recurves on english warbows?

[nickf]

most of you guys have probably seen the medieval drawings of warbows, many of them show recurves in both limbs, or just in the top limb. I did some research about it, but coulnd't find some usable info. but what do you guys know about recurves on warbows? or when they appeared?
they might have become more common after the crusades?

thanks in advance,

Nick

[youngbowyer]

Hi Nick,

there is a documentary about the English longbow on youtube and its from weapons that made Britain.
It states that some longbows have recurves and they show us a medieval picture of a medieval English archer drawing a recurved longbow.
Hugh D.H Soar mentions the subject as well in secrets of the English Warbow and states that English soldiers who fought along side their Burgundian allies might have brought back the designs of their recurved bows and some bowyers saw the effectiveness of them. However, he does mention there is no true evidence so it will stay a mystery.

[Rod]

Small recurves (as well as irregularities and poor tiller) do appear often enough in illustrations and I had a Scots great uncle who hunted with a recurve tipped "Scottish" bow of laburnum.
I don't think it remarkable that slight recurves might sometimes appear, either from character wood or deliberately bent in.
After all they were not subject to BLBS lawn archery rules and we will find small recurves on some very old yew bows.
Nothing new or particularly out of the ordinary I think, even if not the norm.

Rod.

[skerm]

Hugh D.H Soar mentions the subject as well in secrets of the English Warbow and states that English soldiers who fought along side their Burgundian allies might have brought back the designs of their recurved bows and some bowyers saw the effectiveness of them.

Has anyone ever done that to see if there actually is a benefit to it? I am not convinced that there is anything to gain by adding recurves.

Cheers,
Daniel

[nickf]

youngbowyer, I've seen it in the vids, but that's just a 'normal' longbow. I've seen no recurved warbows yet, even though looking at the pictures I would say they were even more common than straight bows.

I don't think this is out of the ordinary, nor new, but I'm just wondering if these were generally used.

Nick

[backgardenbowyer]

Chris Boynton has made some recurved longbows so clearly they can be made and do work, but the ones I have seen have been nowhere near warbow weight.  The trouble is we only have those manuscript pictures and not any actual examples (so far as I know none of the Mary Rose bows were recurved).  Medieval pictures are often not very realistic and there are obvious inaccuracies in some of the paintings of longbows - for example very, very rarely do the archers shooting have any arrows with them other than the one on the bow - an absolutely impossible situation, we now know that arrows were issued in canvas cases.  Similarly most illustrations show archers in action shooting large hunting broadheads rather than bodkins - bodkins have better penetration, greater range, take up less storage space and crucially can be made at a fraction of the cost of broadheads so it is unlikely that braodheads were much issued to archer on service.  One theory I've heard is that the people who painted the manuscripts were mostly monks and would only ever have seen civilian archery where archers only carried one or two hunting arrrows.  Is it possible that lighter hunting bows were recurved - the wood being able to stand this sort of stress at those weights - whilst heavy warbows were generally straight?

I guess we will never really know.

Stan

[youngbowyer]

Hugh D.H Soar mentions the subject as well in secrets of the English Warbow and states that English soldiers who fought along side their Burgundian allies might have brought back the designs of their recurved bows and some bowyers saw the effectiveness of them.

Has anyone ever done that to see if there actually is a benefit to it? I am not convinced that there is anything to gain by adding recurves.

Cheers,
Daniel

The benefit of a recurve is that the end is curved backwars and if u pull the bow back the recurve straigtens and a great amount of energy is stored in it and if you let loose the bow the power of the arrow will be the poundage of the bow plus the extra power of the recurve

[Far East Archer]

Recurve or reflex? Its big differ in my opinion.
A working recurve does not really last in a wood bow, maybe laminated though it will pull out on selfbow.
For selfbow, only static will work for warbow. In this case, we can see only advantage is favorable string angle, but this make no sense since bow is already over man tall......

If reflex, it show some benefit, but I doubt there will be enough to make clear difference at the full draw to paint it. Maybe it just look like straight limb at full draw. Though, it will give benefit, more so performance wise than recurve.  I think it would change if recurve bow was made shorter however.

[nickf]

that's a great theory, stan! the monks thing does make sense

youngbowyer; most recurves are made not to bend at all, otherwise they'll be pulled out, since the steambending usually weakens the bely a little. recurves wich don't have contact with the string have 2 advantages:
- they work as a leaver, so the bow stacks less and has a lower drawweight with the same 'power'.
- they compensate a little set, or even couse a little reflex, so the bow has a higher early drawweight, and an better f/d curve.
recurves wich contact on the string have another advantage; as long as the string touches them, the bow is shorter. when properly made, the string comes loose at halfdraw or so, and the bow 'get's'  the additional length of the recurve, and acts like a longer bow, resulting in a very strange 'dip' in the f/d curve,

Far east archer, I was clearly talking about recuirves here. And indeed, I was referring to more or less static recurves. these will have very little advantages in string angle, but it WILL compensate some stress.

'' If reflex, Maybe it just look like straight limb at full draw ". Maybe you're referring to a exaggerated R/D ? Even reflex won't make the bow look different at full draw. It just adds some stress, and early drawweight, resulting in a better F/D curve.

Nick

[skerm]

youngbowyer; most recurves are made not to bend at all, otherwise they'll be pulled out, since the steambending usually weakens the bely a little. recurves wich don't have contact with the string have 2 advantages:
- they work as a leaver, so the bow stacks less and has a lower drawweight with the same 'power'.
- they compensate a little set, or even couse a little reflex, so the bow has a higher early drawweight, and an better f/d curve.

However one has to keep in mind that a better F/D does not necessarily mean that the bow is faster.

Cheers,
Daniel

[nickf]

technically, it will just make the bow to store more energy.
but practically it will make you able to draw heavier, resulting in even more stored energy.

[mole]

I'm certainly no expert, but it seems to me that the extra mass from a static recurve that far out on the limb would be more of a disadvantage than the advantage of making a bow with recurves there.  Yeah, it’d look cooler, but is it worth it performance wise?

I'd have to agree with Alex.

[nickf]

Mole, the last 6" of a warbow are rarely moving are they? unless you disagree on this fact recurving won't have any negative effects, besides warbows are designed to shoot heavy arrows, and the mass at the tips won't be so important as on 50pound flightbow.

Nick

[skerm]

Mole, the last 6" of a warbow are rarely moving are they? unless you disagree on this fact recurving won't have any negative effects, besides warbows are designed to shoot heavy arrows, and the mass at the tips won't be so important as on 50pound flightbow.

Nick

That only holds when you can make the recurves with the same dimensions as the straight stiff ends. Besides, stiff limb ends are the modern way of making them. If I recall correctly, Steve said that the ones on the Mary Rose may have even been slighty whip tillered.
Regardings the mass at the tips, I suggest to make a test. Grab your bow and some heavy arrows and shoot for distance. Then superglue some additional weight, shoot and compare the distances.

Cheers,
Daniel

[nickf]

Daniel, I'm steamng the 2nd recurve in a ash warbow, right at the moment. But I didn't glue any additional weight on. Why would I do so?
there ain't no need for it, imo. Why  would the mass raise?
'Besides, stiff limb ends are the modern way of making them'
...so the limbs won't move after recurving either

Nick