Ring size and speed

[Bob Barnes]

I would have agreed about the ease of chasing the ring until I started working the stave... you can see that there is a total mix of color and texture in that back... I actually worked on it trying to figure it out and finally went to the next ring down....which was about the same, but at least I knew what to expect.

[Yellarwoodfellar]

I have some ultra thin stuff here I'd love to post (30+ per inch!)

[BowEd]

Bob....looks like you got those lunar[moon] rings evident there within the ring in your stave.That is some pretty wide rings though to say the least yet.Cured good time wise it'll make a decent bow.Old rule of thumb says if into strange territory not seen before make it wide enough and long enough for leeway.
Did you debark  it?How thick was the sapwood on that one?

[paulsemp]

Mighty thick rings for Osage. almost looks like the ring structure of Mulberry

[Mo_coon-catcher]

I don’t notice any difference.just the look of the wood once finished out. I prefer the thinner rings for a challenge and the neat tight feathering on the belly side. With the 30-60rpi stuff I use a draw knife to get close to where I want to be then use a scraper for the last few rings to clean it up.

Kyle

[Springbuck]

You could have chased that back with a chainsaw! Wow!

  Ha ha!  I did that once with elm......ahem..... 

I also once found a freak flat-sawn red oak board that was basically one ring thick.  Or, at least once I finished "chasing" it out and made the bow.  The handle was three rings thick, and the limbs were each basically less than a ring thick. 

[sleek]

I made an elm bow with one ring and a black locust with one ring only. Two worst shooting bows i EVER made. Massive set, and sluggish cast. My fastest always seem to have a high ring count, no matter the wood.

[Yellowstave]

Sleek, after hearing that, and reading about Tim Baker and his shear force theories, one must wonder about the amount of shear involved in each ring of earlywood. . Therefore, and feel free to correct me if im wrong, the earlywood plays more of a role than we realize in cast.

[PEARL DRUMS]

I will leave you with this. Building self bows is very much like spiritual faith. You either believe it and follow it, or you don't. Do I believe early growth plays a role in cast? Nope.  Until a person can build identical self bows it can never be more than opinion. And until we have a way to measure how identical two self bows are, we will never know.  I've seen way too many 2, 3 and 4 ring bows that kicked azz. And I've seen way too many thin ringed bows that sucked.

[Yellowstave]

Great analogy pearl. I love all the brain fodder.

[Springbuck]

  That oak one was pretty good, for oak.  I don't think it was ALL that fast, but it gave me low set, and high-ish draw-weight. 

  But, generally, I don't even pay attention to this on most woods, because I'm just happy to have a clean-ish stave worth working, unless I'm looking for a ring to chase.

  I'd be curious to know the answer, but it seems to me that this factor would be way down the list of things that boost performance, below design (incl. choosing the right design for the stave and species), execution of good tillerr using low-set methods, mass placement and control, heat treating, etc....