Vote for July-August SBOM Here!!

[Stickhead]

Here they are:

1)   Weylin’s “Osage Recurve with Wolf Fish Skins”
http://www.primitivearcher.com/smf/index.php/topic,71550.0.html

2)   dreamcraft_archery’s “Black Locust Mollegabet”
http://www.primitivearcher.com/smf/index.php/topic,71673.0.html

3)   simk’s “Convex-Concave Apple”
http://www.primitivearcher.com/smf/index.php/topic,71663.0.html

4)   superdav95’s “5 Piece Bamboo Hunting Bow”
http://www.primitivearcher.com/smf/index.php/topic,71618.msg1004041.html#msg1004041
 

[arbalest]

I just like nice clean self bows. That, and I have an old apple tree that is going to donate one of its trunks to the cause.

[Alchemist]

A question about the Wolf skin Osage.  Doesn't the skins make it a backed bow and not a self bow?

[Stickhead]

A question about the Wolf skin Osage.  Doesn't the skins make it a backed bow and not a self bow?

Excellent question.  In this case, the skins are considered ornamental, and not structural to the backing.  Yeah, there’s some gray area there, but certain skins like sturgeon are tough enough to be considered a functional backing.

[ridley]

I'm a little torn. I like that wolf fish bow, but I feel like the skin gives it an unfair advantage.  On the other hand, I love that sorta "bruised apple" look the Simk's bow has, it's got a ton of character and looks good too.  It's almost like the spirit of the apple tree lives on in the bow.

[simk]

As a sportsman you've got to accept the referee's decisions. This get's a little diffcult if you don't understand them. So where's the technical difference between Weylin's fish-backing and Mullet's goat-rawhide? Fish-skin imho is very tough stuff, whereas with rawhide it strongly depends on how thick it is - but both for sure prevent splinters from lifting and add additional security to the bow. It was similar last time, when Pinaka's ratsnake wasn't considered as a backing and went as selfbow. In a contest there should always be understandable rules and decisions, Tom.
Thanks

[Stickhead]

As a sportsman you've got to accept the referee's decisions. This get's a little diffcult if you don't understand them. So where's the technical difference between Weylin's fish-backing and Mullet's goat-rawhide? Fish-skin imho is very tough stuff, whereas with rawhide it strongly depends on how thick it is - but both for sure prevent splinters from lifting and add additional security to the bow. It was similar last time, when Pinaka's ratsnake wasn't considered as a backing and went as selfbow. In a contest there should always be understandable rules and decisions, Tom.
Thanks

Well, at this time, based on experience and input from other bowyers, sturgeon and trigger fish skins are considered structural backing due to their strength.  All other fish skins and snake skins are considered ornamental.  Granted, it's a blurry line, and maybe it's time to combine SBOM and BBOM anyway.

[superdav95]

Well deserved win for Weylin here.  Very nice bow!  Congrats.  I personally like having the 2 categories and think it makes sense to keep them separate.   Proper tillering is needed for both backed and non backed obviously to turn out a good bow but it’s crucial with a self bow to get tiller just right for a good bow that will last for years of shooting.  Both have their place here for sure but lots of guys have their preferences and such on which they prefer to build.  A Boyer can get away with a lot more in a backed bow as far as draw length and variety of designs, performance and complexity of curves as well.    I agree that bows with certain backings that are purely decorative should still be in the non backed category.  Just my 2 cents. 

Dave