Ok if you had only 1 choice? A old school Hill type bow with a straight grip or new school Carbon limbed 1 piece longbow. Which one and why? Thanks for replies. Flint

Love my Hill bows above all others. The look, feel, lite weight, stability, forgiveness, grip, and history of the bows all draw me to them. I must say however that one of my absolute favorite Hill's has a carbon back    Ken

I would either use the Hill or make my own, but no carbon.  We don't need no steenking carbon.      

I'd probably use the Hill.  They're about indestructable, solid, stable bows.  They'll always get the job done.

Carbon, I'm in a tech-y phase.  Besides I've had several of both and I know speed isn't everything but all things considered it is a nice upgrade.  The research and development that most of the bowyers have put into the carbon bows has paid off with other advantages like smoothness and reduced hand shock.  That's a broad and not all encompassing statement and JMHO.

Mr. Kemper,

I consider myself "Old School", but I don't really think it's a matter of gear, but rather a state of mind.  As I approach my sixtieth birthday, I'm filled with forboding when considering the future of my country.  I find comfort in proven equipment, well known heros, and fond memories.

You can get a Hill with carbon in it.    

Why the question?  Isn't the hunting community divisive enough?  Now we have to split it further with "what if" questions?  

Thanks, but I'll pass.        :rolleyes:

Carbon, if I had to choose between those two Because the Carbon bow will most likely have a grip that will be more to my liking (I cant use the HH grips), and the carbon bow will most likely have less handshock (I know Hills dont have shock but my elbow says otherwise       ), plus speed isnt everything but like Master Jedi said, it is an added bonus if you have the choice.

But in the end I cant shoot a one piece bow very well so I would choose a Carbon 3pc longbow! LOL

"Old school" is just another term for "traditional". If it were me there would be no hesitation whatsovever with the choice: Howard Hill longbow all the way. It doesn't get any more traditional than that.

its not the bow as much as the nut on the string.

I vote for a Hill bow; a Cheetah; I am one lottery ticket away from it right now  

I like the newer bows and carbon is a pretty universal molecular substance. Most definately nothing "new" about it.

The real reason is, my elbows can't take the pounding of the hill style bows anymore....

Carbon weighs 43% less than glass yet it is stiffer which will reduce torgue which makes for a more forgiving, higher performing bow with less handshock BUT I could only take one in a Howard Hill "D" shape design with HH grip in order to have it truly capture that "longbow feeling." So, if by "new school" you meant "hybrid" pistol grip etc. and not really a longbow, then I would have to change my vote to HH.      

I like the question.  And its not devisive, just thought-provoking.

I like TOTA's response from the great state of West Virginia...hunting with trad bows is and arguably should be a state of mind, nurtured by the humbler mindset and methods of those who came before us.  After 45 years of hunting I've owned bows of all persuasions and I don't much care for race-car wonderbows anymore, whether they have wheels on them or not.  I want durable, quiet, affordable, effective, simple, and 'unplasticky'.  Target shooting is an area where precision-milled metal and chemicals shaped like bows and arrows are truely in their element.  Thats where precision and accuracy is not just the primary directive, its the only directive.  But is that what comes to mind when we seek challenge in the woods with bow in hand?  For most of us I don't think it is.  Sometimes a return to our roots, if only in the mindset we follow, is necessary to find the course we truly  seek.

For me I'll leave carbon bows and arrows to the target courses.  They make some sense there.  But to hunt with the bow and arrow is to hunt with some reflection of why I chose traditional archery to begin with.  In that vein, the Hill-style hunting bow and the pre-carbon style of arrow is a very VERY easy choice.

I like hill style bows so thats what I voted for, but what about a hill style carbon?

I dont do anythin new school or left wing...PR

All good stuff. I have to wonder if Hill had invented the compound what we'd consider "traditional" now days? Personally I like them all and one bow looks an behaves different then others only because someone who puts their pants on one leg at a time built them that way......O.L.

Well O.L., my old friend, Hill didn't invent any bow by golly, so the question is but a quest for philosophical venting.         And since we can't invent reinventions except in our feeble old minds, it's simply a rhetorical question which begs another;  "does everyone really put their pants on one leg at a time?"  I submit that not everyone does, and think that actually, O.L. Adcock has many times jumped out of bed already dressed....making a beeline for the shop and coffee maker.      

I don't like Howard Hill because he looks shifty, so I voted for the carbon for spite.  

I like my very "Traditional" Hill bow more than all the other bows I own, but it is pure sentiment.  I know some guys who shoot carbon bows and they love 'em, and they consistently outshoot me.  Get what you like and go with it for whatever reason you choose.  Having fun is the name of the game  Remember, there were times when fiberglass on bows and aluminum arrows were not mainstream traditional equipment, but those innovations have been well received.