"Second String" woods?

[George Tsoukalas]

Whitewoods vs osage. Brings back memories. I said this a long time ago, "Cast is not in the wood but cradled in the arms of the bowyer." Jawge

[Hillbilly]

Jawge, I agree. I like osage simply because it's tough and it seems to resist our humidity better than other woods, but to me part of the fun of this is trying different woods and ideas. Also osage is almost nonexistant here, while other woods are readily available. I've made good shooters from ash, hickory, locust, osage, mulberry, elm, walnut, maple, etc. and will keep trying different woods as I get the chance to. If the design fits the wood, it'll make a good bow no matter what it is as long as it's a fairly dense, elastic wood.

[Badger]

      I don't really see it as a debate anymore, just simple preferences. 90% of my bows are whitewood bows and I love making them and shooting them. I just have a little soft spot for osage. When I am getting ready for a flight shoot competiton I just favor whatever is doing best for me that day. Steve

[Ryano]

I like most of the white woods, but it's sure hard to beat that yeller wood.........

[duffontap]

Yew and Osage:
1.  Work well with traditional hand tools.  Cut, scrape, rasp and sand easily and efficiently. 
2.  Are very elastic, strong in tension, and strong in compression (all at the same time) making them:
    -Forgiving to tiller.
    -Adaptable to many different designs.
    -Longer-lasting.
    -Consistent performers.
3.  Are very rot-resistant.
4.  Perform better though a wide range of moisture contents. 
5.  Are especially BEAUTIFUL.

Second string woods tend to lack one, some, or all of these benefits.  For example:
My experience with Vine Maple:
1.  Is a challenge to work, regardless of your skill level.  You will spend more time dealing with washboards and torn grain than you will tillering.  You will sand longer than the bow is likely to last (well, almost). 
2.  Is strong in tension, but crystals, takes set and breaks mysteriously nearly as often as it sustains unbelievable abuse and retains reflex.
3.  Rots so fast you will probably have to throw away staves that looked perfectly healthy but were just growing full of cancer.
4.  Performs well with moisture but moisture has a tendency to wake up the reaction wood and mess with string alignment and undo your steam work. 
5.  Looks like a rotten corpse without dye or stain on it. 

I build more white wood bows than I do Yew or Osage.  I like the variety and I'm glad that the bow building community isn't as prejudiced as it used to be toward these woods.  However, there are a lot of good good reasons why most of my special, dependable hunting and roving bows are going to be Yew and Osage.  It has to do with a lot more than performance. 

       J. D.

[George Tsoukalas]

Well it does appear the debate is not over yet. Jawge

[Coo-wah-chobee]

.....Amazing simply amazing. Goes underground but ALWAYS resurfaces.........bob

[Justin Snyder]

HMMM.  I don't know JD, I think chasing a ring on Yew with a scraper is a horrible task. I would much prefer mulberry. Mulberry is so similar to Osage that it isn't funny, but was still considered a second string wood, I must defer to Hillbilly's first post. Justin

[cowboy]

I read the deffinition in TBB, but as usual I'll find out for myself - with a little help from the good folks here of course. Perhaps one day, I'll be able to answer these kinds of question's .

[Pat B]

A lot of wood curls have hit the floor since the TBB series came out(not so long ago) and the knowledge of wood bows has multiplied many times over for the simple reason that lots more folks are interested in the subject and are experimenting with whatever they have available. Now, ain't that what primitive is?
   In different parts of our country and the world, different woods are available and different climatic features exist. Each area usually has a wood(s) that will make a bow. The only non frozen  continent that didn't develop archery was Australia(and they have good native bow wood). Every where else there was appropriate wood for archery(or wood and another component that would make a bow)...and it still is.
   We(humans collectively) are to blame for anointing a few woods as superior to others. The purpose of a bow is to propel an arrow and for some of us the purpose of that arrow is to kill. An arrow going 6" into the chest of a deer will kill it as dead as an arrow that goes through the deer's chest and sticks up in the ground. The difference is our(collectively) belief that more is better. I am all for a clean, quick kill. A 30# bow with the right arrow and a sharp head is enough to kill most(if not all) North American animals. When I build a hunting bow I aim for 55#@26" because it is a comfortable weight for me and I can shoot it well. I have made 35# bows that I would hunt with it legal.
   I LOVE OSAGE!!! ...but I make bows out of whatever I have available or can obtain from others. I also like to experiment with different woods.       Pat

[duffontap]

HMMM.  I don't know JD, I think chasing a ring on Yew with a scraper is a horrible task. I would much prefer mulberry. Mulberry is so similar to Osage that it isn't funny, but was still considered a second string wood, I must defer to Hillbilly's first post. Justin

I'm illustrating a point that you're affirming Justin.  We choose bow woods on a much wider set of criteria than what can be summed up with a single word:  'cast.'  You like mulberry because it possesses qualities so similar to Osage 'it isn't funny.'  Bob and others are right, we're past the argument about whether or not ELB's are the only style of bow that works; we're past the ignorant belief that hickory can't make flight bows; we're past believing that white-wood experimentation and exploration is an exercise in futility.  We know that incredible bow woods other than Osage and Yew exist (Ipe comes to mind). 

The point is, there are qualities that make some bow woods better than others.  There are theoretical opposite ends of the quality spectrum.  Those woods which contain the most advantages for bow builders have been dubbed 'first string.'  Bow woods that have fewer desirable characteristics have been called 'second string.' 

       J. D.

[Gordon]

JD, your description of vine maple made me laugh out loud - but I can't argue a single point you made 

[Badger]

Gordon, I was waiting for you to come along and just rip his head off!@!  Here you are agreeing with him! LOL.

One thing about osage, there is good and bad osage bad osage is some of the worst junk I have ever worked. Too much spring growth makes the wood weak for it's weight. Steve

[Hillbilly]

Oh, and the disclaimer: Lest my words are misconscrewed lol,  I don't have anything at all against ELBs or ELB shooters- they are of course fine weapons and archers- and I've made a ELB or two and probably will again. There's just a whole world of other fine weapons and archery styles out there, too; and a good part of my enjoyment in this is trying different designs and woods.

[Gordon]

Oh, you can make a fine weapon out of vine maple to be sure Steve - it's just that I have a love/hate relationship with that wood