Be forewarned, these are just some random thoughts that are bouncing around in my head, and in most cases probably obvious to even the most casual observer. That being said...
I really like the look, feel and practicality of the short hybrid, reflex/deflex longbows. I've tried several different models from various makers, and for me, with my less-then-consistent shooting form, I can always shoot longer-limbed, less aggresive bows better. That is, until I tried one with a forward handle design. The forward handle, particularly one with a small throat, somewhat high-wrist (think Kanati), seems to compensate for some of my errors (I guess maybe that's what's meant by a "forgiving" bow). But there are limits, I've tried others that were of a radically aggressive reflex-deflex design, and forward handle or not, my shooting once again suffered. Again, these are just my observations, and I'm sure your mileage may vary.
May God Bless, Merry Christmas!
rocketman, it is good to hear from guys with such random thoughts, as it causes me from time to time to consider what I like best and why.
I do better with longer bows. My draw length is about 27", but I still prefer my longbows at 68". They seem to draw more smoothly. Being the simple minded Neanderthal that I am, I do best with a simple design such as the straight gripped Hill style bow.
Merry Christmas!
That's always been the case. Has a lot to do with the more severe string angle when the short bow is fully drawn. More finger pinch, whether one realizes it or not, makes it more difficult to get off the string cleanly. The shorter limbs are more susceptible to torque in any direction, etc.
Forward handle reduces vertical torque, and severe deflex coming off the handle makes for a more obtuse string angle when fully drawn, both features contributing to more stability/consistency, but they don't entirely solve the problem.
That being said, shorter bows can certainly be shot accurately.
because it is oxymoron :) some can shoot short recurves and straight bows...but I think the number is much less than many let you believe. Longer NTN length adds stability and forgiveness all other things being equal.
Never understood the desire for longbows less than 64"....as I dont feel I am hindered in woods on ground or in tree with bows from 64-68" which are considered short in the Golden Years of Archery.
You just adapt...stance, cant of bow, etc...
I found that short bows take a while to get used to. They are less stable to shoot so you have to concentrate on all aspects of shooting it. The way you hold the bow, your release, your form all have to be right on and really consistent. The good news is once you get good with a short bow your long bow shooting will have improved tremendously. d;^)
I find for me the shorter bows benefit from a few more lbs. Of draw weight, seems to get the string off my fingers better.
I love my 54" Shrew longbows. Shoot just fine for me and great in blinds, tree stands or any hunting situation. Other than some vintage Bears, my longest late model bow is 58". I think it comes more down to grip for me. I tried another short longbow and the grip wasn't quite right for me and I would torque the bow on release.
QuoteOriginally posted by Biathlonman:
I find for me the shorter bows benefit from a few more lbs. Of draw weight, seems to get the string off my fingers better.
My experience as well. I draw 30" and had a beautiful 56" Bowbolt Foam Carbon Classic Hunter 46@30. I usually shoot in the low 50's. Grip was perfect for me but I just couldn't shoot it consistently out past 15 yards. Gave up on short longbows until a 56" Classic Hunter Carbon without a Bowbolt popped up in the classifieds 51@30. Thought I'd try one more time. With the extra five pounds I got a much cleaner release and I can shoot it as well as any of my other longer bows.
I have 2 near identical 21st century design longbows that only vary in draw weight a few pounds, but are 64" and 66". The finger pinch is more obvious in the 64" and makes the release less forgiving. I would like to go to the extreme and try a 70". In theory it would be the most forgiving bow to shoot of same design.
I do have a 68" reverse handle HH design that is a little heavy for me, but it is really forgiving of my shooting flaws. When warmed up and feeling strong I can shoot it really well. Stalked and killed 2 turkeys with it.
Those ugly words "less than consistent shooting form" tend to be the deciding factor...I have a dual shelf d/r longbow that is 58 inches amo that I draw to over 30 inches...the throat of the grip on that bow is very wide because the bow started life as a blank and I am just not a very good woodworker...when I shoot that bow a lot I can shoot it, both right and left handed, as well as any bow I own including my 64 and 66 inch bows
DDave
Bowyer Dave Dwyer described the difference between his 62" r/d longbow and his straighter limbed 66+" longbow as " one is like driving a corvette and the other is a Cadillac".
There are guys who can drive both equally, and there are those who can't. Either way you still get there!
If you have less than consistent shooting form, you will never shoot well until you correct your form. A more stable bow is helpful, but the bow can not fix the quality of your shooting.
I've had them from 56" to 66". And for me I shoot my 66"ers best. Lots of longbows out there I'd like to see made in a 64 or 66" length. rat'
It is simply a matter of bow arm stability. If your bow arm is completely still on release you can shoot any bow well. Grip and length will sometimes help compensate for unstable form, but a steady arm is where the real skill resides.
Read this. http://www.bowyersedge.com/elements.html
Ghost Dog, good article, Thanks!
I've had bows from 52" to 66" both longbows and recurves. The two that I shoot the best and most consistently are my 58" Kanati and my 56" Orion recurve. I'm sure the Orion limbs would also be consistent, but they are a little stiff for me. For me at least, the grip makes way more difference than the length.
I have tried various lengths, even a couple of inches longer can be a big improvement. For me a 64" RD is as short as I will go.
I guess I'm just the opposite...60" is a Longbow for me. I much prefer 56" and under. Right now my bow of choice is a 52" Kestrel.
If you say you can...or say you can't, you will be correct.
I have never really sat back and said to myslef...Hey bigun, you need to be shooting "...bow" caus you can't shoot that other one as well.
Yes, at times it does happen that way, but mostly because I am just off my game. I try my best not to blame any bow for my inadequacies but instead blame me for them.
When it comes to hunting especially, I know I'm going to make the shot no matter what bow I chose to use that day, even if it doesn't always work out how I "know" it will.
One of my favorite bows is only 58"s long and with my nearly 32" draw, many will say it can't be done. Don't put your money against a person of confidence!
Don't defeat yourself before you give it a go as the mind is a very powerful tool. (by the way, a go means more than an afternoon or weekend..or even a month if you really want it to happen)
BigJim
Never had a problem with short or long. I prefer short bows for many reasons. In a short "longbow" I prefer a Pacific Northwest Paddle Bow style about 42" long, with about a 24" draw. In recurves I prefer a 48" ntn Scythian style bow with a 26" draw.
I am on Big Jim,on this one. When I have a good form I can shoot any bow lenght equally well,in my bad days I am not accurate with any bow.
When I hunt it looks I take the shorter ones anyway,feel more free and I focus more on the hunt.
QuoteOriginally posted by Orion:
That's always been the case. Has a lot to do with the more severe string angle when the short bow is fully drawn. More finger pinch, whether one realizes it or not, makes it more difficult to get off the string cleanly. The shorter limbs are more susceptible to torque in any direction, etc.
Forward handle reduces vertical torque, and severe deflex coming off the handle makes for a more obtuse string angle when fully drawn, both features contributing to more stability/consistency, but they don't entirely solve the problem.
That being said, shorter bows can certainly be shot accurately.
Orion is spot on here.....The only thing i disagree on is the part about shorter limbs being more susceptible to torque.
Here is a little photo shop illustration showing why some shorter bows can be very user friendly.....
This is a 60" Sasquatch with hybrid long bow limbs. Look closely at the string angle at full draw.
(http://i171.photobucket.com/albums/u301/kirkll/Drawings/SasLblimbmovement.jpg) (http://s171.photobucket.com/user/kirkll/media/Drawings/SasLblimbmovement.jpg.html)
Another thing to look at here is the distance the limb travels from brace to full draw. In this photo the limbs are only moving 3" at a 27" draw.
On a bow drawing 32" this same design only draws the limb back 4.5" ans still no finger pinch issues.....
QuoteOriginally posted by rocketman:
Ghost Dog, good article, Thanks!
Glad you liked it. Dean Torges is one of the few guru level hunting archers, and a gifted writer.
Very nice writing there by Mr. Torges - like the hair over heart concept, and discussion of optimism and the two "camps." Don't often say something is inspirational - but this fits the bill.
For hunting, if I can shoot it well, I'd much prefer shorter. I feel like grip and balance are more crucial to my shooting than length, but I also haven't shot many really long bows.
I would agree with Jim I'm 6"4 and if I'm on I shoot a short bow well if I'm off I don't shoot any thing well.
I really like my 60" MOAB and am in the process of getting a 62" Big River. The later will probably not fit in any pop-up blinds I have but would be great in a tripod or for spot and stalk hogs. :thumbsup: :archer2: But then I have a 27 1/2" draw.