A week and a half ago at the Compton Rendezvous John Lee, Chuck Deshler and I sat and talked about the Hill style bow and how they should be made. John knew Howard and learned first hand from him how he made his bows. John actually made three bows for Howard before he died.

As we three sat and talked John told Chuck what Howard had passed on to him. He drew sketches on paper and Chuck took notes. Today Chuck brought over the first bow he made after Johns instructions. He made it left handed so I could try it and I must say it's a very sweet shooter.

Pretty cool!

Johns quite a guy. Last time I talked to him was about 5 or 6 years ago at gorh. He was telling me how to build longbow without glue. I considered trying it but never did. I still dunno if he was pullin my leg or not,lol.

Do the limbs on that bow go straight out from the handle or is the handle slightly set back?

The bow on the left is the one I'm shooting

Beautiful, what poundage are they?

Very nice! However, what about those Hill secrets?

Joe

Nice long draw Ron,sweet bow. Yea what about the secrets ;) JF

What is the right handed bow? Is that a maple riser?

When I first started I would pick up a bow with a Hill Style Grip and always thought they were clunky and uncomfortable. However, one day I was at Tom Parson's and told him that while holding one of his bows with a Hill grip. He looked at me holding it and said: "Hold it like you are going to shoot it." I did and the light bulb went off. Held correctly they aren't clunky, oversized or anything else bad. I can shoot my Wesley special as well as any bow I have.

Ron's shooting is typical of good accurate archers. The bow will leave the hand many times if you don't have the finger lightly around it...but not gripping. He isn't dropping the bow, but is allowing it to do its will so he isn't likely to worry about twist or torque. His bow arm indicates no movement of the arm if you view it in line with the limbs behind him. His index finger is curled to catch the bow. He wasn't longbow world champion because he was lucky.

Yeah, whatever Runner. All I'm saying is it isn't a form error...nothing more. Your post seemed to assume it wasn't a good thing to do. You should post more positive, helpful thoughts rather than be a wad most of the time.

Somebody telling Mr. LaClair he's not shooting a bow right.

I'll be right back, I'm going to tell LeBron James that his jump shot mechanics are wrong.

George - You are spot on about Ron's form. The old codger is still a shooting machine. When I look at the location of his wristwatch, the top of his head, his drawhand and elbow in relation to the background and I see that he is rock steady.

When I grow up, I want to shoot like Ron LaClair.

There is an early film (can be found as video online) recording Hill's form. In one shot, the bow actually drops vertically through his bow hand on release and he catches it.

Hill bow shooters who talk about HAND SHOCK are the ones who grip the bow firmly.

Aside, yep, George can seem grumpy.. . but he's right.

George, thanks for sticking up for my form but I don't thing runner was criticizing my bow grip he said, "Looks like you're almost dropping the bow on the loose. Interesting." He is however wrong when he says,

"His arm is not actually rock steady based on the background and that to me proves the rock steady aspect of archery is a bit of a fallacy." Runner you'd better take a closer look, my bow arm and drawing arm are lined up exactly with the background after the release.

There are many styles of form in archery, as for myself I've always adhered to Howards advice, "upon release both hands do nothing". I keep a loose grip on the bow so as to let the bow do it's thing without the influence of pressures from my hand.

Jim is right, with a loose grip sometimes the bow will slip down through the hand. In fact it did exactly that on one of my shots that Chuck filmed.

In my competitive tournament days all through the 60's almost everyone shot with an open hand and a "keeper" leather strap around the wrist to keep from dropping the bow.

Like I said there are many styles and a person should use what works best for them.

Having said all of that this thread is about a bow built to Howards specifications, not about an old has beens shooting style 8>)

Nice bow!Ron you might be the cause of my wife cutting more yards and doing more laundry.

Ron tell us about wood options etc,etc,etc

If you watch the DVD of John Lee's lecture on Howard Hill, he says in there the bottom working limb is 2" shorter than the top. Bottom limb is 3/8" stiffer on tiller (not sure where it's measured.) Hill basically glued up the blank with no glass, then like a self bow worked it down so the limbs were bending like he wanted, then glued on the glass. I thought there was something to do with thirds regarding the thickness/taper of the lams -- like a third out, they should be a third less... something like that.

I asked John what the secrets were a few years ago at Kalamazoo, he reffered me to Joel Templin and David Miller.

Wow we're really splitting hairs... Ron's armpit hairs.

Back to the subject: Hal, thanks, did you ever follow up with Joel or David? I'm very curious about the taper of Hill's personal fiberglass bows. I've heard he didn't use much but most makers these days seem to use plenty more.

Pat, When you're at full draw your arm and shoulder are compressed. When that compression is cut the shoulder may move forward slightly. If you see more than a slight deviation it's probably because Chuck moved when he took the 2nd picture,... because I was "rock solid". 8>)

Look at the post on the left of the picture and the bush above my head and see how they differ in the two pictures, proving that the picture taker moved.

Other than shooting off the wrong side of the bow, I'm seeing solid form here.

Joe

The secret is how Ron can shoot that hill style without an arm guard. I've done it, but paid for each shot. :)

BTW, I think that Shrew Hill Ron use to sell is one of the most classic looking hill styles out there. I love the narrow grip on those bows and how all the transitions/lines flow nicely. I wouldn't mind having one around 50#s.

Ron, when did you start shooting with a tab? I thought you were a glove guy.

That is a beautiful lefty Ron.

Thanks for the pics and your advice on shooting the longbow.

I will focus on that this weekend at NALS in Alberta.

BlackCheetah -- Been a few years since I talked to them and Joel hadn't started selling bows at that time... I really didn't know who he was, had I known I would have asked a lot more questions.

Dave Miller is a great guy and will answer any question you have. He mainly talked about how he tillers in a bow and that the shelf is 1.25" above center.

I have been making the upper limb 1 1/2 - 2" longer and tillering + 3/8" for about 15 years. One important ingrediant to a sweet shooting bow IMHO. I got that tip from Dean Torges, but do it on my glass lam bows as well as selfbows and BBOs.

I knew a guy once that knew everything about bowhunting. Had a Peterson Bowhunting Mag everywhere he went. But funny thing is he never had anything hanging from the meat pole while the rest of us did. He would always say I was so lucky n I just shrugged it off. So here we are with certain individuals that consider themselves "gurus" of trad archery and make claims of which they never back up and question former champions. Now don't get me wrong , nobody is perfect and even the guys at the top need critiqued. But there comes a point when you realize it's just the work of a troll and he/she is clueless. What's great is I found a pic of the troll we have amongst us. What You guys think?

Here's two selfbows with long upper limbs. One is a Dran Torges bow

Pat, be careful what you say, not all Greek statues are that impressive. LOL

So Ron tell us all about the bow!

How'd u guess Patty...hahaha. Guess I'm of ur Christmas card list. Nice Ron!!!

Pat being Pat. Runner being Runner. Or, maybe it is Pat being Runner. Or, Runner being Pat? Who knows? What everyone that reads this does know is regardless of what has been said, Pat is right. Or, maybe it is Runner who is right? Who knows? I bet Pat knows. I'm certain Runner knows.

Yeah, that was dumb. About as meaningless as some posts here. What the hayseed man, I like being heard too.

Nice looking bows Ron, I don't shoot them very well but love the look and style of Hill bows. Maybe get to see them live at ElmHall. Pappy

As I recall in one of Hill's books he wrote and dedicated a chapter to his style of shooting, he made the observation that one should pick up and grip the bow like your picking up a suit case. I think Schultz said the same thing or something similar. When I shot a lot I never could let the bow swing free like that. Just my thought. Like Schultz said you do that with a Hill/American style longbow and your liable to get a couple of cracked teeth. keepem sharp

PS obviously RLC didn't get any cracked teeth!

Ron is not holding his mouth right when shooting. I think we should get slo mo of this shot.

Oh my oh my...you caught me Patty...hahahaha. As you can see, no one cares...nice try. But the constant here is no one likes you, and yes, it's obvious you feed off of that. And once again, don't assume I shoot with finger in corner of mouth. Look up Joel Turner and thumbring shooting. Ok, back to the topic.

I don't know who's being whom but when Ron speaks about shooting I listen. :) Jawge

Thanks George, we learn from each other and from experimenting with different styles to find what works best for us.

As bowhunters I think we tend to keep things simple, look, point and shoot. Target archers, to be good need to perfect their form. My 15 years as a competitive archer made me a better shooter which in turn made me a better bowhunter. I learned from watching and shooting with some of the best archers in the country.

Good shooting is the results of good "consistent" form that is ingrained into you until it becomes as natural as tying your shoes.

I'm in the process of putting shelves in my shop to hold some of the symbols of my efforts over the years to improve my shooting.

What Ron knows about archery he knows from experience. When he speaks of anything to do with archery I listen, but especially shooting.

I think the thread title should have been-Rest easy Howard.Your secrets are safe with me.

Ron i am a fan of the hill shooting style. But my wife and I learned from the hitting them like Howard video. In it if I am not mistaken John said . Howard always said hold on to the bow. I took that as a tight grip. Not a death grip but a good one. If I am mistaken please correct me. I will try to be carefull here. I respect every thing about Howard Hill but I don't care for his style of bow. That's why there are other styles out there I guess. And yes Ron guys like yourself has forgotten more than Most people ever learn about archery! Arvin

Ron, you better build plenty of shelves for those. :) Jawge

This bow has Tiger Myrtle on the back, bamboo core, bocote riser and brown glass on the belly

This is recent blog post (copied in its entirety) by Seth Godin, an author

Pugilists Fighters and pugilists are different. The fighter fights when she has to, when she's cornered, when someone or something she truly believes in is threatened. It's urgent and it's personal. The pugilist, on the other hand, skirmishes for fun. The pugilist has a hobby, and the hobby is being oppositional. The pugilist can turn any statement, quote or event into an opportunity to have an urgent argument, one that pins you to the ground and makes you question just about anything. Instead of playing chess, the pugilist is playing you. Pugilists make great TV commentators. And they even seem like engaged participants in meetings, for a while. Over time, we realize that they are more interested in seeing what reactions they can get, rather than in actually making positive change happen. A committed pugilist has a long list of clever ways to bait you into an argument. You'll never win, of course, because the argument itself is what the pugilist seeks. Call it out, give it a name, share this post and then walk away. Back to work actually making things better.

"..idiotwall." lol

"Pat being Pat. Runner being Runner. Or, maybe it is Pat being Runner. Or, Runner being Pat? Who knows? What everyone that reads this does know is regardless of what has been said, Pat is right. Or, maybe it is Runner who is right? Who knows? I bet Pat knows. I'm certain Runner knows.

Yeah, that was dumb. About as meaningless as some posts here. What the hayseed man, I like being heard too."

Is that why we keep seeing two posts? One personality doesn't know the first one has already posted?

"Ron i am a fan of the hill shooting style. But my wife and I learned from the hitting them like Howard video. In it if I am not mistaken John said . Howard always said hold on to the bow. I took that as a tight grip. Not a death grip but a good one. If I am mistaken please correct me. I will try to be carefull here. I respect every thing about Howard Hill but I don't care for his style of bow. That's why there are other styles out there I guess"

Arvin, Howard probably said that but this is a statement posted above,

"There is an early film (can be found as video online) recording Hill's form. In one shot, the bow actually drops vertically through his bow hand on release and he catches it."

Which proves that Howard did in fact keep a loose grip.

Foxbo ask, "Ron, when did you start shooting with a tab? I thought you were a glove guy."

I shot with a heavy glove when I was shooting heavy bows. Since I dropped bow weight I've been using a tab for several years now. I like the Bateman tab. I also shot with a tab years ago when I was shooting competition.

I know it's blasphemous but this bow loves 15-35 carbons. Four shot group from 15yd's.

I shoot carbons w my hills. But I did survive the stoning

That's a very nice group from 15 yards. Carbon or wood it doesn't matter. Good shooting is good shooting. What was the draw weight of the bow?

Sir Ron, In that photo... I swear I was looking at Joe Walker-- King of The Mountain Men (although, personally, I'm split between Jed Smith and Kit Carson)... Or, was that guy in the photo Old Bill Williams...?? Shoot Straight, rare breed

Thats a nice looking bow Ron. I've dropped a couple pounds over the last few years too but I've been shooting 47-51#'s for many years now. I focus on improving some small part of my form every year over winter and spring. My form is better than ever. I enjoy shooting better than ever. This has been a fun thread.

Breed said, "Sir Ron, In that photo... I swear I was looking at Joe Walker-- King of The Mountain Men (although, personally, I'm split between Jed Smith and Kit Carson)... Or, was that guy in the photo Old Bill Williams...?? Shoot Straight, rare breed"

Take yer pick, the longbow and I go back to my buckskinnin days 8>).

Ottertails said, "I keep coming back to this thread for the secrets that state REVEALED... nothing but a bunch of teasers at most.So, howsa bout them secrets?!!!!"

Joe, I'm pushin 80 now and my memory ain't what it use to be. I wrote all those secrets down but now I can't remember where I put my notes.

Jimmy needs to work on that bow arm.LOL

I found this old video that was filmed way back in 1983. Bill Bagwell of Bagwell Bowie knife fame and I were on a bear hunt in Ontario and filmed this short segment of practice at camp one day. Bill is shooting first and then I shoot his bow.You'll note my bow arm drops slightly when I release but the bow weight was 80#. When you release the compression of an 80# bow the bow arm springs forward. If you're shooting a light weight bow the bow arm can be held much steadier . http://www.tradgang.com/videos/ronlaclair/ronl-bb-2.wmv

try again

http://www.tradgang.com/videos/ronlaclair/ronl-bb-2.wmv

From Ron's thread opening, I understand that John Lee passed on some bowmaking "secrets" to a couple of experienced longbow shooters who had earned that confidence. Not every wannabe or nitpicker should be privvy to those lessons.

So Ron now you have everyone looking under the couch for pennies what limb profiles will be available? What about core woods? Looks like about whatever glass option you want. When can orders be placed?

Runner, David Miller is a very good bowyer and I respect him for it. However, he was taught the short course by John Schulz and Schulz was taught the long course over the years by Howard Hill. Which training would you prefer?

I don't know how long John Lee was taught by Howard Hill, but if he has some insights to pass on to bowyers he has confidence in, good for them and good for anyone who benefits from the end product. It's his wisdom and his decision who to pass it on to.

For me, I'm trying to benefit from the wisdom of Roger Ascham and Horace Ford and Don Adams.

NOVA7, the Shrewhill will be made in 66,68,70", straight limb, deep wedge grip with bamboo core. The standard bow will be brown or black glass on the back with white glass on the belly antiqued to an aged ivory color. Strings will be B-50 dacron. That's pretty much how they were made. You'll have the option for color of glass. Exotic veneers and clear glass will be extra. Orders can be placed now.

Ron you used to color your hair back then. lol

dm/wolfskin, That was funny! I just spit iced tea thru my nose and all over my computer screen! No offense Mr. LaClair :)

Nice video Ron, and you have a good grip on that bow, it isn't doing the two step after release. Was Bill a good shooter? He seems to smile after every shot.

I like Jim's clear presentation style, but he might have a stronger mental game if his pronunciation of "arrows" didn't sound like "60 errors".

Ron did divulge a few of those Hill secrets in an earlier thread on this bow. As Ben Hogan used to say about golf, the secrets are in the dirt, meaning hit a few million at the range. Whoever taught one, one still has to stick with it long enough to get the lessons no amount of secrets ever reveal.

Nice video Ron, and you have a good grip on that bow, it isn't doing the two step after release. Was Bill a good shooter? He seems to smile after every shot.

I like Jim's clear presentation style, but he might have a stronger mental game if his pronunciation of "arrows" didn't sound like "60 errors".

Ron did divulge a few of those Hill secrets in an earlier thread on this bow. As Ben Hogan used to say about golf, the secrets are in the dirt, meaning hit a few million at the range. Whoever taught one, one still has to stick with it long enough to get the lessons no amount of secrets ever reveal.

" I've never really heard what exactly the Hill technique was that necessarily made the bow any different from a regular properly tillered simple D bow."

It isn't a D bow, so that makes it different. It is a bow with a riser section that does not bend much and tillered to maximize stability. The photos that open this thread show that drawn or braced, there is a flat section around the grip, or a rate of change change at the grip. Other than that the limbs are tillered to allow no hinge or softness that might favour tracking out of the slot. We have all shot bows that can be torqued way out of line due to limb spaghetti, or unfortunate lever arm inclusions. Not this kind of bow. Is it vastly different from a D, not really. Ostensibly it was Hill's approach to an English longbow with more modern, American, materials and features.

Ok, I'll say right now I don't know near as much as the aforementioned folks about gripping a Hill now. Loose grip, firm grip? I dunno. But I read in one of Hills books that the bow should be gripped "Like you are carrying a suitcase. Not too tight, but firmly".

Mr LeClair, can you expand on that thought?

The problem with all these images is that they don't really tell us much. Obviously carrying a suitcase is virtually the opposite action to holding a bow, and it may be light or hard depending on the effort required to carry the suitcase. If one was engaged in a conversation with Hill and he through one of these images in, it might have been explicit in context, but one can't really tell much by itself. The other thing is Hill included in a lifetime some quite contradictory descriptions of things. And some of that may have been due to different objectives at different time.

"I think most would still call it a D bow though while still being well aware of the difference between a classic longbow versus American longbow."

I don't know what most would say. My feeling is that if you want to look for differences, then that is what you do. You can always say at the end of a discussion of atomic energy, that while it obviously differs from the chemical energy of dynamite, all else being equal, when so configured, they are both just bombs.

"Still not sure of the limb spaghetti and lever arm inclusion references. Seems good even tiller in a straight limbed bow is what it is."

In many ways when Hill talked about bows, or at least what I heard maybe, he was talking about a bow that would shoot accurately with the least effort. FITA bows are supposed to do that also. And in part it is in the bow design, but the bow is really a system. So a proper Hill bow might be tillered to give good feedback for the full draw, a FITA bow has a clicker; A Hill bow is stable due to limb design, the FITA bow have levers, and soft limbs that can easily be torqued every which way, but in compensation is has stuff like stabilizers and sights. ETC...

"If you have that it's hard to include any detrimental features, no?"

Again, if you are trying to make distinctions, what is a Hill bow supposed to do? You can say,"hey look a string and a bent stick, I have seen that before". But when you actually make something you have to make it in it's entirety. Every shaving removed or every thou in the taper is a design decision, and ideally you have something in mind, and the ability to get there. So the way you get to the heart of the mater, as in your original question is by looking at the objectives, and then asking yourself what you would do to get there, and examining the bows to see what features he consistently returned to. It's the distinctions. Hill commonly made the case that he was looking for a stable bow that would be easy to shoot accurately. If you look at the bows, that is what he designed. One might think that everyone wants that kind of bow, but in fact accuracy is rarely talked about with bows, and there isn't any standard way to check whether you have any, no benchrest shooting. Hill was in a good position because he was a highly accurate shooting machine and could presumably evaluate such things.

Bowlim, I like it. "The secrets are in the dirt" I like that as well, or in the case of the Bowyer "The secrets are on the shop floor" When sage advice and long held processes are offered by elders of the craft, a savvy student will listen. Couple that with 25yrs in the shop and an willingness to learn and some good things can result with proper technique and execution.

I'm not a bowyer and don't pretend to be. But, it seems to me the most accurate bow is one that resists torquing... sideways movement... and correctly tillered/timed for vertical movement. If that's true, it seems like David Miller's Expedition type of bow... which has a convexed back to resist side twist and torque would be the most inherently accurate, assuming everything else is equal.

Ron - thanks for sharing this! Long live the ASL!. To me, the ultimate bow would be a deep cored, narrow limbed beauty like one of these. About 62" (I have a short DL) and back set and having a Carbon Sleeve take down! I'd roll that puppy up in a bow sock and throw it in my pack and hunt anywhere under the Sun!

Steve

"So in a nutshell describe the difference between a well tillered American longbow versus the Hill process. Not the process itself but what "extras" are added that sets it apart."

I think Hill coined the term American Longbow, or something very similar. So there may not be much difference there.

Among the many things I don't really know much about is the historic development of that bow. I would have thought that spanning the self-bow to composite fiberglass days, that Hill had a lot to do with the conversion process as the new "flatbow" technologies were tried out. So if you make a bow out of yew, you can have an integral handle because the stick is fat through there. If you are experimenting with slat like materials like bamboo power fibers, and fiberglass, a riser element is going to enter the mix, and does that get there out of design intent, or only as a result of necessity. Conceptually the handle might be set in the center position, but it is easier to build bows where it is forward or to the rear. I am not convinced the rear position is the best one, but it is aesthetically pleasing.

I also don't really know that Hill's objectives were accuracy. That is what he said he liked about the bow. Over and over. And at the draw weights he was able to tolerate velocity was never a problem. But maybe he felt that he was a great accuracy shooter and that was always there, and spent all his time trying to make his bows faster. If some of the oldsters would tell us what he nagged after that would be more important than any process. What did he think the bow delivered inherently and what was he most proud of having added. I am reverse explaining it, but I could be wrong.

As far as the basic design, that is in the Lee tape. It's the grip type and riser effect, the offset of the upper and lower limbs, the tiller (standard for Mediterranean finger position, and a formula for the limbs. Something rhythmic like 50% at 100%, 75% at 50% limb length, and so forth, for plan and profile views. If you build in those elements it will look to the average passer by like a Hill bow as in the pictures above.

I was mostly exposed to Peason Hills when I started out, and I thought they were dogs. I haven't had a chance to shoot one in 30 years, so don't know what I would think about them today. Modern hills are much faster and smoother, just better built.

My favorite bow at the moment which is Hillish, is one of Zacks. I bought a second a while back out of the classifieds. It is a way more sophisticated version. He had been building a while longer. The earlier one he made for me I much prefer, but I can still see how his work is improving from great to greater. So the design is only part of it. And I think back in the day they were a lot more willing to let the man do his bit with bows that today we would call broom handles.

I want to make a modest plea for theoretical crapolla. I don't live in Alabama. I have never seen another Hill shooter up here, though I suppose they are out there. Sometimes one has to work stuff out from first principles because books and the odd bow that one gets to examine are all there is. I have a notebook with measurements of various Hill bows, but you still have to noodle out what is going on. I got some interesting facts for the measurements, there was stuff going on I didn't expect. Craig Eakin had added some of his own magic in there, and there were not particularly new ones. They came from an estate sale I think.

Another funny saying is that "anvil shaped objects" one. Or "guitar shaped objects". Meaning that it looks like an anvil but it isn't hardened like one and is dead, doesn't have any rebound. Or anyone can make a guitar that looks great, some of the first guitars one sees are masterpieces in the true sense. But making one that sounds like what you had in mind can take a lot of tries. Same thing with Hill bows. There are bows out there that look like Hills but they aren't Hills. The most extreme version of that is the ACS.

Very nice looking bow Ron. I always enjoy your pictures. You may have been born in the wrong century.

This is an interesting thread, with a lot of speculation being made by people that admit they "Really don't Know". When you think about Howard's explanation of gripping the ASL like you would pick up a suitcase, you have to know what a suitcase handle looked like in 1940-50. It was very much shaped like a Hill bow but not as deep. Try taking a piece of lumber about 4" long, 1" wide and 1 3/4" deep, round off the corners and you have a suitcase handle. Now attach it to something fairly heavy 50-60 lbs. and pick it up (like lifting a suitcase)and notice the position of the hand in relation to the wrist and forearm. The first thing you will notice is the back of the hand, wrist, and forearm are in line. You don't carry a suitcase with a bent wrist. The weight is being carried by the curled fingers and the palm of the hand. You will also notice that the second joint(counting from the end of the thumb back to where it attaches to the hand) of the thumb will ALMOST be inline with the center of the bow. With the slightly bent elbow the string will not come near the forearm, and with out an armguard it will just tick the wrist. Bob

My grandson came up from Chicago for a visit this weekend. He's a lefty too and wanted to shoot. He's shooting the Shrewhill. Note, he's a Patriot.

Ron: He has excellent form also. Runner: You missed the point entirely, of course the Hill handle is deeper than 1 3/4". Bob

Bob, That is the best explanation I have ever heard on the "Suitcase" comment. For years I had people correct my bow grip because it was "wrong" but the way they told me to do it was very un-natural for me. So I always went back to what felt good and that was what I learned on day 1 of my trad journey. Brian Cole was fitting me to a heavy Miegs bow. He told me to hold the bow down to my side and hold it like a suitcase. I had not read anything about Hill at that point, but when I did read, it made sense to me, and it worked for me. It always surprises me that people want to complicate it. Ron, The Patriot does have killer form(and style). I would expect nothing less from your kin folk.

I can tell you one way you know you gripping it wrong. The first hill bow I had it was beating the heck out of the area between the thumb and the first finger. I was told I was gripping it like a pistol grip bow and to put more heel in it. I did problem solved.

If you have already registered, please

sign in now

For new registrations

Click Here