# How much draw weight for boar hunting



## Crux52 (Apr 7, 2012)

So I have ferral pigs running though my back yard. How strong of a recurve is needed to take one down?


----------



## c.sitas (Dec 29, 2010)

I would say anything you use for a deer will work fine. The key here is "Shot Placement"--- in other words --hit the double lung shot. The pig is down in 30 to 50 yds. I would think anything in the 40 to 60 pds. class would do the job.


----------



## Nokhead (Jun 10, 2012)

These days it depends more on the design and performance of the bow, than it's actual draw weight. For instance my 56# Omega shoots just about as fast and hard as my short old Browning Fury II, which is a 72#'s. It's true.

Having said that, all things considered, and generally speaking, I personally would want at least a 45# bow. But then you get in to all the aspects of what weight you can shoot well...shot placement is right...a good hit from a 45# is better than a poor hit or miss from a 60, 70, or 80 pound bow. Since I can shoot up to a 80# bow pretty well, I'd grab my 56# Omega for best accuracy, and know that it's going to hit as hard as a 65#-70# bow from 30 years ago.

Also, in addition to shot placement, you want a good, reasonably heavy arrow with a good sharp broad head...my preference being just a good, simple, two bladed head.

Or...(there I go...too much coffee again) I guess the answer really is, what is the heaviest weight bow can *YOU* shoot accurately?


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

Crux52 said:


> So I have ferral pigs running though my back yard. How strong of a recurve is needed to take one down?


Shoot em a little lower right behind the front leg.... (obviously the resident missuse is tellin me) and you should be fine with anything legal. I've heard rules of thumbs... 40 pounds and 20 yards.... 50 @ 25.

View attachment 1526343


----------



## 187 BOWHUNTER (Feb 13, 2011)

You put one of those woodsman or vpa's in the vitals with a 40# bow, done deal


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

187 BOWHUNTER said:


> You put one of those woodsman or vpa's in the vitals with a 40# bow, done deal


Hey..... don't fergit them rothaar snuffers now.... :grin: that is the original one shot... :grin:


----------



## Crux52 (Apr 7, 2012)

187 BOWHUNTER said:


> You put one of those woodsman or vpa's in the vitals with a 40# bow, done deal


thanks good to know I have enough power, I bought a 40# recurve @ 28 but I actually have a 29" draw


----------



## Highstrung1 (Oct 20, 2010)

Nockhead: "I'd grab my 56# Omega for best accuracy, and know that it's going to hit as hard as a 65#-70# bow from 30 years ago."

In your opinion? or have you tested your 56# against a 65-70# bow.

'cause....I really doubt it.


----------



## benofthehood (May 18, 2011)

get close , 40# and upwards , uber shaving sharp b'head shot placement ... i prefer 50# [ but I have a short arse draw ] personally but have seen and guided plenty of people onto hogs that were taken cleanly with sub 50# bows ...........


----------



## UrbanDeerSlayer (Feb 10, 2012)

Highstrung1 said:


> Nockhead: "I'd grab my 56# Omega for best accuracy, and know that it's going to hit as hard as a 65#-70# bow from 30 years ago."
> 
> In your opinion? or have you tested your 56# against a 65-70# bow.
> 
> 'cause....I really doubt it.


My 60#@28 Omega throws a 500g arrow 195fps. Assuming the older bows are not speed demons I would say it is entirely possible the Omega will have as much KE as a 70-80# older bow.


----------



## jkcerda (Jan 25, 2007)

Highstrung1 said:


> Nockhead: "I'd grab my 56# Omega for best accuracy, and know that it's going to hit as hard as a 65#-70# bow from 30 years ago."
> 
> In your opinion? or have you tested your 56# against a 65-70# bow.
> 
> 'cause....I really doubt it.


WORLD of a difference in speed between the #45 Shakespeare X18 & my # 48 Omega, no, I did NOT shoot through the Chrono, I simply saw the difference right away.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

I'd go with the chrono results rather than the imagined results every time.

I'd also go with 55 lbs. for big pigs.

:nod:


----------



## UrbanDeerSlayer (Feb 10, 2012)

Logos said:


> I'd go with the chrono results rather than the imagined results every time.
> 
> I'd also go with 55 lbs. for big pigs.
> 
> :nod:


Logos, 

I've chrono'ed the Omega more than once. Nothing imaginary there. Its a speed demon for a hybrid longbow and absolutelypummels my targets to death. I have seen Omegas as low as 25#'s, you should order one and see for yourself.


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

Logos said:


> I'd go with the chrono results rather than the imagined results every time.
> 
> I'd also go with 55 lbs. for big pigs.
> 
> :nod:


Why? and Why?

It might be nice to support your comments there logo's, when you just make carte blanche statement like that you give people the impression you know what you're talking about.

As to the chonograph, you only need it for detail, not evidence, although it can give you that as well. The mind is a beautiful thing Logos... you should take heed of its bounty. Now as to speed, I'm proposing that in *my opinion* most any shooter can ascertain by trajectory and time whether one arrow is faster than another with relative accuracy unless they are almost equal. Then you might need "detail" to determine the winner.

Telling someone that a 55 lb bow is better for big pigs is almost malpractice if you haven't first determined if they can properly handle one... which is of course what you meant is it not?


----------



## Highstrung1 (Oct 20, 2010)

UrbanDeerSlayer: "Assuming the older bows are not speed demons..."

So, there ya have it!


----------



## benofthehood (May 18, 2011)

Logos , I know many archers who suggest 55# plus ... just as I know many who don't even mention poundage but shot placement, arrow weight and Broadhead choice ....

Just wondering if and/or how many big hogs you have taken with a bow ? and which set up you used ?

Killing wild pigs is a bit of a past time here in Oz as we have a few of them roaming around ... just a few lol ... so I am always interested in others opinions and experiences


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

The chrono doesn't lie......the imagination does.

Pride of ownership can make a great bow seem supernaturally high on performance.

Better to stick with facts than assumption and speculation.

:nod:


----------



## benofthehood (May 18, 2011)

I'd also note that many of the hogs I have killed has been with 55# + bows and 500gn arrows , out of Hill style bows , which performance wise are no where near the fast hybrids and 'curves shooting way less poundage ........... then I dropped down to 50# and even lower and noticed that the pigs died just as quickly


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

benofthehood said:


> Logos , I know many archers who suggest 55# plus ... just as I know many who don't even mention poundage but shot placement, arrow weight and Broadhead choice ....


Well, maybe you should ask them what draw weight they recommend. 

:nod:

Never killed a wild hog, but what I do know is that 40 is a popular (minimal) draw weight for deer, but big hogs have a significantly heavier bone structure than deer, plus their hide is a lot thicker and tougher. 

I've killed plenty of deer and know they are fragile creatures compared to a lot of game.

So......as I said, I'd want 55 lbs. in a recurve. Maybe I just feel more comfortable erring on the side of power.

:thumb:


----------



## Highstrung1 (Oct 20, 2010)

jkcerda said:


> WORLD of a difference in speed between the #45 Shakespeare X18 & my # 48 Omega, no, I did NOT shoot through the Chrono, I simply saw the difference right away.


UrbanDeerSlayer : "My 60#@28 Omega throws a 500g arrow 195fps. Assuming the older bows are not speed demons I would say it is entirely possible the Omega will have as much KE as a 70-80# older bow."

You guys should have bought a 1960 Ben Pearson.

http://www.archeryhistory.com/ads/adpics/pearson59.jpg

211 fps - 43# @28

add on edit....52 years old enough?


----------



## benofthehood (May 18, 2011)

Logos , thanks for the response .....
those archers I referred to who don't mention poundage are the very same gents who have killed hundreds of hogs ... many of which were large shielded boars , mud covered and bad tempered ! Oz bowyer Glenn Newell has killed well over a thousand ..... many of which were with sub 45# bows ....... Rod Jenkins takes care of business in fine fashion with 40# rigs ......... 
Conversely I know and hunt with many other fine hunters who are toting 60# + ... and they get there game just as successfully , although by comparison ... as succesful hunters i think they are fewer in number than the guys pulling less # as, and this is a generality , they are not as good a shots as the sub 50# crowd .......

But fair enough on erring n the side of more power , it is all just opinion , my opinion changing over the years with more and more pigs killed both by myself and others I either know or was hunting with ...... and poundage IMHO is not really a big part of the equation when all other things are carefully taken into consideration and put into practical hunting work .


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

Logos said:


> The chrono doesn't lie......the imagination does.
> 
> Pride of ownership can make a great bow seem supernaturally high on performance.
> 
> ...


Again I disagree with you about chronographs not lying.... you aint been around much I can see... 

As far as imagination goes... I'm not going to discount anyones perception when they have two bows and one is saying that his X is just as fast as his y which is 10# heavier. Shooting two bows at the same target will usually give you accurate perception as what is clearly faster, and if you can't tell, then they aint.... :grin:


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

My Omegas are solid performers, just under many of the top end bows you'll find today (from what I'm reading it's about 5-10 fps less all else being equal on average), but still faster than the average bow of yester-year. My personal bow: 55# at 29" shooting a 535 gr arrow about 190fps with a 16 strand endless loop FF string. It's delivering about 43ft-lbs of KE.

Highstrung, does it say about the arrow? The print is too small for me to read. I'd believe it, all it takes for a wood cored fiberglass recurve to really spit them is the right balance. Look at the Martin Hunter recurve, from what I'm told they're pretty darn fast.

String material and design, reflex, limb geometry, and limb mass placement can all make the difference between a bow that will delivering say 28ft-lbs of KE and 42ft-lbs of KE from same draw bows. I used to shoot selfbows in the 80-90# range... I'm getting more power with my 55# hybrid. 

I think the whole draw weight arguments need to be tossed out the window. It doesn't matter. At all. If you want to measure performance, then measure the actual performance: energy delivered. My favorite go-to bow was a white oak flatbow pulling 85# at 29". It produced, at best, 185 fps with a 600 gr arrow. It was actually a fairly good bow for the design, low string follow and good mass placement for a straight bow with a little string follow. Hard as heck to handle tired though, I could handle it fine when the adrenaline kicked in just right... but that's nothing to try to count on when confronted by game.

I'm shooting bows in the 50-55# range these days and getting very similiar performance... but my accuracy is far beyond what I was doing with those bows. During Hill's time bows in the 75-85# range were the norm, and their performance would be similiar to my own selfbows (perhaps a bit less, as I used Fast Flight). So you're looking at bows producing around 36-43ft-lbs of KE. A 40# bow of modern design optimized for delivery of power would be able to achieve that sort of performance fairly easily. If high speed isn't important to the shooter, one of my bows at 40# will shoot a 600 gr arrow at 165-168 fps with a 28" draw. That's 37ft-lbs of KE, and there are many high end bows that could deliver even _more_ energy. Increase the draw of the modern bow to 50# you're looking at 42ft-lbs or more. That's about on par with a roughly 90# bow of yester-year. We're not all built like Howard, but we don't need to be anymore. Even more recent recruves, like many of the Bear recurves popular in years prior. These bows were definately a step up from the longbows used in Hill's time, but given that many of them were fitted with the highly elastic and heavy Dacron strings, you're looking at a 65# recurve delivering 33-45ft-lbs. Clearly you don't even need that much anymore.

Now, this isn't to say that if you can handle that weight you shouldn't. It should just be taken into account if you STRUGGLE with bows on the heavier end. I know I for one certainly enjoy 55# a heck of a lot more than 85#! Choose the right bow, set it up with the best arrow and don't hesitate to add on the weight (draws more energy from the bow), put a razor sharp broadhead on there- and stick 'em in the right spot.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

benofthehood said:


> Logos , thanks for the response .....
> those archers I referred to who don't mention poundage are the very same gents who have killed hundreds of hogs ... many of which were large shielded boars , mud covered and bad tempered ! Oz bowyer Glenn Newell has killed well over a thousand ..... many of which were with sub 45# bows ....... Rod Jenkins takes care of business in fine fashion with 40# rigs .........
> Conversely I know and hunt with many other fine hunters who are toting 60# + ... and they get there game just as successfully , although by comparison ... as succesful hunters i think they are fewer in number than the guys pulling less # as, and this is a generality , they are not as good a shots as the sub 50# crowd .......
> 
> But fair enough on erring n the side of more power , it is all just opinion , my opinion changing over the years with more and more pigs killed both by myself and others I either know or was hunting with ...... and poundage IMHO is not really a big part of the equation when all other things are carefully taken into consideration and put into practical hunting work .


As you say, to each his own. I'd go for 55 on big hogs, as I said.....moot, because I probably will not shoot anything but targets from here on out.

A 40 lb. bow might be fine for hogs, as you seem to think.......however, I like the idea of being able to shoot a heavier arrow and yet have a fairly flat trajectory were I to meet up with a big hog.

The answer is not necessarily the same for everyone.

:thumb:


----------



## GPW (May 12, 2012)

Hogs Everywhere around here , come and get em’ ... (they do taste Good and make great deer/hog sausage .) We’ve taken a couple with an 85# osage 70” LB of our own making ... Not a Fun bow to shoot , but casts a Heavy 850gn. + ramin wood arrow + Zewicky good enough ... We set up an ambush (tree stand) in a swale so we get< 10yd. shots (easy for old guys ) ... I’m sure one of Kegan’s bows at half the weight would shoot the same as “the Beast” ... Much more comfortable too !!!!!!! 
Hogs are pretty TOUGH !!! As usual shot placement is everything ....

So many folks are trapping them now , no need to hunt em’ anymore ... my hunting /trapping neighbors keep my freezer full ...


----------



## UrbanDeerSlayer (Feb 10, 2012)

GPW said:


> Hogs Everywhere around here , come and get em’ ... (they do taste Good and make great deer/hog sausage .) I’m sure one of Kegan’s bows at half the weight would shoot the same as “the Beast” ...


I may have to load up my truck, grab Kegan and a couple of Omega's and do some Hog Hunting! LOL! What part of the country are we talking that has Hogs running wild??


----------



## GPW (May 12, 2012)

Seems like there everywhere these days ... We have so many in some spots , you can see them on the other side of the fence from the I-10 ... during the day !!! ... Come on down boys , it’s above freezing and they’re waiting for ya’ .... :thumbs_up


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

UrbanDeerSlayer said:


> I may have to load up my truck, grab Kegan and a couple of Omega's and do some Hog Hunting! LOL! What part of the country are we talking that has Hogs running wild??


Sounds good to me! Trade you an Omega for some porkers ?


----------



## UrbanDeerSlayer (Feb 10, 2012)

kegan said:


> Sounds good to me! Trade you an Omega for some porkers ?


Now that's a bargain! 
Louisiana Bound!!


----------



## GPW (May 12, 2012)

Kegan ... the “freight” :mg:

Not sure if you even need a local hunting license since they’re a nuisance animal .... I dunno’ ...


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

Crux52 said:


> So I have ferral pigs running though my back yard. How strong of a recurve is needed to take one down?


I wish I had your problem.


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

BarneySlayer said:


> I wish I had your problem.


No you don't..... actually... :grin:


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

Highstrung1 said:


> UrbanDeerSlayer : "My 60#@28 Omega throws a 500g arrow 195fps. Assuming the older bows are not speed demons I would say it is entirely possible the Omega will have as much KE as a 70-80# older bow."
> 
> You guys should have bought a 1960 Ben Pearson.
> 
> ...



That _is_ impressive. However, it doesn't specify arrow weight. Pictures showed relatively light-looking target arrows. While it would imply that it certainly was fast, I don't know if that's exactly the same kind of thing. Would be interesting if there was some more detailed data.


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

rattus58 said:


> No you don't..... actually... :grin:


Okay, I wish a neighbor who'd want me to help had his problem


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

BarneySlayer said:


> Okay, I wish a neighbor who'd want me to help had his problem


Thas right.... grass is greener on his side.... :grin:


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

If your neighbor had the problem, you'd have it too.

Sort of like having aggressively destructive and intelligent 400 pound rabbits......breeding like rabbits.

Hunters and trappers can't keep up in most places.

:nod:


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

BarneySlayer said:


> That _is_ impressive. However, it doesn't specify arrow weight. Pictures showed relatively light-looking target arrows. While it would imply that it certainly was fast, I don't know if that's exactly the same kind of thing. Would be interesting if there was some more detailed data.


 Well a 500 grain arrow at 195 = 8.33 GPP A 7.66 GPP arrow might actually be able to do 211 if my math is correct... very doable I would think with some "Intelligent Design".


----------



## rackman (Nov 10, 2005)

I'm not sure what a minimum weight would be for shooting hogs, but I have a few bows that I could bring down and I would be nice enough to do some testing for you in your back yard. Ha 
I've been trying to put together a hog hunt sometime soon here. They are a serious problem, let me know if you need assistance.


----------



## GPW (May 12, 2012)

400 lb. Rabbits ..... hahahahahahahahahaha with body armor ...
My Dentist moved back into my neck of the woods just so he could bow hunt wild hogs in his backyard ... he’s got 10 acres , which supplies him with as many hogs as he desires...


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

Or more.

:nod:


----------



## Long Rifle (Dec 8, 2011)

rattus58 said:


> No you don't..... actually... :grin:


Hit the nail on the head there rattus, the man knows whereof he speaks. I trapped them, dogged'em, and burned up a crate-full of bullets over 35 years of trying to control feral hogs, it's like trying to get ahead of a never-ending herd of four-wheel-drive rototillers. One day you've got a beautiful crop field, food plot, or manicured lawn so smooth you can drink a beer while mowing it and the next day you can't get a pickup truck across it. Chased many a dog through the palmettos at midnight to get to one bayed up......


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

Long Rifle said:


> Hit the nail on the head there rattus, the man knows whereof he speaks. I trapped them, dogged'em, and burned up a crate-full of bullets over 35 years of trying to control feral hogs, it's like trying to get ahead of a never-ending herd of four-wheel-drive rototillers. One day you've got a beautiful crop field, food plot, or manicured lawn so smooth you can drink a beer while mowing it and the next day you can't get a pickup truck across it. Chased many a dog through the palmettos at midnight to get to one bayed up......


Yeah... I had a pet... Babbles... who at capture was about 5 pounds... at death, she was 350. She stayed mostly to her 1/4 acre but we let her wander the yard a bit everyday... her quarter acre was pretty well set up for her... avacado, breadfruit macadamia nuts, rose apples, worms and weeds and all the kibbles.... well maybe common fare mostly... but anyways... her 1/4 was exactly as you put it... rototilled... Babbles could move 50 pound rocks looking for worms and grubs or going after a mac nut rolled into a crack... her demise came when she spooked and broke away from her acres... and in the interim of a long story... rolled up my hand built back yard... so bye the bye Babbles.... mistake number two... shot her square between the eyes with a .308... most horrible thing I've ever done to a friend... she cried and cried till I put one behind her ear...... Sad... great pets they are... don't know what spooked her and if I didn't have a 5:00 Am flight might have been different....


----------



## Long Rifle (Dec 8, 2011)

We trapped them and always kept a few in a cleaning pen where we'd feed'em corn and scraps for a few weeks to clean them out before butchering. Had a buddy who stepped in with a 22mag pistol and shot an old sow between the eyes. I told him he was making a mistake but he was ten feet tall and bulletproof and yes, there was alcohol involved. 

I don't think she even bled. She just grunted and did her best to eat him before he could get that leg back over the fence. I do know that he got out of that pen a lot faster than he got in.....
I stood back to one side with a 22 rifle, aimed for the ear, and she dropped like a stone.


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

Well I don't have anyplace to hunt where there's anything to shoot at and I haven't in years. I think I'd enjoy a hog problem...or a deer problem or even a rabbit problem. We don't even have any rabbits this year.


----------



## UrbanDeerSlayer (Feb 10, 2012)

MGF said:


> Well I don't have anyplace to hunt where there's anything to shoot at and I haven't in years. I think I'd enjoy a hog problem...or a deer problem or even a rabbit problem. We don't even have any rabbits this year.


Amen. City folk like myself got problems finding something to shoot, and somewhere to shoot it at.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

UrbanDeerSlayer said:


> Amen. City folk like myself got problems finding something to shoot, and somewhere to shoot it at.


You must feel a little bit like Robin Hood.......trying to be invisible while shooting the King's deer.

:nod:


----------



## UrbanDeerSlayer (Feb 10, 2012)

Logos said:


> You must feel a little bit like Robin Hood.......trying to be invisible while shooting the King's deer.
> 
> :nod:


Ain't that the truth. I wear Camo so the yuppies and soccer moms don't see me in the trees. I've had women get out of their SUV's, and walk into the woods, look up at me in the tree, and tell me I can't hunt there because kids and dogs walk through those woods. As if I dont know the difference between a deer and little Johnny. The same women complain about the deer eating all their flowers.....


----------



## Nokhead (Jun 10, 2012)

Hog shooting would be a good test bed for any bow, or bow and arrow combination. You could collect a lot of data...and bacon.


----------



## jack mac (Feb 8, 2011)

220, 221 whatever it takes.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

UrbanDeerSlayer said:


> Ain't that the truth. I wear Camo so the yuppies and soccer moms don't see me in the trees. I've had women get out of their SUV's, and walk into the woods, look up at me in the tree, and tell me I can't hunt there because kids and dogs walk through those woods. As if I dont know the difference between a deer and little Johnny. The same women complain about the deer eating all their flowers.....


Yeah, they don't know a thing about how hunting works or how weapons work.......all they know is it's too dangerous.

:thumbs_do


----------



## Highstrung1 (Oct 20, 2010)

Keegan: Highstrung, does it say about the arrow? The print is too small for me to read. I'd believe it, all it takes for a wood cored fiberglass recurve to really spit them is the right balance. Look at the Martin Hunter recurve, from what I'm told they're pretty darn fast.

My point was....a 52 year old bow was slinging arrows at 211fps with 43# behind it. I believe the statement was made that a 30 year old 60-70# recurve bow can not/will not perform as well as a 50# omega.
Then kinda escalated in to....all old bows are slow pigs that relied on poundage for performance.
Nothing against an omega you understand, but statements like those are simply false.


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

Highstrung1 said:


> Keegan: Highstrung, does it say about the arrow? The print is too small for me to read. I'd believe it, all it takes for a wood cored fiberglass recurve to really spit them is the right balance. Look at the Martin Hunter recurve, from what I'm told they're pretty darn fast.
> 
> My point was....a 52 year old bow was slinging arrows at 211fps with 43# behind it. I believe the statement was made that a 30 year old 60-70# recurve bow can not/will not perform as well as a 50# omega.
> Then kinda escalated in to....all old bows are slow pigs that relied on poundage for performance.
> Nothing against an omega you understand, but statements like those are simply false.


I'm not seeing any escalation. It's not false that the average bow from 30 years ago was typically not designed for the performance we have today. It's also true that the average bow from 30 years before that were not as fast as those. 

At 43# an Omega can easily do 211 fps, or more. Just lighten the arrow/string up. It's really not that big a deal unless the arrow is 8 gpp or more. Then you're looking at a rocket launcher.


----------



## Nokhead (Jun 10, 2012)

I did say that my 56# Omega shoots _almost_ as fast as my old 72# recurve. But my point was that you didn't _need_ a 72# bow to shoot hogs, _especially_ with some of the good bows that are around today.

I'm not sure where the can not/will not comes from. My 72# recurve is only 54" long, I'm sure if it was 66", same length as the Omega, it would outperform the Omega by a wider margin. However, shooting them both side by side, I have learned that there is not much difference between the two. Nothing against recurves...!!

If the statement was made that all bows are slow pigs that relied on poundage for performance, I can't find it...and I'd agree it would be false. But I think that statement first appeared in the post above, and that the statement about the fabricated statement is the greatest falsehood! Almost like fishing or something. 

I think that feet per second really means little. I could shoot a 180 grain pistol bullet out of my Trapdoor Springfield .45-70, and get really impressive velocities. But it wouldn't knock a buffalo down...a slower, heavier bullet would. My point being that slinging a light arrow out of a bow at 211fps does not mean much, whether the bow be 52 years old, or a brand new bow. 

Anyhow, show me I'm wrong, and point me to where the statement was made that "a 30 year old 60-70# recurve bow can not/will not perform as well as a 50# Omega", and...who made the statement? I went through the tread, but could not find it. 

And, I could be wrong.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

Nokhead said:


> I'd grab my 56# Omega for best accuracy, and know that it's going to hit as hard as a 65#-70# bow from 30 years ago.


I think that was what sounded a bit strange.

:nod:


----------



## Crux52 (Apr 7, 2012)

Rattus, were in hawaii you stay? I stay in Kauai.


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

Crux52 said:


> Rattus, were in hawaii you stay? I stay in Kauai.


Aloha... Big Island... Love kauai. Hunt there periodically.

Be in oahu tomorrow back on the Big Island Wed.... are you putting in for axis on Lanai?

Aloha... :beer:



View attachment 1529131


----------



## bolo7735 (Jan 31, 2011)

It's all about shot placement. Doesn't make a difference if you are shooting a 60lb bow if you can't hit vital. I use 42lb recurve to hunt hogs. Sharp broadhead is just as important.


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

bolo7735 said:


> It's all about shot placement. Doesn't make a difference if you are shooting a 60lb bow if you can't hit vital. I use 42lb recurve to hunt hogs. Sharp broadhead is just as important.


True Enough.... :grin:


----------



## Nokhead (Jun 10, 2012)

I stand corrected. But where is the slow pig?


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

Glad I could help.

I will start a new thread on the "slow pig" issue.

:thumb:


----------



## Highstrung1 (Oct 20, 2010)

kegan said:


> I'm not seeing any escalation. It's not false that the average bow from 30 years ago was typically not designed for the performance we have today. It's also true that the average bow from 30 years before that were not as fast as those.
> 
> At 43# an Omega can easily do 211 fps, or more. Just lighten the arrow/string up. It's really not that big a deal unless the arrow is 8 gpp or more. Then you're looking at a rocket launcher.


OK, we disagree. It is true that the "average bow from 30 years ago was not designed for the performance we have today." Because they were designed better than todays bows. Actually they performed better and continue to do so.

Sorry if that hurts your feelings. Post again in forty years when the Omega you built today is still out in the field.....


----------



## Crux52 (Apr 7, 2012)

rattus58 said:


> Aloha... Big Island... Love kauai. Hunt there periodically.
> 
> Be in oahu tomorrow back on the Big Island Wed.... are you putting in for axis on Lanai?
> 
> ...


I havent gotten that serious about hunting yet. This year was my first year ànd ive been going after goat in the canyon. I struck out this season but i did see them from 200yds away, lol


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

Crux52 said:


> I havent gotten that serious about hunting yet. This year was my first year ànd ive been going after goat in the canyon. I struck out this season but i did see them from 200yds away, lol


We've all struck out going after goats in the Canyon... :grin:


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

Highstrung1 said:


> OK, we disagree. It is true that the "average bow from 30 years ago was not designed for the performance we have today." Because they were designed better than todays bows. Actually they performed better and continue to do so.
> 
> Sorry if that hurts your feelings. Post again in forty years when the Omega you built today is still out in the field.....


Nice little personal jab. I'll be sure to come back and apologize in forty years when all my bows are broken and the ones you bought are still the best around. Although I probably won't have to wait that long, they'll all be gone in what, ten tops? No, even five might be pushing it.

I went back to make sure of what I said though, and couldn't find where I said that there WEREN'T some phenomenal bows built. I totally forgot about all the dogs out there today though. Nothing more than pretty handles. Slow, loud, uncomfortable, and about as durable as a styrofoam cup. 

Although I'd still like to know what sort of testing was done to get the performance numbers for those bows then, and what the bows are producing now. I really don't see many people talking about their such-and-such antique producing speeds at or over 200fps without a light arrow.


----------



## ozzypop (Sep 23, 2010)

Highstrung1 said:


> OK, we disagree. It is true that the "average bow from 30 years ago was not designed for the performance we have today." Because they were designed better than todays bows. Actually they performed better and continue to do so.
> 
> Sorry if that hurts your feelings. Post again in forty years when the Omega you built today is still out in the field.....


Where do you get the idea they preform better? Go look at oly archery, compounds, and are you saying a 30 year old Bear at the same weight with the same weight arrow can keep up with Kegan's bows? I don't think so.


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

kegan said:


> Nice little personal jab. I'll be sure to come back and apologize in forty years when all my bows are broken and the ones you bought are still the best around. Although I probably won't have to wait that long, they'll all be gone in what, ten tops? No, even five might be pushing it.
> 
> I went back to make sure of what I said though, and couldn't find where I said that there WEREN'T some phenomenal bows built. I totally forgot about all the dogs out there today though. Nothing more than pretty handles. Slow, loud, uncomfortable, and about as durable as a styrofoam cup.
> 
> Although I'd still like to know what sort of testing was done to get the performance numbers for those bows then, and what the bows are producing now. I really don't see many people talking about their such-and-such antique producing speeds at or over 200fps without a light arrow.


Actually you've been very complimentary to other bows all through your posts.. on AT that I've seen... keeping in mind that if it has anything to do with target... well... I didn't see it... :grin:


----------



## Highstrung1 (Oct 20, 2010)

kegan said:


> Nice little personal jab. I'll be sure to come back and apologize in forty years when all my bows are broken and the ones you bought are still the best around. Although I probably won't have to wait that long, they'll all be gone in what, ten tops? No, even five might be pushing it.
> 
> I went back to make sure of what I said though, and couldn't find where I said that there WEREN'T some phenomenal bows built. I totally forgot about all the dogs out there today though. Nothing more than pretty handles. Slow, loud, uncomfortable, and about as durable as a styrofoam cup.
> 
> Although I'd still like to know what sort of testing was done to get the performance numbers for those bows then, and what the bows are producing now. I really don't see many people talking about their such-and-such antique producing speeds at or over 200fps without a light arrow.


I really didn't mean it to be a personal jab. I am absolutely sure you make some really fine bows, and I congratulate you on the success of your bows. All I really trying to do is call dude out on his statement that his omega would out perform recurves 10-20 lbs heavier and 30 years older. I just don't believe that to be true. I would say the same about almost any "new bow." I do believe if you put a heavier string and shot heavier arrows, your bows might last longer? 

The "older bows" were not designed to shoot lighter arrows. But I'm pretty sure that they shot as well as possible with the materials (wood under glass) they utilized. Are you using something different? Carbon or something? If 200fps is the goal, I'm sure you could blow up an old pearson or bear with a fastflight string and a light arrow if you wanted to. Or, maybe they wouldn't blow for a year or two.
To tell you the truth, I don't see many people talking about their such-and-such custom bow producing speeds at or over 200fps without a light arrow either. The speed junkies generally gravitate towards the wheels.....


----------



## Highstrung1 (Oct 20, 2010)

ozzypop said:


> Where do you get the idea they preform better? Go look at oly archery, compounds, and are you saying a 30 year old Bear at the same weight with the same weight arrow can keep up with Kegan's bows? I don't think so.


No, I'm saying a bear that is 40 years old will. And a 40 year old Pearson. And a 40 year old alot of other bows......

There is no real magic here. Glass and wood right?


----------



## UrbanDeerSlayer (Feb 10, 2012)

Highstrung1 said:


> All I really trying to do is call dude out on his statement that his omega would out perform recurves 10-20 lbs heavier and 30 years older. I just don't believe that to be true. I would say the same about almost any "new bow."


Which "dude" are you calling out? I went over this entire thread, and unless I missed it, Nobody stated that an Omega would out perform a "recurve" 10-20 lbs heavier from 30years earlier (the word recurve was not used). I believe that it was implied that the Omega was being compared to longbows from that time frame. I watched a movie the other day where Howard Hill was hunting a feral pig with a 100 lb longbow with something like 20+ laminations of bamboo. Did Mr. Hill shoot 100 lb bows for fun, or in order to obtain speed and power out of his bow? I will assume the latter is correct. I believe that what was being suggested is that the hybrid technology enables a lighter longbow to deliver the same speed and energy as a heavier longbow of yesteryear. No need for hostility.


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

Highstrung,

I think your intial comment was intentionally meant to be a personal jab, but I understand that you also felt insulted. However I have seen quite a few older, and newer, Bear recurves that do NOT shoot anywhere close to my bows- with the same draw and same weight arrows (actually my arrows have been heavier in some recent cases since switching to 200 gr points to match my Tree Shark heads). Even accounting for the difference in string material (16 strand dacron instead of my 16 strand FF) my bows are still faster. There are also a number of bows out there faster than mine. I'm not using anything special other than solid design characteristics. I use fiberglass over a hardwood core (hickory). Being a longbow rather than a recurve allows me to make the limbs more narrow, which reduces mass. I use a large amount of reflex over the full length, which reduces limb mass and turns the outer limbs into long "stiff" levers, reducing vibration and increasing efficiency. The reflex itself is balanced with enough deflex to recess the mid limb (further reducing vibration) but allowing for nearly 2" of net reflex on the bow (adding stored energy). Likewise, I designed the reflex to uncurl just enough to create a "vertical recurve" without contact. This allows for maximum leverage and stored energy without sacrificing limb stability (torsional).

There are a lot of builders out there that also know a heck of a lot more than I do, and there are plenty of folks these days pushing the 200 fps line. If you have a chance, look into "Walk the Talk".


----------



## Nokhead (Jun 10, 2012)

I feel somewhat responsible for this mess. I could be..."dude". Let me say again, that I did say that _my_ Omega (56#) shoots about as fast as _my_ 30 year old, 54", 72# Browning Fury II. I didn't state that very well, and it looked like I was saying that my Omega would out shoot "any" 30 year old recurve. That's not what I meant. Again, I was saying that MY Omega is shooting as fast, or almost as fast as MY 72# recurve, which is around 30 years old. I was speaking only of those two individual, specific bows. 

If I am dude, I am sorry. That's all I was trying to say. I sure didn't mean for everyone to get sucked into this black hole of archery!!!

If I'm not dude, please disregard this post. (but do tell us who dude is)


----------



## ChadMR82 (Sep 22, 2009)

Don't worry Nokhead, I think the majority knew exactly what you meant. There is always at least one person on this site that always has to take things too far and try to prove everyone else wrong. I don't get. I just enjoy reading people's archery experiences and look for advice when it is needed. I got what you were saying and I totally agree. 

My 40# Omega shoots way faster and harder than my 1964 Bear Grizzly zebrawood (45#) and my 1972 Browning Nomad (45#). I am even shooting the same 1916 arrows through all three bows. The Omegas are a very efficient design and can really sling an arrow. Happy shooting!!


----------



## Nokhead (Jun 10, 2012)

Well thank you. I didn't want to be that dude.


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

Nokhead said:


> Well thank you. I didn't want to be that dude.


dude.... :grin: http://www.pitt.edu/~kiesling/dude/dude.pdf


----------



## UrbanDeerSlayer (Feb 10, 2012)

rattus58 said:


> dude.... :grin: http://www.pitt.edu/~kiesling/dude/dude.pdf


Seriously??? Somebody actually subsidized this 25 page document on the use of the word "Dude"? Some poor parent paid tuition for this education? No wonder this country is going in the dumpster. Im a graduate from that same University, maybe I shouldn't admit that right now....Besides we are waaaaaaay off topic...


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

It's far bigger than the word.

It's a religion......a way of life.

http://dudeism.com/


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

UrbanDeerSlayer said:


> Seriously??? Somebody actually subsidized this 25 page document on the use of the word "Dude"? Some poor parent paid tuition for this education? No wonder this country is going in the dumpster. Im a graduate from that same University, maybe I shouldn't admit that right now....Besides we are waaaaaaay off topic...


 True.... but we're having fun.... :grin:


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

Logos said:


> It's far bigger than the word.
> 
> It's a religion......a way of life.
> 
> http://dudeism.com/


 dude..... you need to immerse yourself in the baptism of dudeism.... gotit dude...


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

To be a dude......or not to be.

That is the question.

:lol:


----------

