Author Topic: Is Deflex Really That Bad?  (Read 4823 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Shooter

  • Member
  • Posts: 99
Is Deflex Really That Bad?
« on: December 27, 2007, 05:32:23 pm »
When I first read Robert H. Miller's (White Arrow) article in last Month's issue, I laughed through the whole thing. Nothing new under the sun, indeed. I was reading the words of a kindred spirit.

I've built fiberplastic bows (and other stuff) for a bunch of years before developing sensitivities to all the chemicals. I made the switch to wood bows a few years ago. My first wooden bows were selfbows (board and stave) and a few backed. Deflex was really messing with me since I had very little practical knowledge of how to deal with it, or how to prevent it. About a year and a half ago I started asking the same kinds of questions Mr. Miller asks in his article. I eventually came to the same thinking - that if it's redefined as something that's not necessarily bad, maybe it could become an asset to a bow's functionality.

I started working with laminates of different species and playing with the reflex/deflex design since it was the most obvious...to me anyway. Experiments ranging from pre-tillering, prestressing and pre-deflexing and all manners of arranging the laminates in opposed, non-opposed, and wedged and tapered orientations eventually yielded the two designs I've posted examples of on this board - my modest attempts at allowing deflex to contribute to the functionality of a bow.

Anyway, I was wondering what others thought of the article. It'd also be interesting to read from others here how they've dealt with deflex, how they design around it and with it in mind, etc.

Bruce

Offline Kegan

  • Member
  • Posts: 2,676
Re: Is Deflex Really That Bad?
« Reply #1 on: December 27, 2007, 08:54:41 pm »
I just make my bows longer or wider to reduce stress, and like a little string follow. If it is too bad, I'll heat treat the belly and induce some reflex. If a short bow has take four or so inches of set, and the tips are still wide, I'll recurve it though- which usually dramatically increases the performance.

Offline Sidewinder

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,946
Re: Is Deflex Really That Bad?
« Reply #2 on: December 28, 2007, 01:00:12 am »
Bruce, I look forward to the hearing the responses. I think it is a very intelligent question and is one I'm glad you asked. I think we shall all benefit from the dialogue. I haven't built enough bows yet to have an educated opinion. The one bow I recently fashioned has a about 2" set after shooting and after rest is down to a little over 1 3/8" which doesn't seem to hinder it too much. I haven't fashioned enough bows to be able to manipulate it one way or the other I just know this one shoots very well and thats good enough for now. I do however find it interesting that there seems to be an obsseion for reflex and that maybe something could be being overlooked, so as I said earlier I look forward to considering the responses.  Danny
"You know a tree by the fruit it bears"   God

Offline Ryano

  • Member
  • Posts: 3,578
  • Ryan O'Sullivan, North Western Pennsylvania
Re: Is Deflex Really That Bad?
« Reply #3 on: December 28, 2007, 01:55:24 am »
Set hapens.......Deflex and set and string follow are three different things. Set is the amount the bows limbs change from the non tillered shape after tillering. A bow can take 3" of set and still not follow the string. String follow is a sign of bad design/tiller or wood choice. String follow is a bad thing as far as I'm concerned. Deflex is ether a intentional added set back of the limbs(usualy in the non working handle area) or in the case of a selfbow perhaps a natural shape of the wood before bending and can be a good thing if the limbs are set in reflex(or recurve) to off set the deflex.
Its November, I'm gone hunt'in.......
Osage is still better.....

Offline M-P

  • Member
  • Posts: 876
  • PA731115
    • Traveling Surgery
Re: Is Deflex Really That Bad?
« Reply #4 on: December 28, 2007, 03:17:45 am »
Hi folks,   I too, think deflex / set can be overly worried about.   My own experience is that I'm not a good enough bowyer to totally prevent some set during tillering, and some of my staves have some deflex that cannot be easily eliminated.  Fortune has it that the bows with mild to moderatel set/ deflex, shoot just fine.  Arrow speed may be slightly less, but I worry less about the bow exploding.  On the other hand stretching boundries in search of greater arrow speed, or flight distance, or draw weight, etc. can be fun goals and eliminating deflex is one tool to use in achieving many of those goals.  Ron
"A man should make his own arrows."   Omaha proverb   

"There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves."    Will Rogers

Glenn R.

  • Guest
Re: Is Deflex Really That Bad?
« Reply #5 on: December 28, 2007, 04:52:29 pm »
I think it was one of the authors in the TBB volumes that said a slightly deflexed bow will practically shoot by itself. As long as the string is under good tension and begins gaining # right from brace--does it really matter?

Offline carpenter374

  • Member
  • Posts: 205
Re: Is Deflex Really That Bad?
« Reply #6 on: December 28, 2007, 05:40:25 pm »
not to "beat a dead horse" but arrow speed has more to do with string angle at full draw and early draw weight, right? So a bow deflexed at the handle but recurved at the tips compensates for the deflex with higher string angle. deflex or string follow could also be compensated for with a longer  bow with less bend at the tips. my best shooting bow is one of the 3  hickory bows i have owned. this particular bow came from bowstick archery. it measures 67 in nock to nock unbraced. It draws 61 lbs, follows the string 2 in when first unstrung. it casts hunting weight arrows 178 yards. my worst bow was the first hickory bow i made. it was 60 in n to n. followed the string less than an inch. drew 48 lbs. cast a hunting arrow only 115 yards. it broke when i overdrew it a while back. i think the shorter cast came from the higher string angle from a slightly whip-ended tiller combined with the bow being shorter overall. am i right? cool topic for discussion lmk what you guys think.
"Those who would sacrifice their freedom for safety will find that they will inherit neither." -Ben Franklin     

--Carpenter

Offline Shooter

  • Member
  • Posts: 99
Re: Is Deflex Really That Bad?
« Reply #7 on: December 28, 2007, 08:05:57 pm »
Thanks very much for the replies so far, gentlemen. Some good food for thought.