Longest Bow You've Hunted With?

[Dictionary]

Pearl The only problem I have with body size theory is that some american native groups used both short 50 ish bows & long bows 70 in  like in Jim Hamms book  not trying to be argumentive just curious  makes me wonder because not all of the 70 in bows were war bows .

Western Natives who didn't even use horses had bows as short or shorter than 3 ft. Those fellas surely weren't short enough to call that a medium sized bow. So, I agree. That theory doesn't always hold water.

[PEARL DRUMS]

If I were building bows with sharpened rocks, Id build them super short to. That's a lot of work.

[loon]

Peculiar that Ishi was supposedly unimpressed with Pope's longbows, "too much man-nee"
And he didn't do as well at target shooting

[SLIMBOB]

I came to these self bows, like many I suppose, from the compound world.  The older versions were all mostly longer bows, and then the short bow ATA (axle to axle) craze hit.  And they kept getting shorter and lighter until folks began to question was there a "too short", a point of diminishing return.  I generally preferred the longer ATA bows as they were just sweeter shooting with less work.  Point is Field and Stream (I think) did a test to determine if short bows were in fact less accurate than longer ones.  Their results were about what I expected.  Yes, average groups at given distances were better with the longer bows than the short ones, but it was by very little at close distances.  As the distances increased, the difference was greater.  It was their conclusion that at hunting distances of 20-30 yards, not enough difference to worry about. At 60 yards, go longer for better accuracy.  Intuitively, this is what I had suspected.  If you like them short, go short.  If longer suites you better go longer.  Either will work.  But that doesn't change the fact that on the margins, longer bows were more accurate.  I shoot both.  My little Plains Style bows are a blast to shoot and with practice, I can do pretty well with them, but when inches count, I'll reach for that longer, sweet pulling, no stacking, anchor at the corner of your mouth and smile, mid 60's bow.

[Fred Arnold]

68" for me. It was the first new bow I ever purchased. Dan Quillian you finish off the auction site. Prior to that it was mostly recurves in the 58-62" models.

[dylanholderman]

Our ancestors were quite a bit shorter than us though. Childhood nutrition has made us giants by comparison... Not hard to imagine that the people living in a fairly hard climate without modern technology were a bit shorter and carried shorter bows...

i don't really buy this either, do a quick google search we aren't that much taller than our ancestors.
and some of the plains tribes had a average height on par with today's

[SLIMBOB]

I think folks today believe mistakenly, that the indians were a short race of people, and in fact they were by and large a tall people.  I'm speaking of the plains tribes specifically.  The Cheyenne, Crow and Arapaho were through various reports averaging over 68 inches tall.  That is taller than the average European American of the time.  As you moved west those averages were shorter, I believe around 65-66 inches was common.  They were in fact a rather tall people on the whole.
I do think Pearls point stands.  A person at 5 feet tall could less comfortably carry a 6 foot weapon than a 6 foot person, or so it would seem to me.  Interestingly, the debate that surely began in times of antiquity regarding ideal bow length still rages today!

[bradsmith2010]

ok I think about this alot,, not saying what I think is right at all, but very fun to speculate,,
the height of the archer could have something to do with the size of bow,, but thats just part of it,,
I really think the performance was one of the main factors,,,
even the short bow,,
the longer bows were that were not backed probably did best in humid conditions,, just like the bows from South America
if you get a bow to draw say 24 inches,, thats a pretty effective power stroke, and good cast can be obtained in a 48 or 50 inch bow,,if sinew backed ,,,
a self bow slightly longer will shoot well at 24 inches of draw,,
some bows were shorter and had a shorter power stroke, but at a higher poundage still effective,, on game or for war,,
I have been making bows for 30 years and they are more simple and Native like in design as I learn more and gain experience,,
I have a very short 42 inches sinew backed bow, its about 50#@ 20 inches,,
it will shoot a 500 grain arrow about 140fps,, ok thats slow compared to a good long draw self bow,, but 140 fps is 140fps,,
its so short it would almost go in a  back quiver,
it is accurate for close shots,, and would make a nice hunting bow no matter how tall your were,,,
if you need more fps,, you could go up in weight to achieve more cast,, say for Buffalo or large game,, so I can see why and how some archers used the short bows effectively for hunting and war,, maybe like today,,, alot was personal preference as well,,based on what the archer liked??

[Dictionary]

SLIMBOB, you're right! Talking about bow length is like opening a can of worms!

Brad, good points. No one is saying that short bows don't make effective hunting weapons. They just aren't as effective as a good longbow  . Just kidding...kinda. In the end, everyone will shoot what feels right for them. No one is right or wrong I guess

[bradsmith2010]

yes lots of different bows for different applications ,,

[SLIMBOB]

Ok.  I will compromise and agree to that, so long as we can all agree that long, short, narrow, wide, straight, deflex or reflex....Osage is King in all of them!

[Traxx]

I think folks can make em all work,if they want too bad enough.

That comment regarding carrying your height through the brush,so carrying a longer bow through,shouldnt be a problem.I thought that odd,when i first read where Paul Comstock said it,because,how many people walk through thick brush,standing up as tall as they can and how many of them,carry their bows,the same way.LOL
Im usually crouched over and my bow is carried closer to horizontal.

Most West coast Native people,were shorter by todays standard.Ishi would have been considered a tall man among the people of that region.Ishi was 5'8" tall and most native men,of that region,averaged about 5'4".Look at the Pics of Ishi standing with Sam Batwi.Ishi's mother was so small,that the Party that ransacked the camp at Wowonupa,thought she was a child at first.

I have examined Stave trees,where a longer stave could have been taken,but was not.I believe,in the region where these staves were taken,it is too dry,for the local woods to be used,without backing and sinew fits the bill best.Where these short bows were used,and in the predominate,way they were used,by my observations of many old sites,the short bow was needed,for the small inconspicuous ambush blinds used.

[Traxx]

Oh...
And i forgot to answer the original question.I have used a 68" bow fine,in all different kinds of terrain.

[loefflerchuck]

I like Sleeks mentality on this one. Although i rarely have the time to hunt big game, my weapon of choice is sinew backed juniper. My bow is 49" long for my 26" draw. I would never take a shot from over 20 yards though. I find after you you are camped out for 3 days in a hunting spot 15- yard shots are common. It's like you loose your scent and become a part of where you are. I've gone 2 days without seeing any game and on the third am surrounded by deer. I am adapting to 25" without even noticing.
 Last month I spent a couple days on the Kaiparowits plateau and brought a little reflexed 35" sinew backed juniper with a 41# draw at 20" for small game. It sure was nice for bushwacking through scrub oak etc and had shots that you would have to see to believe(and plenty of misses). With instinctive shooting draw is not always to the same anchor. Focus, draw and shoot.

[sleek]

49" with a 26" draw? I love to see some pics of this bow, got a thread link?