Author Topic: New static  (Read 2304 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Cameroo

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,579
    • Cam's Stuff
Re: New static
« Reply #15 on: March 10, 2014, 09:48:54 pm »
Here's a little better view of the second one.  I like to move the ellipse off the bow a bit so you can actually see it, and then compare the gap.  Looks pretty good to these eyes :)



Here's the one you posted earlier.  Looks like both limbs are bending a bit more around 2/3rds of the way out from the fades, but still nice and even.

« Last Edit: March 10, 2014, 09:56:15 pm by Cameroo »

Offline adb

  • Member
  • Posts: 5,339
Re: New static
« Reply #16 on: March 10, 2014, 10:07:45 pm »
Hey Cam... thanks a bunch. That's kinda what I was looking for in the second bow. It's 2" shorter (60") and I wanted it to bend deeply in the mid-limb, with a bit more rounded tiller shape.

Offline PatM

  • Member
  • Posts: 6,737
Re: New static
« Reply #17 on: March 10, 2014, 10:16:54 pm »
I remember Dan Perry talking about potentially using the recurves to better work the limb a  bit further out on the limb. Interesting to compare the two profiles as far as performance goes.

Offline adb

  • Member
  • Posts: 5,339
Re: New static
« Reply #18 on: March 10, 2014, 10:24:15 pm »
I can tell you already, for being the same draw weight, the second bow (the shorter one) is faster.

Offline PatM

  • Member
  • Posts: 6,737
Re: New static
« Reply #19 on: March 10, 2014, 11:43:16 pm »
Everyone knows short recurves are the fastest bows around.  >:D

Offline Badger

  • Member
  • Posts: 8,124
Re: New static
« Reply #20 on: March 10, 2014, 11:54:04 pm »
  They both look great, I love that tiller shape. I bet you have next to zero handshock.

Offline adb

  • Member
  • Posts: 5,339
Re: New static
« Reply #21 on: March 11, 2014, 12:21:28 am »
The first one has a bit of handshock because the tips are a bit overbuilt, but the second one has none. It shoots fast and smooth without even a hint of recoil. I estimate that I reduced the overall tip size by about 20% on the second bow. They're narrower and thinner.
« Last Edit: March 11, 2014, 12:29:22 am by adb »

Offline PatM

  • Member
  • Posts: 6,737
Re: New static
« Reply #22 on: March 11, 2014, 12:27:00 am »
Maple or White Oak backing?

Offline adb

  • Member
  • Posts: 5,339
Re: New static
« Reply #23 on: March 11, 2014, 12:28:34 am »
Maple. My old standby. Never lets me down! I also made the static tips out of maple.

Offline bubby

  • Member
  • Posts: 11,054
Re: New static
« Reply #24 on: March 11, 2014, 12:37:23 am »
Maple. My old standby. Never lets me down! I also made the static tips out of maple.




Yeah you use maple a few times you'll use it all the time
failure is an option, everyone fails, it's how you handle it that matters.
The few the proud the 27🏹

Offline adb

  • Member
  • Posts: 5,339
Re: New static
« Reply #25 on: March 11, 2014, 11:07:48 am »
I keep trying other backings like hickory, white oak, elm... but besides ash, maple is definitely my go-to backing material. I can't think of a time it has let me down, ever... even on heavy warbows. I like it.

Offline Josh B

  • Member
  • Posts: 3,741
Re: New static
« Reply #26 on: March 11, 2014, 11:30:37 am »
Nicely done!  Josh