Primitive Archer

Main Discussion Area => Bows => Topic started by: 72shane on February 16, 2010, 08:37:25 pm

Title: Sapling vs. stave?
Post by: 72shane on February 16, 2010, 08:37:25 pm
What are the reasons/advantages of a self bow from a split stave compared to a sapling bow? Any disadvantages to mention? Ive never used saplings and was just curious...ive always split out staves for self bows.
Title: Re: Sapling vs. stave?
Post by: aznboi3644 on February 16, 2010, 08:43:59 pm
I've broken a few sapling staves...and also split a few 12-14" logs.

Difference is the size of the crown on the back...the larger logs have a flatter back...but on some woods a crowned back is like natural trapping. 

I'm no expert though...I just enjoy making shavings and for some odd reason I enjoy splitting logs haha...my back my not like it though but its fun to me
Title: Re: Sapling vs. stave?
Post by: Ryan_Gill_HuntPrimitive on February 16, 2010, 09:13:25 pm
I have had good luck with both. the only real difference to me is the available draw weight. sapling bows typically dont have the poundage potential that staves do. the saplings also are a bit more prone to breakage, and i usually make them a little bit longer than my stave bows.  but one thing i really like about saplings is- less roughing out and more character - Ryan
Title: Re: Sapling vs. stave?
Post by: George Tsoukalas on February 16, 2010, 09:20:07 pm
Use saplings 2-3 in. in diameter. Leave them an inch or 2 longer than your usual save length to counteract the crown.  Make sure the string falls on the handle area. Mark belly from back with a marker. Remove the belly wood with a hatchet. Wait a few days and remove the bark. In the spring the bark will come off easily. Bring the stave to floor tiller just bending it a few inches and it will dry faster. Jawge
Title: Re: Sapling vs. stave?
Post by: Simple Hunter on February 16, 2010, 09:36:32 pm
Just like George said but I use a draw knife.
Title: Re: Sapling vs. stave?
Post by: radius on February 16, 2010, 09:38:02 pm
using branches is good, because branch-wood is forced to resist tension stress its entire life.   similar to a sapling in size, but stronger due to how it has lived.
Title: Re: Sapling vs. stave?
Post by: wodpow on February 16, 2010, 11:17:17 pm
I like limb small tree trunk bows because I think thats what most real primitve bows would of been made from not split staves .wedges of rock,wood , antler or bone would of been a lot of trouble when you could hunt for and find a small tree trunk and work it down with flint and make a bow. stave bows are stronger because you can get into dense heart wood  and have a  lower crown. Limb bows are not as long lived with me but I still like them because I feel thats how early bows were made
Title: Re: Sapling vs. stave?
Post by: broad_head on February 17, 2010, 10:34:59 am
I have made both but being lazy I find making sapling or branch bows much quicker to make. I normally go for dogwood or hawthorn, both are strong woods and high draw weights are easy to achieve.
                                 Peter (UK)
Title: Re: Sapling vs. stave?
Post by: 72shane on February 17, 2010, 11:01:28 am
I was just curious to what others thought. Just dont seem to see as many sapling bows as I do staves. Thanks for the replies.
Title: Re: Sapling vs. stave?
Post by: NTProf on February 17, 2010, 11:31:25 am
I like saplings just because I do not have the tools or the facilities to cut down and split log staves. I also found that in the couple of sapling bows I have made from 2-3" saplings, I was able to cut ones that were more oval in cross section, choosing the flatest side for the back, thus reducing the height of the crown.