Arrow speed vs bow/arrow weight

[Del the cat]

Funny how we are going to hi tech mathemetics to quantify what some skin wearing rock knockers figured out while trying to feed their families!  Man I love this sport!

Very true ! But thanks to genius thinkers like Tim Baker, Steve Gardner, Marc St. Louis, et al our simple wooden sticks shoot better than their simple wooden sticks

Surely TTBB etc show that this is not true...the Holmgaard design etc are shown to be be pretty good models for what we are re-discovering today. I agree that they are to be commended for publishing their work, but doubltless the skin wearing rock knockes haded their skills down in a practical or oral tradition.
I though that on a site like this we'de outgrown the sold streotypes of early man as stupid.
(Sorry if you were just being funny, I just hear so much 'dumb neanderthat rubish' it winds me up)
Del

[Swamp Bow]

Surely TTBB etc show that this is not true...the Holmgaard design etc are shown to be be pretty good models for what we are re-discovering today. I agree that they are to be commended for publishing their work, but doubltless the skin wearing rock knockes haded their skills down in a practical or oral tradition.
I though that on a site like this we'de outgrown the sold streotypes of early man as stupid.
(Sorry if you were just being funny, I just hear so much 'dumb neanderthat rubish' it winds me up)
Del

I guess it is just a matter of perspective and what you consider smart.  If being smart means knowing quantum mechanics and how to apply it, then prehistoric man was not very smart.  If being smart means being able to survive in the "wilds", making and designing tools that work to survive, then prehistoric man was very smart.  Then again by either of those rules, I'm REALLY dumb.    A modern and a prehistoric education are not comparable directly when viewed from outside of their respective times.  The ability to use and understand an eduction in whatever context and then be able to move beyond it to solve a problem, that is intelligence as far as I'm concerned.  If we were to meet prehistoric man on his own terms, in his environment, he'd probably think we are the stupid ones, and he'd be right from his perspective.

As far as bow design is concerned, it is again a matter of perspective.  The holmguard is a high performance hunting bow that can be made in the field without special tools, glues, cauls, heat sources etc.  It's the equivalent of a pump shot gun, you can beat the snot out of it and still provide diner.  A "modern" bow that has been laminated, reflexed, deflexed, and any other "exed" you can think of, is a performance "target" bow (even when that target is game) that pushes the physical abilities of design and material as we understand them.  It's the equivalent of an Olympic target rifle.  So which is the better bow?  That depends on whether I've been dumped in the hinterlands and I need six months to walk out, or I'm trying to win an archery competition at a world class shoot.  I'd go with the Holmguard for the first, or I'd be on the phone for the second.

Swamp

[Ryano]

...THE DEER DOESN'T KNOW IF YOU SHOT HIM WITH A 45# BOW OR A 145# BOW.

Not completly true, hit a scapula or some heavy bone and there will be a difference, ( things go wrong sometimes, no matter how good of a shot you are).......than again deer is pretty soft game, but still...

Actually, I've dropped several deer in there tracks hitting them in the spine with my 45-50# bows...with any kind of reasonably vital hit a 50 # bow will do the job just fine. I've also shot them with a 70# compound shooting machine in the front shoulder and not recovered them......In my experience it's all about shot placement. You can even lose a deer shot with a 30-06 too if you don't hit'em right, that's all just part of hunting. It happens to every hunter at some point no matter how good a shot you are or what weapon you use.

[hawkbow]

Well said Ryano, shot placement is the key to a clean kill, your equipment used is not nearly as important as where the arrow ends up once released. my wife just shot a muledeer with a light poundage selfbow, arrow went in about ten inches. deer went down quickly.. shot placement! saved the day.

[zeNBowyer]

Yeah  Ryano,
   That's  why  Howard  Hill  hunted  with  a   90# bow,
it's  all  about  shot  placement!
Ha.....

[Kegan]

Del- I never meant to say prehistoric man was dumb. No harm intended

[NOMADIC PIRATE]

" A 50# BOW WITH WELL MATCHED ARROWS WILL TAKE ANY BIG GAME IN NORTH AMERICA "     - Art Young -


....However, good old Mr. Young hunted with 80-85# bows,...wander why 

[Del the cat]

Del- I never meant to say prehistoric man was dumb. No harm intended

  ..no prob I just a grumpy cat.
Del

[zeNBowyer]

Del- I never meant to say prehistoric man was dumb. No harm intended

LOL

[Ryano]

Howard Hill was not the norm. Not everyone can shoot a heavy poundage bow accurately. On the other end of it, I've heard several guys who shoot heavy draw weight bows claim that they can hit anything with a 45# bow because they can't get a clean release and there not as steady at full draw. Maybe this is why Hill shot such a heavy draw weight bow? (Also Byron Fergison?) Who knows? I just know it doesn't take that much to run arrow through a deer.

[Kegan]

Howard Hill was not the norm. Not everyone can shoot a heavy poundage bow accurately. On the other end of it, I've heard several guys who shoot heavy draw weight bows claim that they can hit anything with a 45# bow because they can't get a clean release and there not as steady at full draw. Maybe this is why Hill shot such a heavy draw weight bow? (Also Byron Fergison?) Who knows? I just know it doesn't take that much to run arrow through a deer.

I think Hill shot the extra heavy weights because he wanted to pretty much kill anything he came up against, so he shot the heavier weights because he could. We all know a heavy arrow carries more momentum, so if he could shoot a 700 gr arrow quickly just by using a heavy weight. With Ferguson, I think it is jsut a matter of making the release easier (if your release is a little off, a heavier bow would jsut rip the arrow straight at the target).

Heavier weights aren't that hard to get used to. My spindly little arms are simply pathetic, but I can drop an arrow into a target at 20, 30, 40 or so yards. Just... not for very long

[hawkbow]

I hunt big game alot, my take on the heavier bows is that sometimes things go wrong, deer moves when arrow is in flight, hits a limb, something happens and arrow hits a shoulder, a spine etc... heavier bows can make the shot deadly instead of losing the animal. no one ever wants these things to happen but if it does shooting the heaviest bow you can handle can be the deciding factor for a harvest. ...... Dangerous game die just as easily as deer with a good hit, but a bad hit and not enough penetration because of a lighter bow can be not fun. If you hunt deer like whitetails lighter bows may work well, but I would suggest at least 55# for everything larger than a turkey...60+ for elk, bear, muledeer, hogs.. hope you find a winning combo for you brother.. Hawk

[Justin Snyder]

Yeah  Ryano,
   That's  why  Howard  Hill  hunted  with  a   90# bow,
it's  all  about  shot  placement!
Ha.....

It couldn't have anything to do with the fact that he hunted elephants could it?

[zeNBowyer]

HH used a #110 for his elephant kill.
For most people shooting med or smaller thin skinned light bows do well, but a heavier bow is superior in larger game, where more range is needed etc. Also many people are interested in other venues of the bow, as in the study of war, strength training other

[mullet]

 It probally had to do with Howard Hill being such a big man, and after meeting Byron Ferguson at the Classic, he is a big man also. I always hunted with heavier weight bows when I was younger, 50, now I'm backing off to 55# to 60#.  I guess you either get smarter or lose body muscle and mass. Now, I sharpen the piss out of my points.