Full Compass or Stiff Handle?

[Gary Mac]

Full Compass or Stiff Handle . . .

What are the pro's & con's with both tillering methods?

I have noticed English Bowyers that tiller their ELB bows in a full compass fashion do not include a shaped handle section as such.
Equally, I have also noticed that tillering and ELB for a stiff handle profile, they include a built-up handle section.

Any thoughts please?

[Del the cat]

I think its a draw weight issue.
Light bows will be of a relatively small cross section and thus may need the handle building up to provide a comfortable grip.
A warbow draw weight bow will be fat enough without building up, and if it's made with an even taper along the whole limb it will bend  flex very slightly through the handle.
If you happen to have a large knot in the stave, it makes sense to place it at the grip, and leave some extra meat there which will stiffen the handle slightly.
My personal preference is to have as much working limb as possible, certainly on a warbow.
Del

[Gary Mac]

Hi Del
I understand now what your saying, I had a peek at The Bowyers Bible and it said something similar.
The next Warbow I will do will be 70lb. Do you think that is sufficent enought weight to warrant full compass?

[adb]

Del is absolutely right, but it's also about arrow weight. War bow shooters are launching heavy arrows, sometimes up to 1/4#. With these massive arrows, you need as much working limb as possible to optimise cast. It's like throwing a shot put, as compared to a baseball. Non-bendy handled Victorian style ELBs generally throw light weight, target style arrows, like a player throwing a baseball, mostly with the wrist and arm, while full compass war bows throwing heavy arrows need to use their whole body to move the heavy shot.

[Del the cat]

Hi Del
I understand now what your saying, I had a peek at The Bowyers Bible and it said something similar.
The next Warbow I will do will be 70lb. Do you think that is sufficent enought weight to warrant full compass?

Yes I think 70# will be good full compass...Look at the home page of my website (click the globe symbol beneath my username) The bow there is 75# @ 28" 90# @31.5" the tiller is pretty much full compass despite a huge knot in the centre. The bow is about 70" ntn (my height) and it copes with the full draw nicely.
Del

[Phil Rees]

I think its a draw weight issue.
My personal preference is to have as much working limb as possible, certainly on a warbow.
Del

Agree 100%.
The Victorian / Edwardian recreational long bow was altogether a different style of bow, however, there are a few surviving examples of pre Buchanan full compass lighter draw weight bows still in existence. It would be interesting to compare the performance of lighter weight bows made full compass and stiff handle.

[bow-toxo]

Any thoughts please?

   Victorian shooters were advised that a bow bending in the hand would cause hand shock at the loose. They considered Buchanan's dips to be a wonderful technical advance. I personally have never experienced significant hand shock with any full compass bow I ever made, of any weight.

[Pat B]

I have very little experience with war bows. I have only built one and it was too heavy for me to shoot(95#@30") but I do have experience with full compass Native American bows, specifiaclly Eastern Woodland style. These bows have wide tips(very little difference in limb width tip to tip) and if properly tillered they have very little hand shock. I think the hand shock is more with limb timing and not necessarily the tillering style.

[Davepim]

It's really a question of draw-length rather than draw-weight. Military bows invariably need a long draw-length to load them with the maximum possible energy; full-compass ELBs can be any draw-weight and still be sweet to shoot.