Penobscot (exploring the puzzle) SUCCESS

[willie]

Rich

that back bow adds quite a bit of performance. If I understand you correctly, the main bow was tillered for around 30#, and the back bow added approx 20# more when combined?

Can you comment on how the original tiller profile of the main bow has/has not changed when combined with the back bow? Did the outer limbs become stiffer?

It would be interesting to see just how much the different variations might change the f/d curve.

river rat commented earlier that the the design might have been an innnovation to simplify the tillering of a sapling bow, but I am curious as to whether the original bowyers might have been on to something bigger.

willie

[riverrat]

from the results.the draw increases steadily to end of draw. i.e. no let off like on a compound.pretty much like a normal flatbow though much more complicated for a flatbow.that back bow basically "helped" a weaker main bow. they used a flat bow. as well as the double bow. in pictures the double bow does look like a sapling split down the center like i mentioned earlier.  quite a few years ago i built one like this.2 flatbows tied together, though i used hemp strings. i was hoping Half eye found a different outcome. i was hoping thered be something more than a way of strengthening a weaker bow. heres why i think that double bow was made. to use a sapling. yes they made a flatbow as well. but keep in mind the tools in use at that time. bone, stone, shell, and horn, not to mention wood. o.k. its easier to make a bow from a sapling with these kind of tools rather than cutting down a 8 inch diam. tree , or worse yet, trying to split out a stave from a erect standing tree. not saying it cant be done, it was a lot. but human kind has for all eternity used everything they could. and took the simplest route to get there. face it its just the way we are. not saying we dont get very complex when we have to, but when we find a easier way, yep we are on top of that. case in point modern manufacturing. build it faster cheaper easier. thats us.just my thoughts. it is a sweet bow Half eye. it is somthing to be proud of. not a lot of people have succeeded with that design.you gave me the inspiration to try this again myself.this spring hopfully i find a long straight sapling. and try it tillering it like i mentioned earlier.its still a puzzle but we are much closer now.Tony

[half eye]

Fellas,

     Sorry for the delay. I finished a bow to a member that was for a young man to start him out. I did finish the the Penobscott style with the long grip wrap. This was supposed to come out at 70# but is way short on weight.....a little over 50#.
     There was a difference in the "feel" of the 2 styles that I made. The short grip style has high early weight, and seems to stay "heavy" all the way back. The long grip bow seemed to draw more like a single bow with decent weight at brace and builds steady as it comes back. It is still pretty "quick" in recovery but not so much as the short grip.
    The long grip had more deflex than did the short grip, and had longer working areas to the backbow. Between the deflex and lack of longer "springs" I believe is the reason for the difference in feel.....unbraced and braced pics attached.
    There are a lot of variables in any bow, let alone having 2 seperate ones tied together. So I suppose the only thing I can say with some certainty is that the short grip wrap variant with moderate amount of recurve to the tips is snappier and spring like. The other thing would be that the large overall deflexed type gives a smoother drawing bow....or rather easier to draw as both are smooth....just the short grip draws with more felt weight.

    Here are the comparison pictures. Pay attention to the way the two work....by that I mean the one has greater distance between limb and cable, and retains the recurved tips longer into the draw. Also at full draw the shortgrip has the backbow cable still "lifted off" the main bow but the long grip allows the backbow cable to contact the mainbow limb much like a cable bow.
    Anyway, I'll finish my post with the fact that I now have as many questions as when I started. Some of your questions I dont have an answer to and dont believe that speculation would be productive.

Any questions that I can answer please let me know
rich

[George Tsoukalas]

Awesome, Rich. I knew you'd do it. Looks great. Jawge

[burchett.donald]

Rich,
           They look awesome bud Would love to see full draw...
                                                                                                                                  Don
                                                                                     

[half eye]

You are correct old wise-one.....should have posted up some full draw shots, there may be a couple I can pull back. Cant believe I did not post full draws Don.
rich

[richardzane]

great to see the whole series from theory to the real thing(s)

[BowEd]

Your the bow building investigating guru half eye.Nice job.Glad to see success for ya.Awesome look to those bows.

[half eye]

Richard, thank you, just trying real hard to see if I could understand why the Penobscot made these bows. All of their arrows I have seen pictures of look to be made for "pinch" grip so that would limit top draw weight some. These bows seem to be as quick as bows about 15# heavier so maybe that was the reason....I do not know for sure.

Thanks Beadman, I glad I finally got the rawhide string thing kinda-sorta under control.

Don, here are the full draw shots....not the best but Ms. Donna gets madder than a wet hen for being out in the "ga-buuuurrrrs". Also added a teaser pic of the one I'm trying to make for Oglala Bowyer and it's a frickin beast....there is a partial draw pic (teaser) right now it's probably near to 75/80 @ 24" but will get 'er all dolled up after she's out to full draw and post that one separate.
rich

[simson]

Rich, this is an awesome thread. I haven't read all yet, but will do! Thank you for doing all the experiments.
Some thoughts:

- I was told (don't remeber who or which book) the Penobscot and Micmac came to this design, because of the poor bowwood they had access to.

- I have made some bows of this type, years ago. I combined several daughter bows to the same mother bow. It had strange effects when reducing (length) of the daughter or reflexing the daughter. I just taped the bows together with gaffer's tape, to allow quick removal.

- The daughter bow should reach the mother at a point oft about 2/3 draw.

- I think the cast of this bows is better compared to 'normal' designed bows (of same drawweight) because there is no hysteresis between the two bows


just my 2cents, keep them coming
you motivate me to try this design again

[burchett.donald]

 Rich,
          Looks awesome    Thanks for taking the time to put this up for us...

                                                                                                                          Don


P.S. That beast you have going on for Oglala looks awesome, but you trusting that brittle file gives me the shivers. Would hate to see that handle stuck in Donna's ceiling

[half eye]

Simon, thank you for the insight sir....I'll check into that  hysteresis condition. Yes I agree about the speed and cast as well. You have excellent insight as evidenced by your bowyering skills, sir.

Don, That file is a big rasp type....but I agree sir, if something gets stuck in Donnas ceiling cause of me I'd be hangin right next to it.

Fellas, gonna let this one go. I'm going to post the bow I'm making for Oglala Bowyer. My string making with rawhide is getting better so we'll see. I'm calling his bow "kills far". It is a Penobscot, way past 70# draw weight (closer to 80 I think) and is a real beast.....will be posting that up if anyone would be interested.
rich

[simson]

........

Fellas, gonna let this one go. I'm going to post the bow I'm making for Oglala Bowyer. My string making with rawhide is getting better so we'll see. I'm calling his bow "kills far". It is a Penobscot, way past 70# draw weight (closer to 80 I think) and is a real beast.....will be posting that up if anyone would be interested.
rich

Yes sir, we are interested in seeing this bow 

Rich please post as much specs as possible, length of both bows, drawlength when minor bow reaches limb of major bow, also some dimensions  and cross profiles of the limbs.

[Urufu_Shinjiro]

Yes please post it!