Author Topic: Too small of rings?  (Read 4114 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Chuck.e.b

  • Member
  • Posts: 61
Re: Too small of rings?
« Reply #15 on: October 11, 2019, 10:34:31 am »
How long is it?

There’s probably 75” of a stave here. Anything above 55” if going to be somewhat snakey though.

I’m a 30” draw and want around 50#. So with backing thinking 60”, what y’all think?
2” limbs at least, short bow design with a handle. Oval or pyramid shape.

Offline Josh B

  • Member
  • Posts: 3,741
Re: Too small of rings?
« Reply #16 on: October 11, 2019, 10:56:10 am »
A few pics from each end showing the length of the stave to see how snaky would be helpful.  60" is going to be to short for a 30" draw even with a backing and a working handle.  There is an old saying that goes "it doesn't take much Osage to make a bow".  The opposite is true for juniper and especially ERC.  It takes a lot of ERC to make a bow.  The snake is going to make hard backing difficult at best.  If you're going to make it stiff handled I would use most of your available length.  Sinew backed 30" working limbs plus the length of your handle and fades.  Try to keep as much width as you can on the inner limbs either way.   If you haven't made many bows, this is going to be a rather ambitious project.  Don't get discouraged if it fails.  ERC is fickle in the best of conditions and highly variable in it's properties from stave to stave.  You never really know how good it is until you give a try.

Offline Chuck.e.b

  • Member
  • Posts: 61
Re: Too small of rings?
« Reply #17 on: October 11, 2019, 12:20:24 pm »
A few pics from each end showing the length of the stave to see how snaky would be helpful.  60" is going to be to short for a 30" draw even with a backing and a working handle.  There is an old saying that goes "it doesn't take much Osage to make a bow".  The opposite is true for juniper and especially ERC.  It takes a lot of ERC to make a bow.  The snake is going to make hard backing difficult at best.  If you're going to make it stiff handled I would use most of your available length.  Sinew backed 30" working limbs plus the length of your handle and fades.  Try to keep as much width as you can on the inner limbs either way.   If you haven't made many bows, this is going to be a rather ambitious project.  Don't get discouraged if it fails.  ERC is fickle in the best of conditions and highly variable in it's properties from stave to stave.  You never really know how good it is until you give a try.

Thanks. This will be my second bow and I’m in for the challenge. So maybe shoot for 64”? I’ll post some pics here soon gotta get the rest of the bark off.

Offline Josh B

  • Member
  • Posts: 3,741
Re: Too small of rings?
« Reply #18 on: October 11, 2019, 05:05:59 pm »
No, much longer.  With a 30" draw that would be too short for a stiff handled Osage bow.  The basic guidance for top tier woods like Osage, hickory, yew and others is to make each limb the same length as your draw length at a minimum.  With enough experience and bows behind you that can be cheated some, but the bows longevity and performance is the usual price for doing so.  That's with your best woods.  Junipers are not in that category.  To get juniper to handle the same weight and length of draw requires a lot more length, width or preferably both.  Even with the proper dimensions the tiller has to be very precise in comparison to the better woods.  If you're going to make an unbacked, stiff handled juniper bow that is in the neighborhood of 50#@30"  you need to make it longer.  Especially since it appears to be that you are limited in width.  If you figure 8" to 9" stiff section for handle and fades and about 33" per working limb to compensate for the narrow width, you are going to need every bit of your 75" stave.  The juniper bow I just made is 2 3/4" wide at the fades, with 27" long working limbs for a 26" draw.  It is right at the very minimum dimensions for what I'm asking of it.  You're wanting 4" more draw with half the width I had to work with.  You have to make up the difference in length

Offline Josh B

  • Member
  • Posts: 3,741
Re: Too small of rings?
« Reply #19 on: October 12, 2019, 01:12:18 am »
After looking at the pic again, it appears you have more width than I first thought.  So you could probably get away with 70-72" total length if you go 2 1/2" wide at the fades.  That's for a selfbow.  For sinew backed, go wider at the fades and you can shorten the limbs another couple inches each.  Any shorter and you'll start having string angle issues.

Offline Chuck.e.b

  • Member
  • Posts: 61
Re: Too small of rings?
« Reply #20 on: October 12, 2019, 03:46:27 pm »
Thanks josh. I plan on backing it really well with elk backstrap sinew. I also plan on recurving limbs. There’s a bow from a while back on here that I’ve been basing my specs on. It was 54” at 27”. I’ve heard for every inch of draw add 2” to total length of bow. That’s where my 60” for 30” was estimated from. 

Gotta check this thing out it’s sweeeeet.
http://www.primitivearcher.com/smf/index.php/topic,28081.0.html

gutpile

  • Guest
Re: Too small of rings?
« Reply #21 on: October 15, 2019, 12:21:14 pm »
sinew and this ERC go together like peas and carrots... no need to decrown either.. I'd use hide glue as well ... gut

gutpile

  • Guest
Re: Too small of rings?
« Reply #22 on: October 15, 2019, 12:24:29 pm »
30" draw if you have a handle you gonna need at least min 64"... IMO... thats is only if you sinew this one too...