Warbows and String Follow

[WillS]

Out of interest, what are people's opinions on the detrimental effects of string follow on heavy weight bows? 

Does something 80#+ suffer in the same way as lightweight hunting/target bows when dealing with 3 or 4 inches of set / string follow?  Or does the large weight increase counter the string follow and spit the arrow with enough force to not matter? 

[llkinak]

80# is on the low end of "warbow", but 3-4 inches seems like quite a bit of set at any rate.   I'd imagine that much would reduce cast no matter what weight you're shooting at, if the bow started off at zero to begin with.   

[WillS]

Yeah I used 80# as an absolute minimum (although the EWBS accept "warbows" from 70#@32).  I'm just curious, as there must be a point where most wood can't help but take set as you get heavier.

Would 3 - 4 inches of string follow on a 170# bow still be excessive, or would you start to expect to see some string follow at this weight?

I know that for a lightweight / target bow most people like to keep it flat, or reflexed as the speed is fairly vital, but when dealing with distance/clout/roving shoots as with a warbow, does reduced cast make a whole heap of difference at a high draw-weight?

[llkinak]

Ooo, well, my personal opinion is that cast is one of the most important things in determining how useful a warbow is, and anything which reduces it is pretty much a bad thing.  Regarding a 170#er, I can't say from personal experience, I've never drawn one that heavy.  My gut reaction is that it's still quite a lot of set and might indicate one of a couple of issues with the bow.  Remember that brace height is often between five and six inches, so you're losing a fair amount...in my inexpert opinion.  They're not sniper rifles, after all, so they need to be able to cover a fairly broad area as far away as possible. 

[Del the cat]

Feel free to ignore these musings...
My old Yew bow has been severly over stressed. It's only 70" long and has been over drawn from it's 28" to 31". It has a load of set but still throws an arrow a good way. It was originally 75# but is now 68#, it will still throw a heavyish arrow past the 180 yard clout.

I'd guess the main reason for set is making a bow too short for it's draw weight/draw length.
I've no experience over 90#
I also suspect there are problems caused by building high D section Victorian style bows at over heavy weights rather than a more square/circular profile as seen on the Mary Rose bows
Big problem of course is finding decent wood to make 'em in the first place. I s'pose the answer is make bows that fit the wood, but it's not always apparent what the qualities of the wood are initially.
Del
(PS I assume you are mainly talikng 'set' which is permanent, rather than 'string follow' which is generally taken to be the temporary curve whcih relaxes out after several hours unstrung.

[adb]

Set is set, and will reduce cast regardless of draw weight. Set is caused by over stressed limbs. A little bit of set (about 1") is good... it lets you know your limbs are not over built and too heavy. 3-4" of set will rob cast. I have many warbows, but one I just finished is a maple backed yew, 90#@30" with <1" of set. I have an older tri-lam warbow, hickory, bamboo, osage... 100#@30" with 4" of set. They both have a physical weight within a few grams of each other, but the yew bow consistently outshoots the tri-lam. I attribute that to set.

Steve Stratton of DIY Archery in the UK has made some very heavy self yew warbows with zero set. I believe he posted one here that was 160#, and it was pipe straight unstrung. Do a search... you'll find it.

But, as Del mentioned, are you talking set, or string follow?

[WillS]

Thanks Del and Adb for posting, always good to hear from guys who have experience in this stuff!

Del, its good to know that your yew bow still chucks 'em out, makes me feel slightly better.

 The reason I ask is because my two "best" yew bows both have a large amount of set.  By best I mean they came out as I wanted, despite lots of trouble! I think the reason they have so much set with VERY little shooting (the bow i posted recently on here is pushing about 2-3 inches of set/string follow and has never been shot!) is down to my impatience.  They came from the same tree and the wood had been cut almost a year and half ago, and left outside.  When compared to the 3 - 5 years mentioned for good yew bows, thats nothing!

At least, i hope thats why, as compared to bad tillering or design.  It may also be down to the wood quality (although the rings are dense) or too much heat straightening etc.  I haven't made enough bows yet to blame anything but my lack of experience at this stage though. 

Adb, I do remember seeing that, and I think it must be both Steve's skill and the fantastic quality Italian yew he uses for those monster bows that keeps the set down. 

I guess I sort of wanted to be reassured that the set I've ended up with wouldn't be too detrimental, but I think I knew the answer really! Just adds more motivation to get the next bow even better!

[AH]

Steve Stratton of DIY Archery in the UK has made some very heavy self yew warbows with zero set. I believe he posted one here that was 160#, and it was pipe straight unstrung. Do a search... you'll find it.

But, as Del mentioned, are you talking set, or string follow?

This one?
http://www.primitivearcher.com/smf/index.php?topic=9817.0

[adb]

Steve Stratton of DIY Archery in the UK has made some very heavy self yew warbows with zero set. I believe he posted one here that was 160#, and it was pipe straight unstrung. Do a search... you'll find it.

But, as Del mentioned, are you talking set, or string follow?

This one?
http://www.primitivearcher.com/smf/index.php?topic=9817.0

Yup... that's the one.

[AH]

Steve Stratton of DIY Archery in the UK has made some very heavy self yew warbows with zero set. I believe he posted one here that was 160#, and it was pipe straight unstrung. Do a search... you'll find it.

But, as Del mentioned, are you talking set, or string follow?

This one?
http://www.primitivearcher.com/smf/index.php?topic=9817.0

Yup... that's the one.

I still can't get over how beautiful that bow is...

[WillS]

84" long, 82 rings per inch, seasoned Italian yew, Steve Stratton's experience... One day! Until then, I think I'll be satisfied with my 72", 40 rpi, unseasoned English yew with no experience! I should be grateful the bow didn't explode rather than fussing over some set!

[Davepim]

Yeah that's a typical bow from Steve! My experience is that some staves will take a set no matter how quickly/carefully you tiller them, but some, especially those that started with a slight natural reflex will stay straight or even retain a slight reflex, even after shooting them for years. There are a lot of factors to take into account such as how long the stave has been seasoned, what it's moisture content is, ring count, original stave dimensions etc. I have made a few bows with no set - my most recent was only 63" or so long but tillered out to 33" (120lbs) and had no set.

Dave

[WillS]

That's quite an achievement.  Was it yew? How long was it seasoned for before starting?

[Del the cat]

84" long, 82 rings per inch, seasoned Italian yew, Steve Stratton's experience... One day! Until then, I think I'll be satisfied with my 72", 40 rpi, unseasoned English yew with no experience! I should be grateful the bow didn't explode rather than fussing over some set!

Yup 84"  there's the clue.
If you scale that down as a length/draw your 72" bow would be drawing 72.4" and at that draw it may well have had no set.
Ok I realise, a simple scaling prob' isn't geometrically exact, but it gives an idea.
Bottom line, you don't get 'owt for n'owt
Del

[Davepim]

Hi WillS, yes the bow was Italian yew, 3 year seasoned. I have to say that it came from a very dense, very narrow stave, with natural recurve, hence growth rings were very curved; maybe this also helps resist a set.

Dave