which is more important?

[RedBear1313]

What is more important when evaluating a stave and looking for potential wood in osage.

Ring thickness or or early to late growth ratio?

Specifically I should be asking is I have several staves that have fairly thin rings, but the wood is nearly straight with very minimal twist and snake and virtually knot free.

[Pat B]

If it is osage, build a bow out of it!   
I like thin ring osage. Probably the biggest consideration it the early:late ratio.

[missilemaster]

I always look at the summer/spring wood ratio.  Some of the best quality osage I've seen is thin ringed. But heck, its osage, so its usually just fine!

[RedBear1313]

awesome.

What kind of design would you guys recommend as a first time build?

All I have right now is some really nice osage staves, I was thinking about getting another wood to work on first before I use my best ones.

Although I do have about 8 staves right now.

[osage outlaw]

This is what I followed when I made my first bow

http://peteward.com/Articles/Ferret.osage.buildalong1.htm

[RedBear1313]

I know how to follow a ring.

I've already been working on that with a couple of the staves I have.

I was thinking in actual style/design of a bow.

[bubby]

an eastern woodland would be nice, a good strait forward style to start with

[Joec123able]

Neither ring thickness or ratio is important if ya ask me Osage is Osage just make a bow

[Bogaman]

I've heard both ways on ring thickness. Personally I've never been able to see much difference. The thinner ringed stuff is a little harder to chase down, however. If you are new to bow building, I would keep it simple on the design. Save the more complicated builds for later.
Mickeys site, provided by osage outlaw, is very good for an osage build. Have fun!

[lebhuntfish]

That is awesome information Osage outlaw! I will use that on the stave in working now! Well worth the read! Patrick

[osage outlaw]

Mickey did all the work, all I did was post the link.  It is a sticky thread in the how-to and build-a-long page.  I was lucky enough to meet him at the Classic two years ago.  That was a very cool experience.

[blackhawk]

Eh...for the most part and in general osage is osage,and its all good...I care more about the "character",or the lack thereof than its rings...but even that doesnt matter as much as other woods as it heat corrects better than any other wood as well...although its nice not to have to fight a stave sometimes

[Pappy]

Probably the ratio for me,rings just need to be thick enough to chase, the rest don't matter much with Osage,you can make it do about anything you want it to do. Propella in a snaky stave is the worst for me,they will sometimes rupture when trying to flatten them out if you ant real careful, for the most part Osage is good and will turn out a bow if you got the patients to work with it. 
   Pappy

[PAHunter]

In terms of ease of chasing a ring it would be nice to have growth rings in a smooth even arch from side to side (not wavy) and thicker late growth so you don't violate a ring.  Other than that I gravitate to staves that have more late growth than early but I'm honestly not sure if that makes a more efficient bow or not.  good luck!

[SLIMBOB]

Just my pet theory and nothing to back it up but, lots of thin rings separated by very very thin early wood rings, say 10%, are the ones I want in an ideal world.  I think they are lighter and springier.  The closer I get to that the better I like it.  I will work with whatever I get, gladly.