Trad Gang

Main Boards => PowWow => Topic started by: Hawken1911 on November 23, 2011, 10:22:00 AM

Title: Old Martins compared to HH's
Post by: Hawken1911 on November 23, 2011, 10:22:00 AM
Hi Guys,

I'm thinking of going back to a Hill style bow; I'm currently using a modern hybrid.  Before ordering a custom bow I was thinking about buying a used one to try out.  The best deals I'm finding are on old Martin longbows, like the ML-14, ML-10, etc.  They certainly appear similar to Hill style bows, but are they?  How do they compare in general to a Howard Hill longbow?  Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks,

Paul
Title: Re: Old Martins compared to HH's
Post by: SCATTERSHOT on November 23, 2011, 10:45:00 AM
Well, they're inexpensive for a reason. if you look, you can probably find the reaal deal for about $100.00 more than a Martin. Don't get me wrong, Martin makes a fine bow, but their longbows are not in the same class as their recurves.
Title: Re: Old Martins compared to HH's
Post by: JamesKerr on November 23, 2011, 11:03:00 AM
I would buy the Hill. I have a Martin Stick bow in a hill style and quite frankly it don't shoot worth a flip.
Title: Re: Old Martins compared to HH's
Post by: Swamp Yankee on November 23, 2011, 11:20:00 AM
I had a Martin ML-14 and was never able to figure out how to shoot it without it feeling like a firecracker went off in my hand.  It took me all of 5 minutes to figure out how to shoot my new Hill.  There is a world of difference between the mild "thump" from a Hill and the kick of a rabid zebra (someone elses words but it fits) from an ML-14.  Some do like the Martin longbows, but most can't figure out why ;-)
Title: Re: Old Martins compared to HH's
Post by: Canyon on November 23, 2011, 12:10:00 PM
My first longbow was a Martin ML-14. I killed my first elk with it and the deer in my avatar. It is a decent bow but it does not compare to my Hill longbows.
Title: Re: Old Martins compared to HH's
Post by: LongStick64 on November 23, 2011, 12:42:00 PM
If you want to shake your shoulder to bits, get am ML-10, looks like a Hill, feels like a Hill, shoots like........No Where Near a Hill.
Title: Re: Old Martins compared to HH's
Post by: Stumpkiller on November 23, 2011, 01:46:00 PM
I have a Dick Palmer Hunter, which is basically a 72" ML-10 blank but worked to a trapezoidal limb profile.

Perhaps if I had a Hill I wouldn't be such a recurve fan.  I just don't enjoy shooting it.  Hard on the wrist - at least for me and apparantly others from reading the above.
Title: Re: Old Martins compared to HH's
Post by: Anointed Archer on November 23, 2011, 02:00:00 PM
I had ML 10 when first started to shoot longbows instead of recurves. To be totaly honest it almost caused me not to shoot longbows. Thank goodness a friend had me shoot his custom built bow and I ended up really enjoying the longbow.

Although I have only shot a few HH bows, I have got to believe you would be much better off with one v.s the Martin's. Good luck on the quest Bro!
Title: Re: Old Martins compared to HH's
Post by: Anointed Archer on November 23, 2011, 02:41:00 PM
I had ML 10 when first started to shoot longbows instead of recurves. To be totaly honest it almost caused me not to shoot longbows. Thank goodness a friend had me shoot his custom built bow and I ended up really enjoying the longbow.

Although I have only shot a few HH bows, I have got to believe you would be much better off with one v.s the Martin's. Good luck on the quest Bro!
Title: Re: Old Martins compared to HH's
Post by: 58WINTERS on November 23, 2011, 02:43:00 PM
I owned two ML10's when they just starting making them too many years ago to remember. I now have 2 Hills and 2 Liberty English models.
I would go with Hill or a Liberty.
Title: Re: Old Martins compared to HH's
Post by: Mudd on November 23, 2011, 02:53:00 PM
Here is a case of you get what you pay for.

I can't speak of any Martin except their little stick. I've owned a couple of low poundage ones and they were harder on me than my heavy wt(56-57#) Hills.

I once borrowed an Old Ben by Pearson to try out longbows and I didn't want to ever touch another longbow as long as I lived.You can not run fast enough to give me one after shooting it.

I am truly grateful that Straitera talked me into giving longbows another chance.

I'm still not looking backwards...lol

God bless,Mudd
Title: Re: Old Martins compared to HH's
Post by: bucksbuouy on November 23, 2011, 03:05:00 PM
I have a Martin Ml-14 and I attribute the kick to the ridiculous speeds it generates. It is significantly faster then my hybrid custom of the same weight. Never shot a HH but either way if you switch from a hybrid to a Hill style be prepared for a challenge, or a life long obsession.
Title: Re: Old Martins compared to HH's
Post by: Brently on November 23, 2011, 09:29:00 PM
Man I love the ML-14s,  have 2 of them and also a HH.  I don't think they kick or rattle your teeth or make your wrist fall off. I just think they are great, if anybody dosn't like their ML-4 please send it to me and I will put it to good use.
Title: Re: Old Martins compared to HH's
Post by: NomadArcher on November 24, 2011, 01:13:00 AM
I would buy a Hill from the classifieds here if I were you. There are some bows that may resemble a Hill, However they just don't shoot like a well made Hill.
Title: Re: Old Martins compared to HH's
Post by: L. E. Carroll on November 24, 2011, 03:38:00 AM
My first LB was a Martin "Stick"....what a piece of C@ap !

After shooting or trying to shoot it   :goldtooth:   I'll take that Martin "Stick" [ I think it was actually a ML10 ? ]... [ I know it had a zebrawood riser and I think zebrawood under clear glass ] over about anything else.    :laughing:  

Gene
Title: Re: Old Martins compared to HH's
Post by: oldtimerbow on November 24, 2011, 05:23:00 AM
I have an old ML14 70#, that hits very hard and Ishoot it well.With that said if you shoot it next to a good bow,Hill,Northern Mist,etc thereis no comparison in shootability IMO.