Gonna be ordering a new Stalker bow whats everyones thoughts on spending a extra $75.00 on carbon limb cores is it worth the extra money or not mainly interestd in how much speed i can pick up since I,m not shooting alot of poundage thanks

I would ask the bowyer what he believes the carbon core does for his limb design. Some bowyers do not use carbon or even offer it. A center core of carbon I have read will help stabilize the limb and keep it from torquing? In a hunting situation you might unknowingly torque the bow to take the shot. As for speed you may gain a few FPS but from what others with chronographs have posted here and elsewhere the difference is slight. agian I would contact the bowyer and ask him, ask him why he offers carbon.

Had South's original recurve w/ carbon core. 58LBS @28'' 60'' bow. Had a guy draw it and the string flipped off the limb tips! Yes, the bow was strung properly. The limb tips on this bow where very flimsy. Hate to think if they didn't have carbon in the core.

Is it a carbon core, or a carbon layer in the center of the lam. Putting carbon in the neutral axis was done in early years of carbon exploitation. The idea was to put it at an off axis angle and to counter limb twist. Byron Ferguson made the original Royal Safaris that way. I am not sure there is any evidence this makes more accurate bows, and I don't know if current Olympic bows still use it.

I think that using carbon was a long term concern of early bowyers. They knew they should do it, but were not enthusiastic about taking on the challenge. Long after carbon was used in all kinds of products like arrows, fishing rods golf club shafts and heads, it was not used in bows. Using off angle neutral axis carbon may have been a way to have a "carbon" limb in the line-up, and a carbon upcharge, without tackling the big issues.

Are you talking limb cores or carbon back and/or belly? Regardless, the type of carbon makes a difference. Don't know what Border and Morrison are using in their limbs, but each builds a limb that has great resistance to twisting.

This Stalker bow, are these "cores" or "laminations" over the cores?

If I may. I was one of the first bowyers to use carbon in the very early 90's in R/D longbows Can't remember off hand who the first bowyer was but he was out of Alaska. He was also building R/D longbows and Sam Salem of Mohawk Archery sent me one of his bows to look at and told me I needed to give some thought to building them.

There were to types of carbon back then carbon-uni which was a unidirectional fiber and carbon bias which was a 45 degree weave. Both of these carbons were to be used under glass laminations. Carbon when used "properly" will give you a stiffer, and lighter mass weight limb for the poundage that it will produce and will increase the speed of the bow. How much really depends on the design of the bow. A very efficient design will "not" benefit much from it! And in fact can cause more problems than its worth!

Uni won't do much for limb twist but the weave would. I built a very radical 56" static with the weave in 94. Which was also about the time Master Crafters quit selling it. With out the weave the bow would throw the string at about half draw. I still have one but scrapped the form after that.

Since I've thought of getting back into this have noticed the new carbon weaves being used today and have some coming for a project. It's like the old bias weave but can be used as facing and backing no glass, be interesting!

In any event Fritz, what's the bowyers selling point on what he is offering. If he is using unidirectional carbon it should be for speed. A weave should give you speed and torsional stability. If it is cores then this is "another" new one on me!

Hope this helps some in your decision

Y'all take care, Old

what did you learn regarding ordering a carbon vs non carbon Stalker bow? I like the looks of his bows

Checking out the Stalker website it appears that South Cox simply uses a carbon fibre application as decoration...it does not appear to be a working part of the limb...as always the best person to discuss this with is the bowyer...I have talked to many bowyers on the phone, or in person, and I find them to be honest and forthcoming when it comes to their bow designs...I know that Jack Kempf at age 83 is using carbon lams for some of his limbs

DDave

CArbon in the core lightens the weight of the limb a bit plus it adds a lot of torsional stability if the carbon has a 45 degree weave/. I have one limb design I use carbon in that I use this in the limb as it has a radical hook and the bias weave really strengthens the torsional stability. When coupled with a carbon back the speed is increased plus the torsional stability is fantastic. I have been building bows with carbon for 15 years and have gone through a huge learning process that has cost thousands of dollars in r and d plus the expense of the materials so am writing not from he said she said but actually using the products and developing my own carbon designs. I have done this along with Kirk from Bigfoot bows and this enabled us to do the testing and purchase of materials. The real plus in carbon comes in longbow and D and R longbows though. It really increases their performance when used properly.

God bless, Steve

Steve I recall that being the opinion that Marc Moriez had on the subject as well...carbon lams good for d/r longbow limbs and maybe of little value for a hunter with recurve limbs...still Border seems to be having success with it in their Hex series limbs

DDave

I build a lot of carbon limbs, In fact I am just finishing up a koa and Bastogne walnut recurve with double carbon limbs that is super stable and very fast with no vibration on the shot. When I say its best in a d and r that is because a nice designed recurve will gain less fps over the glass than a d and r or a longbow will. D and R longbows with carbon will perform right with super fast recurves and straight longbows will perform right along with glass d and rs/ People that own or have shot my double carbon string follow cannot believe how fast they shoot but purists seem to shy from using carbon in their longbows.

God bless, Steve

Steve, does the carbon in a d/r and string follow bows sound different ? Is it noisier?

I have often wondered what carbon would shoot like in an ASL bow with string follow or back-set.

Howard Hill archery have a model called the Black Bear, it has three laminations of bamboo and one strip of carbon.

Byron Ferguson told me that he used it for the stability more than anything else. His Safari bows are very mild R/D, I think he said you would gain 7-10 FPS with a strip of carbon.

Carbon limbs have proven greater torsional stability in the bow making world, but I've yet to meet another human who could exploit that advantage. Don't get me wrong either, I like carbon limbs, but not any more so than glass to continue to buy them at an advanced price - there isn't any justification in it for me. I have also shot too many arrows from them through chronos to know that there is a very slight speed gain, like on average 2-3fps, when comparing identical limbs - one with carbon lams and the other glass. That's just not enough of an 'advantage' for me to continue to spend the extra money either.......but whatever.

All Carbons are not created equal. Carbon is carbon, the layup,epoxies used. and the people actual doing the layup make the difference between a carbon that actual benefit a limb, and one that just carbon in a limb....

I agree with Bowbldr. I also believe there is a more that can be done to increase preformance that carbon can offer. Unfortunatally we seem to be stuck with the " tried and true" mentality from a lot of bowyers and major manufacturers like Bear. But it does not seem to be such an issue with overseas companies.

other than stability gained by using a properly laid up woven I have never seen any gain at all from using carbon in a lamination stack. all the benefit of carbon in a predominately linear layup depends on it's inability to elongate or compress. if it's in an interior lam, it just slides back and forth with the glue creep. that's why there is so little gain in a recurve. you have to use a balanced weave in recurves because linear will not work at all there. in longbows, you can use a pure linear on the exterior where it does the most good if your design does not ask it to stretch or compress. just having carbon somewhere in a lam stack is not worth the cost in any way I have ever seen except for torsional stability.

I use different carbon layups for the back and the core and do not use carbon directly on the belly. Bowbuilder said it right IMHO. I would not use carbon if it did not have benefit in performance and to me performance is not speed alone but lack of vibration because carbon returns to original structure faster than other materials and is lighter in weight. The advantages of using carbon has to have the bowyer understand enough to take advantage of its attributes. I learned the hard way but my carbon bows definitely outperform my non carbon bows. As I previously stated though , more in longbows than in Recurves but still enough in recurves to make a difference , depending on what a persons goals are. My goal was breaking 200 fps at 10 gpp and 28 in draw. NOt 29 but 28. I believe that is close to the max for any bow that would be dependable.

God bless, Steve

"Byron Ferguson told me that he used it for the stability more than anything else. His Safari bows are very mild R/D, I think he said you would gain 7-10 FPS with a strip of carbon."

I really like Fergusen bows, in fact just got outbid on one an hour ago. I own 2 Zachs. But I sense an element of BS in that description. For on thing, I have been told the exact opposite by them, that the carbon strip doesn't add anything, and is just there for show. At the time I think it may have been proprietary for Bear, but It is arguable either way.

What was great about Byron's early bows was that he was trying a ton of stuff to take Hills to the next level. If you take the standard Hill of 30 years ago, there are many many things you can throw in a bucket that would improve performance without changing the fundamentals. And the fundamentals are that the bow is built so that it bends progressively and it requires longbow length to accommodate the draw length.

One of the things Byron tried, and was in the air at the time - for instance Black Widow had a FITA bow, all wood, with the same thing - was carbon cores. But it never really caught on. 7-10 fps from a carbon core is a pipe dream.

As a separate comment, I doubt carbon as a core material is lighter than wood. Glass certainly isn't, but carbon is a little lighter than glass for a given volume.

How can practically every other high end sporting product benefit from the mechanical properties of carbon, yet it's adavantages seem to remain a huge complicated mystery to us?

I ordered a bow from south with his static tip and carbon limbs. South me it decreases the mass weight and increases the speed of his limbs. I shot his coyote with carbon and static tip limbs this bow was the quietest I have ever shot with no silencers so quit that I am not sure you would need silencers it was one pound less weight and shot a little faster then my Widow not may have. I will have my bow next week will do a report and post it. Widow

I build a string follow real longbow that does not stack at 28 inches. That is for the 60 inch bow. There is a lot you can do with a longbow that's not being done. God bless, Steve

I am about to return to building bows after a lay off of about six years. For several years before I stopped I only used carbon on the backs and bellies of my bows. I also made my own carbon lams. The advantage of carbon is that it is lighter and stiffer than glass which means you can make the limbs thinner, and therefore lighter. The net result is that the limbs will draw more smoothly, recover faster and have less hand shock than an equivalent bow made with glass laminates. The only disadvantage is that the carbon lams are black and you cannot see the beautiful woods which can be used under the glass.

roger; "Carbon limbs have proven greater torsional stability in the bow making world, but I've yet to meet another human who could exploit that advantage".

^^^This^^^

I also noticed theres no speak in terms of long term reliability.? (I know, I know.......You've never had a limb with carbon in it explode before.)(laughs)

KenR ... Just out of curiosity, have you ever had a limb with "carbon in it" explode?

oneTone,

Yup, several. Not in recent years.... but back when I was trying to use it in double limb facings....Yes! KAPOWW!!!

I just believe theres right and wrong ways to use carbon within limb construction. Or maybe I need to be more P.C. here and say "acceptable" and "risky".

I often see so much emphasis is always put on performance over quality or longevity. IMO theres NO amount of performance worth risking someones health for!

A bow that is truly optimized via profile design, width and thickness tapers per that design, gives up little if anything to one using carbon anywhere in its construction. Thats just my opinion based on my own experience and testing.

Ken, I agree with you. I work primarily with wood but we deal with similar issues. Some woods are more elastic and some less so require different designs. I think glass is more elastic than carbon so can tolerate tighter bending radius where the carbon may need a littel more bending limb area. No reason that glass can't pretty much match carbon if both designs are optimized Carbon may have a slight advanatge in weight.

Badger, Yup...And I believe that might be "mostly" what makes carbon limb bows quicker. Overall weight of the limb is one thing I always consider when making up a new design.

The way I always looked at this in measurable difference that mattered was that I was only trying to measure what part of the limbs movement or where I thought it would likely start making a difference.

There really is'nt a whole lot of limb section movement thats responsible for affecting its recovery speed back to brace from full draw.

Had one of my personal bows come out to heavy once but narrowed it way up to shave as much weight as I could to get it comfortable......and that bow was just as fast on the crono as a carbon backed one I had of a slightly heavier draw weight with my normal design and width template. What I gave up was to much cross sectional glue line area and that bow ultimately became a tomato stake.

My thought was that I had shaved enough carrying mass of that limb to surpass that of the carbon backed bows limbs mass I was comparing it to.... therefor making it recover faster.

Im know there was other slight variables involved but I thought that observation was worth noting.

Thanks for the clarification Ken. Your above observation is instructive ... food for thought.

I'm a greenhorn bowyer but have used uni carbon some on the backs of limbs with good results. I've shot at least 1000 arrows thru each of two of them and they are still staying together.

The one bow I tried w/ carbon on the belly blew it off while I was tillering it! Likely, that was the result of mistakes I made during the glue up, I may try it again sometime, but for now I am sticking w/ carbon on the back and fg on the belly, which seems to work well ... so far. In another 10 yrs. I'll have a better idea about their ultimate long term durability.

Have you abandoned using any carbon in your current bows?

oneTone; "Have you abandoned using any carbon in your current bows?"

Not entirely. ...I dont and havnt used it at all in recurves for quite a while now. For a short time and just a few bows I used some of the fancy bias weave stuff on the backs of them but quickly realized it really did nothing at all for them in stability or speed.

Like you....I still (by request) will use it on the back only in longbows. No issues in reliability doing it that way (so far)....with at least some minor gains in performance.

I can relate to having one explode on the tiller scale! (laughs)....I was building a double carbon bow for a fella here that goes by the handle "Ibex". He sent me some pretty high end carbon from a company to try out in a bow for him.....strung it for the first time ...put it on the scale and pulled it to about 25 or so inches and KAPOWW!!! I believe the stain is still in the concrete floor where I was standing! LOL

I am not a bowyer, so cannot speak with the authority of others here -- I'm just a shooter. But here is my take on the issue....

It seems to me that carbon is a bit of a fad for traditional bows. My understanding is that it can add tensile strength to the back of a bow without adding much additional weight to the limbs. That is good. As a core lamination, to the extent that the lamination increases the tensile strength without adding weight, it MAY improve performance, but I am skeptical that it is significantly better than a natural material like bamboo. Plus, when it is stacked inside other other laminations, how much can it really improve overall performance? Frankly, I would be surprised if a single carbon core lamination adds much, if any, performance improvement. As a belly material I believe it is absolutely not worth the money, because generally carbon's compression response is not particularly better than other materials.

Finally, there are some bows that have specifically designed carbon limbs -- Black Swan comes immediately to mind, and limbs for FITA rigs, etc., and there are others. Those bows are (in theory) specifically designed to take advantage of the carbon's properties and account for its limitations (and even the Swan bows use bamboo as a core, and great ILF limbs use foam). Simply adding a carbon lam to a more general bow design seems a bit of a hype to me.

I would never spend money on a carbon lamination that is imbedded between other materials in a limb core, because I can't imagine that it is worth it....

If you have already registered, please

sign in now

For new registrations

Click Here