Primitive Archer

Main Discussion Area => Around the Campfire => Topic started by: Stonedog on July 25, 2012, 06:20:00 pm

Title: Bow vs. crossbow?
Post by: Stonedog on July 25, 2012, 06:20:00 pm
This topic is not about modern versions of either.  It pertains to longbow/flat bow/trad bow and the medieval style crossbow. 

It is also a comparison of the two as hunting weapons, not a weapon of war.

So, as a purely hunting weapon, which do YOU think is superior?

Have at it....I am getting the popcorn!
Title: Re: Bow vs. crossbow?
Post by: johnston on July 25, 2012, 08:21:01 pm
I can clear this all up in a hurry.

It all depends on what and how you are hunting. There.

Lane
Title: Re: Bow vs. crossbow?
Post by: Stonedog on July 25, 2012, 08:35:22 pm
Well and true Lane....but where is the fun in that?  ;)
Title: Re: Bow vs. crossbow?
Post by: johnston on July 25, 2012, 09:27:32 pm
Okay, I'll play. The American Flatbow would be my over all choice. Can be long or short, medium or stout.
A lot of different woods are suited to it and it is easy to make with few tools required. For an all around
hunting weapon it is my Number One.

Lane
Title: Re: Bow vs. crossbow?
Post by: Tortoise on July 25, 2012, 09:48:46 pm
In my opinion the crossbow is a much easier thing to use, the bolts are set in place, the string locks in a fixed position, ect. It is also much easier to aim with, so you have a better chance of hitting your next meal. Basically a very simple version of a bow from my point of view. But that doesn't mean it is better or shoots faster, though.
Title: Re: Bow vs. crossbow?
Post by: beetlebailey1977 on July 25, 2012, 10:58:38 pm
I disagree with the crossbow being easier to use.  Bulky, more work to load and fire, and just plain ugly.  My opinion.  Does not mean that they don't work or do the job.
Title: Re: Bow vs. crossbow?
Post by: JW_Halverson on July 26, 2012, 12:37:10 am
I disagree with the crossbow being easier to use.  Bulky, more work to load and fire, and just plain ugly.  My opinion.  Does not mean that they don't work or do the job.

...pluss the lightweight bolts are not suited for humane killing. 
Title: Re: Bow vs. crossbow?
Post by: Stonedog on July 26, 2012, 12:34:04 pm
JW-
I have to respectfully disagree.  My crossbow shoots 3/8" oak bolts, 13" long with a 125gr broadhead. They are 500 gr.....more than heavy enough IMO ...
Title: Re: Bow vs. crossbow?
Post by: JW_Halverson on July 26, 2012, 03:15:47 pm
Ok, I stand corrected, Stonedoggie.

I guess the thing that makes me shy from the crossbow is the additional parts, pieces, processes, and priorities that go along with them.  Every additional step squares the opportunities for something to go wrong.  Bow and arrow?  Much simpler.

Was shooting a 3D event and the woman in the lane next to me spent her 5 minutes on the line fussing with every conceivable gadget you could mount on a bow including Dish Network and a DVD player!  Finally she drew the bow and fired (Yes, CraigMBeckett, I said fired...these bows have more in common with a gun than a real bow! You gotta give me that much!)  She then asked everyone in her flight if they could tell her where her arrow went.  They all agreed they did not know.  I told her to count her arrows.  When she reached the final tally of three she became quite confused.  Yup, in all that fussing with all the NASA inspired technology she had forgotten the second part of the two part equation. 

Bow + _____ = weapon. 

(example:  Bow + "nothing" = unwieldy and ineffective club)


Title: Re: Bow vs. crossbow?
Post by: mullet on July 26, 2012, 03:24:43 pm
Well, just look at what it says at the bottom of my post, sums it up for me. ;D
Title: Re: Bow vs. crossbow?
Post by: JackCrafty on July 26, 2012, 06:41:17 pm
Unless the crossbow has steel limbs, it will not shoot consistently.  The longer the crossbow sits at full draw, the slower the bolt will travel when released.  Close range won't be a problem though.

Crossbows were used for hunting as soon as they were available and replaced the bow in many areas  when they were made with steel limbs.  It was the preferred hunting tool before firearms.  That says a lot right there.  They were very expensive, though, so the bow never lost out completely.
Title: Re: Bow vs. crossbow?
Post by: Badger on July 26, 2012, 06:50:34 pm
  I think Jack nailed it.
Title: Re: Bow vs. crossbow?
Post by: Pappy on July 27, 2012, 07:35:23 am
Yep Patrick nailed it and Eddied nailed it even better. ;) :) :)
   Pappy
Title: Re: Bow vs. crossbow?
Post by: Stonedog on July 27, 2012, 03:22:13 pm
So a modern medieval crossbow with a metal prod made from  spring steel would LOSE power?  I am not confronting...just trying to understand.!
Title: Re: Bow vs. crossbow?
Post by: JackCrafty on July 27, 2012, 07:12:13 pm
Unless the crossbow has steel limbs, it will not shoot consistently.

This means that the crossbow will not loose power if it has steel limbs, and will shoot consistently.  Limbs made from other natural materials like wood, horn, etc, will loose power and this will cause the arrow or bolt to shoot lower than you expect.
Title: Re: Bow vs. crossbow?
Post by: Stonedog on July 27, 2012, 10:15:55 pm
That is what I thought you meant.....but didn't want to put words into your "cyber mouth", so to speak.... ;)
Title: Re: Bow vs. crossbow?
Post by: M-P on July 28, 2012, 05:32:10 am
I think part of the answer goes back to the observation that crossbows take less training and practice  to use.   Crossbows certainly became a very popular hunting weapin for the European nobility.  I suspect because they had no interest in consistent, year round practice.   And.. lets face it a many of those crossbows were more highly decorated than even the fanciest modern double barrel and probably equally expensive.    Those that had to hunt for food may have always stuck to bows because   1) they practiced often enough to be good   and 2) even cheap crossbows were probably not cheap.
Ron
Title: Re: Bow vs. crossbow?
Post by: agd68 on July 30, 2012, 10:58:44 am
Comparing a hunting bow to a crossbow is like comparing an apple to an orange.
First lets look at history. Crossbows have been around since about 600BC. There are examples of Greek and Roman Crossbows. They were a military weapon and came to England in 1066 with William the Conqueror. They remained much more prevelant in Europe than Britain.
They were far easier to make and did not require the training or strength to use that the English war bow required. I watched a BBC program on the English archers and boys began apprenticing at 8 but never drew a bow until about 12. Everything to that point was strengthening exercises and theory.  A trained archer was able to hit a mansized target at around 100yrds. Bodies of English archers could often be identified by their deformed right shoulders from huge muscle growth on that side. With a crossbow, childern, oldmen and cripples could be used as archers.
Both weapons were designed for one thing. To peirce armor, and both could do the job out to 300yds. However, a crossbowmen could only fire 2 bolts a minute to a longbowmans 12-13 arrows.
In 1346 the English archers decimated the French army at Cercy. The French lost 2000 dead to English arrows to 50 English dead.
The crossbow became a popular huntinn tool by A) poncey nobility who did'nt want to spend the time practicing and B) peasants who could not afford a proper bow and because of their high use in Europe were familiar.
All that preamble aside, which is better..They both have their advantages , bows are quieter, faster less complicated and more accurate with practice .Crossbows can be drawn by folks who for what ever reason cant draw a bow, they are much easier to use in a tree stand, easier to learn to use . BUT THEY ARE NOT A BOW.... >:D