# My Comparison Of Hoyt Fred Eichler Buffalo and Martin Diablo Recurve Bows



## Golfbuddy45 (Jun 23, 2010)

I have read many people asking for advice on which recurve bow to buy and often the Buffalo or Diablo comes up with varying opinions. I have several Hoyt's and Martin/Damon Howatt bows and love them all. The Buffalo and Diablo are my only takedown bows except for my ILF Win & Win target bow. COST of the bows is often an issue as the Buffalo now retails for over $700 while the Martin Diablo is retailing for around $250. As is often the case people seem to have a favorite brand and they will offer praise for that brand while giving less favorable statements on the opposing brand without even having owned one or shooting it. So I decided to do a comparison of my bows the Hoyt Fred Eichler Buffalo and the Martin Diablo recurve bows. I took both of my bows to NC HUNTER SUPPLY indoor range today here in Raleigh and used their archery chronograph system to compare arrow speed. 

Martin Diablo on top and Hoyt Buffalo on the bottom.







The Hoyt Buffalo weighs 3.2 pounds while the Martin Diablo weighs 2.7 pounds but you would think the reverse when you look at the two risers.

Closeup of the Martin Diablo Riser with the NAP 360 QUICKTUNE REST. You can also see the rubber components that are part of the Martin VIBRATION ESCAPE SYSTEM.








Closeup of the Hoyt Buffalo Riser with the rounded rest. The side plate is not worn - that is actually a lighter color fur that looks like there is nothing there.








The plastic rest that ships with the Diablo - the only thing I would recommend replacing as the bow comes from the factory.








Both bows are 62 inches and 45 pounds @ 28 inch draw with Fast Flight strings. I checked each one with a bow scale to verify they are actually the same draw weight. Both bows are at the same brace height as well. For my comparison test I used Easton Carbon Raider 55-70 arrows with 100 grain field tips and 4 inch vinyl fletches. I can't say the total weight of the arrows as I do not have a scale for that purpose but all 12 arrows are identical. The only difference in the 6 arrows I shot on the Martin Diablo had the nocks rotated 45 degrees due to the NAP 360 QUICKTUNE REST I added to replace the stock arrow rest that comes with the Diablo. The stock rest is a rather inexpensive plastic centerest and I had a lot of difficulty keeping the arrows on the rest when at full draw. The arrows kept pushing to the right and jumping over the very small side plate of the rest. The NAP 360 QUICKTUNE holds the arrows in place very nicely and the Hoyt Buffalo has a very well rounded rest that provides minimal arrow contact. The Hoyt Buffalo uses a standard traditional recurve rest and does not have any threading for a sight while the Martin Diablo does have the feature of the threaded riser for sights and optional rests. 

In order to ensure the closest possible test shots I did not use my finger tabs but instead used a string release that is designed to shoot off the string not a loop. I also used great care in the hand position locking my thumb behind my jaw every time. I fired 6 arrows through the chronograph for each bow and I repeated this twice on each bow. The speed range for the the Diablo was between 160-166 fps. The speed range for the Buffalo was 162 - 167 fps. Very little difference between the two bows averaging 163 and 164. 

Arrow flight was very similar between both bows. I did not pay specific attention to accuracy as I was concentrating more on my shooting hand position and getting the arrows through the center of the chronograph. I can say that when I shoot both bows in my backyard 30 yard range my accuracy is the same with either bow. 

While the vibration of every shot was very nice on both bows I have to say that all 5 people who were in the area of my test immediately noticed that the Martin Diablo was not nearly as quiet as the Hoyt Buffalo. In all fairness I do have to say that the Martin had a non-standard rest in that I replaced the original rest with the NAP 360 QUICKTUNE so it was not easy to determine if the extra sound was coming from the new rest or not. 

All in all I would say for the cost of $250 the Martin Diablo is a very respectable recurve bow. However, if you want true traditional shooting experience of a top quality recurve bow it is hard to say anything negative about the Hoyt Fred Eichler Buffalo. 

First chance I get I will take off the NAP rest and put the original rest on the Diablo and shoot some more arrows to see if the additional sound was being produced by the rest of just the bow itself.

Hope you enjoyed this non-scientific amateur comparison test and maybe it might help someone make a decision one way or the other on which bow to buy.









GB45


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

Golfbuddy45 said:


> I have read many people asking for advice on which recurve bow to buy and often the Buffalo or Diablo comes up with varying opinions. I have several Hoyt's and Martin/Damon Howatt bows and love them all. The Buffalo and Diablo are my only takedown bows except for my ILF Win & Win target bow. COST of the bows is often an issue as the Buffalo now retails for over $700 while the Martin Diablo is retailing for around $250. As is often the case people seem to have a favorite brand and they will offer praise for that brand while giving less favorable statements on the opposing brand without even having owned one or shooting it. So I decided to do a comparison of my bows the Hoyt Fred Eichler Buffalo and the Martin Diablo recurve bows. I took both of my bows to NC HUNTER SUPPLY indoor range today here in Raleigh and used their archery chronograph system to compare arrow speed.
> 
> Martin Diablo on top and Hoyt Buffalo on the bottom.
> View attachment 1683282
> ...


:thumbs_up I have both manufacturers of bows... many more martins than anything else in my bowcase... however... I've got to say... Ahem.... cheap... yes... uGLY... yes.. just as is my Jaguar... :grin: However... price is going to be a factor for some I'm sure... but any bow you can afford is usually worth it.

What did the "extra noise sound like to you?

Aloha :beer:


----------



## reddogge (Jul 21, 2009)

Just curious what your draw length was. Blacky Schwartz got 186 fps with fingers out of the Buffalo he tested with 9 gpp arrows. But they were 50# limbs though.


----------



## Golfbuddy45 (Jun 23, 2010)

reddogge said:


> Just curious what your draw length was. Blacky Schwartz got 186 fps with fingers out of the Buffalo he tested with 9 gpp arrows. But they were 50# limbs though.


I draw about 28.5 so just a hair more than the rated d/l. If someone is drawing 30 inches on a 50# bow that is like 60-65# so obviously would have a higher fps. 

The sound was just louder shooting the Martin. Everybody in the room noticed the difference. Maybe a video of the two shooting would show something bud did not have a setup for that.

GB45


----------



## Thin Man (Feb 18, 2012)

Thanks for taking the time ... more carrots for the stew.


----------



## reddogge (Jul 21, 2009)

Thanks. He drew them to 28" exactly.


----------



## Golfbuddy45 (Jun 23, 2010)

Probably due the difference in the limbs and also the arrows. Not sure how the GPP arrows compare to the Eastons I used.

GB45


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

Being that the Martin is a much more reflex handled, it would not have surprised me if it were slightly faster - could have been. But, if your Quicktune (compound capture-rest) arrow rest was not set-up on center to shoot like a compound, with caliper release, and still set like for a finger shot bow, arrow off-center, even though you used a release, the rest would have a lot of interference with the arrow's dynamic travel and that could slow it down and contribute to a lot of noise. 

Same for the Buffalo, since the rest is designed for finger release, the caliper release would not induce enough lateral string travel to get proper dynamic travel to clear the rest, effecting tune, arrow to shelf interference, and slowing the arrow a bit.

A better comparison would be both bows shot off the fingers and using their respective properly designed rests for finger shooting - shelf for Buffalo and a similar rest like the factory one for the Martin.


----------



## Golfbuddy45 (Jun 23, 2010)

Can't disagree with you on what you said SANFORD.... Martin does say their Diablo is the "FASTEST IN THE INDUSTRY".. 

GB45


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

Curious as to respective brace heights. Arrow weight would be interesting as well.

my velocity riser is a little more reflexed than my classic risers. I haven't noticed the difference in 'forgiveness', but then we're talking totally different grip width as well. Speed does seem little higher. However, my 70# classic, with 3/4" less power stroke, does within a couple fps at same grain per pound, same limb design... wonder how much performance difference there is due to simple manufacturing variance?


----------



## Golfbuddy45 (Jun 23, 2010)

Weighed the arrows on gun reloading scale and they weigh 430 +/- 3 grains total weight. Brace height was set at 8 inches on both bows. Like I said I tried to keep everything as close to the same as possible. 

First chance I get I will replace the NAP rest with the stock rest and see how the Martin compares in sound and speed since that is the only thing I changed from the stock Diablo bow. 

GB45


----------



## Golfbuddy45 (Jun 23, 2010)

I put the original arrow rest on the Martin Diablo and shot several arrows at the range. Arrow speed was about the same but the noise was still present. We paid particular attention to this and during the arrow launch you could hear the arrow sliding across the rest and that is the NOISE we kept hearing. Difficult to analyze exactly what is happening in that short instant but the sound is there. I still like the overall performance of the Martin Diablo but I am selling that one and keeping the Hoyt Buffalo primarily because of the Hoyt traditional rest versus the Martin Compund bow style rest. Obviously the Hoyt is very limited in what you can do with the traditional rest whereas the Martin allows you to choose from many rest designs so that feature would be something for a buyer/hunter to consider and the much lower cost of the Martin Diablo. 

GB45


----------



## Dewboy (Apr 19, 2005)

Shooting across felt vs shooting across plastic? felt is always quieter.


----------



## centershot (Sep 13, 2002)

I have also shot both - while the end performance in the form of arrow speed may be similar - that is where the similarities ended. The Buffalo, drew smoother, shot smoother, was more dead in hand and aimed easier which all added up to being more accurate. Sometimes there is more too it than what a chronograph reads. I would me more interested in what your scores were shooting several 300 rounds with each bow. That may tell us a bit more about how the riser design affects accuracy not just speed.

Not picking on your review, but for me where the arrows land is the ultimate test for any bow.


----------



## Golfbuddy45 (Jun 23, 2010)

centershot said:


> I have also shot both - while the end performance in the form of arrow speed may be similar - that is where the similarities ended. The Buffalo, drew smoother, shot smoother, was more dead in hand and aimed easier which all added up to being more accurate. Sometimes there is more too it than what a chronograph reads. I would me more interested in what your scores were shooting several 300 rounds with each bow. That may tell us a bit more about how the riser design affects accuracy not just speed. Not picking on your review, but for me where the arrows land is the ultimate test for any bow.


The DIABLO is long gone and I bought a set of Hoyt Buffalo 55# limbs so that with the limb screw adjustments and the 40# and 55# limbs I can go from 35 pounds to 60 pounds on the same riser. I have had several friends want to try out my Buffalo and having that draw weight adjustability helps. 

As to your "where the arrows land is the ultimate test for any bow" I can not disagree with you on that at all. Another reason I kept the Buffalo instead of the Diablo is that while I did not report this fact in my "TEST" the Buffalo was more accurate than the Diablo as far as hitting the target where I was aiming - possibly because I am more used to the Traditional rest on the Buffalo than the modern rest on the Diablo. 

GB45


----------



## centershot (Sep 13, 2002)

Good choice! Rest type make very little difference in my shooting. An actual rest is easier and quicker to tune but once set up I shoot about the same scores with either type. The Buffalo is a very nice bow. With the limbs sets you have - the bases are well covered.


----------

