# Why not longbows in the Olympics. Or the ultimate 3D bow.



## Ben Pearson (Oct 7, 2016)

I'm a recurve guy, though I also shoot longbows. But I think it's fairly well established that a long bow, though it shoots at a lower velocity, is more forgiving, if not more accurate, than a recurve. So why don't you see longbows at the Olympics? They do shoot at a pretty long distance, so maybe the extra velocity tips the scale in the favor of recurves. But I'm thinking that for everyday shooters, long bow limbs on an Olympic style riser, would be pretty fantastic. Add a few vibration dampers and you'd have a pretty smooth shooting bow. Could be the ultimate 3D bow.


----------



## 3D Archery (May 19, 2016)

What makes you think a Long bow is more accurate? As for more forgiving, that is purely subjective. The main reason they went to recurves is that that they are a more efficient design (limb wise).


----------



## Bender (Dec 6, 2006)

Longbows are not "excluded" from the Olympics. If one were able to shoot the scores necessary to qualify using a long bow limb type configuration, there would be nothing stopping them. 

But there are a couple of reasons that we don't see this.

First off it is a mistake to take it as a "given" that long bow limbs are more "forgiving." Where's the data to support that idea?

Secondly its also a matter of sponsorship. Considering that here in America, shooters get into and through qualifications on their own dime. If they can scrape up any sort of sponsorship, they'll take it. Then once they are on the Team, they will shoot what the sponsors provide to the Team.

Outside of America, in countries that "grow" Olympic competitors with government support, like S. Korea, they will shoot that equipment that wins, regardless of cost, or configuration, or whatever. I can assure you that if there were ANY sort of equipment advantage to shooting a long bow limb profile, the Koreans would already be shooting it.


----------



## Bender (Dec 6, 2006)

Oh and BTW, Longbows and Self bows are my "First Love" regardless of what I may actually actually be shooting on any given day. I have absolutely zero interest in somehow trying to either, promote Recurves, or disparage Longbows.


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

Ben Pearson said:


> I think it's fairly well established that a long bow, though it shoots at a lower velocity, is more forgiving, if not more accurate, than a recurve.


Really? When, and by who?



> So why don't you see longbows at the Olympics?


Maybe those Olympic shooters don't know that they're more accurate? 

Look, I like longbows, but generally speaking, they are NOT more forgiving. That's one of many reasons I really respect people like Bender who can wrangle accurate shooting out of them. It's not that I'd consider them unforgiving, necessarily, but that for a given level of accuracy, speaking generally, I find it more difficult with a longbow.

Now, some of them longbows are pretty darn nice. Some of them are almost recurves, when it comes to pistol grip handles, metal risers, whatever. If you're talking a long ILF riser with a customized grip, and longbow limbs, yeah, there isn't really much difference, _either way_.

That's my opinion anyway. If you don't like it, you can have a full refund


----------



## Stephen Morley (Aug 11, 2016)

Years of shooting NFAS Longbow in the UK says differently, we had a Recurve and Longbow div which shoot very similar rules Split finger and wood arrows,( Recurves could have an arrow rest), in those 10 years I shoot that div only 4 Longbows beat the Recurves at National champs, I was the first to do it on 2000 and before that most Archers thought it wasn't possible, once that urban myth was broken others followed. Taking scores from these champs it's pretty obvious which bow dominates, the top 2-3 Longbows are in the mix but generally it was mostly Recurves shooting higher scores.


----------



## Viper1 (Aug 21, 2003)

Ben - 

As Bender said, LBs are perfectly legal for use in the Olympics, but the fact is, when in human hands, ALL longbows are inferior to modern dedicated Olympic recurves. It has nothing to do with speed, but the balance, stability in the hand consistency are far enough apart to explain why they aren't used. 

The notion of a LB being more forgiving "may" have been true 70 or more years ago, but is pretty much a myth today.

Viper1 out.


----------



## Keeshond (Sep 13, 2016)

Ben, are you now channeling for JamesThom? LOL

I remember reading on either this forum or some other about an Italian Olympic shooter experimenting with a modern longbow limb mounted on his riser and not finding it satisfactory. I've been doing an online search and can't find the thread or article I read a few years ago.

You have to know every type of limb has been tried by now. It always boils down to a moderately shaped Hoyt-style limb that wins in the end. It's fast enough and very stable. The rest is up to the shooter.


----------



## Keeshond (Sep 13, 2016)

https://www.reddit.com/r/Archery/co...ion_for_you_all_if_a_classic/#bottom-comments

I did find this series of discussions on Oly risers and longbow limbs. Hope it links up for anyone who's interested.


----------



## ahunter55 (Aug 17, 2009)

If I wasn't so old & Howard was alive, we could do it.. I competed in the NFAA outdoor Field Nationals (Longbow) & we (Recurve, metal handle shooters) talked about this.. It's pretty much our general consensus NO all wood Longbow could match the modern recurve (metal risers) in the hands of equally qualified shooters. Not scientific, just what we felt to be true.


----------



## Chris Hill (Aug 26, 2005)

Most ILF longbow limbs are like a wet noodle when mounted on current ILF risers. I think if a manufacture could make a good longbow limb with a dedicated riser you might get some good accuracy. A longbow limb should hold its line better than a recurve because of torque. I think it won't happen anytime soon as there is a limited market for them.


----------



## Keeshond (Sep 13, 2016)

Chris Hill said:


> Most ILF longbow limbs are like a wet noodle when mounted on current ILF risers. I think if a manufacture could make a good longbow limb with a dedicated riser you might get some good accuracy. A longbow limb should hold its line better than a recurve because of torque. I think it won't happen anytime soon as there is a limited market for them.


The market is limited because it's a mediocre idea. Nobody who shoots formal target archery is going to use a straight limb when a recurve limb has been proven superior for over 70 years. Do you really think you just came up with a new concept nobody has thought of, or tried before?


----------



## berzerk64 (Nov 27, 2013)

Dang it. There goes my Olympic aspirations.

I love my longbow, but I am under no illusions it is a more efficient weapon, all things considered. Fortunately, that's not my goal anyhow. The biggest positive to a longbow, in my opinion, is that it is far easier to make under any given set of conditions. In more primitive circumstances, longbows may win out in numbers in use, but with the full capabilities of industry, there's really no competition.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

When I was training for the Olympics, a well-known bowyer with a revolutionary longbow limb design sent me a "target longbow" to test against my recurves - with the idea that longbows have greater potential accuracy. Well, it was an utter failure. I sent the bow back to them in less than a week. Sorry, but this myth persists - that longbows are somehow more accurate - and it needs to just die a quiet death.


----------



## Stephen Morley (Aug 11, 2016)

It was an awesome bit of marketing from a man who made his living shooting and making Longbows. :angel:


----------



## Bender (Dec 6, 2006)

Given same materials and construction methods, a LB limb will show better torsional stability than a RC limb. Its just a part of the geometry and force vectors applied to the limb.

HOWEVER, there is so much more that goes into making a bow a capable of greater accuracy than just torsional stability alone.


----------



## J Wesbrock (Jul 6, 2016)

limbwalker said:


> When I was training for the Olympics, a well-known bowyer with a revolutionary longbow limb design sent me a "target longbow" to test against my recurves - with the idea that longbows have greater potential accuracy. Well, it was an utter failure. I sent the bow back to them in less than a week. Sorry, but this myth persists - that longbows are somehow more accurate - and it needs to just die a quiet death.


That brings back memories. I remember when he was all over the internet, saying he was going to revoltionize Olympic archery. Yeah, didn't happen. He had me test shoot one of his metal riser longbows once. It felt like a tuning fork. Not pleasant.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

J Wesbrock said:


> That brings back memories. I remember when he was all over the internet, saying he was going to revoltionize Olympic archery. Yeah, didn't happen. He had me test shoot one of his metal riser longbows once. It felt like a tuning fork. Not pleasant.


Well, the gentleman is still a friend of mine. Like most great innovators, he had some ideas that just didn't work out. But I can't name another small bowyer in the past 30 years who's patented a limb design.


----------



## ChrisK. (Oct 23, 2009)

I know who I would be rooting for if someone showed up with a Hill style bow.


----------



## JamesThom. (Oct 9, 2016)

They don't use longbow's or rather longbow limbs because a recurve is always going to be faster than a longbow. At 70m they want every ounce of speed they can get for their sight marks. Also without a doubt a longbow limb is much more stable than a recurve limb, but when you are using a wrist sling, a huge stabilizer in the front and on the side, and you have trained your release in and out and do not grip the bow than torque is not as much of an issue until you screw up. It's all about trade off's, do they want more speed or do they want a more stable limb shooting at 70 meters.


----------



## reddogge (Jul 21, 2009)

At 70 meters they want speed. It's why Brady Ellison shoots 48#. Also in 60 years of shooting these bows I've never run into unstable recurve limbs like you apparently see regularly.


----------



## JamesThom. (Oct 9, 2016)

reddogge said:


> At 70 meters they want speed. It's why Brady Ellison shoots 48#. Also in 60 years of shooting these bows I've never run into unstable recurve limbs like you apparently see regularly.


When we are talking about stability we are talking about well a limb resists being drawn off course (torqued) during the draw cycle and release. All of the recurves I have shot could easily be torqued.


----------



## Halfcawkt (Dec 27, 2015)

James:

An archer should strive toward a shooting form that anchors and releases on a plane perfectly perpendicular to the plane of the limbs and riser. Simplified; in a straight line.

An archer that masters this, will not have to take into account the limb's forgiveness of torque.

I am not saying that torque forgiveness should be completely ignored by designers or buyers. But I do not feel that one should be buying with that as a priority.

I have a long way to go in the pursuit of bomb proof consistency of form category.

I am to the point that a bow being critical of my flaws will make me a better archer. I embrace this concept and feel that others may benefit from it as well. No, it's not for everyone. It does work for me, in my development.

If you can shoot a critical bow well, how much better could you shoot a forgiving bow?

It's just food for thought.


----------



## JamesThom. (Oct 9, 2016)

Halfcawkt said:


> James:
> 
> An archer should strive toward a shooting form that anchors and releases on a plane perfectly perpendicular to the plane of the limbs and riser. Simplified; in a straight line.
> 
> ...


I agree with you that we should all strive to improve our form but all limbs design are a compromise. What recurves lose in stability they gain in speed. What longbow's lose in speed they gain in stability. It's all about trade off's. With that being said I prefer the longbow because it's very stable, light in the hand, and has a smooth draw not to mention I prefer the low wrist grip compared to a pistol grip. That being said if someone has poor form no bow is going to shoot well for them. Some shoot longbow's better than recurves and vice versa. 

I'm still unsure about whether shooting longbow limbs in the Olympics and most other FITA barebow event's would even be legal. It's all labeled as recurve archery and freestyle recurve.


----------



## CAPTJJ (Dec 24, 2007)

JamesThom. said:


> When we are talking about stability we are talking about well a limb resists being drawn off course (torqued) during the draw cycle and release. All of the recurves I have shot could easily be torqued.


You should really take a step back, open your mind and listen to these guys that have WAY MORE experience than you do.... you might actually learn something. There is a wealth of knowledge on this forum but you have to be willing to accept it; took me a little while to know which guys on here no their stuff, once I did I learned a lot and improved because of it. Sounds like your experience is based on what you have read and/or seen on Youtube.


----------



## Halfcawkt (Dec 27, 2015)

James: 

At the end of the day, I'm sure I fall solidly into the hybrid longbow camp despite the fact all of my personal best scores from 3D to paper were shot with my current recurve.

I too enjoy shooting my hybrids. My only reason for the post was to try to get others to consider the flip side of the coin. You seemed to have not considered it yourself.

I was not trying to attack your view point, only to get people to think.


----------



## JamesThom. (Oct 9, 2016)

CAPTJJ said:


> You should really take a step back, open your mind and listen to these guys that have WAY MORE experience than you do.... you might actually learn something. There is a wealth of knowledge on this forum but you have to be willing to accept it; took me a little while to know which guys on here no their stuff, once I did I learned a lot and improved because of it. Sounds like your experience is based on what you have read and/or seen on Youtube.


Umm no. My experience is based on the bows that I have actually used and shot......

I have yet to shoot a recurve where you could not twist the limb tips. Do realize this, if you even torque the limb tips off even slightly your shot could be thrown off as much as 6-8" to the left or right even at 15 yards. I have never had any issues regarding stability shooting a longbow. They are just a much more stable bow design through and through. This is through _personal experience_.



Halfcawkt said:


> James:
> 
> At the end of the day, I'm sure I fall solidly into the hybrid longbow camp despite the fact all of my personal best scores from 3D to paper were shot with my current recurve.
> 
> ...


My friend, I did not take it personally. Your comment about shooting an unforgiving bow to get better makes a lot of sense. It's why a lot of the guys shoot very very light weight bows (around 20# or less) to work on form. Hybrid bow's are good stuff. Instead of straight up longbow limbs being used in the Olympics a Hybrid limb would probably be the best compromise as they can keep up with the recurves in the speed department yet most are very stable from what I have seen and read (I have not shot a hybrid). 

I know if I was shooting Olympic Archery I would want every bit of speed I can get. 

Shooting at 70m you really have to lob that arrow in there and it's coming in at a sharp angle so any amount of speed you can get exponentially cut's down your risk of missing low or high. 

Shooting within 40 yards or so the difference in speed is going to be unnoticeable by most. 

That's not to say one can't be deadly accurate shooting a slower bow at 70m and beyond just that it will require more skill.


----------



## Stephen Morley (Aug 11, 2016)

James all those Stabs on an Olympic bow totally change the character of the Recurve limb, a WA coaching course I attended years ago the instructor tapped the limbs tips with and without the Stabs attached, without Stabs those limbs acted like wet noodles for about 2-3 seconds, with Stabs they came to a stop almost immediately. 

A riser that's cut way past center with plunger and arrow rest allows the arrow paradox to be minimal, Recurve limbs on Olympic bows just don't need to be as stiff as Longbow limbs.


----------



## CAPTJJ (Dec 24, 2007)

JamesThom. said:


> Umm no. My experience is based on the bows that I have actually used and shot......
> 
> I have yet to shoot a recurve where you could not twist the limb tips. Do realize this, if you even torque the limb tips off even slightly your shot could be thrown off as much as 6-8" to the left or right even at 15 yards. I have never had any issues regarding stability shooting a longbow. They are just a much more stable bow design through and through. This is through _personal experience_.


Your experience killing tennis balls? Still haven't seen any pictures of game you have harvested.

You have an obsession with torqueing limb tips, never been an issue for me, so no I do not realize what you are trying to say. Torque happens at the grip.


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

James 

Grants a real good archer and shot a lot and knows a lot 

Just trying to be helpful buddy


----------



## 3D Archery (May 19, 2016)

James you wrote "if you even torque the limb tips off even slightly your shot could be thrown off as much as 6-8" to the left or right even at 15 yards"
Do you have the study or stats to back that up. I would love to see it if you do.


----------



## reddogge (Jul 21, 2009)

Standing there twisting the tip of a recurve back and forth has nothing to do with how those limb react when drawn. Makes about as much sense as someone saying they hate ILF bows because they rattle and the limbs fall out when unstrung. A straight untwisted recurve limb is not unstable.


----------



## Hank D Thoreau (Dec 9, 2008)

This post is about longbow limbs in the Olympics. For this scenario, we can assume that we are talking about the best shooters in the world, and not folks that tweak and pluck their bows to a point where the torsional stability of modern recurve limbs become a factor. If you twist your limbs when you shoot, then you need to work on form. You optimize the bow to the shooter. A heavier Schwinn bicycle is much more stable than a carbon fiber racing bike, but I would not use one at the Tour de France. The Tour de France is not for recreational bike riders. As far as speed, getting 70 meters is not a big deal. I shoot FITA barebow and actually have to go to heavier, 434 gr arrows when I shoot 70, otherwise, my point is in the grass. And that is with a 40 pound bow. I shoot 343 gr arrows at 90 meters. If I had a sight, I could probably make 90 meters with the 434 gr arrows. The bows that are used are the ones that put the most points on the scoreboard, and there has been a lot of R&D that has gone into the current configurations.


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

Here is a little concept that is quite interesting.
Construction for construction. The basic idea can be considered like a fishing rod.

If the rod points downwards the extra mass of the fish will not effect the direction the rod points.
If the rod point level with the water. The rod will remain stable when the extra weight of the fish is applied.
If there is any part of the rod that points upwards. Or hints at upwards it will start to loose its stability.
Hybrids point upwards.
Imagine a rod that entirely pointed upwards and a big fish took the bait. You would soon have blisters on your hands trying to holt that rod stable.
So torsional stability. Is key to stability. When looking to hold the whole thing in a stable maner.

So in days gone by. The way to make a torsionally more stable limb was to make it wider.
And this mass incured was over come with the extra smoothness delivered by recurveing the limbs. But at the same time. Allowed for shorter stubbier limbs.
So a comprimise was found on the torsional stability of the limb. Against its width and length.
Build for build. Recurves were faster than longbows. Provided you didnt overstep recurve size.
Longbow limbs scribe a much longer arc. Meaning more movement. Meaning its mass is more critical. So they have to be skinny to keep up. The length for smoothness. Skinny for efficency. And long and skinny doesnt equal stable...
On the flip side. Hybrids are mostly wider limbs. And this is to stop them getting unstable too as they are naturally less stable due to the forward flick they want to exhibit.
This forward flick is mild. So have mild improvements in smoothness so are limited in how short they can be.
Recurves are shorter. Because they are smoother.
Which means adding width to stabilise them is possible.

The other flip side. Is vertical stability. A LB has the limbs coming almost straight out the riser. And due to thier length of limb need this to get some preload and curvature. This doesnt help vertical stability.
Recurves create more compact triangles. Giving more robust geometric shape to help with vertical stability.
Supporting the string.
Again recurves pip longbows.

The other advantage is the shorter limb allows for a longer riser. Which gives you a usefull sight window.

All this stack the odds against longbows being the better bow for full target archery imo


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> A LB has the limbs coming almost straight out the riser. And due to thier length of limb need this to get some preload and curvature. This doesnt help vertical stability.
> Recurves create more compact triangles. Giving more robust geometric shape to help with vertical stability.
> Supporting the string.


Precisely the problem I had with the "target longbow" I tested. Vertical stability was simply non-existent.


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

limbwalker said:


> Precisely the problem I had with the "target longbow" I tested. Vertical stability was simply non-existent.


There are Hybrid designs with very high vertical stability. 
Ive not seen one with that concept that had high Vertical stabilty.

That design was about out and out speed and efficency.
If it were toned down a little. There could have been some VS added to it im sure.

Check out any bow with lots of preload near the fadeout area. And watch them get vertically noodly.

But recurve risers are not the chassis for that game


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

Untill someone breaks the rules. They remain rules.


----------



## Stephen Morley (Aug 11, 2016)

Unfortunately a bunch of people are still sold on a urban myth started 50 years ago by a guy that branded and sold Longbows for a living. :dontknow:


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Yup.


----------



## NY_bowhunter (Aug 8, 2010)

Borderbows said:


> Untill someone breaks the rules. They remain rules.


Well .... I'm game for breaking the rules!!! Traditional archery intrigues me ALOT!! I'm willing to try this out at local events and see what happens.  If I can win a few 3D shoots with a long bow, is that breaking the rules enough? How about if I do it with an old Damon Howatt Super Diablo recurve? Close enough? I suck at traditional archery, but man I love a challenge and this thread is VERY interesting to me.


----------



## NY_bowhunter (Aug 8, 2010)

Halfcawkt said:


> James:
> 
> At the end of the day, I'm sure I fall solidly into the hybrid longbow camp despite the fact all of my personal best scores from 3D to paper were shot with my current recurve.
> 
> ...


I think you're more than mildly delusional. That's probably why I like where you're coming from.


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

NY_bowhunter said:


> Well .... I'm game for breaking the rules!!! Traditional archery intrigues me ALOT!! I'm willing to try this out at local events and see what happens.  If I can win a few 3D shoots with a long bow, is that breaking the rules enough? How about if I do it with an old Damon Howatt Super Diablo recurve? Close enough? I suck at traditional archery, but man I love a challenge and this thread is VERY interesting to me.


When i said rules are there to be broken. And i keep getting told its not all about speed. With string materials creeping forward in tech. And limbs creeping forward. I would like to see some outside the box thinking.
74" bow. Vertically stable longbow limbs. Designed on a propper longbow target riser. Shot indoors.the 74" should give enough room for a sight window. While also long enough to accomodate longbow limbs that would be smooth enough to shoot... etc etc. Rather than a 68" recurve.


----------



## NY_bowhunter (Aug 8, 2010)

Borderbows said:


> When i said rules are there to be broken. And i keep getting told its not all about speed. With string materials creeping forward in tech. And limbs creeping forward. I would like to see some outside the box thinking.
> 74" bow. Vertically stable longbow limbs. Designed on a propper longbow target riser. Shot indoors.the 74" should give enough room for a sight window. While also long enough to accomodate longbow limbs that would be smooth enough to shoot... etc etc. Rather than a 68" recurve.


Ahhhhh .... gotcha. This is why I love this place. People like yourself that add more crap I don't need to think about when thinking outside the box because then .... I'm boxless and bad things happen. LOL


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

NY_bowhunter said:


> Ahhhhh .... gotcha. This is why I love this place. People like yourself that add more crap I don't need to think about when thinking outside the box because then .... I'm boxless and bad things happen. LOL


Lol!


----------



## JamesThom. (Oct 9, 2016)

Borderbows said:


> There are Hybrid designs with very high vertical stability.
> Ive not seen one with that concept that had high Vertical stabilty.
> 
> That design was about out and out speed and efficency.
> ...


What is "vertical stability"? I shoot a longbow but have never had a problem with any kind of stability. I know some have said they prefer a recurve over a longbow but I shoot more accurately with a longbow. One thing that a recurve has over a longbow is a heavier mass riser. This is great for shooting groups but they feel like a chore to lug around and are not as good for snap shooting. 

I know some people also complain about the handshock felt in a longbow but I personally prefer feedback from my bow. It tells me if I'm doing something wrong or right and a heavy rise riser throws away any type of feel you would get in a comparison to shooting a longbow. So for me, shooting a longbow is more of a _feel_ type of bow if that makes any sense. It lends itself heavily to the instinctive/splitvision type of shooting.

As for caring about speed, speed's not that important to me although it is nice. I prefer shooting a Dacron string as it is easier on the fingers and quieter than your latest high tech non stretch strings. With enough shooting of any arrow weight and bow speed you can quickly learn the trajectory and become accurate ant any distance if you put the effort in. 

I know at one point I was shooting near 14GPP arrows at probably around 140~150fps at around 50 yards and could shoot them just as well as my 10GPP arrows at that distance. 

Not to mention they are as cheap as dirt and even the high tech strings creep after a long shooting session. 

Also what do you think would be harder to torque, a Borders limb or a longbow limb if you put both in a vice and tried to torque each limb. 

One last thing, I read that a thick narrow limb is best for stability and resisting torque. You mentioned that a wide limb is preferred over a narrow limb. Why is that? It seems to me if you took a very narrow and thick limb like a longbow with very little R/D or a Hill style limb it would not torque at all. 

The more reflex/deflex you add and the wider it becomes (starts to become more like a recurve) it seems to me that it would become easier to torque due to the nature of the limb design (wider and thinner).

Another thing I'd like to add is that for me shooting a longbow is easier on the joints. I know I was getting shoulder pain shooting a recurve due to the high preload they have which is very compoundish. The longbow is very smooth from start to finish due to it's more natural design that is just like bending a branch on a tree.


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

JamesThom. said:


> What is "vertical stability"? I shoot a longbow but have never had a problem with any kind of stability. I know some have said they prefer a recurve over a longbow but I shoot more accurately with a longbow. One thing that a recurve has over a longbow is a heavier mass riser. This is great for shooting groups but they feel like a chore to lug around and are not as good for snap shooting.
> 
> I know some people also complain about the handshock felt in a longbow but I personally prefer feedback from my bow. It tells me if I'm doing something wrong or right and a heavy rise riser throws away any type of feel you would get in a comparison to shooting a longbow. So for me, shooting a longbow is more of a _feel_ type of bow if that makes any sense. It lends itself heavily to the instinctive/splitvision type of shooting.
> 
> ...


On you last point about shoulder pain on high preload.
Drop 10lbs in holding weight. The preload will drop proportionally the same.


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

Lighter bows especially with good deflex are quick to point. So good for moving targets.
But manuverability is not stability.
Stability is infact resistant to movement.


----------



## JamesThom. (Oct 9, 2016)

Borderbows said:


> On you last point about shoulder pain on high preload.
> Drop 10lbs in holding weight. The preload will drop proportionally the same.


Well I went up 5# in draw weight shooting a longbow and I have no shoulder pain at all even though it's heavier at full draw. The longbow is easier on the joints but I appreciate your deep knowledge as a bowyer Sid, I hope to have even 1/4 of the experience you do making bows some day.

EDIT - When I'm talking about stability I'm talking about a bow's ability to throw an arrow inline where you are pointing it despite torquing the string, torquing the bow itself, and everything else that comes along with suboptimal form. 

I understand that stability could also apply to a heavier mass riser and/or bow which helps keep the bow from moving akin to what a tripod does for a camera or a bipod does for a rifle.


----------



## Stephen Morley (Aug 11, 2016)

James I just figured out who you are.

You're some guy lost from another parallel universe where everything that works with Archery is the total opposite to this universe :shade:

Some of your posts, I don't if I should be laughing or crying lain: your opinions are just so far out there.


----------



## JamesThom. (Oct 9, 2016)

Stephen Morley said:


> James I just figured out who you are.
> 
> You're some guy lost from another parallel universe where everything that works with Archery is the total opposite to this universe :shade:
> 
> Some of your posts, I don't if I should be laughing or crying lain: your opinions are just so far out there.


Stephen. Why don't we just each post a video of shooting one round, a round of your choice in one take and in one continuous video we see who the better archer is, I'll do the same. 

If you win I will stop posting since most of the people on here that quote me are as rude as well and VERY disrespectful and act like children. If I win you stop posting. 

You were a world champion so this should be an easy win for you. 

You pick the round.

Cause if you were a respectful man you would of at least added something relevant to the conversation instead of being rude and adding nothing. That doesn't sound like what I would expect from a world champion but what I would expect from a troll that gets off on bullying others. 

Limb stability is the ability for the bow to cast the arrow inline with the target despite sub optimal form (primarily a sub optimal release or torquing the bow). Where is your argument against that? When you argue against that you are arguing against many great archers.

I'm starting to really see how OSB was right when he said to avoid the Trad archery forums like the PLAGUE.


----------



## Hank D Thoreau (Dec 9, 2008)

Body stress has a lot to do with form, which is also influenced by what you shoot. I have a bad bow arm shoulder. I shot my longbow in a tournament this past weekend and it ate me up. I shoot my recurve and it does not cause nearly as much problems. I shoot more of a classic Olympic style form, even when shooting a longbow. The chart below shows three bows: a longbow, a convention recurve of the same marked weight at 28 inches, and a super recurve. The last bow has a much heavier marked weight since I did not have a super recurve to match the first two bows. The smoothness curve charts the pounds/inch at each point along the draw cycle. While the longbow is lighter at the start, it picks up weight much faster at the back end. This back end weight (hard back end) impacts the ability to execute because of the larger incremental increase in weight at expansion. If you expand at release, a bow with a harder back end will be more difficult to execute good form with. Super recurves are very easy to expand against since you can find incremental weights as low as 1/2 pound/inch at full draw (soft back end). What this means is that how you pull during each part of the draw cycle dictates where the stress is placed on your joints and muscles. Also, how long you hold at full draw makes a difference. Snap shooting, where there is only transient anchoring (at best) and no expansion, does not stress the body in the same way as drawing, transferring load, expanding, and releasing. So it is difficult to say, with certainty, how a particular bow will impact your body. I originally started shooting super recurves several years ago to reduce stress by providing a softer back end, and the ability to pull less weight and get the same performance. It has worked out well for me, with my shoulder situation and shooting style. It is different for James. His shoulder responds better to a longbow. I am not sure why but it likely depends on the type of trauma his shoulder has experienced and the way he shoots a bow. When I do not shoot super recurves, I shoot lighter weights and longer bows. This provides similar stress reduction. 

And to add: vertical stability

Grab your nock locator and pull it down in the direction of the string. This will be very difficult for a vertically stable bow. Some longbows suffer from what is described as noodly limbs. This is an extreme case of poor vertical stability. You can improve a noodly limb by increasing the brace height. I tried some ILF longbow limbs on a 25 inch riser. It was so noodly that the limbs would invert. I had to set the brace height at 10 to 11 inches. This is obviously an extreme example, but it is a good for demonstrating the principle. You should not notice this affect on a well designed longbow.


----------



## Stephen Morley (Aug 11, 2016)

James by all means keep posting, I have nothing to prove to you or anybody else.


I just see a pattern of you turning up on threads which pretty much always the total opposite opinion to everyone else, it feels like you're looking for and enjoying the conflict. That's great for you but bad for newer Archers looking for solid advice.


----------



## SteveB (Dec 18, 2003)

Fact is if longbow's or longbow limbs could add anything to an Olympic qualified shooters potential score, someone would be shooting them.
Out of the 1000's around the world who focus on the olympic style and attempting to actually shoot the venue, I doubt you could find even one who shoots competitive scores.
Sponsorship or not, if they could add even 1% to your score and mean the difference between medaling and attendance, they would be there.



> Not to mention they are as cheap as dirt and even the high tech strings creep after a long shooting session.


Absolutely 100% false with a well made string.


----------



## 3D Archery (May 19, 2016)

Why would I put a limb in a vise and twist it? What does that prove but leverage? You are not going to twist the limb on my 47 or 48 pounds bows. I doubt you could even twist my 40 pounders. The effort it would take to twist one, especially at full draw is pretty significant and would mean you are doing something seriously wrong.


----------



## JamesThom. (Oct 9, 2016)

Hank D Thoreau said:


> Body stress has a lot to do with form, which is also influenced by what you shoot. I have a bad bow arm shoulder. I shot my longbow in a tournament this past weekend and it ate me up. I shoot my recurve and it does not cause nearly as much problems. I shoot more of a classic Olympic style form, even when shooting a longbow. The chart below shows three bows: a longbow, a convention recurve of the same marked weight at 28 inches, and a super recurve. The last bow has a much heavier marked weight since I did not have a super recurve to match the first two bows. The smoothness curve charts the pounds/inch at each point along the draw cycle. While the longbow is lighter at the start, it picks up weight much faster at the back end. This back end weight (hard back end) impacts the ability to execute because of the larger incremental increase in weight at expansion. If you expand at release, a bow with a harder back end will be more difficult to execute good form with. Super recurves are very easy to expand against since you can find incremental weights as low as 1/2 pound/inch at full draw (soft back end). What this means is that how you pull during each part of the draw cycle dictates where the stress is placed on your joints and muscles. Also, how long you hold at full draw makes a difference. Snap shooting, where there is only transient anchoring (at best) and no expansion, does not stress the body in the same way as drawing, transferring load, expanding, and releasing. So it is difficult to say, with certainty, how a particular bow will impact your body. I originally started shooting super recurves several years ago to reduce stress by providing a softer back end, and the ability to pull less weight and get the same performance. It has worked out well for me, with my shoulder situation and shooting style. It is different for James. His shoulder responds better to a longbow. I am not sure why but it likely depends on the type of trauma his shoulder has experienced and the way he shoots a bow. When I do not shoot super recurves, I shoot lighter weights and longer bows. This provides similar stress reduction.
> 
> And to add: vertical stability
> 
> Grab your nock locator and pull it down in the direction of the string. This will be very difficult for a vertically stable bow. Some longbows suffer from what is described as noodly limbs. This is an extreme case of poor vertical stability. You can improve a noodly limb by increasing the brace height. I tried some ILF longbow limbs on a 25 inch riser. It was so noodly that the limbs would invert. I had to set the brace height at 10 to 11 inches. This is obviously an extreme example, but it is a good for demonstrating the principle. You should not notice this affect on a well designed longbow.


How does vertical stability impact your accuracy? I never noticed my longbow being noodlely at all while shooting. But even if a bow did, I don't see how it would effect accuracy. Being able to torque a limb impacts the left to right but I don't see what up and down would effect.


----------



## Hank D Thoreau (Dec 9, 2008)

The nock travels up and down while the arrow moves forward after release. You want your nock travel to be straight and level. So think about the bow doing the same thing in the vertical axis as the stability you point out, does in the horizontal. 

You won't get a noodly longbow unless it is poorly designed and/or incorrectly setup bow. I used it as an example because it is the easiest way to actually see the effect of vertical stability.


----------



## JamesThom. (Oct 9, 2016)

Hank D Thoreau said:


> The nock travels up and down while the arrow moves forward after release. You want your nock travel to be straight and level. So think about the bow doing the same thing in the vertical axis as the stability you point out, does in the horizontal.
> 
> You won't get a noodly longbow unless it is poorly designed and/or incorrectly setup bow. I used it as an example because it is the easiest way to actually see the effect of vertical stability.


Ahh I see thanks for the clarification. I'm guessing you would get more nock highs and nock lows (bareshaft) with a noodly longbow. I shoot an SLB as well. How much vertical stability does it have in your opinion? I don't get any nock high's or nock lows or weird arrow flight so I'm guessing it's really good in that department as well.


----------



## Corene1 (Apr 27, 2014)

JamesThom. said:


> Stephen. Why don't we just each post a video of shooting one round, a round of your choice in one take and in one continuous video we see who the better archer is, I'll do the same.
> 
> If you win I will stop posting since most of the people on here that quote me are as rude as well and VERY disrespectful and act like children. If I win you stop posting.
> 
> ...


I think that is a great idea but a new thread needs to be started so as not to hijack this thread. I also think everyone should jump in, I am game. But it needs to be a short round so as not to be too long of a video and have a single shot from multiple distances say a walk up from 60 yards to 20 yards at 5 yard increments That's 9 continuous arrows, that shouldn't take to much time. Let's play, it will be fun and educational as well.


----------



## Hank D Thoreau (Dec 9, 2008)

I have two SLB and a Falco Trophy. They all seem to be pretty stable running 8 inches of brace height. The SLB are harder to keep the arrow on the center line without canting. The Falco shoots much better in a vertical position, which, as a target shooter, is my personal preference. All in all, the SLB are great bows for the money. I used them for a few years until I decided to compete in the longbow division for a year. It is not easy finding a production 69 inch longbow like the SLB. The Falco I got was specifically built to be a competition D shaped longbow. I had my Falco built 70 inches to help with my 32 inch draw. It was fun taking my longbow out again last weekend. I am normally a barebow stringwalker, but I really like the longbow as a change of pace. I had not had an opportunity to shoot it for a couple of years since it was a higher draw weight than I had progressed to during my form development work.


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

Hank D Thoreau said:


> Body stress has a lot to do with form, which is also influenced by what you shoot. I have a bad bow arm shoulder. I shot my longbow in a tournament this past weekend and it ate me up. I shoot my recurve and it does not cause nearly as much problems. I shoot more of a classic Olympic style form, even when shooting a longbow. The chart below shows three bows: a longbow, a convention recurve of the same marked weight at 28 inches, and a super recurve. The last bow has a much heavier marked weight since I did not have a super recurve to match the first two bows. The smoothness curve charts the pounds/inch at each point along the draw cycle. While the longbow is lighter at the start, it picks up weight much faster at the back end. This back end weight (hard back end) impacts the ability to execute because of the larger incremental increase in weight at expansion. If you expand at release, a bow with a harder back end will be more difficult to execute good form with. Super recurves are very easy to expand against since you can find incremental weights as low as 1/2 pound/inch at full draw (soft back end). What this means is that how you pull during each part of the draw cycle dictates where the stress is placed on your joints and muscles. Also, how long you hold at full draw makes a difference. Snap shooting, where there is only transient anchoring (at best) and no expansion, does not stress the body in the same way as drawing, transferring load, expanding, and releasing. So it is difficult to say, with certainty, how a particular bow will impact your body. I originally started shooting super recurves several years ago to reduce stress by providing a softer back end, and the ability to pull less weight and get the same performance. It has worked out well for me, with my shoulder situation and shooting style. It is different for James. His shoulder responds better to a longbow. I am not sure why but it likely depends on the type of trauma his shoulder has experienced and the way he shoots a bow. When I do not shoot super recurves, I shoot lighter weights and longer bows. This provides similar stress reduction.
> 
> And to add: vertical stability
> 
> Grab your nock locator and pull it down in the direction of the string. This will be very difficult for a vertically stable bow. Some longbows suffer from what is described as noodly limbs. This is an extreme case of poor vertical stability. You can improve a noodly limb by increasing the brace height. I tried some ILF longbow limbs on a 25 inch riser. It was so noodly that the limbs would invert. I had to set the brace height at 10 to 11 inches. This is obviously an extreme example, but it is a good for demonstrating the principle. You should not notice this affect on a well designed longbow.


Vertical stability isnt always improoved by increasing the BH.
There is a correct shape for a bow. Where the vertical is best.
Try the following as you can feel it by hand.
Take a conventional ILF limb. (DO NOT attempt to draw the bow under these conditions) With the bolts fully out. Try a 6.5" bh. A 8" BH. And a 10" bh.
Id put money on the 8" being the better. But 9 would probably be best.
Wind the limbs in. And repeat. Id put a wager on 7.5" being about the better location. Ie 8", while the 10" fully in. Be soft/springy vertically.

Some recurve designs with very far forward limbs and high BHs exhibit the same problem. The dont get noodly. They simply get very soft. 
They dont flip flop back and forth like an underbraced hybrid. They just turn to rubish if theyvare out of geometry.
Which is why when you hear coments of conventional bows being shot at 10" BHs indoors. I kinda cringe at the thought!

You dont see the pros running anything abormal for indoor shooting.


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

3D Archery said:


> Why would I put a limb in a vise and twist it? What does that prove but leverage? You are not going to twist the limb on my 47 or 48 pounds bows. I doubt you could even twist my 40 pounders. The effort it would take to twist one, especially at full draw is pretty significant and would mean you are doing something seriously wrong.


The leaverage is the very thing that makes recurves unstable. Its the torsional resistance that beats the levers effect. I need to dig up the document about recurve limbs.
Post a link.


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&s...gQTALmdDiKViNJqzQ&sig2=gvZ_3rTFFw8AWCXcoJE2Lg


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

Hank D Thoreau said:


> The nock travels up and down while the arrow moves forward after release. You want your nock travel to be straight and level. So think about the bow doing the same thing in the vertical axis as the stability you point out, does in the horizontal.
> 
> You won't get a noodly longbow unless it is poorly designed and/or incorrectly setup bow. I used it as an example because it is the easiest way to actually see the effect of vertical stability.


Not sure about level. Just constant. With no flick at the end.
If your form variation results in a 0.5mm difference in NO height as an example before the trolls jump up and down.
And the setup is vertically unstable. Then there is every opertunity. At the point of separation. The bow could be flicking up OR flicking down.
If the bow is vertically stable. Then the taughtness of the system will haul the string into a tighter location at thenpoint of separation giving 0.25mm of movement as an example.


----------



## Bender (Dec 6, 2006)

As an aside, again in terms of practical application, I have shot "noodly" longbows. That is, they were unstable up and down. They're miserable. God Awful arrow flight. Hideous porpoising due to erratic nock travel up and down. Too close to the target and no telling if you would a good, high, or low hit on any given shot. The arrow wouldn't settle down until out past 15 yards or so. The fletching would have accomplished its job, and consistency would improve somewhat. Finally get to where the arrow flight could show its "average" trajectory. But that would still show a big grouping. 

I would rather shoot a vintage recurve with its attendant lower level of torsional stability. The tips may be wiggly, but still able to achieve more consistent results.


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

JamesThom. said:


> Limb stability is the ability for the bow to cast the arrow inline with the target despite sub optimal form (primarily a sub optimal release or torquing the bow). Where is your argument against that? When you argue against that you are arguing against many great archers.
> 
> I'm starting to really see how OSB was right when he said to avoid the Trad archery forums like the PLAGUE.


As others have mentioned, there's quite a bit to limb stability. Your bow is likely very stable, as it's not really a "performance" model. The more aggressive you go, the more stability you lose. 

You know Ken? Have you shot with him? 

I miss Ken.


----------



## Bender (Dec 6, 2006)

I know, off topic, but OSB was funny! I disagreed with some stuff that he had to say. I agreed with some stuff that he had to say. But either way I swear I could visualize seeing him actually frothing at the mouth when he would go off.


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

Bender said:


> As an aside, again in terms of practical application, I have shot "noodly" longbows. That is, they were unstable up and down. They're miserable. God Awful arrow flight. Hideous porpoising due to erratic nock travel up and down. Too close to the target and no telling if you would a good, high, or low hit on any given shot. The arrow wouldn't settle down until out past 15 yards or so. The fletching would have accomplished its job, and consistency would improve somewhat. Finally get to where the arrow flight could show its "average" trajectory. But that would still show a big grouping.
> 
> I would rather shoot a vintage recurve with its attendant lower level of torsional stability. The tips may be wiggly, but still able to achieve more consistent results.


Exactly. Though. The old design could have a monster boost in TS with new materials. Therefor giving up nothing


----------



## Stephen Morley (Aug 11, 2016)

kegan said:


> I miss Ken.


He argued a lot (mostly about Instinctive aiming) but I respected his shooting ability and knowledge.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Anyone who doesn't understand the influence of vertical stability probably hasn't ever shot a competitive score with an Olympic recurve bow.

Sometimes it's pointless to argue with a person who has no experience shooting competitive scores. Honestly, to them what difference does it make... ?

I don't say that to be mean, but rather to say that people who have not yet learned how to realize the benefits of certain features, shouldn't spend time worrying about them, much less arguing about them because all they are doing is wasting their own time, and that of anyone willing to engage them.


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

limbwalker said:


> Anyone who doesn't understand the influence of vertical stability probably hasn't ever shot a competitive score with an Olympic recurve bow.
> 
> Sometimes it's pointless to argue with a person who has no experience shooting competitive scores. Honestly, to them what difference does it make... ?
> 
> I don't say that to be mean, but rather to say that people who have not yet learned how to realize the benefits of certain features, shouldn't spend time worrying about them, much less arguing about them because all they are doing is wasting their own time, and that of anyone willing to engage them.


To understand stability. You have had to have made the unstable too. We have made bows that couldnt replicate one shot after the next. The string was choosing to sit left or right of the string groove on every shot. It simply wasnt consitant.
Where the limbs looked twisted to the left. After a few shots looked twisted to the right. And back again.

Its been done


----------



## 3D Archery (May 19, 2016)

Borderbows said:


> The leaverage is the very thing that makes recurves unstable. Its the torsional resistance that beats the levers effect. I need to dig up the document about recurve limbs.
> Post a link.


Interesting read, but I believe you a selecting what you want. In the section about stability it states: "It is important to note, however, that as a recurve bow is draw further back, the recurve begins straighten, such that the entire bow is usually stable at the maximum draw length, as shown in figure 14"

And later: "Since the shape of the recurve for these bows is nearly identical (and essentially unchanged for the past two decades), it is likely that that only a minimal torsional stiffness is required for this geometry, and additional torsional stiffness beyond this minimum yields little additional benefit"

The paper mainly deals with materials for Olympic limbs. Nice read though, Thanks for sharing.


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

3D Archery said:


> Interesting read, but I believe you a selecting what you want. In the section about stability it states: "It is important to note, however, that as a recurve bow is draw further back, the recurve begins straighten, such that the entire bow is usually stable at the maximum draw length, as shown in figure 14"
> 
> And later: "Since the shape of the recurve for these bows is nearly identical (and essentially unchanged for the past two decades), it is likely that that only a minimal torsional stiffness is required for this geometry, and additional torsional stiffness beyond this minimum yields little additional benefit"
> 
> The paper mainly deals with materials for Olympic limbs. Nice read though, Thanks for sharing.


You need to think past that....
The need for more ts is not required in designs that are stable. Adding more ts allows you to modify the design.
Adding more ts to that again is relativly pointless.
Once there is very little tip movement. Adding more is pointless.
If you change shape. You might need more ts. But adding more after that yealds little to no reward


----------



## Viper1 (Aug 21, 2003)

John -



limbwalker said:


> Anyone who doesn't understand the influence of vertical stability probably hasn't ever shot a competitive score with an Olympic recurve bow.
> 
> Sometimes it's pointless to argue with a person who has no experience shooting competitive scores. Honestly, to them what difference does it make... ?
> 
> I don't say that to be mean, but rather to say that people who have not yet learned how to realize the benefits of certain features, shouldn't spend time worrying about them, much less arguing about them because all they are doing is wasting their own time, and that of anyone willing to engage them.


You are absolutely right, which begs the question why is it even being discussed here?
In fact, conservatively, I'd guess that 99% of the equipment discussions here and even upstairs in the FITA forum are pretty meaningless and most would be resolved if people just learned how to shoot in the first place. 

Viper1 out.


----------



## Stephen Morley (Aug 11, 2016)

Sometimes these Forums feel a bit like this lol


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

If you understand the features in a bow. That make it stable or unstable. Then you can pick designs that suit your needs.
Instead of generic coments like unforgiving.
Some folks have a flappy loose. Some a wobbly bow arm.
Some struggle with consistant draw lengths. There are bow features that can help with these

But yes. You still have to be able to shoot.


----------



## Stash (Jun 1, 2002)

Viper1 said:


> In fact, conservatively, I'd guess that 99% of the equipment discussions here and even upstairs in the FITA forum are pretty meaningless and most would be resolved if people just learned how to shoot in the first place.
> 
> Viper1 out.


In fact, 99% of the questions here and there can be answered by either "it doesn't matter" or "try it and find out for yourself (you lazy...)".


----------



## Tereva (Feb 12, 2015)

Stephen Morley said:


> Sometimes these Forums feel a bit like this lol


No, it doesn't !


----------



## Stub (Aug 13, 2013)

Tereva said:


> No, it doesn't !


Lol! Good one


----------

