# recurve vs long bow



## BLACK WOLF

bowtech198 said:


> I am reading "Hunting the hard way" by Howard Hill. He says in the book that is is easier to master the long bow than the recurve. Which is true?


It depends on who you ask 

It's really a personal issue based on grip, smoothness of draw, torsional limb stability, speed, mass weight, etc. etc.

Most top scores are made by recurve shooters if you're gonna research and compare scores.

There really are quite a few variables that it would be best for you to try a few out and find out for yourself...which feels easier and fits you better.

Shooting a primitive bow of your hand is harder to achieve the same kind of consistant accuracy than shooting a recurve with an arrow rest, a cushion plunger and precision made ILF limbs generally speaking.

How a bow fit's an archer starts at the grip when draw weight and draw length are already taken into consideration.

Ray


----------



## Wanderlust

I think HH was talking about hunting shots when he said that. He was able to keep the arrow in the vitals better with a longbow. Has to do with nerves I think. He thought the recurve was touchier than the longbow. Which is bad when you don't make a perfect release. After hunting with a recurve for 13 yrs and then a longbow for 8. Taking almost 200 big game. I think he was right. But thats just my opinion. Lots of others. I do like being in agreement with the best of all time though. 
I can kill better with a longbow. A 3 pc tkdown longbow even better, because of the weight of the riser. Also the straighter (not so much reflex) the limbs the better. HH liked a straight limb bow. Also as a rule quieter.
Just for fun try shooting while your walking broadside to the target with both bows. Without slowing to shoot.
Good read that book.


----------



## rraming

This as come up alot lately - 1/2 and 1/2 they go each way (I think mostly to what they shoot) Scores at the 3D events (the handfull I have been to) the recurve guys score higher and there are more of them. I heard and explaination on recurves having wider tips and are more forgiving. IMHO they are faster lb for lb but that apparently is highly speculative on my part (but that is what I believe). I have not "mastered" either so I can't answer that part. I think longbows are more fun to shoot and they look better to me AND both unstrung fit in a small tube for traveling - can't beat that. Something to think about - do any of the "trick shooters" shoot a recurve - I would like to see that is anyone knows of some - I have only seen longbows.


----------



## BLACK WOLF

rraming said:


> Something to think about - do any of the "trick shooters" shoot a recurve - I would like to see that is anyone knows of some - I have only seen longbows.


I've done some exhibition shooting with a recurve but I don't claim to be any where near the level of these 2 guys.

Look up Frank Addington Jr. and Rev. Stacey Groscup. They're awesome!

Ray


----------



## steve morley

BLACK WOLF said:


> It depends on who you ask
> 
> Most top scores are made by recurve shooters if you're gonna research and compare scores.
> 
> There really are quite a few variables that it would be best for you to try a few out and find out for yourself...which feels easier and fits you better.
> 
> Ray


.

In my opinion of shooting Recurve for 12 years and Longbow 11 years a Longbow is easier to use when learning to shoot as it's less complicated and easier to tune but if you look at tourney scores, on paper at least a Recurve is more accurate and it's only a few of the top Longbow shooters right up there with Recurve scores.

It's really about personal choice and how a particular Bow makes you feel, I still shoot Recurve every now and then but get the most enjoyment from a Longbow. :smile:


----------



## ravensgait

As has been mentioned more than a few times when this discussion comes up-- you don't see longbows in the Olympics---

I like em both but recurves are for the majority the easier to use.. Randy


----------



## BLACK WOLF

ravensgait said:


> As has been mentioned more than a few times when this discussion comes up-- you don't see longbows in the Olympics---


That may change someday...especailly with some of the recent longbow limb designs...but than again...they will basically be just recurve style risers with reflex/deflex style longbow limbs 

Ray


----------



## sawtoothscream

recurves are easier to use and transfer more energy into the arrow than a long bow. recurves are a little more forgiven as well.


im having a hard time deciding on if i want a long bow or a recurve for my next bow. since i already have 2 recurves im really leaning toward a nice long bow but idk. have to see in a year or two.


----------



## Flint Hills Tex

There's more to accuracy than just the limb design. While recurve limbs are supposedly faster than longbow limbs, a bowyer in our club makes longbows that shoot faster through a chrono than a lot of compounds! Honestly!

You have to differentiate between primitive and modern longbows, as well. Sure, a modern, metal risered recurve with plunger and arrow rest will be more accurate than a primitive longbow shot off the hand. But a lot of the modern longbows have a pistol style grip, a sight window cut close to center, and an arrow rest.

The pistol grip allows more accuracy than just leather wrapped around the bow. Shooting a bow with a sight window cut to or past center is more accurate than shooting around a bow without a window. Shooting off the shelf is more accurate than shooting off your hand. Shooting off a rest is more accurate than shooting off the shelf. Shooting carbon arrows is more accurate than woodies. Laminated limbs are faster than primitive wooden limbs. Etc., etc., etc.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying you can't become a deadly accurate hunter with primitive equipment, because you certainly can, but it's harder.


----------



## Wanderlust

One of the reasons recurves as a rule have slightly higher scores is because they are generally flatter shooting with less pull. Where a longbow has more arch which at longer distances takes a better archer. . Howard was talking about a HUNTING shots, (hunting) not shots where you can have your feet and body in perfect form every shot like most 3d, olympics and feild archery.

If I was a target only shooter I would use a recurve. If I was primarily a hunter I would use a longbow. Fred Eichler sure kills bunch with his recurve, as do some others. Hard to guess if they would do slightly better with a longbow. 
Now lets talk about the noise when the shot is released.
Recurves as a rule are louder causing the game to jump more at close ranges. Say under 30 yards. Which gives aother nod to the longbow. I am sure the noise vary's recurve to recurve.


----------



## steve morley

Flint Hills Tex said:


> There's more to accuracy than just the limb design. While recurve limbs are supposedly faster than longbow limbs, a bowyer in our club makes longbows that shoot faster through a chrono than a lot of compounds! Honestly!


IFAA Compounds are limited by rules to 300fps the fastest Longbows I've owned was only just a touch under 200fps with woodies, Recurves shooting Carbons dont even get close to Compound speeds. 

I would like to see a Longbow that can shoot 240fps let alone 300fps and if it could I would still like to be able to hit what I was aiming at.


----------



## kegan

Right now, Hill's arguement only applies to people making their own selfbows or wooden laminates.

The recurves of Hill's time did not have the heavy, stable risers we do today. They didn't come out until the end of his career, by which time he simply was so accustomed to his longbows it would a really hard switch. 

Recurves that were used back then were just longbows with recurved tips. Literally, they were exactly the same thing- only shorter and with turned tips. If you've ever shot one of these types of bows, you can see why Hill prefered a 6' longbow. They are too light to hold steady, too short for a very clean release, and have nothing in their design for stbility at ALL. They're fast... that's it. 

Of course, the mass production of fiberglass limbs and "seperate" risers, like Bears and Hoyts, allowed you to make a heavy riser, a "torque-free" handle, centershot with rest, and the same (or better) speed. 

So originally Hill was right (and for anyone making wooden bows he still is). Longbows are much more forgiving. But today, for users of fiberglass bows, the recurve is more forgiving (especially since 90% of the 'longbows' out there are more like those original recurves than actual longbows anyway).

If you read Saxton Pope's _Hunting with the Bow and Arrow_, he says the Elnglish longbow is the greatest bow type in the world. He was only comparing it to Native bows and Asiatic flight bows! Things change.


----------



## Flint Hills Tex

steve morley said:


> IFAA Compounds are limited by rules to 300fps the fastest Longbows I've owned was only just a touch under 200fps with woodies, Recurves shooting Carbons dont even get close to Compound speeds.
> 
> I would like to see a Longbow that can shoot 240fps let alone 300fps and if it could I would still like to be able to hit what I was aiming at.


Steve, I'll probably see the fellow on Friday at the club, so I'll try and get some concrete numbers for you. He shoots any bow extremely well, but only barebow with fingers (including compound). Obviously, a compound will be a bit slower if you use your fingers instead of a release.


----------



## JV NC

I went through 3 LB's and one /curve before I settled in on my hunting bow. To ME....there's not a bow more aesthetically appealing than a beautiful recurve. I didn't always feel that way, though.

When you find the perfect bow, FOR YOU, that will be the best bow.

Good luck.

Oh yeah....."sexy", aint she?.....lol


----------



## Chris Wilson

rraming said:


> Something to think about - do any of the "trick shooters" shoot a recurve - I would like to see that is anyone knows of some - I have only seen longbows.


The late Stacy Groscup. 

http://stacylgroscup.memory-of.com/About.aspx


----------



## Flint Hills Tex

steve morley said:


> IFAA Compounds are limited by rules to 300fps the fastest Longbows I've owned was only just a touch under 200fps with woodies, Recurves shooting Carbons dont even get close to Compound speeds.
> 
> I would like to see a Longbow that can shoot 240fps let alone 300fps and if it could I would still like to be able to hit what I was aiming at.


Okay, like I said, the bowyer's longbow is faster than _some_ compounds. The statistics are as follows:
Drawweight 65#@28"
Arrow: 5.6 grain/# Drawweight
Chronometer read speed: 220fps

Using woodies at about 9 grain per pound, the speed slows down to somewhere between 180 and 200fps, depending on the particular arrow.


----------



## steve morley

Thats a good turn of speed but I still don't consider it Compound speed, Recurve maybe.

What make of Longbow?


----------



## steve morley

Just wanted to add.

Speed is a good thing as it does make aiming a lot easier but speed should not be sacrificed for Bow stability or the Archers ability to control the Bow. I’ve meet many people rave on about how fast their Bow is but they’re unable hit a thing with it. 

My 49lb 21st Century Longbow with very low brace height, 12 strand 8125 string and untra light arrows can shoot comfortably over 200fps through a Chrono but I wouldn't hit much in a tourney on a 3D range.

I've just picked up a new Blackbrook 'Zeta' double Carbon (only 3 have been made) at my draw 43lbs and totally blows away the 21st Century on speed and stability, it's not gone through a Chrono but the point-on Gap is 10 yards longer.


----------



## Teucer

*What comes naturally*

The choice comes down to what you shoot naturally better. Most shoot traditional because we love the feel of a recurve or longbow. The one that feels better is the one that we shoot better. For years I touted the Hill longbows, argued their merit. Then someone put a Saluki Turk recurve in my hands and I couldn't believe how great it felt, how natural it felt. Bye Bye went my longbows. Also it's really not fair to generalize Longbows vs Recurves, I think you need to get real specific. Like Howard Hill Big Five vs Black Widow PSA X. There are way too many differences even in the same class of bows to make statements of comparison.


----------



## alanraw

bowtech198 said:


> I am reading "Hunting the hard way" by Howard Hill. He says in the book that is is easier to master the long bow than the recurve. Which is true? Remember the book was from his experiences in the 20's and 30's, technology has changed but not basic bow design. I want to get into traditional archery and need some guidance on where to start and the equipment to go with. Thanks for anyones help.


Why not try both and make your own judgement. Not to sound like a jerk, nor to avoid---or even skirt your question, but I honestly feel that you're asking a question that no one can answer but _you..._


----------



## Flint Hills Tex

steve morley said:


> Speed is a good thing as it does make aiming a lot easier but speed should not be sacrificed for Bow stability or the Archers ability to control the Bow. I’ve meet many people rave on about how fast their Bow is but they’re unable hit a thing with it.


Well, this fellow is a bowyer who builds his own longbows. He is also a great shot, and was Bavarian State Champion a few years back. He almost always hits where he aims, and can shoot tighter groups with that longbow at 50m than a lot of us recurve guys.

I respect anybody shooting a longbow. I find them more difficult to master than a recurve.


----------



## longbowdave1

i exclusively shoot, build ,and hunt with longbows. i just really enjoy shooting longbows. they are not for everyone but, once you learn to shoot with one, it's a great weapon of choice. they have proven to be very quiet and effective in the field for me. the greater the challenge the greater the reward! 
it just doesn't get any better than a longbow, cedar arrow, and a two blade broadhead. at a recent shoot, another archer saw my longbow and said,"i would like to try traditional archery but i just don't have the time. thats why i shoot a compound.". i felt sadness for this individual. all of us can have time if we take time. the world spins too fast most days and traditional archery helps slow it down, at least for a while.
i often get request to build recurves, but i just like to focus my attention to the longbow. the recurve may have a little to much technology for me.( just kidding).
CHOOSE YOUR WEAPON, LEARN YOUR WEAPON, AND ENJOY TRADITIONAL ARCHERY! DON'T FORGET TO TAKE A KID WITH YOU AND PASS THE TRADITION ON!


----------



## steve morley

longbowdave1 said:


> the world spins too fast most days and traditional archery helps slow it down, at least for a while.


LongbowDave I like that, well said :smile:


----------



## Aspirin Buster

I like to shoot anything with a string on it... instinctively of course. Compounds, longbows and recurves. 

90% of my exhibitions are done with a Hoyt recurve. However, I can do everything with a long bow I do with my recurve. I simply like the grip better on my recurve and the "feel". The long bows I have are great, but I am partial to recurves. That being said, shoot and find what works best for you. 

The important thing is that you shoot. And yes, Stacy shot longbows too, but did most of his shooting with the very shortest recurve he could find.

Shoot Straight,
Frank


----------



## quick kill

*My Opinion*

I like my new hybrid reflex/deflex longbow. I can shoot my recurve pretty good and it is smoking fast (Pittsley Predator). But, for some reason, that little skinny Centaur Carbon Elite just sizzles arrows right where i'm looking. And, my skinny carbon arrows are just a perfect marriage. I love the way the bow feels (custom made grip) and how it draws. Plus, it doesn't really feel like i'm holding 52#'s. I can hold this bow at full draw for at least ten seconds and still maintain rock steadiness. I love recurves but these hybrids are sweeeet.


----------



## GBKGBKGBK

I think that both a recurve (which I shot when I was growing up) and a longbow are both wonderful (my first, a Bear Montana, should get to me next week). I enjoy shooting my compound, but I just wanted to get back in touch with the basics again.... I have never used a release, always used a tab or a glove, but I view the the compound as a tool, and the recurve or longbow as a more spiritual choice that anything that could be justified in practical terms. I have never used sights on any bow, although I confess to having a stabilizer on my compound. I deal with complexity al week at work, and in my spare time, I like to do things that are a challenge that is mastered by time and practice, rather than buying the latest gizmo. Most of you are probably on a much higher level than me as archers, and may chuckle at this, but my shooting is for how it makes me feel, rather than what score I can achieve, or how fast the arrow goes.


----------



## rembrandt

GBKGBKGBK said:


> I think that both a recurve (which I shot when I was growing up) and a longbow are both wonderful (my first, a Bear Montana, should get to me next week). I enjoy shooting my compound, but I just wanted to get back in touch with the basics again.... I have never used a release, always used a tab or a glove, but I view the the compound as a tool, and the recurve or longbow as a more spiritual choice that anything that could be justified in practical terms. I have never used sights on any bow, although I confess to having a stabilizer on my compound. I deal with complexity al week at work, and in my spare time, I like to do things that are a challenge that is mastered by time and practice, rather than buying the latest gizmo. Most of you are probably on a much higher level than me as archers, and may chuckle at this, but my shooting is for how it makes me feel, rather than what score I can achieve, or how fast the arrow goes.


I understand fully the "feel" thing......I just love to shoot the bow and since I came back to the trad bows, I'm alot more into it and excited about shooting everyday. Its definitely a surge in my spirit......I have a hard time focusing on two and three things at the same time and I've got my art to think about and my knife making coming up. I am pretty sure that shooting my bow will not be put on the rack and collect dust! I love it way toooooo much for that...


----------



## Brianlocal3

GBK, since you brought up a 3 year old thread I am going to answer Rembrants question he asked me on my thread. 
Rembrant, you asked why a longbow, not a recurve. For me it is that I already own and love my recurve and I want to try a Straight limbed/string follow longbow so thats what im doing. If I find im more suited to the recurve grip then I will sell it and get a new Recurve. I personally like the longer Recurves and there just dont seem to be that many. and the two that I know of are god awful expensive.


----------



## Night Wing

I've always been a pistol grip (medium) recurve man. Tried a longbow and never was accurate enough with it on the first shot of the day so I wouldn't bowhunt with it. I could never get used to the grip of a longbow. Sold the longbow two years later.


----------



## Easykeeper

I like them both, but at this time only have recurves. In general I shoot recurves better, but to be more specific, I shoot "modern" style recurves better. Take down or one piece bows with relatively massive risers and deeper grips. I find them to point more naturally and I'm much more consistent with them. With a little work they are almost as quiet as a good longbow (quieter than some), but usually a bit faster...if that matters. I also really like the looks of the recurve, but that wouldn't be enough if I didn't shoot them better. I have never had a three piece TD longbow, but assume they would be very similar to the recurves I like. Maybe the best of both worlds. 

Few things in archery are more elegant than a well made and balanced longbow. I've had some nice ones but have let them all go...for now...LOL. For me though they require a significantly different grip than my recurves so there is a bit of adjustment to go back and forth. I have a nice little 50's style recurve and it's actually more like the longbows because of the grip, just a little faster. In general I shoot low with longbows relative to my recurves. I don't think it's the arrow speed, more likely the way the LB sits in my hand compared to the RC. Between a good longbow, especially a hybrid, and a good recurve, the difference in speed is not relevant IMO. I also find the longbows to be a little more fussy with form, not sure why. I'm better if I stick with one style, so recurves it is for me. I do 99% of my shooting with one bow (but life is to short to only _own_ one bow).

You need to try them both. Between traditional Hill style, hybrid, three piece longbows, 50's style recurves, three piece recurves, one piece recurves...all have something going for them and the only way to know what you like it to try them.


----------

