Basic question on draw length vs long bow length

[shackleton]

I know this is basics but as I'm at a point on my 1st build I just want to double check.I have a draw length of 26-27"/I'm multiplying by 2 then adding 8 for "handle" section...modified D bow Eastern Woodlands style.Slightly thicker handle section.Total length 62".A buddy who built a few bows said I should go 68".Thoughts?For beginners Achieving draw lengths can be confusing at times.
Scott

[wizardgoat]

If you haven’t built many bows, going a bit longer will always help yours odds.
Drawlength x2 is for sure possible with the right design and execution, but not as much
wiggle room for errors.

[shackleton]

Thanks...I just wanted to be sure.
Scott

[Springbuck]

  I second what the Wiz says.  No harm in starting longer.

  Good job explaining your intended style to us, cuz that helps.  Just remember that rules of thumb are starting points, and a lot hinges on what the wood will tolerate.

  For the fairly narrow style you intend, a mediocre wood like ash or elm might NEED that 68", while a better wood like osage might only NEED the 62-64". 

[shackleton]

BTW using Hickory.
Scott

[willie]

modified D bow Eastern Woodlands style.Slightly thicker handle section.

Is there a particular example your planned bow is modeled after? Do you think the handle will bend some?

[shackleton]

Leaning towards Lenape or Algonkian from Alley/Hamm's book.Nocks will not have fancy carving..basic.I like these because they are simple in design.
Scott

[JWMALONE]

What page? Just curious. Longer bows are easier to tiller.

[Marc St Louis]

The 62" should be good for a 27" draw.  You may want to add a couple inches to that length if the handle is not working very much.  68" is a bit overkill

[shackleton]

20,22,25...influenced by these esp.Lenape.
Scott

[JWMALONE]

Well ill be darned, that's what I was looking at for this hop hornbeam stave I was working. Mine is 68, may end up shorter, it will be drawn to 28.
Actually more like C on page 38. A lil reflex deflex.

[George Tsoukalas]

If the stave has no knots and is relatively clean and bends a little in the handle, 62" should be fine.

Often new bowyers need a few inches longer on the stave.

Jawge

[willie]

I am having a hard time seeing a thickened handle in the bows you mentioned. This one  https://www.primitivearcher.com/smf/index.php/topic,58067.msg831974.html#msg831974    bend slightly less at the center and has 1/2" set with an 1.25 width "handle".  from a board

I did ask my self if many of the examples seen in the book were drawn less than we are used to now days

[Springbuck]

In the first post he mentioned it being a "modified" version of the style, thicker in the handle.    I assumed he was choosing to thicken the handle area on purpose tp make it stiff.  That's why I left the advice that he start on the long side. 

If the handle area works at all, I revise my suggestions.  Unless very high draw weight, you don't need 68"

[Tim Baker]

For safety, efficiency, comfort of draw, and accuracy it's a good rule to always make the bow as long as use conditions allow. Longer bows, all else equal, are far less likely to break. They have lower string angles, for lower stack/higher energy storage. The mass disadvantages of length can be neutralized by reducing the degree of bend in the grip and near-grip areas. This reduced bend means lower hysteresis just where most of the bow's energy is stored. Arguments and comments welcomed. -- Tim Baker