I was watching a interview last weekend with Byron Ferguson, and the gentleman asked him why he chose the longbow over a recurve, and he had said that its more forgiving. He said that you can make more " errors" and get away with still making the shot. I always thought the recurve is more forgiving then the longbow... Why, and what makes the longbow more forgiving ?   :confused:

Each person has a different idea about that.  Recurves are more stable on the shot, mostly due to mass weight.  Usually, longbows aren't as fast or "quick-ended" like a recurve and are a little more forgiving of a sloppy release...especially with heavy arrows.

Think of it this way....the faster the arrow, the more significant the miss if a mistake is made on release.  Hyper-sensitive bows can be a real pain in the a## in that category.  One needs balance in everything.

I think the longbow is better for weird shot angles. I've had a couple from a treestand that required some circus contortion and the arrow went were I was looking.  

A longer bow is harder to torque, most classic D shaped longbows are 66" plus in length. Even shorter longbows usually have more working limb length then most recurves which may help the bow to be torsionally stable.

Arwin,

I don't think it's the bow that allowed you to make those difficult circus shots. I used to think the same thing, because I always did better at those types of shots. It seemed like the harder the shot the better I was at it. A good friend was watching me shoot one day at a 3-d course and he said that it seemed like I concentrated more on the circus shots than a regular shot. After some experimentation I found he was right, so I think your probably like me and concentrate just a little more on those kind of shots, rather than it being because of bow type. just my 2 cents  

I wonder about this too. Here are some specific points i wonder about.

1 I really dont understand the faster arrow idea. I dont get why a faster arrow is more effected by a bad release more than a slow arrow.
Im not saying its wrong - I just dont get it.

2 Byron Ferguson says "if you try to push the tip of long bow from side to side you cant do it, but you can with a recurve. The lack of lateral stability makes the recurve less forging."
What is he talking about?

3 What is Cris talking about - is that the same Byron was dealing with.
Are you saying that if you are holding tight and twisting the bows handle(on a verical axis) on a long bow the plane of the string and the plane of the bow are closer than on short bow when you twist the same?

doesnt a longer brace height = a more forgiving bow??  :confused:

Dartwick, think about it this way; if the bow is faster and less forgiving, and you make a mistake on the release, the arrow will be affected more prior to leaving the bow.  That is what I'm talking about son.  There will be no forgiveness of the mistake...especially with lighter arrows and fast bows.  If the bow is shot correctly, there will be no issues with either type bow and the recurve will be more accurate overall...if it has more mass in the riser.

QuoteOriginally posted by NightHawk:
Arwin,

I don't think it's the bow that allowed you to make those difficult circus shots. I used to think the same thing, because I always did better at those types of shots. It seemed like the harder the shot the better I was at it. A good friend was watching me shoot one day at a 3-d course and he said that it seemed like I concentrated more on the circus shots than a regular shot. After some experimentation I found he was right, so I think your probably like me and concentrate just a little more on those kind of shots, rather than it being because of bow type. just my 2 cents      

I'm going to try this next time a deer sneaks up on me.   :D  
 http://www.wildcast.tv/play.php?vid=219

Oops had to fix that here ya are. Edited the last post.

I've tried for years to believe that a longbow is more forgiving but I just can't agree .  A "takedown" recurve with it's mass weight and center shot riser tends to absorb or allow for more mistakes.  

I do believe light mass weight short one piece recurves are more difficult to shoot in comparison to longer length longbows.

I LOVE longbows but for accuracy and stability I'll have to stick with my Schafer recurve "for now"!

Dartwick, what I was talking about is the same thing Byron is reffering to. Longer bow length usually means more lateral stability, I think this is the reason target recurves are usually much longer then hunting recurves. Of course this is assuming a longbow is in fact longer then a recurve, which is usually the case with classic "D" shaped longbows. Some newer longbow designs are just as short or even shorter then some recurves.

The way that Quillian illustrated it was to grab the tip of a braced recurve and show how the tip can be twisted easily. Then he would grab the tip of a braced longbow and show how much harder it is to twist the tip. Try it- there's really a lot of difference.

The idea is that if you torque the shot with either hand or make a poor release, the bad form can pull the tips of the recurve out of alignment more easily at the release, which can affect the accuracy of the shot and the flight of the arrow. Hence the longbow is more "forgiving" of bad form.

QuoteOriginally posted by frassettor:
doesnt a longer brace height = a more forgiving bow??   :confused:  

What about brace height guys??

Here's something that I've noticed. It seems that all the trick shot guy's,(B. Ferguson,Ron LaClair, John Shulz, Howard Hill)all shoot longbows. Another thing is that Howard Hill said in his book,(Hunting the Hard Way) that he considered the longbow more forgiving in "hunting situations", especially when proper form can't be attained,shooting quickly, or not being able to cant the bow exactly the way you would target shooting, where things are more controled.


John Sh

IMHO the bow you like the most will probably be the one you shoot the best.Regardless of how forgiving or not the bow is,there is probably enough room just on the mental side to make up the difference.

In all the 3D shoots I've seen,the recurve class had overall higher scores.I shoot recurve and had to twist in plenty of odd angles at the last shoot.I'm sure there are exceptions, especially at smaller matches where there isn't a large sampling in all classes.

bihunter, we have to add Stacy Groscup (Zipper recurve) to the recurve trick-shooters...as we  should Bob Markworth (Bear recurves) from the 60's.  There is an exception to every rule.  In my experience, I don't think one as an advantage over the other...it's an individual thing once again.   Howard Hill's time was one of mostly longbows, with the full recurve not being introduced until the early 50's, and then they had longbow style handles.  Given time, Ron, Byron, et al, could do the same with a recurve.

Don:  Good example re limb sensitivity.  The reason, of course, is that longbow limbs tend to be stacked -- thick from back to belly and not wide, while recurve limbs are just the opposite, thin in their thickness dimension and quite wide.  Much easier to twist one than the other out of alignment.

Tim:  You probably don't notice the longbow as being more forgiving because you probably shoot either well.  I, too, am of the opinion that recurves will outshoot longbows if the person doing the shooting has good form, etc.  The longbow is a little more forgiving for those who don't.  I shot recurves for nearly 20 years, but have been shooting longbows almost exclusively for the past 20 years.  Used to do a lot of tournament shooting and generally posted higher scores, not much higher, but a little higher, with the recurve than the longbow.  Of course, at this point, that could be a function of my age rather than any differences in bow design.  

On the other hand, I seem to be able to put the longbow into action more quickly, and I like the reduced physical weight for carrying.  

"I use the straight-end longbow for the simple reason that it requires a less exacting hold and loose to get necessary accuracy while hunting, where quick shots must be made from unconventional positions-standing, kneeling or sitting-not the traditional target archer's pose. Also, the longbow throws a heavy arrow much better than any recurve designed, which is necessary for sufficient big game penetration. The longbow is fast, smooth, sturdy and dependable, built to give many years of trouble-free service." - Howard Hill

I'm of the opinion that those words are as valid today as then. I agree completely when kept in context of hunting, hunting shots, and hunting accuracy. Many target archers will quickly point out tournament scores and rankings to dispute this logic. I'm of the opinion that such comparison misses the point entirely.

One does not need pinpoint accuracy while using strinct target archer form when hunting game afoot. It would be great to have, but it is more important to have greater flexibility and a range of tolerance in position and form while maintaining killing accuracy. It is of far greater importance to maintain this killing accuracy from unconventional field positons than to maintain pinpoint precision from your best position.

All of the above does require that you have proficiency in your marksmanship. You need the ability to properly execute killing shots. But it doesn't require that you maintain silver dollar tournament groups.

Where I find the joy in the longbow is indeed when hunting game afoot. The very characteristics that hamper the longbow in tournament scores are the very characteristics that make it shine when hunting game afoot. Its light weight and pointability marries the bow to the hunter like no other. Combined with the proper draw techniques, the longbow shows outstanding accuracy on small moving game that is hard to match with the heavier recurve. Despite its longer length, with the longbow shooting an arrow close to the hand it is very accurate on game when working the bow from extreme angles both forward and reverse to include everything between.

For me, when it comes to having a hell for stout bow that is easy to manage, light to carry, casts heavy arrows well, has a broad range of acceptable accuracy (forginveness) for when I'm cold, tired, and/or shooting from an odd position, keeps the arrow close to my hand so I can quickly swing on moving targets, aerials and such, ....for all of this I find the longbow to be my choice.

later,
Daddy Bear

Well then it's unanimous 8^).

Daddy Bear, I wouldn't take exception to what you stated as I like hunting with longbows as well...even some that aren't actually longbows.
Still, it depends on the individual and the bow and I'm sure Fred Bear and Ben Pearson would enjoy discussing their reasons for choosing the recurve bow.

I've found no ill-effects to using a good recurve when the necessity arose for a quick and agile weapon.  I see little difference in cast either, between my 55 Kodiak and my 57 pound longbow. They will both send heavy wooden arrows about the same distance with neither having the advantage all the time. And, the Kodiak is actually lighter in mass weight than the longbow.

The longbow is normally much sturdier for those who wish to use it as a wading staff or defensive weapon (8^)).  I wouldn't want to choose between the two.  Isn't it great we have such issues to talk about?