Fellas, thank you a lot for your nice words and searching for the reason of the blow-up.
After seeing the pics, I realized that the blow-pic was on the wrong place (it was not the first but the second bow). I edit the posting.
Yesterday I was in too excited to realize that I haven’t put in sufficient info about the bows /staves. Sorry for that, I will do it now:
Both bows are elm, I think you call it whych elm. The staves came out of a bunch of elm staves I have harvested 5 and 6 years ago, will say seasoned enough. Could not say if these two were sister staves, but could be. I have built several bows out these staves, the elm flat posted recently also came out of these. Both had no visible flaws, rawhide was in order too. Both were shot a few times and were on the tiller tree to do the force draw curve.
I have a hygrometer in my shop, which I will test if it says the truth. It always shows a relative humidity of 50-60%, I think this o. k.
After some thinking about the reason, my result is this is a way too extreme design for that draw weight and bow length. I have built it too narrow and too high crowned. This was over the limits for elm with drawweight of 74# (69” ntn) and 96# (74” ntn). But damned, they were elegant. I have loved the tiger camo from the first and the natural setback of the second.
Again, many thanks for your input here.
The first shock is over, time to look forward. I will try another two other bows out of that bunch, also aiming for higher drawweight elbs, but a little change in design. I think of a flatter D-profile with a wider back, or perhaps trapping and flat belly. Let’s see what happens …