Profiles for Warbows made from woods other than yew

[Hereward]

I understand the answers to my question involve speculation, since (as far as I know) all surviving English warbows are made of yew.  How did the bows of elm, wych, ash, or other "Wode of mean price" differ in cross-section from yew bows, if they differed at all?  I've seen (and have been very impressed with) the pictures of non-yew bows board members have posted, but the members often say they're consciously trying to match the profiles of the Mary Rose yew bows.  Assuming medieval and Tudor bowyers went for whatever width-to-thickness ratio worked best for the wood they were using, how did these bows compare to the surviving yew bows?

[nidrinr]

wytch elm, which as far as I know was the preferred wood once yew was not available, can handle the same dimensions as yew without trouble at all. I guess that is one reason why it was preferred. Another is how wytch elm, as yew, are relatively good at handling all kinds of weather conditions. It doesn't match yew quality if the weather Gods decide to go all wet, but on the other side of that same scale it does hold out better in dry weather.

Some Viking bows include two wood bows, laminated from pine compression wood and some or another tension strong hardwood. Birch, goat willow, ash etc. would all make fine backs on such a wood combination. The idea of this wood combination most probably were adapted by the vikings from the Lapps. There are some founds of pine compression wood from theese bows, mostly in Norway. Many of them seems to have had some kind of narrowed handle and wider/flatter limbs. Still, I believe theese bows were meant as weapons of war.

Interesting topic