 65pounds is near middle of the road for my hunting longbows and I think there is enough written documentation by the fathers of traditional hunting archery to support this. It is abundantly clear by the written record that many who took the path of target archery reached different destinations than those who took the path of hunting archery. One destination does not negate the other. Where this path lead some in 1968 does not negate the path rediscovered by Pope with his recreation of the Mary Rose bow. It does not negate the path taken by Young, Imler, Bear, Hill, or the many other legends in archery. People were not in agreement then and are not in agreement now, but the facts exist:
"Of all the bows of the days when archery was in flower, only two
remain. These are unfinished staves found in the ship _Mary Rose_, sunk
off the coast of Albion in 1545. This vessel having been raised from
the bottom of the ocean in 1841, the staves were recovered and are now
in the Tower of London. They are six feet, four and three-quarters
inches long, one and one-half inches across the handle, one and one-
quarter inches thick, and proportionately large throughout. The
dimensions are recorded in Badminton. Of course, they never have been
tested for strength, but it has been estimated at 100 pounds.
Determined to duplicate these old bows, I selected a very fine grained
stave of seasoned yew and made an exact duplicate, according to the
recorded measurements.
This bow, when drawn the standard arrow length of twenty-eight inches,
weighed sixty-five pounds and shot a light flight arrow two hundred and
twenty-five yards."
-Saxton Pope
"The following is a partial list of those weighed and shot. They are, of
course, all genuine bows and represent the strongest.
Weight Distance Shot
Alaskan....................... 80 pounds 180 yards
Apache........................ 28 " 120 "
Blackfoot..................... 45 " 145 "
Cheyenne...................... 65 " 156 "
Cree.......................... 38 " 150 "
Esquimaux..................... 80 " 200 "
Hupa.......................... 40 " 148 "
Luiseno....................... 48 " 125 "
Navajo........................ 45 " 150 "
Mojave........................ 40 " 110 "
Osage......................... 40 " 92 "
Sioux......................... 45 " 165 "
Tomawata...................... 40 " 148 "
Yurok......................... 30 " 140 "
Yukon......................... 60 " 125 "
Yaki.......................... 70 " 210 "
Yana.......................... 48 " 205 "
The list of foreign bows is as follows:
Weight Distance Shot
Paraguay...................... 60 pounds 170 yards
Polynesian.................... 49 " 172 "
Nigrito....................... 56 " 176 "
Andaman Islands................45 " 142 "
Japanese.......................48 " 175 "
Africa.........................54 " 107 "
Tartar.........................98 " 175 "
South American.................50 " 98 "
Igorrote.......................26 " 100 "
Solomon Islands................56 " 148 "
English target bow (imported)..48 " 220 "
English yew flight bow.........65 " 300 "
Old English hunting bow........75 " 250 "
- Saxton Pope
"Our hunting bows are from five feet six
inches to five feet eight inches in length. The weight of a hunting bow
should be from fifty to eighty pounds. One should start shooting with a
bow not over fifty pounds, and preferably under that. At the end of a
season's shooting he can command a bow of sixty pounds if he is a
strong man. Our average bows pull seventy-five pounds. Though it is
possible for some of us to shoot an eighty-five pound bow, such a
weapon is not under proper control for constant use."
-Saxton Pope
USE HEAVY BOWS by Tom Imler, Jr.
published in Ye Sylvan Archer 1942:
http://members.tripod.com/~tmuss/shotfrompast/imler.htm
Hunting Arrows by Fred Bear
published in Ye Sylvan Archer 1943:
http://members.tripod.com/~tmuss/shotfrompast/bear.htm
Art Young:
Young made all of his equipment: Osage longbows pulling 75 to 85 pounds, heavy birch arrows with homemade broadheads, and handtooled leather accessories.
http://members.tripod.com/~tmuss/shotfrompast/young.html
At least 80% of the bows I sell are between 45-51#. I think this has a lot to do with the fact that 90% of my customers are middle age or older. Younger shooters under 30 years old just are not buying many stick bows.
10 years ago I would say the average weight people were shooting was 53-60# now it is 8-10 pounds less. This is what I'm seeing in the upper midwest anyway. Chad
Chad, do you think this speaks of the state of archery in general and Traditional arhery in particular? Our numbers are comprised by an aging demographic. Without an influx of younger archers and hunters our's is a dying venture, destined to go the way of shuffle board and white loafers...into obscurity.
John
I think archery is very safe from obscurity...but traditional archery doesn't hold the appeal to a lot of people my age. Seems you've 3 groups in my generation and in my area. Dedicated Waterfowlers (shotguns, pumps and autos to be exact), Deer chasers (muzzleloaders and shotguns) and then the guys who are just all around hunters. I know very few of the all-around hunters who don't bowhunt. I only know one other my age who has ever shot a non-wheeled bow. I actually think he went to all-wheeled a year or two ago. Hopefully this summer I can get him back into it. Most likely he couldn't ever get things tuned right and got frustrated after 4 or 5 years of no improvement.
I'd say give it time. The generation before had to choose to LEAVE traditional archery. My generation is going to have to choose to JOIN traditional archery...I think you'll see guys move towards as they get older.
Oh, P.S. Break those white loafers out...the prettyboys are all over the retro stuff right now. You'd be in the height of fashion. AND if there was a place to play shuffleboard on campus I guarantee it be at least as busy as the bowling alley!!!
Having given it some thought, In recent years I've met just one strictly Traditional Archer under 50. There are a few others that own a recurve but they primarily use compounds.
Hey....smile when you call me an aging demographic! :saywhat: :p
Also....quality in bow design will negate the advantage of heavier weights in many cases. Choose a good design that shoots well for you and don't worry about what someone else thinks.
Me and my mate are working up to 90lb bows to be like our heroes Paul Schafer and Bart Schleyer.
Seriously, in my neck of the woods 50lb is about average.
I shoot 60 now and hope to move up in the next couple of years.
Soilarch, there are lots of traditional-only archers my age (born 1985). Hell, 2 of them live in my house.
In the late 70's to mid 80's most of the guys I shot with where using 65-80# bows. I was shooting a 74# Redbud one piece recurve and my second bow was a 65# Rocky Mountain recurve. I finally hung up the RMR about 2 years ago (and the Redbud a looooong time ago) although I still bring it out a couple of times a month because I still like the bow. I'm comfortable now in the 55-60# range and I'm on the long side of 61 years old.
It seems that history shows that in the 60s and 70s - 40-50# was plenty but when I got into traditional archery in the mid 80's and throughout the 90's bows between 60 and 65 lbs seemed to be average. I can remember looking at some used bows in the mid to late 90's that were less than 60 lbs and I considered them too light.
I filled my rack with 65 lbs bows give or take a few pounds and got out of the market for a couple years and did not really pay attention. When I started trying to sell a few of my bows a few years ago, I quickly learned the market had changed and you can't hardly sell a bow if its more than 60 lbs.
I still shoot 60# because I can - but 50# is starting too feel pretty nice!!! Humans are herd type animals and the herd is moving to lighter weights.
i mostly own 60+# bows
Younger bowhunters coming into the sport are obsessed with big antlers. They are more interrested in the end result rather then the process. That is why so few young people take traditional archery seriously.
Last year I sold 2 longbows to a couple young guys (about 30) They both missed a buck bigger than any they had previously taken. They both put the longbow away and got the compound out. This year they hunted with the compound. Fear of missing a big buck is why so many young people choose not to go with traditional equiptment.
We will always get the mature hunter who is middle age that comes full cycle and switches to traditional equiptment but I don't see an influx of young people in our sport. Sad.
Chad
"They are more interested in the end result rather than the process."
Well put. We see this in all forms of hunting and really at all ages.
I get tickled at the cable TV hunting shows that feature a shooter sitting in a permanently constructed stand that resembles a tree-house. Complete with nice chairs, coffee, and room for 2-3 hunters. He has a rifle that has a scope with a bell big enough to put a softball in the end. He sits comfortably, sipping coffee and doing a lot of whispering until a thick-horned, likely baited, whitetail wanders out in front of him.
Not much of a hunt but he does end up with a nice set of horns.
QuoteOriginally posted by Holm-Made:
Younger bowhunters coming into the sport are obsessed with big antlers. They are more interrested in the end result rather then the process. That is why so few young people take traditional archery seriously.
Last year I sold 2 longbows to a couple young guys (about 30) They both missed a buck bigger than any they had previously taken. They both put the longbow away and got the compound out. This year they hunted with the compound. Fear of missing a big buck is why so many young people choose not to go with traditional equiptment.
We will always get the mature hunter who is middle age that comes full cycle and switches to traditional equiptment but I don't see an influx of young people in our sport. Sad.
Chad
Come now, no need to make general assumptions about young bowhunters. Maybe the ones you've had dealings with are trophy hunters (who could blame them for the amount of media on hunting would surely make anyone obsessed with big antlers), but it's certainly not the case where I come from that we're all just after trophy males.
When I got serious about bows back in the ealy 60's, 40-50 was the popular weight range. In the late 60's thru the 90's, 55 -60+ seemed the norm. Now, as I see it, and from the classifieds and going to shoots, etc., bow weights are going back to the 40-50 range.
I've gone from 65# down to 45#. Course I'm 70 years old and have some health problems. But most of our trad shooters in our club shoot 50 or less. But then, there's always a few macho studs around who still shoot 60+. More power to them !!!
I'd shoot more if I could but it really isn't necessary unless one's after BIG game.
Tom,
I'm not putting down younger bowhunters. I'm only 37 myself and been involved with traditional archery for 12 years so I guess I'm the exception to the rule as I can see you are from your birth date.
I should have started my first sentence with "Most". I apologize for not doing that.
However I did say "few young people take traditional archery seriously." What I meant was people under 30 make up a small percentage of the number of traditional archers in the mid west. That's the area I'm familiar with. I stand by that.
I'm glad that you aren't seeing the same thing in your country. Good luck, Chad
QuoteOriginally posted by Holm-Made:
Tom,
I'm not putting down younger bowhunters. I'm only 37 myself and been involved with traditional archery for 12 years so I guess I'm the exception to the rule as I can see you are from your birth date.
I should have started my first sentence with "Most". I apologize for not doing that.
However I did say "few young people take traditional archery seriously." What I meant was people under 30 make up a small percentage of the number of traditional archers in the mid west. That's the area I'm familiar with. I stand by that.
I'm glad that you aren't seeing the same thing in your country. Good luck, Chad
Chad. Thanks for the reply.
Even with what I said, there are FAR fewer tradtitional archers than compound users around my area too. I haven't though, seen any trends to do with age. It seems that there are an equal number of trad archers and an equal number of compound archers. Strange.
Then they're mostly target archers. I'm not sure what they use when hunting but it could be compound bows.
I do find though, that most compound users have bows of 60lb or over.
I have gone to every Eastern Traditional Archery Rendevouz except for the very first one. I so see younger people shooting with their families and I think that we need younger people in the sport to replace us old timers when we fade away.
I do notice that most shooters are using bows in the middle to high 40's as far as draw weight. I used to shott 70lbs @28" inches in the 1970's and have gradually gone down to middle to high 50's. I shoot a heavier bow better than I do a lighter one. I think that its because I need the heavy weight to get a clean release.
Several years ago I was told by someone with considerable knowledge of archery history, and a name that most people here would recognize, that most bows in the 50's and 60's were in the 40# to 50# range. The reason for that was that back then most people hunted and shot target with the same bow, and a lighter bow was better for target shooting. I was also told that prior to that time the previous generation of bowhunters usually shot bows of much higher poundage.
I wasn't told this, but perhaps the growing popularity of the recurve back then also had something to do with the lower poundages of that era since many considered it to be superior in design and effeciency compared to the longbow.
I am certainly not against shooting a heavy bow. I shot bows in the mid-60#s draw weight myself for a few years and could still work into that weight. If you prefer a 60-80# bow and shoot it well, that is good. :thumbsup: I dropped 10-15#s for a couple of reasons. Awkward shooting positions when hunting is one. As long as I could stand pretty much square to the target and use the same muscles that were toned up well for shooting I could shoot my 65#er with fine accuracy and yes, I too seemed to get a little cleaner release with the heavier bow.
But when I try bending forward to shoot under a tree limb, or turning to shoot to the right, (in the case of a RH shooter), to shoot slightly across the body, or any other "non-standard" shooting position, accuracy would suffer because I was using different muscles.
Also, the bows built in recent years simply have a little more zip. I have a '66 Bear Kodiak that is 52#s and a beautiful bow. I have a copy of a mid-late '60s Kodiak that is 50#s and has a slightly different limb design with bamboo cores. I don't own a chronograph but the newer version is obviously faster than the original.
The last two deer I shot were w/ bows in the 50s draw weight. One w/ a 54# Shrew that was a pass-through that still had enough steam that the cedar arrow stuck in a tree behind the deer. This year I shot a deer w/ a 50# Red Wing hunter that the broadhead passed through but the fletchings hung the arrow up on the hide, but this was at 35 yards.
In Montana in the late 1960's, most of the bowhunters I knew were using 40 - 55 lb bows. When the elk became more prevalent in the 1970's, 55 - 65 lb bows became the norm. My 1st bow was around 40 lbs., 2nd 55 lbs Eventually I was hunting with a 70 lb. recurve.
After a brief time using a wheel bow in the 1980's (which carried like an aluminum step ladder in the woods) I returned to packing a 65 lb. recurve. Presently I shoot bows in the 60lb. range.
My three sons grew up shooting compounds and packing them around during hunting season seems natural to them. Although all three of them own traditional bows and shoot them very well, they tend to grab their wheel bows when the serious hunting begins.
From reading the previous posts, it appears that my family is a pretty typical snapshot of bowhunting today.
In my case age. Started in 65 with a 47# kodiak then got somewhat competative and went up to 61# black widow for the flatter trajectory. That worked well for me and by 79 was shooting 88# bear t/d. When the big bow broke(at full draw) I started switched to longbow since Bear wasn't making their takedown them days. Longbows were different and I had to drop to 70-75#. In 92 I found a used Bear t/d for a good price and have been shooting them again ever since. I have limbs ranging form 38# to 65# but find myself shooting the 55-60"s the most. Most recently I've been shootig RER limbs 57#(62@30) and found them to be faster and more efficient then ever. I've shot deer with 45# but always felt a little better shooting more.
I started bowhunting in 1966. At that time I was using a 45# Bear Bearcat and nearly every bowhunter I knew (not too many back then) was shooting in the 45 to 50# range. Then I went to a huge archery gathering put on by one of Bear Archerys first dealers. There was a man and wife there shooting this new thing called a "judo" point and tons of people were watching them. The lady was maybe 5' tall and under 100# and she was shooting the "new" Super Mag. 48 and I alomst died when I saw it was 55#. Her husband was shooting the "new" Super Kodiak and it was 65#! That did it for me. I began working my way up and now can't shoot anything much under 65# without shaking horribly.
The average bow weight when I began was around 50# and as I go to tarditional shoots I see that it hasn't really changed much during the past 40 yrs.
Not really sure what you consider "young" but in just my immediate friends (20-27yrs) I can come up with easily 8 people who shoot trad. and 6 who hunt trad the other two are my gf who doesn't hunt (yet) and my sister. Guy friends shoot about 60#-65# and women about 45#
Tmccrumb,
You young (20's) guys can handle those weights with practice as I once did.
All my bowhunting buddies are in their 60's and we all shoot 40+.
It's a generational thing, although I know young guys that shoot light bows, and have heard of some oltimers that still shoot heavy bows.(we're talking stick bows).
Regardless, hitting the vitals is more important then bow weight.
Good shooting!!!!!!
born 1970 and yes i shoot 100# plus bows.
Born in 1939 and at almost 70, shoot 42#. (Deer and small game)
Well, to each his own. Whether it's a 42#er 0r 100#er, the best it can do is make an entrance and an exit wound, two holes.
Tom I just wanted to add though that our situations are very different.
I'm sure Australia has a much different vibe than the us. Especially for younger generations coming into the sport.
The US in engulfed in the big antler mentality. And quick fixes. One of our top tv show hosts is cutie pie Tiffany Lakosky. Her big sales pitch is: "Even I can do it!". In reference to the trophy bucks she takes by hunting with compound bows (they sell) overlooking acres of food plots made of blends (they sell) specifically for deer.
Most of the hunting strategy is to essentially bait them. Put food plots in isolated sections of woods and form the plot where you can guesstimate where the deer will enter. They took most of the hunting out of hunting. Instead of chasing the big buck they'll either bring it to them, or rather wait a few years and literally grow one by managing the habitat and food resources.
Most of the info out there isn't about finding deer trails, what acorns deer prefer, ripening times of different species, etc. It's mostly about bringing deer in- rather than you finding the deer.
I think in Australia (not that I know much about Oz, forgive me if I'm wrong) you guys still do much more spot and stalk and ambush hunting. Though I'm sure waterholes play a large part in hunting many regions over there, which isn't much different. But anyway I got wordy, all I'm trying to say is I think our cultures are probably hunting with different aspects in mind. US is more about getting trophy deer faster and easier to the busy hunter with less time. I couldn't say what Aussie hunters do because I don't really know them... but I'm sure the media infiltrates us harder at ground zero than when it gets across the pond.
Some years back, a friend asked if I'd be interested in his dad's silver medallion Bear bow and accessories.
I wrote to a collector on another site to ask for the value to make a decent offer. The bow was 40#.
What was shared, as George stated, in the mid 1960's that was the standard fare for draw weight..40-45#. If it had been one in the 50# draw, it'd have been worth more as it would have been more "rare."
I've stumbled onto some older gents who indicated that was the norm as well. Back through to the 1950's, but that might be regionalized by geography. This is in E. PA.
Confirmation for George also comes from vintage arrows - you find 99% of them to be rated for 40-50 pound bows.
I am a strictly traditional hunter that hunts only with my longbow and poc arrows and alot of my buddies are bowhunters and i have almost converted one over to traditional archery and by the way im 22 so there is hope for the future of our great sport not all "kids" as you "old timers" say are inside playing video games and listening to mp3s
What's a mp3? Is that like a record player or something? :rolleyes:
Alot of those earlier bows were shot with sights or a sight reference style and if you use the same style of shooting today probably a light weight bow is still a good choice.
I think alot of trad archers that are shooting more Instinctively and do not hold at anchor can easily bump up a few #'s with no ill effects.
Those "site reference styles" where called instinctive and you shpt the instinctive class.
Its only fairly recently the retro trad movement has tried to redefine the term.
Steve
The amount of time you hold at anchor is a factor in bow weight. A snap shooter can shoot a heavier bow than one that anchors for a couple of seconds. I've seen a few snap shooters over the years that were very good but most,(that I've witnessed), could not achieve decent hunting accuracy beyond 15-20 yards.
And yes, before the word "traditional" was coined in reference to archery, many used sights and we thought nothing of it. Whatever works for ya.
I was thinking today the issue is hunter age, as well as in the 60s. I was talking with Dale at 3rivers last week and he opined most guys were dropping into the 40# range when just 10 years ago it was mid 60#s. I know alot of my hunting friends are heading into their 60s and doing very well killing with mid 40# bows. I think maybe the same thing happened back then. My first two store bought hunting bows were 45 and 48#, and they were heavy for a teenager. When in our prime we can handle much heavier bows, even on cold days. My guess is the next generation of trad archers will be shooting 70# longbows and recurves when they are in their 30s. It has been so for tens of thousands of years and will be again. A 70#+ bows are much better for longer shots, which is fine for a young guy with 20/10 vision. No need shooting past the distance you can pick a hair and 40# is more than enough for 15-20 yard shots.
QuoteOriginally posted by Swamp Pygmy:
Tom I just wanted to add though that our situations are very different.
I'm sure Australia has a much different vibe than the us. Especially for younger generations coming into the sport.
The US in engulfed in the big antler mentality. And quick fixes. One of our top tv show hosts is cutie pie Tiffany Lakosky. Her big sales pitch is: "Even I can do it!". In reference to the trophy bucks she takes by hunting with compound bows (they sell) overlooking acres of food plots made of blends (they sell) specifically for deer.
Most of the hunting strategy is to essentially bait them. Put food plots in isolated sections of woods and form the plot where you can guesstimate where the deer will enter. They took most of the hunting out of hunting. Instead of chasing the big buck they'll either bring it to them, or rather wait a few years and literally grow one by managing the habitat and food resources.
Most of the info out there isn't about finding deer trails, what acorns deer prefer, ripening times of different species, etc. It's mostly about bringing deer in- rather than you finding the deer.
I think in Australia (not that I know much about Oz, forgive me if I'm wrong) you guys still do much more spot and stalk and ambush hunting. Though I'm sure waterholes play a large part in hunting many regions over there, which isn't much different. But anyway I got wordy, all I'm trying to say is I think our cultures are probably hunting with different aspects in mind. US is more about getting trophy deer faster and easier to the busy hunter with less time. I couldn't say what Aussie hunters do because I don't really know them... but I'm sure the media infiltrates us harder at ground zero than when it gets across the pond.
Yep, I think you've hit the nail on the head there.
Don't get me wrong, there are WAAAAY more compound shooters here. Walking into any archer's shop here will tell you that.
But I've never seen a blind or treestand here.
I'd never heard of them until I started reading on Tradgang and looking at videos on Youtube.