I think my natural inclination is to overbuild with the idea that "I can always take a bit more off". Some of my earlier bows are almost laughable as I look at the limb tips.
This bow pulls. 70+ pounds but would probably make a better pry bar because of the limb mass.
No doubt, on many occasions, I've left a great deal of limb speed "on the table". Looking back, and probably like many beginners, I think I began cutting down the limbs from a stiff cumbersome pattern, and stopped when the bow had what seemed like an adequate tiller and cast--never thinking that fair could be made good, and good could be made better. (Analogous to my 13 year- old son's lawn mowing-just a little more scrutiny, time, and effort would make a marginal job an excellent one.)
Interesting, I've never run into anyone who has applied Mr. Gardner's principle. (No doubt because of my limited experience and contacts.) Admittedly, with this short bow, I weighed in "after the fact". I think I will, at least once, build a bow and apply his principle from the get go. He has apparently worked with a lot of different materials, and I think his "mass principle", the culmination of his years of experience, observation, and application, deserves a shot. It's seems a little different mindset, building a bow with a certain mass as your terminal objective. However, in the process of "making weight" I suppose the scraping and shaping is performed in the same manner as with other bows. Only with Gardner's principle, the ideal mass coaxes you on or tells you when to slam on the brakes.
It would be interesting to know how many have used Gardner's formula from the ground up.
