Primitive Archer
Main Discussion Area => Bows => Topic started by: warpath on December 24, 2012, 04:03:47 pm
-
Hello everybody! Haven't posted in awhile so here's a "Molly" I just recently finished. Please criticize the heck out of it since I haven't made one in awhile.
This bow is 66" overall, 64" NTN, and 61" when strung. She is made of Pignut Hickory backed with Bamboo. The belly side of the levers are reinforced with Bloodwood and Osage along with the handle. She's 2" wide at the fades and along the length of the bending limbs. The levers are 3/8" wide and 14" in length. The nocks have been reinforced with Osage that has been glued and pinned to assure that they don't slip. Handle has been wrapped in black cowhide and artificial sinew in a shelfless design. This bow pulls 45# @ 26". The Mrs. thinks that this bow looks like a Gharial Crocodile so I've named this bow "The Gharial" Without any further delay, here she is:
-
More pics
-
thats a good looking bow!
-
Good job !!
Guy
-
Looks great! That's a really nice bow. 8)
-
I am digging the Gharial! 8) Sweet tiller too.
-
Wow, that one looks real sharp. Those levers are real narrow. Since you asked for criticism, I would have maybe tried to keep them narrow on the tip and make overlays. But really, I just made this up cause you asked. Actually, I think it is a real nice molly and looks damn hot.
-
That is a damned fine bow right there. Aint but one thing wrong, and that's the fact it aint hidin on my bow rack >:D.
rich
-
Well, If I were to really knit pick the tiller, and this is going to the point of insane, the top limb bends more out of the fades, and the bottom limb is more of an even round bend. But only a touch. Other than that, the wrong person is holding the bow and should be sent to me directly to remedy that problem! ;D
-
I want to put googley eyes on it!! >:D Thanks guys. Maybe I'll sell or trade it in the near future, but for now, I'm going to shoot it for a bit. Maybe make some meat with it next month! ;)
G
-
How does it shoot with those heavy tips? I think you coulda done much narrower with them! (Jking, i wouldn't dare make mine that tiny!!)
I bet that thing outperforms its weight by a long shot!!!! Niceeeee job!
-
Zion- It shoots pretty fast despite the extra weight on the tips. Only able to do 40yds shot lately. Hoping to get out to the outdoor range around here to see how it performs at 125yds. I'll let you know how it does at that distance when I'm able to get there.
G
-
Sweet bow all around there, very unique and quite striking in appearance. Thanks for posting.
Greg
-
Sleek- You're right. It does bend a little more out of the fade on the top limb. That's because there was a knot towards the lever on the top limb and I was trying to avoid overstressing that area. Basically I was trying to take a piece of hickory that would not have made a good bow at all and make it work. Only got a few shots through it now, (maybe 100 or so.) Need to shoot it more before i decide to do anything with it as far as trade or selling it goes.
G
-
Gorgeous bow. I think 2" is a little too wide at mid limb for as little bending that goes on there in this design. Also Molly levers need to bend ever so slightly but they don't like too deep. 3/8" along the length of the levers is awesome! But I use side nocks with 3/8" tips and never have problems with slipping so I think the osage on there is just dead weight where it counts most. I still think you did an excellent job with this one. Thanks for sharing!
-
NICE. BOW! Looks Awesome!
-
Cool :)
-
Beautiful. I don't see nothing that could possibly be criticized. Nice!
-
That is sweeeeeet :o
-
Thanks guys.
Ryoon- Someone on here had made a Molly from a paddle bow that was much wider than this so I felt that 2" would be fine and it was. As far as the tips being beefed up, I did this because of the thickness as opposed to the width. Probably should've done overlays instead but it's not hurting this bow's performance in any way. They're much thinner than they look in the pictures. Barely 1/8" on each side and hardly any weight.
G
-
The problem with width near mid limb is that its very difficult to get that area bending like it should for as wide as many people make it. In your bow there's essentially almost no bend for a few inches past mid limb before the transition to stiff tips. I'd say 90% of molly designs I see are overbuilt in that area and while many people may only consider mass near the tips, I think mass at mid limb is important to consider as well. True that they are thin but mass is mass. To say it doesn't effect performance in any way is not true. May still be a great performer but you could squeeze out that 0.5fps without them. ;) Still a beautiful bow man. I'm just too picky. :P
-
Ryoon- I completely understand. You had mentioned before about how the levers should have some bend in them. I thought that also but almost every one that I've seen has very stiff levers. Why is that? Is it a misunderstanding of the design? Or is it because people are just trying to be safe like I was? I didn't like how this bow was stiff near the levers, but I admit that I wasn't sure what to do about it. Probably shouldn't have built the levers up as much as I did. Possibly could've made it pull to 30" safely in that case, however it was more the look I was going for that dictated the end result. Please respond to this becuase I think that you make some really good points and I can use all the tips I can get since I've only made 4 of these in my 25 yrs of making bows and always followed this formula. Thank you in advance.
G
-
Very cool bow. I like what you did with it. I have'nt made a molly yet but I do recognize the tiller as most of mine are stiff in the outer limbs and get most of their bend in the inner 1/2. They shoot pretty fast so I bet this one does too. Good job. Danny
-
Could your levers lose some mass? Yes...but are they overbuilt affecting a "noticeable" difference...No. so Id say your fine...you built the bow to "your" specs and intentions,and not what someone else may think it should be. I think those small side overlays are cool and unique and dont think they affect anything to worry about. Id rather shoot a bow that's a couple fps slower that I shoot lights out accurately than the faster bow that I can't hit $&@+ with. I've made countless types of lever bows with slightly bending levers n stiff levers and I really can't physically see a difference..but that's maybe because I make my levers teeny tiny either way..anyways..just my two cents...not that my opinion matters
-
Very nice bow! Merry Christmas! Jawge
-
Very interesting design!!!
I love it when folks draw outside the lines ;)
I like it!!!!
-
Awesome looking bow
-
It can honestly be pretty hard to pull off levers this narrow for their full length, unless you are working with a board bow, and even then you gotta have a perfect layout. On a stave bow from a less than perfect stave, where alignment can be in anyway questionable, you could easily lose lateral stability with levers this thin. Nice job.
-
I think more often than not people think that if the levers are stiff then that's all that's necessary for this design. Without seeing a slight bend there is no way of knowing they are reduced as much as possible for optimization, at least in thickness, and often times peoples tips are grossly thick and not narrow enough to take advantage of this design. What's awesome about your bow is that it's 3/8" wide for the whole length of the levers which is fantastic! Not to mention how beautiful the color combination is. This bow is an excellent example of a Molly and just a few nitpicky things would make it even better in my opinion. Save these criticisms for the next bow. I'll be excited to see it.
-
Ryoon- one of the things that I forgot to mention is that the bloodwood and osage laminations on the levers are tapered. They go from 1/32" at the tips to 1/8" where they start on the levers/limbs. I don't know if this helped the design or not but I think that I'l be using this formula again if I laminate the belly sides of the levers.
G
-
With a straight taper for the levers that's probably a good taper for those lams. If the taper were from wider at mid limb to narrower at the tips then the taper should be more even or actually even increase toward the tips. One reason why I'm not a fan of the Molly design is that there's no easy way to efficiently tiller the transition to stiff tips and then the problem if making sure they aren't excessively deep.
-
A lever is upposed to be stiff so reducing until the lever flexes slightly is a sign that too much is taken off.
It is likely that a slightly flexing or a slightly oversized lever will shoot about the same but that doesn't mean that the optimum is still not between those two extremes.
I've never had trouble with the transition from working limb to levers. It's no different from a handle dip through the fades except on a smaller scale.
-
PatM, a lever with less mass will shoot faster than one with more so how would reducing it till it flexes, just enough so you can see it, have any negative effects? The lever is still very stiff relative to a normal bow limb and also has less mass. Also I never see the transition area doing any sort of flexing even several inches on either side. If its not bending at all how can you be sure that the area isn't carrying excess mass? You can't.
-
I think more often than not people think that if the levers are stiff then that's all that's necessary for this design. Without seeing a slight bend there is no way of knowing they are reduced as much as possible for optimization,
Oh thats just a bunch of hooey, making the levers bend is basically killing the leverage advantage that a molly or holmegard bow typically has, making the typically smooth draw of a molly or holmegard bow stack in the last couple of inches, where it would of had a beautiful force draw curve to begin with if you would of left them stiff.
EDIT: I guess if you wanna go all flight shooter and every single fps is your goal then I might see your reasoning, but a molly is already going to shoot pretty quick, so why take a quick shooting bow that draw incredibly smooth, and turn it into a quick shooting bow that draws a little less smooth?
-
Oh thats just a bunch of hooey, making the levers bend is basically killing the leverage advantage that a molly or holmegard bow typically has, making the typically smooth draw of a molly or holmegard bow stack in the last couple of inches, where it would of had a beautiful force draw curve to begin with if you would of left them stiff.
If the levers bend ever so slightly how could that make the bow start to stack if it wasn't stacking with non bending levers. stacking is a factor of the string angle. I don't see how this question of totally stiff levers vs. slightly bending levers has much if anything to do with string angle. I think the biggest concern with slightly bending levers is that you are likely pushing the boundaries of safe lateral stability on the levers.
-
How could making the levers bend in all possibility not effect string angle? And in terms of leverage, I would rather try to pry a door open with a stiff metal crowbar than a bendy rubber crowbar, if you see what I'm saying.
-
Good looking bow and good looking tiller for sure.
-
Tmk, your assumption about bending levers is of an extreme bend which is not what I mean. The bend should barely be noticeable just enough to show that the levers are reduced to a good degree. Any change in string angle or leverage wouldn't be noticeable. Weylin is correct that lateral stability can be a concern but rarely do I see tips made narrow enough to worry about it.
-
So Ryan..how much firsthand experience have you had testing this hypothesis out? Id sure like to know so I can build a Molly "right". >:D
-
I don't think you have anything to worry about Chris. You make the exceptions. ;)
-
Ryoon, That's part of the fine-tuning and learning process. If it's bending, you screwed up. It's the same reasoning that makes guys put an I-beam configuration in a handle. Absolute rigidity IS desireable.
It makes no sense to reduce the levers until they bend. You have to make several bows to figure out where that line lies. We don't make every bow style and fine-tune past the tipping point.
Do you make a nice full compass longbow and then overdo the ends until they are too whippy in order to prove that optimimum reduction has taken place?
For someone who wants the best performance possible, it seems odd that you will sacrifice potential gains.
-
Why is absolute rigidity desirable and how could you possibly know that you've reached a good amount of mass removal without some sort of bend? A barely noticeable bend in the levers has absolutely no ill effects but a definite positive of mass reduction. It is still stiff by any measure and still keeps string angle low, mass is reduced as much as possible with no issues of safety to the bow with such miniscule bend. Your comparison to the full compass longbow is not accurate. Of course in that situation mass reduction can take place in the width during the tillering process if the bow is showing absolutely no signs of stress.
-
It takes about 60 grns. of weight change at the tip of the average bow to change the average arrow speed one FPS. 60 grns. is a VERY noticeable amount of material but one fps is not.
-
Steve b., for me, going for that 1fps is a challenge that makes building bows so fun for me. :D
-
I like the bow and the conversation about design, very informative.
-
Fair enough, and more power to you, ryoon.
-
I think that everyone is misunderstanding what Ryoon is saying. He's not saying that the lever should bend like the rest of the limb but only ever so slightly. Though I personally think that a very stiff limb is the purpose of a molly, I understand what he's trying to say. I see that there's alot of debate going on over exactly how a molly is supposed to be built and work. I think you all have great ideas which is why I love posting here so much. If you're able too, everyone should post pics of mollies that they've built on this thread and let's see all of the different designs. You've seen my latest molly so now let's see yours. How about it?
G
-
Well since I'm doing so much talking I'll post my last Molly type bow which I actually call a holmegaard by mistake. Can't get the pics since I'm posting from my phone but here's the link.
http://www.primitivearcher.com/smf/index.php/topic,16281.msg223711.html#msg223711
It's been years since this one and although I had a few more attempts since then, I never finished them as I found a distaste towards the transition from working limb to stiff limb. One thing you WON'T notice is the imperceptible bend. Because its almost not even bending! But if you sight down the limb you can see that the lever is curved ever so slightly. Cool right?! ;D
-
Ryoon- I now see what you mean about the levers bending slightly. I don't know if I'd be comfortable with bending levers but that bow looks amazing!! Great job!!!
G
-
I've made so many lever bows that my experience has taught me how far to reduce a lever to just before it starts to bend. I got it down to a science. I have learned just how much thicker the lever needs to be than the thinnest part of the working limb. As I stated before I have done em both ways before,n my personal preference is to leave em stiff,but reduce them right to the point before they wood start to bend. And it doesn't matter what wood I use,my simple lil formula works for any wood because its based on the thickness of your thinnest part of the working limb. I've used osage,hophornbeam,elm,blacklocust,red oak boards,dogwood,rosebay rhododendron,hackberry,and who knows what else I'm forgetting off the top of my head. And a smooth transition can be had from working limb to lever without being bulky and excessive in mass. Not knowing how much to take off is hogwash..it just takes several to make with careful observation and documentation to know and figure it out. Its called experience ;)
I should do a build along on a Molly one of these days and expose all my lil tricks n secrets on how to get to an optimum lever. Soooo...how much ya gonna pay me guys to do it >:D
-
I would like to see your technique Chris. I never see much if any excess on your bows but I can't say the same for others. I just wonder how you Really know if its about to bend. Even so you'd have to argue why the nearly insignificant difference is better. By my strategy I think you could squeeze out 0.1fps. ;)
-
It's hard to live in a perfect world and a person gets the drizzles trying to all of the time.These bows are homogenus materials shot by imperfect people.To get stuck on 1/10 of a fps second is crazy.But yes it does inspire us to keep improving the bows we make.I see that point for sure.
-
BTW warpath heck of a nice bow you got there.I can see your educated in the dense qualities of wood you used.Hickory to me is a good base for about any type of ideas a person has about a bow.Strong and tough but still not overly dense.Good choice.
-
I'm not arguing at all that there is a insignificant difference....but personally I like the "just stiff" lever for durability reasons...and if you do go for a slightly bending lever you start to play with too much fire as far as lateral stability and being able to lean on your bow as a walking stick...if its just stiff its a very durable hunting weapon. The difference of .1 fps of a second can be picked up or easily lost in the many other variables that can affect fps.
-
I'd argue that that insignificant difference is not significant enough to make a difference in durability or lateral stability. If it is then the bow is already on the edge. I hope you guys realize I know perfection is unattainable. But for me, if there's Any way a bow can be improved I look for it. Also I know most people are only concerned with hunting, but when flight shoots are won by inches, that 0.1fps can make a difference. Just a note if anyone ever plans on making a flight bow. :laugh:
-
You're kind of arguing against yourself now. The slightly flexing lever undoubtedly sacrifices more performance than the lever that has been fine-tuned by practicing on other bows.
Trying to find that perfect lever stiffness per mass should be one of your quests rather than throwing up your hands and saying it can't be done and going too far the other way.
-
PatM, it can be done and I believe that's by making it flex ever so slightly. I have never said anything about how it would sacrifice performance and you have yet to explain why either.
-
Well if you just want to "believe" your method is right then explaining why an alternate method is better would be a waste of my time. Nobody ever got anywhere arguing against someone who bases an argument on a belief rather than data.
Plenty of info out there on how perfectly rigid structures are better. You may want to review the rigid arm bow model by Hickman that will give good evidence as to why rigidity in parts of a bow limb is a very good thing.
The more material in a bow limb that can be prevented from bulging and rippling on release, the better things are.
-
PatM, I guess belief is the wrong word since the fact a that the physics proves my point. It's important to make sure that there is an even level of stain for optimal mass reduction in real world bows which means that the stuff lever will have to flex to some degree. The stiffness to prevent limb vibration and energy loss is indeed important but you'd have to convince me that the insignificant decrease in stiffness outweighs a sure fire way of making sure mass reduction is optimal. I know you'll find a way out of explaining it though. ;)
-
It's also a surefire way of losing the tiny bits of performance that you obsess over. I find it interesting that you use sweeping generalizations that are basically regurgitated Bakerisms but never have much to say in the way of explaining yourself.
"The physics prove my point " is hardly a concise explanation of your thoughts. Can I use that one too? lol
-
I have a Molly made by blackhawk and I will remove some mass from the handle so it fits me better ,but aint no way I want to do any scraping on the tips !
I worry enough about stringing it up now !
I was thinking about trying to do a molly in Hickory but know I don't have to ,thanks for sharing !!!
Have fun !!
Merry Christmas !!
Guy
-
Pat M, again you have yet to explain your point. In making bows there is an optimal strain which lies between taking absolutely no set and taking too much set. We don't yet know EXACTLY what that strain is but experimentation has showing that its enough that the bow takes some set. If it takes zero set then there is too much mass for optimal performance. Too much set and energy storage is compromised. We know that the limbs have to be strained to a certain degree for optimal mass reduction which means that the levers have to show that they are stressed. Of course a completely stiff lever is under stress but to the point of taking absolutely no set. Allowing that lever to bend slightly shows us it is near optimally stressed and such a small bend causes no set. In a perfect bow with no limb vibration, limb mass doesn't matter because all the stored energy goes into the arrow. But in real world bows mass is a factor we can take control of to increase performance. Even though the stiff tips of a Molly may decrease limb vibration to a degree, they still lose energy to it to a degree which the slight bend in the levers would be insignificant.
Buckeye guy, I've said several times that I think Blackhawk is able to reach near optimal in his bows. Hopefully he'll share his techniques with us.
-
There is simply no need for anyone to "explain" themselves beyond pure performance numbers.
No rule at all states that we have to be able to reduce a bow performance to numbers and graphs like Allen and Dave can do.
Why are you so persistent in that line of questioning? You should be wondering why with all your knowledge your bow only shoots a bit over 160 when many people do considerably better with zero knowledge of what is really going on apart from 'what works".
BH will tell you that a certain dimension is too heavy, another is too flexy and he makes the lever between those two. That line is a fine one and he knows how to work up to the line but not over.
Did you even try shooting your bow when the levers were stiff and actually compare performance to the flexing levers?
-
I wanna jump in this, having never even considered building a mollie. I have a question. If one lever is tillered so that it is exactly stiff, and another is tillered to bend only one millimeter, which will shoot further? Now this question as it stands is not answerable because we dont know how much the stiff lever weighs. But lets assume if another 60 gr ( to use a number used earlier in this thread ) were removed it would flex 1 millimeter.
I am willing to bet ( with no experience to back this ) that they would perform the same. Or at least without an exact shooting style and release every time, you would never tell a difference. That being the case, is there anything wrong with the argument Ryoon is offering? Seems as though Blackhawk has found a way to split that hair with his bows, but I would put him in a completely different classification of bowyers. So, sorry bud, you dont count ;) For the rest of us, how would a person know when his levers are reduced to max efficiency mass?
Perhaps if two bows were built? But no two bits of wood are the same. If one bow was built and the tips were reduced, weighed for mass, measured for amount of stifness, shot through a crono, and repeated until the speed numbers start to fall. That graph would be imposable to argue with.
-
Can't we all just get along?!?!?! Pat and Ryoon- Kiss and make up! :-*
Now how about showing some mollies?! :D
G
-
There are much better ways of reducing mass without making the tips flex.
The argument Ryan is making is misguided because he has shown no evidence that he's tried both ways. He's just hoping that his way is right.
After he's made a few with hollow levers he may change his tune.
-
Pat M, it's funny you say that about my Molly since there is a lot I could do to change it as my current knowledge has increased drastically. Also consider that at the time I was building bows with a tillering stick and an old bathroom scale. Bows from that time in my bow making life were actually under the measured weights. I haven't measured that one but other bows I had measured at 50#'s on the bathroom scale were actually under 45. I think the only possible way I could convince you of anything is to make every possible bow design of every possible wood and let you test them yourself. Apparently the logical argument doesn't work. ;)
Sleek, the only problem I have with completely stiff levers is that I fail to understand how one can tell they are reduced to optimal thickness without having them flex at all. A stiff lever could be extremely close to optimal or way overbuilt and you couldn't tell the difference. If there is a way then I'd like to know.
Warpath, no animosity on this side. I love that we can have open discussions like this. :)
-
I know where your coming from Ryoon, and I am slightly sympathetic towards your side, because I have the same question. How do you know? Blackhawk knows because he has the experience and figured it all out. Us though? I would have to kepp shooting through a chrono untill the numbers stopped going up to find that sweet spot for me.
-
As you are making the bow you should be getting a feel for the wood choice you are using. Some woods are quite consistent. If you can see that your levers are flexing very slightly then logically your next bow should be a hair deeper.
You could very easily grind a flat surface on the belly of the lever and replace thickness and fine tune multiple times.
You will find that it's not so much the experience BH has but rather that he gets right on the stuff that might make a difference rather than dodging and speculating.
-
Pat M, SO YOU DO GET YOUR LEVERS FLEXING! Oh you dog! ;)
-
Only once and I fix my mistakes rather than saying "I meant to do that".
-
Pat, do you ever chrono the tips before and after they flex and you fix em back stiff? Just wondering the difference, or if you tell a difference?
-
Looks pretty fine to me......good work.
-
IMHO there must be many ways to discern whether a lever is optimized or not. BTW according to Dan Perry, "Leverage may be the most controversial element of bow limb dynamics, since most bowyers I have talked deny the existence of leverage and gearing in bows." (p.164 of TBB4) Does that mean the so called unbending lever is just the end part of limb that is not very well tillered? ;) Do we even have to optimize the static recurve by making sure it bends at least a little? IMHO there must be many ways to talk about bow limb dynamics. The issue is not whether there is such a thing as leverage, but whether it is useful to talk about leverage. Is it useful for optimization to make a lever bend at least perceptibly? I guess so. But that is not the only way. Several people suggested using a chrono. Much more cumbersome but probably safer. Did I mention that there are many ways to skin a cat? ;)
-
Great looking bow, I am still needing to give one of those a try