The insanity continues....2nd Pike, 2" now 46" 52#@26"

[blackhawk]

Thanks for answering my question...now I got more 

So you didn't pike it like you had said you wanted to at the start,and just retillered the weight down to pull the same weight at 28",and that it didn't take anymore set(not even a 1/4") by pulling it further than what it was being pulled at before??

[half eye]

Blackhawk, here';s the chronology,
1. make a bow that is 50" ntn, and draws about 45 @27" , made as circle tiller w/stiff tips, and post it

2. Jon W mentioned it would go another 1 or so inches, so instead of "V" bending the grip area by overstressing (set) I decided to bring the tips back (not stiff) to gain the extra draw length

3.I expected more draw weight at 28" than I had at 27" (maybe 2-3 pounds) when the bow gave the same weight I was somewhat puzzeled. So I was commenting that I thought the thinner flipped tips (thinner to open up more) might be the reason because they were storing a little less energy...just speculating.

4. I'm getting the pics for the first "pike" post on the Osage which has been done between the thunder showers and hail....will be posted here shortly.
rich

[Josh B]

Your results are pretty much in line with what I would expect Rich.  Looking at the unbraced pics before and after are the key.  In the first pic you have pronounced flip tips that probably netted you an inch or so of reflex.  In the second pics the side profile shows a flatter profile.  I didn't see whether you heat straightened them or if they just pulled out.  It doesn't really matter much either way.  The effect is the same.  The bow doesn't know if its reflexed, flat or deflexed on these simple designs.  It only knows how much energy is stored while being bent from unbraced to full draw.  So as far as draw weight alone is considered, a bow with 1" of reflex drawn 50#@27" is gonna pretty much equal a straight bow drawn 50#@28" because the limbs are bending the same amount from unbraced to full draw.  The actual energy imparted to the arrow is where things get complicated.  But as far as why the draw weight stayed the same, I believe that is why it turned out that way.  Just my feeble minded understanding of course.  So I could be way off.  Josh

[PEARL DRUMS]

I believe the only real way to measure all of this is to check the weight at say 15" before and after changing the profile of the bow. That way extra set hasn't had a chance to creep in. You'll know then if you simply lost string tension, lost actual draw weight or just added set to the bow by pulling it another inch. Ive come to notice that very little draw weight changes register when fussing with tips. Draw weight is generated way down the limb towards the handle.

One thing I cant wrap my brain around is drawing a straight limbed bow 2-4" beyond half its length, yet no stack or set? I haven't figured that secret out yet. But Im trying.

[tattoo dave]

Please tell me this post isn't going to turn into a B.S. discussion over 1/4", or even 1" of set!!! Set or no set, those are two damn fine bows ya got there Rich!! Nice work again! I'm looking forward to seeing the piking results.

Tattoo Dave

[IdahoMatt]

Damn fine couple of bows Rich. 

[PEARL DRUMS]

I thought it was an experimental thing Rich was doing. So I tossed my two cents in how to get a good measurement of what's going on as he changes the bow.

[half eye]

OK fellas, Piked the Osage bow from 50" to 48", the results are that I still dont have much set and the bow now weighs  47# @ 27". That means I have 2-3 pounds more draw weight for 1" less draw length.  The bow was tested and shot with 4-7/8" brace height.

The other thing is that I'm leaving the pin knocks whole so ya can see how much was cut off @ one.

There is a new full draw, un-braced, and details of both knocks. So we dont get into any arguements if there is anything else you'd like to see please advise so I can take more photos.

Enjoy the pics
rich

[half eye]

Gun Doc, think ya said it better than I can, believe your right on the money.

Idaho, Tattoo thanks fellas, appreciate the support

Pearl Drums, I never did say they dont pinch, to the contrary believe I told Don ya do get callous's on the outside of the string fingers, the stack question has also be addressed, yes if go far enough they stack....if they stack I take a hard look at my tiller to see if there is any more room in there anywhere, if so I correct the tiller, if not I quit pulling at the stack point. There is a lot of reasons for the little set, and I've brought it up a bunch of times which resulted in some "discussions" with a bunch of ya's. I'm not going there anymore. I'll let the bows speak for themselves. Also in fairness I dont believe I said there was no set in these bows so dont know where that came from.

Just so there is no misunderstanding I'm gonna post a picture of 5 unbacked self bows from staves made by 3 different people and all pull past half their length and none has very much set. Don Carter's bow, Wildkatt's bow and 3 I made and have posted. Look further at Jon W's bows same thing, anyway not being a smart ass but it is not impossible to do, not even close.

Thanks again for all the comments, much appreciated
rich

[JonW]

There is no way a bow made from wood, that is repeatedly drawn to full draw is not gonna take some set. I think we can all agree to that statement. What is cool to me is the comment that Chris (P.D.) made. A bow drawn past half it's length is just cool to me. It's not rocket science. It's not someone bragging about what they can do. It is what it is, FRIGGIN COOL! I believe with a good eye for floor tiller comes a bow that will have LESS set than usual.

I think that might be what Chris was saying about the 15" draw thing. Am I close Chris?

[half eye]

Here are the 5 bows I mentioned earlier
1. Don Carter
2. Wildkatt
3. rich
4. rich
5. rich (bow in this post)

rich

[half eye]

forgot the photo....

[Josh B]

That's what I gleaned from Pearly's post Jon.  It makes sense to me anyway.  Dave, I guess I don't understand where your coming from though.  Rich is experimenting by pushing past assumed limits and sharing his findings as he goes.  If that's not an invitation for some discussion on just how in the world he and a few others are doing it, I don't know what would be.  I'm not doubting or trying to discredit what is being done.  Quite the opposite actually.  I marvel at what these fellas can do with so little wood.  I'm not trying to be a jerk Dave.  I'm just trying to figure out what prompted the "BS discussion" comment? 
Rich I understand why you left pin knocks the way you did, but they sure look funny!  Lol!  Thanks for taking the time to do this Rich.  I have enjoyed it!  Josh

[JonW]

Rich just remember that you and I and some others like things in a bow not many other people do like. I always appreciate what you do and why you do it even if you get a little agitated. People are people..........

[half eye]

Thanks fellas, Ya Josh it does look stupid, but it's the only way to photographically "prove" I'm doin what I say. They'll get sawed off when I'm done with the shortening. Gonna cut it down to 46" tomorrow and update. If it turns out like I suspect the 46" may be as short as I go.....just maybe 45" but we'll see, it will depend upon draw length and how high the weight goes.

Jon, used to let the site get to me, not no more. I'm not agitated at all. I'm doin my thing and if it's of interest that will be great, if not I dont care. You know me, I want to know all I can about the bows I intend to hunt with so if my methods aint scientific enough for others it's no big deal, cause they can do their own experiments and everybody's happy.
rich