TBB I Meare Heathe WHY?

[punch]

I was rereading TBB I & IV today.  In the "Other Bow Woods" chapter Paul Comstock says his favorite design is a Meare Heathe based design for white woods.  In TBB IV most of the discussion/bow are a molly design.  So knowing what we know about light tips=faster bows why would anyone ever make a Meare Heathe?  Other than liking the looks of such a bow.

[Del the cat]

Because it worksand has a good safety margin ...
I may be way off here, but I get the feeling that most Molle's we see are an over exaggerated modern take on the design and that in reality there was a blend of designs where the Molle is just the extreme end of the spectrum and the Meare Heath the other.
i think narrowing the tips is a natural evolution, wide tips just give you shoulders to act a nocks.... if you bind the tip with sinew then you can chop off the shoulders and go narrow.
I think we place too much stock on individual archaeological finds. That's what is so great about the Mary Rose Bows there are enough to be statistically significant.
I think the Molle is a slightly daft design... ok for accomplished bowyers but a nightmare for the newbie.
I've seen plenty where the levers were heavier than a bending tip would have been, and all they have achieved is to overload/overstress the inner limbs and add weight to the outer.
Del

[PatM]

The design Comstock favored was a fairly radically evolved Meare Heath design. Shorter, not as wide  and with more tapered outer limbs. The lighter tips are faster thought is taken to extremes when it's not the be all and end all of arrow speed.

 Still, the Mollie design  was more than a one off design.  The more recent discovery adds to the picture.

[Spotted Dog]

I am building a Meare Heath as of now. Cut from juniper and will be raw hide backed. I like the feel of trying to build what my ancestors had.
I want to experience that which they did. I have built 3 Molle's to what seems to be correct size. Love the way they shoot. I build Plains bows from
pictures of originals. Why ? To experience them the closest way I can to original. Arrow speed is good , but if you can still make the kill with a slower
bow what's the difference ?   My take.

[bradsmith2010]

I remember reading that with a heavy arrow the wide tips did not effect the arrow speed as much,, but my memory is not all that great sometimes
you can get the speed with just a little heavier bow,, 

[bowandarrow473]

I think that even though the mere Heath design isn't as fast or naturally smooth as other designs, it still has it's merits. This is evidenced by the fact that it was used for years by the natives.

[PatM]

Which Natives?

[bowandarrow473]

Wasn't it the eastern coast of North America, around virginia?

[PatM]

 No, it's from England or what is now known as England.

[Hrothgar]

bowsandarrow473, you may be thinking of the Wampanoag Sudbury bow, there are similarities between the two. The main differences being the overall lengths and the wood, hickory vs. yew.

[PatM]

 And the width and taper.  More different than alike I would say.

[toomanyknots]

Because it worksand has a good safety margin ...
I may be way off here, but I get the feeling that most Molle's we see are an over exaggerated modern take on the design and that in reality there was a blend of designs where the Molle is just the extreme end of the spectrum and the Meare Heath the other.

I always thought one huge benefit of the molly design was the leverage that the stiff tips provided, aside from the speed. I always disagreed with the thinking that molly tips should bend a little or else you are loosing fps... even if that is true you are loosing a tiny bit of the super smooth draw that mollys have.

[bowandarrow473]

Ahh.... Yes, it is from England. I suppose I confused the two. My bad, but still, a type of bow with wide tips used by at least two places that are separated by great amounts of water and land have bound to posses some type of advantage over say, a homelgard.

[PatM]

The Sudbury bow did not have wide tips.   Comsstock's  modified Meare Heath actually looks a lot more like the original Holmegaard artifact rather than the wildly misinterpreted early versions.
 Not sure why you would say those two would have any advantage though. Have you seen the artifact? It's a solid design.

[willie]

IIRC, there was an explanation that suggested that the more the work could be spread out over the whole limb, the less strained the bow need to be to get desired arrow performance. I believe the performance gain would be better seen with heavier hunting arrows, as the heavier outer limbs could be a penalty for lighter arrows.

I have often thought that some primitive designs such as these may have been more desirable in damp climates, as primitive settings with higher humidity probably didn't favor highly strained designs