Trad Gang

Main Boards => PowWow => Topic started by: ChrisM on September 14, 2011, 06:57:00 PM

Title: Why are they more stable?
Post by: ChrisM on September 14, 2011, 06:57:00 PM
I have a Bob Lee recurve a Bob Lee Stick and a Hill Wesley special.  I have always heard that a hill bow is more stable and a curve is faster and a Rd is a little of both.  Well I have found this to be true.  My hill will stack groups like no other and if I ever thought about trick shooting that bow would be the one.  My recurve is super fast yet on the finicky side.  My RD stick is both fast and very stable.  Why is that what about the curve makes it more sinsative, I know that thin and flat materials can twist alot easier, and what about the hill makes it so stable and forgiving.  Just wondering, thought I would learn something today.

Thanks
Title: Re: Why are they more stable?
Post by: giff on September 14, 2011, 07:10:00 PM
QuoteOriginally posted by ChrisM:

I know that thin and flat materials can twist alot easier
I think you got it right there
Title: Re: Why are they more stable?
Post by: Ragnarok Forge on September 14, 2011, 07:14:00 PM
Less limb twist.  Hill bows are slower which in and of itself makes any mechanical system more stable. Longbows are normally longer than a recurve which also makes them more stable and forgiving.   The weight of the longer limbs also provides more inertia and more shot stability.
Title: Re: Why are they more stable?
Post by: Javi on September 14, 2011, 07:22:00 PM
Are all three bows the same length...

Get a 66" 2X4 and holding it in the middle with your bow hand... slowly begin to twist it back and forth along the axis of your arm... Now grab a 58" 2x4 and repeat...
Title: Re: Why are they more stable?
Post by: ChrisM on September 14, 2011, 07:35:00 PM
I see the inertia of the limb lengths helping.
Title: Re: Why are they more stable?
Post by: Ragnarok Forge on September 14, 2011, 11:19:00 PM
Physics is what dictates stability it is all in the bow design and resulting mechanical actions of the bows.
Title: Re: Why are they more stable?
Post by: Don Stokes on September 15, 2011, 08:00:00 AM
Howard Hill was quoted as saying he wasn't good enough to shoot a recurve.
Title: Re: Why are they more stable?
Post by: dragonheart on September 15, 2011, 08:28:00 AM
limb thickness
Title: Re: Why are they more stable?
Post by: Jeff Strubberg on September 15, 2011, 10:56:00 AM
Limb thickness and limb length both plat a part.  Thicker limbs won't allow you to torque the string offline and mess up arrow flight.  Longer limbs mean a lower string angle and more mechanical advantage.  They are less finicky about small changes in draw length than shorter bows.
Title: Re: Why are they more stable?
Post by: Jason R. Wesbrock on September 15, 2011, 11:06:00 AM
QuoteOriginally posted by ChrisM:
  Why is that what about the curve makes it more sinsative, I know that thin and flat materials can twist alot easier, and what about the hill makes it so stable and forgiving.  Just wondering, thought I would learn something today.

Thanks
I don't know that recurves, in and of themselves, are more sensitive. Different people shoot one type of bow better than another, which is simply a personal thing. Aside from a few truly incredible shooters like Dave Wallace, I usually see the highest 3D scores at traditional shoots being turned in by recurve shooters. I suspect if the Hill style bow was truly more forgiving, they'd be the choice of FITA shooters, and the NFAA Traditional class would be full of them.

In the end, on a individual level, there is no right or wrong choice aside from whichever you personally shoot better. For one guy it's a recurve. For another it's a longbow.
Title: Re: Why are they more stable?
Post by: JohnHV on September 15, 2011, 11:09:00 AM
I had a conversation with a well known bowyer once who explained to me that longer limbs will be more forgiving of small changes in draw length. Compare the distance of travel of the limb tips on a 66" bow between 27 and 28" of draw and the distance of travel of a 58" recurve limb.  The movement of the longer bows tips will be far less than the shorter bow.

I guess this is some of the rationale for what Jeff said above regarding "finickyness."
Title: Re: Why are they more stable?
Post by: on September 15, 2011, 11:42:00 AM
If you look at the string anles you will find that a shorter recurve will have the same string angle as a longbow of 6 or more inches in length. The Hill style longbow with its thick core and thin tips seems to have a self correcting ability before it releases the arrow. I have a 72" Kodiak from the fifties that the recurve tips do very little in the shot process, I find it to be more forgiving than most longbows. I would bet that if one compares something like a Stotler recurve to a longbow you find that the difference is minimal. Handling, however, could be more of an issue. There is also the aspect of a bow that allows a natural slightly bent bow arm and having the weight and gravity of the bow to be very centralized, like a Schulz longbow, which can allow for a quicker reflex reaction that may be needed to conform to the shot. Get a FITA bow wobbling and it is hard to settle down, wobble a slim longbow and you will find that you can stop it anywhere you want.