Author Topic: Which of these two is better bow wood?  (Read 9273 times)

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Velociraptor

  • Member
  • Posts: 15
Re: Which of these two is better bow wood?
« Reply #15 on: December 26, 2014, 04:54:54 pm »
It goes for any well made bow.
 Not enough info in a pic to determine lifespan.

Could you tell me how to determine lifespan,when i'll see it (monday)?

Offline bubby

  • Member
  • Posts: 11,054
Re: Which of these two is better bow wood?
« Reply #16 on: December 26, 2014, 05:04:14 pm »
You can't really determine lifespan as it incompasses to many variables including how it's taken care of if it gets overdrawn, if it is left strung for a long time, go look at it, rub your hands all over it feeling for slivers , and shoot it,
Make sure you can draw it and if it rattles your teeth out, and if it has the cast to hunt with, should be able to shoot a hunting weight arrow 120 yds thats the requirement in California
failure is an option, everyone fails, it's how you handle it that matters.
The few the proud the 27🏹

Offline bubby

  • Member
  • Posts: 11,054
Re: Which of these two is better bow wood?
« Reply #17 on: December 26, 2014, 05:06:10 pm »
Imo for $40 the guy dont think much of his work but thats jmo
failure is an option, everyone fails, it's how you handle it that matters.
The few the proud the 27🏹

Offline sleek

  • Member
  • Posts: 6,764
Re: Which of these two is better bow wood?
« Reply #18 on: December 26, 2014, 05:10:07 pm »
40$?!! I wouldnt even ask. Id just buy them. I couldnt even buy a stave for that much. Good find.
Tread softly and carry a bent stick.

Dont seek your happiness through the approval of others

Offline Springbuck

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,545
Re: Which of these two is better bow wood?
« Reply #19 on: December 27, 2014, 10:44:49 am »
  Velociraptor, you are worrying about something that just doesn't really happen.  A well made bow of ANY wood (except a handful of tree species that are just not suitable in the first place) will shoot basically until you are an old man. Years and years, at least. Even wooden bows don't just wear out from shooting.  And, any bow's longevity has more to do with craftsmanship, design, and how YOU treat it, than wood species.n

  An overstrained bow will eventually take a lot of set and shoot poorly.  A badly tillered bow with one spot taking way too much of the load will evenbtually hinge there.  Limbs can go out of tiller if they aren't strained correctly.  If you leave a bow outside over the winter, fungus, bugs, and weather will get under the finish and cause the wood to degrade.  If you over dry the limbs down to 5% moisture content, they can become brittle.  If you ding it all over on the rocks and fail to touch up the finish, it can fail.   If you leave it strung constantly, it will eventually take a lot of set and lose limb snap.  If you use it as a wading staff to cross rivers, the finish will wear off the tips and water will get in there, etc....

  There is NOTHING about wood that makes it so maple will only shoot 20,000 arrows, but plum will shoot 50, 000 before it breaks, or vise versa.    Buy the bow that bends well, suits you, and that  you like best, and then take care of it.   Enjoy it!

Offline bradsmith2010

  • Member
  • Posts: 5,187
Re: Which of these two is better bow wood?
« Reply #20 on: December 27, 2014, 05:51:51 pm »
it depends on how far the bow has been draw and the length
also an unbraced photo will tell alot about the quality
if you want a bow to last a life time,, you might have to have one made by someone that makes that quality bow,,

mikekeswick

  • Guest
Re: Which of these two is better bow wood?
« Reply #21 on: December 28, 2014, 08:51:22 am »
It doesn't look particularly well made to me. The edges of the limbs have been left very thin (easy to damage and excess limb weight). The handle fades have been sanded out with the end of a belt sander, the handle itself is also very square edged which won't be comfortable after shooting for a while.
All these things are easy for you to fix with nothing more than a fine rasp,a file and some sand paper. You would of course have to redo the finish.
However more important than any of that is what the tiller is like. The finishing details could be lacking but the tiller dead on...it's still a good bow. If the tiller is off it's not a good bow even if it looked fantastic.
How it bends is the really important thing.
40$ is very cheap for any wooden bow - this in itself would make me nervous. Once you've made a few bows you will realise that to make money out of selling quality wooden bows you would have to charge a lot more than 40$  ;) I would even sell a raw stave for that!

Offline Gordon

  • Member
  • Posts: 3,299
Re: Which of these two is better bow wood?
« Reply #22 on: December 28, 2014, 02:11:00 pm »
Elm is excellent bow wood, but I never turn down a plum stave when I can get my hands on one.
Gordon

Offline bradsmith2010

  • Member
  • Posts: 5,187
Re: Which of these two is better bow wood?
« Reply #23 on: December 28, 2014, 02:42:50 pm »
the fact that there is not a full draw pic,, or unbraced pic,,makes it impossible to tell much about the bow,, I am guessing that even though it is a good wood,, that the lack of detail might indicate that it does follow the string more than a good quality bow,, and that the tiller may not be that of a well made bow,,,I am just guessing so please check those details before making a judgement on the bow or quality,,  :) it could be the best self bow ever made,, just hard to tell from the photos and lack of information,,

Offline PEARL DRUMS

  • Member
  • Posts: 14,079
  • }}}--CK-->
Re: Which of these two is better bow wood?
« Reply #24 on: December 30, 2014, 03:24:08 pm »
If all the person wants for their bow is $40, Id run the other way faster than Superman. J-U-N-K
Only when the last tree has died and the last river has been poisoned and the last fish has been caught will we realize we cannot eat money.

Offline bow101

  • Member
  • Posts: 2,235
Re: Which of these two is better bow wood?
« Reply #25 on: December 30, 2014, 04:35:28 pm »
Never used plum myself.   Most of the old school recurves made by Fred Bear and the likes used maple as the core wood.  Obviously maple would be more economically sound as it grows like flies in the East.   Maple has proved its performance and durability in many applications, like Skis, Toboggans, Snow shoes, Bows, Gymnasium floors, Furniture, Residential applications and more.  It has proved its worth in our part of the world. 
"The privilege of a lifetime is being who you are."  Joseph Campbell

Offline Joec123able

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,769
Re: Which of these two is better bow wood?
« Reply #26 on: December 31, 2014, 02:16:42 am »
It goes for any well made bow.
 Not enough info in a pic to determine lifespan.

Could you tell me how to determine lifespan,when i'll see it (monday)?

There's so many variables in how long a bow will last. Length being a major factor. Longer limbs are under less stress than shorter limbs.
I like osage