Author Topic: Horsebow shape without the horn?  (Read 19378 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline kevinsmith5

  • Member
  • Posts: 287
Re: Horsebow shape without the horn?
« Reply #45 on: November 04, 2013, 06:18:29 pm »

Offline bubby

  • Member
  • Posts: 11,054
Re: Horsebow shape without the horn?
« Reply #46 on: November 04, 2013, 06:21:43 pm »
i'm interested in trying this like the article and then a little longer with different angles on the ears and seeing about the difference I can get performance wise, sounds like a nice experiment
failure is an option, everyone fails, it's how you handle it that matters.
The few the proud the 27🏹

mikekeswick

  • Guest
Re: Horsebow shape without the horn?
« Reply #47 on: November 05, 2013, 04:52:08 am »
I disagree. Many of the longer hornbow styles are perfectly attainable in wood and sinew and the unbraced bow will show just as much reflex as those bows typically have and stand as much draw as a person is likely to use.
 A typical hornbow uses up about 6.5% of its compression capability just getting to brace height. I think you're giving the impression that all of that 8% is available in actual delivered stored energy.
 The dismal performance of 98% of recent hornbows shows that there is far more to the picture than just bending s piece of horn a long way.

Seriously how can you not see that if a hornbow is made close to it's limits (like every bow should be to get decent performance) wood simply cannot do the same thing.....it's just basic physics  ;)
All the longer hornbows are meant to be drawn to 34 - 35 inches......
Do I really have to show you pictures of my hornbows at full draw and then lay down a challenge for somebody to make a dimensionally correct bow wooden that looks the same at full draw.....I KNOW it can't be done  ;)
Shall I also post results of how my hornbows perform....then you can judge wether they are dismal performers or not.....
The performance of a bow is down to the maker and not just the materials.....
Like I said of course it's possible to make a good wooden bow that would fool the untrained eye but not the trained eye.  ;)
Have fun making short wood bows. Then when you find the limits of wood alone try horn/wood/sinew and you'll find the limits are a lot further away  ;D ;D ;D

Offline Lukasz Nawalny

  • Member
  • Posts: 233
  • Lukasz Nawalny
    • Camelot bows
Re: Horsebow shape without the horn?
« Reply #48 on: November 05, 2013, 05:11:55 am »
I love work with wood . I make hornbows but I will be always primitive bows bowyer. I make short wodden bows many years and dont find yet wood limit. Hornbows are not suprising - always shoot good  :) . I think it is possible make wodden shortbow in combination  Ipe/white wood/sinew or lamination bamboo/bamboo with performance similar like in good hornbow. I think it is possible even make wood/sinew shortbow with great performance. Hornbows are realy amazing, soft, elastict and fast but I will be always wood defender :)

Offline PatM

  • Member
  • Posts: 6,737
Re: Horsebow shape without the horn?
« Reply #49 on: November 05, 2013, 10:15:03 am »

Seriously how can you not see that if a hornbow is made close to it's limits (like every bow should be to get decent performance) wood simply cannot do the same thing.....it's just basic physics  ;)
All the longer hornbows are meant to be drawn to 34 - 35 inches......
Do I really have to show you pictures of my hornbows at full draw and then lay down a challenge for somebody to make a dimensionally correct bow wooden that looks the same at full draw.....I KNOW it can't be done  ;)
Shall I also post results of how my hornbows perform....then you can judge wether they are dismal performers or not.....
The performance of a bow is down to the maker and not just the materials.....
Like I said of course it's possible to make a good wooden bow that would fool the untrained eye but not the trained eye.  ;)
Have fun making short wood bows. Then when you find the limits of wood alone try horn/wood/sinew and you'll find the limits are a lot further away  ;D ;D ;D
[/quote]
 The trouble with your  analysis is that there is no "dimensionally correct" rule. Horn bows come in every shape, length and size. There is little evidence that the long bows were all meant to be drawn that far. The found arrows tell us otherwise.
 I merely pointed out the style of hornbow shape that was possible for someone to make cheaply and falling under the non-glass rule.
 I'm not sure why you don't understand what 98% means.  ;
 

Offline lostarrow

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,348
Re: Horsebow shape without the horn?
« Reply #50 on: November 05, 2013, 02:31:08 pm »
I disagree. Many of the longer hornbow styles are perfectly attainable in wood and sinew and the unbraced bow will show just as much reflex as those bows typically have and stand as much draw as a person is likely to use.
 A typical hornbow uses up about 6.5% of its compression capability just getting to brace height. I think you're giving the impression that all of that 8% is available in actual delivered stored energy.
 The dismal performance of 98% of recent hornbows shows that there is far more to the picture than just bending s piece of horn a long way.

Seriously how can you not see that if a hornbow is made close to it's limits (like every bow should be to get decent performance) wood simply cannot do the same thing.....it's just basic physics  ;)
All the longer hornbows are meant to be drawn to 34 - 35 inches......
Do I really have to show you pictures of my hornbows at full draw and then lay down a challenge for somebody to make a dimensionally correct bow wooden that looks the same at full draw.....I KNOW it can't be done  ;)
Shall I also post results of how my hornbows perform....then you can judge wether they are dismal performers or not.....
The performance of a bow is down to the maker and not just the materials.....
Like I said of course it's possible to make a good wooden bow that would fool the untrained eye but not the trained eye.  ;)
Have fun making short wood bows. Then when you find the limits of wood alone try horn/wood/sinew and you'll find the limits are a lot further away  ;D ;D ;D

Not to prove anything, ....but I wouldn't mind seeing some more horn bows!
I disagree. Many of the longer hornbow styles are perfectly attainable in wood and sinew and the unbraced bow will show just as much reflex as those bows typically have and stand as much draw as a person is likely to use.
 A typical hornbow uses up about 6.5% of its compression capability just getting to brace height. I think you're giving the impression that all of that 8% is available in actual delivered stored energy.
 The dismal performance of 98% of recent hornbows shows that there is far more to the picture than just bending s piece of horn a long way.

 Maybe you could show us some of your bows as well ,Pat. Ones that have been shot in  and used regularly, to see how the design stands up over time.

Offline PatM

  • Member
  • Posts: 6,737
Re: Horsebow shape without the horn?
« Reply #51 on: November 05, 2013, 02:41:21 pm »
I already did. The bow on the first page is 12 years old and has been shot thousands of times and was shot in sub-optimal conditions with no finish on it on many occasions. It has been abused and overdrawn and left on a tiller stick at full draw for too long.
 It has definitely lost a tiny bit of oomph because of this but any natural material bow will. Still it's just "broken in" rather than broken down.
 It was also finished and shot about a month after being cut down.  Do everything right and give it a touch of heat treating and it would be all the more impressive.

mikekeswick

  • Guest
Re: Horsebow shape without the horn?
« Reply #52 on: November 05, 2013, 02:42:10 pm »
Lostarrow - unfortunately my most recent Turkish hornbows core broke at full draw.....however i'll try and dig out some photos of my older bows. I have an experimental sort of hornbow that I can get strung up and photo.

Pat as for no dimensionally correct hornbow read A.Karpowzi's book on the Turkish bows. Instead of talking about all hornbows in general there is a large table with dimensions of actual Turkish bows in the palace collections....add them all up and average them. Bingo! Then make a wooden bow with the same widths, thicknesses and length of bending sections, same side profile etc my prediction is that it will get to brace and have taken a massive amount of set, if it doesn't break during drawing the amount of set will make it very easy to string  ;D
Anyway I have said what I wanted to on the subject.
Each to his own.

Offline PatM

  • Member
  • Posts: 6,737
Re: Horsebow shape without the horn?
« Reply #53 on: November 05, 2013, 02:50:25 pm »
That's my whole point. You've made the Turkish bow into the only horn bow. I have repeatedly said that people should make a feasible hornbow style when doing this. People are trying to duplicate the look of a typical warbow, not a flightbow.
  The funny thing is that the hornbows made today are really just for looks too. Lots of really nice looking bows on ATARN shooting about 170 fps and going 200 yards. >:D

Offline lostarrow

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,348
Re: Horsebow shape without the horn?
« Reply #54 on: November 05, 2013, 03:05:38 pm »
I already did. The bow on the first page is 12 years old and has been shot thousands of times and was shot in sub-optimal conditions with no finish on it on many occasions. It has been abused and overdrawn and left on a tiller stick at full draw for too long.
 It has definitely lost a tiny bit of oomph because of this but any natural material bow will. Still it's just "broken in" rather than broken down.
 It was also finished and shot about a month after being cut down.  Do everything right and give it a touch of heat treating and it would be all the more impressive.

Any unbraced  pics?  How much set  did it take from the original unbraced profile?

Offline PatM

  • Member
  • Posts: 6,737
Re: Horsebow shape without the horn?
« Reply #55 on: November 05, 2013, 04:34:42 pm »
 Originally it was straight through the grip. The original string I made to go with the bow was shorter than necessary which undoubtedly strained the bow far more than necessary. I never bothered changing it though.

« Last Edit: November 05, 2013, 04:40:19 pm by PatM »

Offline PatM

  • Member
  • Posts: 6,737