Author Topic: In progress elm Holmegaard (Read 30322 times)

adb · « **Reply #45 on:** February 08, 2009, 04:08:50 pm »

Hey, nickf
You can't pike a Holmegarrd, and expect the # to increase! The outer limbs do not bend.

Dane,
It's too bad you retillered. I think it was fine the way it was, and you should have just shot it. No worries, however, I have retillered several bows, just to "make them a little better", and have regretted doing it. Live and learn!

Dane · « **Reply #46 on:** February 08, 2009, 04:57:00 pm »

'tis true, I really should have left it alone. It should still be a fun shooter, and I got to try out Trueoil for the frst time, wonderful stuff.

I had planned to take photos today, but chores got in the way. Next week. I can also try out a new staff sling I made, those are really fun toys.

Dane

Gordon · « **Reply #47 on:** February 08, 2009, 05:23:00 pm »

Quote

Being a glutton for punishment, I have started a sapling bow with tons of character (i.e. knots).

Boy, I'll say, good luck!

Dane · « **Reply #48 on:** February 15, 2009, 08:07:14 pm »

This thread is a bit old, but for those who want to see, I retillered the Holmegaard. Although I thought it was a mistake reworking it, I am actually pretty happy with how it turned out. It still shoots really well, and I had a lot of fun testing it out. This bow, though I lost over 10 pounds retillering it, is one of my current favorites. It will make a good 3D bow, I think.

Dane

[attachment deleted by admin]

Badger · « **Reply #49 on:** February 15, 2009, 10:04:42 pm »

That looks great, I bet she is smooth as silk to shoot. Steve

james parker · « **Reply #50 on:** February 16, 2009, 12:34:45 am »

dane,your bow is fine ,as others have stated no one knows how the original bow looked at braced and full draw .mere speculation in all regaurds.and as others have stated i dont think any harm was intended,only construtctive critisism.that and applied techniuqes are how we all learn. i myself have taken many critisisms about some of my bows tillers,what one likes another will not.all these guys mean good and all are great,you can learn from everyone here.keep building and making bows ,remember as long as you are happy with it ,thats all that matters....good luck on your next bow....robustus

Dane · « **Reply #51 on:** February 16, 2009, 08:03:28 am »

Everything you said is true, and thanks. And thank you, Badger. She is smooth, a lot of fun, and I am very happy with the bow. When I release an arrow, it is almost like I can't tell it has left, if that makes sense. I'll be showing it off at a Thursday night shoot this week with some fiberglass guys.

The next Holmie will incorporate the lessons I learned from this one. And that is as it should be. I just wish I had a lot more time to work on bows instead of having a job and chores and bills and all that. Universal feeling though, eh?

Dane

Little John · « **Reply #52 on:** February 16, 2009, 09:26:36 pm »

I hear ya Dane we need more time for bows. This Holmie thing is a tough one to crack. I have made a couple of holmie simular bows that shot good but still bent in the outer limbs. I have been working off and on on one more like the one you made, heat treated hickory with 4 inches of reflex, after floor tillering and after getting it braced it was already bending more in one place than I liked and a bit shy on weight. Already running short on options was just pulling it a bit farther and farther till it made a tick sound at 26" I found where a small splinter was lifting. Guess I will sinue the inner limbs and retiller a bit to spread out the bend and maybe pike a bit as the bow is 70" now. Any way to make a long story short, this is a very difficuly design to get perfect but I think the potential rewards keep calling me back. I love the stackless draw and lack of handshock. Your bow is bending better now, and am sure you will enjoy it. Good luck on the next one. Kenneth

Dane · « **Reply #53 on:** February 17, 2009, 07:33:11 am »

Hi Kenneth.

If you have checked out the discussion at Paleoplanet, perhaps what we have been calling the Holmgaard is actualy not correct. http://paleoplanet69529.yuku.com/topic/23167/t/Holmgards-Are-They-All-the-Same.html

The central argument in that discussion is that this design should be called the Möllegabet. Maybe just calling it a neolithic bow may be easier

At this point, how I think of this design is that you have a relatively small window to get everything balanced - tips, inner bending limbs, handle, and so on. I want to keep exploring this design, and see what else I can get out of it.

Aside from performance, it is a cool looking design.

Dane

Badger · « **Reply #54 on:** February 17, 2009, 11:04:22 am »

Dane, we have a group that meets out at pasadena once a month. Last sunday I took my latest Holmgarde down with me to shoot. I was shocked at how fast the bow was when tested, It outshot my best boo backed bow. All the recent rain we had and the wide thin limbs went out of tiller on me but the performance was still way up there, quiet and no handshock whats so ever, I am really sold on the design. Steve

Dane · « **Reply #55 on:** February 17, 2009, 11:30:47 am »

Steve, I wonder why this design disappeared in the first place? Or did it?

They really are wonderful performers. You have to work and pay your dues though, dont you?

I think I am not done paying my Holmie dues, too

Dane

adb · « **Reply #56 on:** February 17, 2009, 05:00:21 pm »

Quote from: Badger on February 17, 2009, 11:04:22 am

Dane, we have a group that meets out at pasadena once a month. Last sunday I took my latest Holmgarde down with me to shoot. I was shocked at how fast the bow was when tested, It outshot my best boo backed bow. All the recent rain we had and the wide thin limbs went out of tiller on me but the performance was still way up there, quiet and no handshock whats so ever, I am really sold on the design. Steve

Hey, Steve

Would it be possible for you to post some pics of your interpretation of the Holmegaard design?

ChrisD · « **Reply #57 on:** February 17, 2009, 05:48:48 pm »

Quote from: adb on February 08, 2009, 04:08:50 pm

Hey, nickf
You can't pike a Holmegarrd, and expect the # to increase! The outer limbs do not bend.

Dane,
It's too bad you retillered. I think it was fine the way it was, and you should have just shot it. No worries, however, I have retillered several bows, just to "make them a little better", and have regretted doing it. Live and learn!

Not sure how this can be right. Shorten a holmegaard and the string angle increases for the same draw irrespective of whether the outer parts of the limb bend or not. That means more energy in the same bow in my book. Secondly, I have piked a holmegaard, and the weight certainly went up, and then some!

Chris

Kviljo · « **Reply #58 on:** February 17, 2009, 09:16:26 pm »

Quote from: Dane on February 17, 2009, 11:30:47 am

Steve, I wonder why this design disappeared in the first place? Or did it?

They really are wonderful performers. You have to work and pay your dues though, dont you? I think I am not done paying my Holmie dues, too

Dane

Good post Dane! You're doing some really nice work. The retiller looks nice! These designs are so intriguing, and can be incredibly fast, smooth to draw, and still be relatively short. I see no other reason for them disappearing than the time it takes to make one. It takes a lot less time to make a longbow. ...and if you want a lot of arrows in the air...

I've tried a similar variation of a holmegård a couple of times. This one is perhaps a bit extreme, though it was educational. Making the outer limbs bend slightly is always good, as it tells you that you have removed any superfluos mass that's not doing any work. I think Badgers point is that if you presuppose that all the moving wood in a bow should be equally stressed, there is always just one perfect tiller for each front profile.

http://www.kviljo.no/bue/3tomholmegard/3.jpg

http://www.kviljo.no/bue/3tomholmegard/2.jpg

What I've found recently is that rather short outer limbs seems to make them quicker. Wonder what the optimal lenght-ratio between the inner and outer limbs are? Guess it varies with the weight of the arrows though. Longer outer limbs for heavier arrows, and shorter for lighter arrows.

Dane · « **Reply #59 on:** February 17, 2009, 09:52:41 pm »

Ivar, hi! Good to hear from you, and thank you for your words. At risk of sounding like I am blowing my own horn, I think I am getting better at all this. The catapult work couldn't hurt

More care in the details also helps, including the finish. I didnt take any close ups of this bow, maybe I should.

I recall your own work in this design, and really admired it. I revisited it before I began this one.

Good questions about the limb ratio, and I have wondered that myself. Perhaps the best ratio is that which averages out different lengths and weights of arrows? What kind of game did our Neolithic Danish ancestors hunt? What else did they use the bows for? Skirmishes with other tribal groups? Ceremonial purposes, or maybe reglious rites? Perhaps you know more about that, considering your professional background.

Dane

Primitive Archer