# Pros and Cons of Longbows and Recurves?



## Arquebus (Jul 16, 2015)

I'm curious about the pros and cons of longbows vs. recurves? Which are easier to shoot? Which are easier to set-up and maintain? Which are most durable? Etc., etc. Thank you.


----------



## erotomaniac1928 (Sep 28, 2014)

I don't have the numbers to reference, but a recurve has an advantage in nearly every aspect outside of simplicity. But, a compound has every advantage over a recurve. Shoot what you like.


----------



## fallhunt (Aug 2, 2013)

I have a recurve with a low-wrist grip handle that I enjoy shooting. I prefer the low-wrist grip. I find it easier to maintain correct bowhand placement while pushing a thin straight handle against the lifeline of my palm. I am parroting someone else by saying that one does not require thought and effort (i.e., fighting the grip shape) to keep one’s bowhand correctly in place while pushing forward on a straight narrow grip. 

A narrow straight handle for a low-wrist grip is not exclusive to longbows. However among my small collection of bows only one of my recurves has this good grip while all my longbows have this preferred grip.

A longbow is simple, quick, and easy to brace safely (safe for the bow and you) without using a stringer. While it is possible to brace a recurve without a stringer (I did this for many years), it is advisable to always use a stringer for recurves. One of the primary joys of archery for me is the fun of bracing a longbow without using a stringer.

I do slightly prefer the aesthetics of a longbow over a recurve, but this is a relatively rather minor preference.

The grip is the main reason I prefer longbows.


----------



## secretagentmann (Jul 6, 2012)

You don't have to buy or build a press.
And strange enough, I feel more accurate with a stick bow


----------



## dhaverstick (Jul 26, 2006)

I feel that longbows vs. recurves is a matter of personal preference. The longbow is definitely more quiet but can be sometimes less forgiving of form errors; especially if you are shooting a straight limb longbow and/or on that is not cut to center. I own several of both and I much prefer the longbow mainly for the small grip and sleek elegance of its design.

As far as the compound having every advantage over a traditional bow, I have very, very serious reservations about that. Have you seen how fast Lajos Kassai can shoot his recurve on horseback, or how fast Lars Andersen can shoot for that matter? That could never be accomplished with a compound bow simply due to the complexity of the system.

Darren


----------



## secretagentmann (Jul 6, 2012)

Geez. I misread. I thought we were comparing compound and trad...
Recurve vs longbow?
Recurve is faster..can be, little louder.
Long is quieter and little slower but I doubt any would notice by looking, you'd need a chrono. 
I've owned both, I like both.. Probly long a tad more.


----------



## Bowsage (Apr 29, 2008)

I think what you will find that it's a personal preference as to which one is prefered. I shoot both equally well so I really don't prefer one over the other. My bows will outlast me as well as any other quality bow. As far as advantages ,1928 ,we talking about longbow vs. recurve, the only bonus I found with my hunting bows is that my recurves are shorter although my 62" longbow isn't awkward for hunting.


----------



## derfarhar333 (Apr 16, 2013)

As has been stated, the longbow is quieter because the string doesn't contact the limb when you loose it. The biggest advantage of the recurve to me is the grip. Fred Asbell claims that the straighter a shooters wrist is (bow hand), the more accurate he can be. He's talking about shooters who rely mostly on hand/eye coordination, but I think he's on to something. The grip on a recurve is more concentric to a straighter wrist. That being said I spend most of my time shooting a Hill style longbow or a hybrid longbow. My experience is fairly limited as far as the # of bows I've seen or shot. The only recurves I've been around are a Samick Sage and Black Widow. When standing side by side with my uncle who shoots a 42# Black Widow w/ GT 7595s & 325 grs up front, his bow is noticeably louder but easily faster than 47# & 50# longbows shooting arrows that are 100 grs lighter. Take that for what you will....


----------



## derfarhar333 (Apr 16, 2013)

Bowsage made another good point in that recurves are typically shorter.


----------



## Easykeeper (Jan 2, 2003)

In general it comes down to personal preference, you really need to spend some time with both. To confuse the issue, a lot of the differences people notice between longbows and recurves might be differences in grips and riser mass as much as difference in limb geometry.

Aside from shooting, aesthetics enters into the choice for some archers; it's hard to deny the simple beauty of a one-piece longbow.

Personally I prefer a recurve, preferably one with plenty of mass in the riser. A three-piece take-down recurve of relatively long length is what I always come back too. I like them all, tried them all, but that's what I shoot the best.


----------



## Azzurri (Mar 10, 2014)

You look at tournament scores and in order it will be OR, trad/ILF, longbow in accuracy terms. A longbow looks more like the mental image of archery and some people like the simplicity. You can get ones with shelves and pistol grips that start to get some of the advantages of a recurve. But to me it's just a more finicky bow. Particularly if you're shooting some primitive thing off your knuckles and you're used to an OR with a magnetic rest, clicker, etc. But some people want a challenge and that's getting as far from the tech end, just about, as you can get.


----------



## Aronnax (Nov 7, 2013)

Arquebus said:


> I'm curious about the pros and cons of longbows vs. recurves? Which are easier to shoot? Which are easier to set-up and maintain? Which are most durable? Etc., etc. Thank you.


Define "longbow". Define "recurve". Are we talking riser design or the degree of curvature of a limb tip? Shape of braced limbs is independent of riser design.

What advantage does a Toelke Chinook or Super Static recurve have over a Acadaian woods, 3pc takedown longbow? or an a metal riser ILF rig with longbow limbs?

My $0.02. Most mass produced recurves on the market are what I consider "cosmetic recurves". The curvature doesn't do much beyond the aesthetic. There's one specific exception who I'm sure will chime in if he hasn't already (I have not read the whole thread yet).

Generally, a recurve limb allows an amount of stored energy in a slightly more compact package, and generally a slightly higher brace height. But then most recurves tend to be a tiny bit less efficient than an longbow limb of equivalent build.

Generally, a 1pc longbow is built with a more slender/low wrist/lower overall mass kind or riser than a recurve, though there are plenty of exceptions.

Recurves also have the potential to suffer from limb twist, and can be more noisy (string vibrating against limb).

Like I said, my $0.02.


BM


----------



## Tracker12 (Sep 22, 2003)

I own, shoot and like them both. Buy for efficiency # for # and accuracy I have to give the edge to a recurve. That being said I hunt with my longbow 90% of the time.


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

You can find one of each that are closer to each other than the variances within a give category, however you draw the lines.

I would jump onto the try and see what you like bandwagon.

Were there particular examples of either you were thinking about?


----------



## ArcherFletch (Jul 8, 2012)

Longbow is so light. I love that. Recurves are gonna be easier to setup with a cut past center riser. But longbows are more fun


----------



## Treeman732 (Nov 19, 2010)

After shooting recurves for many years I got a Bear Montana longbow. It took me quite a long time to adjust to the grip but now that i have I much prefer shooting the longbow. The longbow is very quiet and a joy to shoot.


----------



## Arquebus (Jul 16, 2015)

Thanks for all the replies. The only bow I have ever shot was a longbow -- it was a lot of fun. I am going to do some shooting at my sportsmen's club (I believe they lend compound bows) and find out my pull length and # and go from there. While I will likely be taught using a compound bow, I ultimately want either a longbow or a one-piece recurve for the events I am likely to shoot.

Then again using firearms as an analogy, longbows seem to be like flintlocks, recuves like bolt actions and compounds like semi-automatic rifles. Perhaps in time I'll own all three...


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

Arquebus said:


> I'm curious about the pros and cons of longbows vs. recurves? Which are easier to shoot? Which are easier to set-up and maintain? Which are most durable? Etc., etc. Thank you.


Longbows, in MY OPINION, are far easier to shoot, are more durable, lighter, and the hybrids today are every bit as fast as recurves. Longbows are in my experience more forgiving, smoother to draw, generally no or less stack, and much quieter than the recurve.

The downside of longbows are that they are long. This creates problems sometimes in where and how you can take the shot. this creates problems in travel. If you are into accessories, the longbow really offers little compared to the recurve which can be outfitted along with any Compound.

Aloha :beer:


----------



## Fivl (Jun 29, 2015)

only shot a few longbows so far, but of those the hybrids had the best feeling for me. 
also encountered one with really nasty and heavy hand-shock, that was really unpleasant.

overall I prefer takedown recurves, just because they are really easy to travel, bike and hike with. 
but I dislike too artificial or technical bows, so I am currently thinking about buying a Rudi Weick wood takedown.


----------



## dhaverstick (Jul 26, 2006)

I agree with rattus58 that a reflex/deflex longbow is every bit as fast as a recurve and they are really nice to shoot. I own two of these bows that are 2-piece takedowns that I had made specifically to travel with for remote hunts. One is a Thunder Stick Mag made by Jim Reynolds that I used on a blacktail hunt on Kodiak Island. The other is a Tall Timbers longbow made by Don Orrell. I am going to use it this September on an Alberta moose hunt. Both of these bows are only 58" long.

Darren


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

Given similar sized, shaped and weighted risers with the same materials in the limbs there is very little detectable performance difference.
However comparing a tiny-risered Hill bow to a modern 3-piece recurve is pretty unfair on the longbow. Both can be make very quiet although it's perhaps a bit easier with the longbow.
The performance difference between a really cheap recurve and a mid-priced one isn't significant, with longbows the bottom end and even many higher-end models are dogs.

In terms of one-piece bows there are a number of excellent longbows with just enough recurve DNA in the riser to make them very pleasant to shoot. Really extreme hybrid limbs give-up a lot of stability for a bit more power. I generally prefer a bow which is still D-shaped when braced, they also look better to my eye.

-Grant


----------



## Bill 2311 (Jun 24, 2005)

Personal preference. 
I like the looks of the longbow, but shoot the recurve handle style much better.
I really like the ILF recurves. Easy to switch limbs and risers.


----------



## sidekick (Feb 10, 2006)

Very soon, hopefully Friday if USPS priority mail comes through, I will be trying a set of SKY longbow limbs on a 13" VPA ILF riser. Though it won't look so much like a traditional longbow, I'm hopeful it will be the perfect marriage of benefits between longbow and recurve. If not, I will concede to my recurves as I seem to shoot them better than other longbows I've had and have. My quest for "the perfect bow for me" continues.


----------

