Hi everyone. I was wondering, all other factors being equal, what is the difference in fps between a straight ended longbow, a longbow with a shallow RD profile and a longbow with a more aggressive RD design? All being glass bows. My understanding is that a true HH type bow will shoot around 115fps plus the bows weight,with 10gpp arrow, and a severe RD longbow about 15fps more. A mild RD probably in between. Is this what you guys have found? For interest sakes, how much faster still would a recurve be over an aggressive rd longbow? I've never worried about speed. Just curious.Thanks guys.

All the numbers that you have posted are VERY general in nature. As a for instance based on your math above a 75lb. Hill style bow would shoot 190fps. with a 750gr. arrow. I ain't never seen that one and don't know anyone else who has either.

You have addressed the side view profile aspect of the design, but not the front view.

A very narrow tipped ASL (Hill style) bow may shoot as fast as or faster than a deflex/reflex bow that has excessive limb weight in the working sections of the limb.

The formula you are using originated at Mojam to test all wood bows. The formula is 115 fps plus draw weight using a 500 grain arrow not 10 grains per pound. The formula is still pretty much useless and does not compare apples to apples. I think the range is more like about 165 fps for stright bows and up to about 184 fps with a more severe profile. As far as I know there are a few bows that do a little better than this. This is using 10 grains per pound for any draw weight bow.

I only know what my bows have done, so here goes all with the same arrow of about 425 or 450 grains, I cant remember. all drawn to 29":

Bear montana @52 160fps Ferguson hunter elite 55 pounds174fps 7 lakes String follow hill style 58 pounds 170 Martin hunter recurve 57 pounds 178 fps

The actual cast of the 7 lakes, martin, and Ferguson are very close but the Montana had a point on about 8 yards closer.

I agree with the order of your ranking, but the numbers themselves might be suspect. Some extreme RD bows are just as fast as most recurves.

I just chronographed my Toelke Super D on Saturday, avg of 166 fps. It's 66", 54@30", and I ran 31" Easton fmj 400 (10.2 gpi) with 75 gr insert and 200 gr broadhead. About a 600 gr arrow, I was talking with my buddy about this, and at 15-20 yds, seemed that speed was less a priority for me than having a heavier arrow. My Toelke Whip r/d was in the 180's fps with the same arrow, and my Toelke Super Static (64") was flirting with 200fps, although I had a lighter arrow set up for the recurve.

Isn't the Savannah a hybrid and not a longbow, by any of the historical or cheater definitions? It isn't long, it isn't all positive curve, and it probably touches at the nocks.

Setting aside the fact that the term hybrid seems no longer popular, people call them RDs but just about every bow ever made in glass is an RD.

A superbly well made straight limb Longbow will shoot shoot with pretty decent arrow speed, and have very low recoil/Handshock...Also, will rival the arrow speeds of more Deflex/Reflex bows, once the arrow weight get up around 10 G.P.P. and over...Very well-made Hybrids will run with a decent recurve for arrow speed, and once the bow is made quiet through string silencers, maybe even exceed the arrow speed of a good recurve..I have a milder profile Delflex/Reflex Border Griffon longbow that will shoot arrow speeds with some pretty good recurves, on an Apples to Apples comparison, and do so VERY quietly..As in naked string...I still love a well made Hill-Style ASL, though...I just wish I could shoot a bow of this design well..L.O.L...Take care.......Jim

shooting fingers with a 16 strand fast flight string drawn to 28" and a 9gpp arrow....high performance R/D longbow mid 180s, mild R/D 170s and straight limbed longbow 160s. I generalized this because unless you shoot with a shooting machine its very hard to get consistent perfect results and short drawing 1" can make you lose up to 7fps. If you are shooting a B50 string, then take 10fps off these numbers. If you are shooting with a machine, add approximately 5fps.

In thread like this you can go by the comparisons but not anyones actual numbers, including mine. Draw length makes a huge difference as does the person shooting the bow and their anchor and release style. I draw 31" with longbows and shoot a hair over 10gpp with Dacron strings. With my 62lb Hill Sirocco I got an average of 183fps. With my reflexed longbow with the same arrows and the same 70" bow length and weight I got an average of 197. This is the bow in the pic. It's close to d shaped once strung but not even close unstrung. To put things in perspective I usually get around 195 with most recurves drawn to 32". That may sound fast but at 32" it's not really. I shoot 32 recurve and 31 longbow, I guess the grip difference.

sorry, forgot to post the bow pic

Numbers are useless except for bragging or complaining purposes, unless done with a shooting machine and calibrated chronographs (more than one to get opposing readings). Other than that it's my dog's bigger than your dog dialog. All bows, regardless of design, have their limits. That really doesn't reflect on overall performance which is a lot more than that coveted FPS reading.

George, I agree with that but its also a very good way to compare bows for personal reasons....example, lets get into one of the greatest debates of all times...can a light weight bow kill an elk? Most people on web boards that weigh in on this discussion have never hunted elk let alone shot one so I like to get my information from people who have first hand experience. Someone can tell me that they use a #65 longbow and shoot a 650 grain arrow at X fps....knowing this actual data, I can take this data, and 'build' a lighter weight bow setup that will equal the performance of his higher bow setup (calling Dr. Ashby). I'm a numbers guy so this is how I use FPS readings. And saying that, I have to chuckle at times on bow weight debates on the net. The general consensus out there says a #55 longbow with a 500 grain arrow will have no issues on elk size game but then turn around and say that a #45 bow is very borderline...Really?? Using Dr. Ashbys research, a 'built' setup for a modern day 45# recurve will outperform a standard #55 longbow setup. I've actually proven this with actual numbers that I get from shooting bows through my chronograph and crunching numbers..but like I said, I'm a numbers guy and I enjoy messing around with it. I like seeing the data on paper. It gives me confidence in my setup but I'm not holding anyone else to this standard...just giving another way I use a chronograph and again, I'm talking about elk size game not whitetails.

duvall: You can kill a million Elk on paper, its really easy all you do is crunch the numbers. However its much harder in real life. I guess my question too you is "How many elk have you killed (in real life?)" If everything is just right you can kill an elk with a 40# bow and a field point, but how many times is everything "Just right" and a bow hunter in my opinion has a responsibility to the animal he is hunting to take him as quickly and cleanly as possible. Bob

LOL I haven't killed any and that is my point in my post. To have confidence in my setup I want my setup to match what other people use that have been successful. that's all im saying. If someone tells me that I have killed elk using this setup, then I know that if my setup matches that, I'm good. I use numbers to show my setup will work against what is proven. that's all. For me to tell someone who has killed elk that their setup is 'inadequate' when I haven't killed one is kinda arrogant and stupid don't you think? I'm not degrading anyone with their setup. you may have missed the part about this is what I do and not holding anyone else to my standards. But on the other hand, one can't say that a #40lb bow is 'borderline' if the setup is built to match the performance of a #60 bow that is deemed to be 'perfectly adequate'. I guess im not getting why you wrote your last sentence. nowhere in my post did I mention anything about not being responsible for a quick clean kill. That is actually opposite to what I was saying. I want to know that the setup I have is perfectly capable to perform so that I don't have an inadequate setup.

These are interesting discussion's and I see the point...sort of. But I have to agree with George and Bob.

There have been millions of Elk killed with archery equipment that was (from our point of view) far inferior to the lowest performing bows manufactured today.

What I'm trying to tell you, is if you have 10 people kill an elk with a 40# bow and 400 grain arrows from a tree stand at 12 yards, you just can't say "I should be able to use that set up on the ground at 25 yards" To many factors! You have to keep in mind that your arrow is the fastest its every going to be the second it leaves the string, from there on friction is slowing it down, and heavier bows/arrows will retain their velocity longer than will lighter ones, its a matter of simple Physics. Arrows penetrate from momentum not Kinect Energy. So yes the light bow/arrow combination will take elk size animals close up and personal, but when you start getting further from the target they can and do fail miserably. And there is no way your going to get a light bow as efficient as a heavier bow, once the arrow gets away from the chronograph, I've proven that by shooting through two chrono's at the same time using a shooting machine. You don't realize how quickly velocity drops off own range. Bob

Shooting machines tell you what a bow is capable of, not what it will really shoot in a real life situation. I use a chrono on occasion to figure out what arrows I need to get the job done on whatever hunt I'm going on or how it's gonna do on a 3d range. Shooting machine numbers tell me nothing except what the bow will do if I take the shooting machine hunting or to a shoot. There are factors such as force draw curve that will effect a humans release and maybe make the faster bow slower for a particular guy. A machines not gonna tell a person much about what the bow will do for him.

A computer may say a stock car is faster than another on a mile track, but when you add the human element it may have the slowest times.

I should add that I know speed isn't everything and actually my go to bow is my slowest bow. She just don't know how to miss and still shoots a heavier arrow fast enough to get the penetration I want.

I totally agree that arrows drop speed after a certain distance. Theoretically, an arrow starts to lose speed as soon as it leaves the string but at this point, we are killing elk on paper lol. I’ve accepted Dr. Ashbys writings on this because there is nothing better currently out there that would challenge it scientifically and I’m a science/physics guy. I particularly use his momentum factor equation (arrow weight x arrow speed all divided by 225219). One can choose to not buy into the research and I don’t really care…to each his own. But this is how I use it in case anyone is interested and again this is just me personally. I don’t really care what anyone else does. You can shoot a #85 bow with 300 grain arrows for all I care. So that being said, when I went on my first elk hunt, I really wanted to know that my equipment was going to work so I wanted the input from guys who had actually done it not keyboard experts who were just retyping stuff they have read from other people. Because, if something is said over and over and over again, it has to be true right ?? So, I contacted some guys who had been successful with trad gear to get their opinions on setups. I have an email from a resident in Colorado who hunts for elk with low 40# bows due to shoulder issues and is quite successful. He told me that his 650 grain arrow is going around 142fps and he shot an elk at over 40 yrds with this setup and he broke the offside leg. Well, I’m not shooting no 40 yrds so in my mind, if I match his setup, I’m golden out to 25 yrds or so. But most guys are recommending a 600 grain arrow going 160fps as a minimum (some others would call this overkill ). Plugging these numbers in gives a momentum factor of 0.42. So, if I can produce a setup that gives this same momentum factor then I should be good. By the way, the guy shooting the #40 bow is getting 0.41 with his setup. So, is his setup any less efficient other than arrow trajectory? So, I take these numbers and a bow, and play around with arrow weight, strings, silencers, etc until I get a setup that gives me a setup that produces closely to these numbers. Speed is just one variable in the equation. Again, this is just me, your mileage may vary.

Duvall your method makes more sense than what most people do.

I have an ideal situation to compare a set of radical d/r limbs to a set of static tip limbs on the same riser...my RER LXR has just those two sets of limbs, both at 57 pounds...unfortunately I have never actually remembered to chrony both combinations so I will rely on what Sue TerMaat told me on the phone back when she and Kevin still owned RER...she said the d/r limbs are almost as fast as the static tips...the fact is subtle string differences can make a few fps difference in bow speed so setting things up so they are equal is virtually impossible anyway

DDave

duvall it's not that the older guys don't buy into ashbys studys. It's that we've killed enough wihout using his formulas to know that its not need on our game. If I ever go cape buff hunting I'd sure use his studys for my setup. But I've killed most animals on this continent as have thousands of guys before me using double bevel heads, light , medium, and heavy arrows so we know its not needed in north America, just as ashbys himself said a few times, his study was mainly done for guys who hunted cape buffalo.

"Momentum factor...."

LMSkinnyAO.

Momentum = MV; you can divide that by whateverthehell constant you want and it's still plain old Mass X Velocity, but with potential for a copyright.

I'm a numbers guy myself.... or at least that's how I make my living… But you know, a couple of years back I asked anyone and everyone here to send me the data that they have on the performance of their set ups. You know, basic stuff like draw weight at their draw length, total mass of their arrows, FPS if they happen to know it, style of the bow that they are shooting, brace height, and performance on whatever species of game that they have hunted with it, what they hit...

The idea was to come up with a table that would show what momentum value seems to be necessary in order to ensure pass-through performance on various species of game, and a way to ballpark what a #45@28" recurve should be able to do if you were to draw it to 26" and give it an 18" power stroke to launch a 460 grain arrow. You can see how this could turn into a pretty huge project… But hell, I'll take it on!

Only one problem here… I basically got told that if I really wanted to know how well a particular set up works I should go out and kill my own damn animals, rather than taking the Losers' way out by expecting to learn anything by relying on "secondhand" information.

Fancy that. There is no substitute for actual experience in the field, but putting all of the collective experience of this entire board in one place and running some analysis to make sense of it is bullschitt. Interestingly enough, the only one among the Old Sages here who was interested in the project was Jim Fetrow...

But I'd be very interested in how you can get the same momentum value out two similar bows at #40 and #60 unless you're hobbling the #40 with an ICBM and shaking the #60 to pieces shooting toothpicks. Or maybe it's the opposite. Either way, you'll have a hell of a time spotting the competition a 50% advantage right out of the gate and coming up in a tie.

GF, just for the heck of it I ran the 40 and 60# bows estimating speed through the momentum calculator. They could be equal with the 40# shooting 600 grains and the 60# shooting 480 grains. Surprised me. Not all tat much difference in arrow weight but a huge difference in speed between the two.

GF, I'm basically doing what you wanted to do. I'm taking actual field data (collected from successful hunters) and using that as a baseline for my setups. In regards to making 2 bows of vastly different draw weights equal, I showed that in the my previous post. An arrow of 600 grains going 160fps and an arrow of 650 going 142 fps are basically equal momentum wise. Now that being said, I wouldn't want the 650 @ 142 setup because arrow trajectory past 20 yrds would be an issue for me. A 60# bow will always be able to outshoot a #40 bow...that's not my point...maybe i'll say this another way...if I use 600 grains @ 160fps as my minimum acceptable baseline then it doesn't matter what bow I use that I can achieve that with...whether its a #70 selfbow, #60 longbow or a #40 recurve. If my bow will shoot a 600 grain arrow 160fps than the bow I use to do that with doesn't matter...my 600 grain arrow is still going 160fps...but using this data, I also know that if I want to shoot a lighter weight bow, I can load up my arrow weight enough, change string materials, ect. that I can still get the same potential out of my setup. I think we both are thinking the same I'm just thinking about it differently..and again as I say in every post...this is what I DO because I like messing with numbers. No where did I say that anything else wouldn't work...some people just accept data which is perfectly fine, some like to prove why it works and kille elk on paper...I'm in the latter. Bring back the dead cow thread LOL...honestly though, it would interesting to do a Dr. Ashby type study on a whitetail deer carcass with light weight setups to see how they perform....I might actually do that first chance I get.

After several decades and shooting a whole host of bows I will say that the speed between different makes and models of modern laminated bows is just not that relevant. I think far too many people worry about 10 fps and, outside long range target archery, it just does not make all that much difference. Your release, form and arrow have more influence on speed then design of the bow IMO.

I guess I can respond to both duvall and badger in one go here...

AGREED: it doesn't matter whether you use KE or Momentum or whateverthehell you want to quantify it; an arrow weighing X and traveling at Y is going to penetrate exactly the same regardless of what you launch it from.

I'm not entirely convinced, however that "Momentum is Momentum" regardless of whether you're talking about 600 grains at 160 feet per second or 160 grains at 600 feet per second, because Momentum is Mass X Velocity, and in archery, some amount of Velocity is always lost on impact; Mass, however, is almost always 100% retained.

OTOH.... you guys are going to have to show me ALL of the numbers you're looking at, any you'll need to explain the details of the assumptions behind any estimates, because (for example) 160 feeps at 10 GPP is not altogether useless. But to compare 600 grains at 160 FPS to ANY combination of grains and velocity coming out of a #40 bow of ANY non-compound type is just beyond my imagination... And if there is any bow on the market that will throw 15 GPP at 160 FPS (assuming some kind of a normal DL)... Dude... I WANT one!

I wouldn't hobble it with 15 GPP, of course, because that would be Stupid. But increase the draw weight by 25% (to a completely manageable #52 and change)..lighten the GPP by 20% for an entirely adequate 500 grain arrow, .. Now you're talking about 9.2 GPP and probably over 200 feeps... I don't think that's possible, but if it is, count me in!

Even if the momentum figure IS only a hair more than you get from 600 grains at 160...

GF...we are on the same page regarding hobbling a bows performance. I wouldn't want to shoot 15gpp either. I would do what you proposed...increase the bow weight and lighten the arrow. But in the case where someone can't do that, it is possible to shoot an equivalent setup though with lighter weights and heavier arrows. Where you and I wouldn't hobble ourselves with the arrow trajectory, they ARE willing to trade that off...its all give and take.

we are thinking the same. On paper, it will work but neither of us want the tradeoff of arrow flight. I've decided I'm going to shoot a 600-650 grain arrow so at this point, its just finding a bow that is going to spit that out at 160fps. and hopefully the BBO that I'm working on will fit the bill. its all good.

Back to the O.P.'s original topic now...I recently chrono'd 3 different straight limb bow designs...A straight reflex(back-set) 69" Hill-Style,.. a 64" Hybrid,.. and a 66" mild delfex-reflex bow..The Hill style bow is a Custom made bow, a Louie Armbruster Zebra, and weighs in at approx. 54# @ 26" draw length,, 6 1/4" brace height, HMPE 16 strand String.....The Hybrid is a Samick Verna, and weighs in at approx. 50# @ 26.5" draw length,,7" brace height, and 14 strand D-97 string,.... And the mild Deflex-Reflex bow is a Border Griffon(double Carbon with yew veneers, and thin clear glass on the back and belly),6 3/4" brace height, and 14 strand HMPE string, which weighs in at approx. 42# @ 26.5" draw length..All arrows shot were the same, and weigh in at average of 387 grains..All hand shot by me, with a Cordovan leather tab, over the same Chronograph, under the same conditions....The average arrow speeds for all three are as follows...69" Zebra back-set Hill style, 170 f.p.s.,the Samick Verna Hybrid averaged 175 f.p.s., the Border Griffon averaged 170 f.p.s....The Zebra Hill style was shooting 7.17 G.P.P.arrow weight, the Samick Verna was 7.74 G.P.P. arrow weight, the Border Griffon was 9.46 G.P.P. arrow weight..The Border Griffon was shooting the same arrows, at the same speed, at 13# less draw weight,(but approx. 1/2" more draw length) approx. the same arrow speed..Admittedly, the Border Griffon is a double carbon bow, and finely made, whereas the Samick has no Carbon, and is a bit Over-Built, so there are a few more F.P.S. left in the Samick's design, if a good Custom Bowyer were to do a "Make-Over" on it, and fine tune it a bit...The Armbruster Zebra Hill-style bow is pretty well made, but is a bit long for a 26" draw length..Make that bow 66", and it would likely pick up a few F.P.S....So, in as close to "Apples to Apples" testing as I could do that night, these are my results...Take care..........Jim

Harpman, Go up to 600 or 650 grain arrow and see how the Hill compares to the others.

A 40# will shoot just as fast as a 70# given the same design and same gpp arrow. So that tells you it's not just speed that you need. The combination of speed and mass (MO) is a better indicator. That has been stated on here just shy of a million times I guess.

As for a shooting machine, it just gives you facts...solid facts. What you do with those facts in real life is still dependent on hitting the target you are shooting at, whether it's an elk with a broadhead or a rabbit with a blunt. Facts don't lie, they just need to be interpreted.

Here is another thing that would bode you well in life in general; ''the best indicator of future performance, is past performance.''

Beave....I see where Your going with the extra arrow weight thing for the Hill Style bow,, but this informal testing was just to compare all three bows with the same arrow weight, and see where they shook out, comparing design in a side by side test...The Hill style bow will always be the slowest of the three, regardless of arrow weight, though, as long as G.P.P. goes up, the Hill style will gain Efficiency, and start catching up to the Griffon...But, it has a LONG WAY to go to do this..Doing some basic rule of thumb calculation, lets look at these two bows again... 377 grain/41# = 9.195 G.P.P. for the Griffon, at 170 f.p.s...The Hill style bow is approx. 13# heavier, so its arrow speed is roughly 26 f.p.s. behind the Griffon, using approx. 2 F.P.S. per Bow Pound..Lets do that Math for the Hill style..54# X 9.195 G.P.P.is 496 grains, minus 377 grains is 119 grains..This would further slow the Hill style down, likely coming in at around 155, maybe 160 f.p.s...Given the benefit of the doubt, then the Hill style is still behind the Griffon by almost 5#-6# of bow weight, easily, probably more...Shooting the Griffon at 7.17 G.P.P., to compare it to the Hill style, would be a 286 grain arrow..so the 90 grains lighter arrow would likely be picking up a ballpark figure of 15 f.p.s, adding this to the 170 f.p.s. makes approx. 185 f.p.s, further making the Hill style look bad..Think about this..The two bows shoot the same arrows, at the same speeds, but one bow is 13# lighter in draw weight..Why would anyone choose the Hill style over the Griffon?..:)...What if I had a 54# Griffon?..;)......Jim

Why would anyone choose the Hill style over the Griffon? Because we love them- the way they look, the way they carry in your hand in the woods, the way you can feel them work, their silence.

Some men prefer brunettes, some blondes, some redheads. Performance doesn't have much to do with it. Actually, it may be inverse.

Some men prefer pointing dogs, some retrievers,some Basset Hounds, some Chihuahuas. Bassets do not perform at all. Chihuahuas don't perform, and they bite, but a several men have them in my neighborhood.

My best dog was a Vizsla, the Hungarian pointer, a great performer and very sweet. I have met some nice Golden Retrievers. An Alsatian stole both my shoes and a Basset once ate one.

Back to longbows, I suspect that there may be up to 20 feeps between the hottest ones like the Border and my Carbon Edge versus the straight limb longbows like the Hills. But there have been many more Hills made and loved than any other. - lbg

Longbowguy...You post, answering me is exactly why I asked the question in my last post..Same reason why some folks shoot Selfbows, and other natural material bows, and why we shoot Single string bows, when compound bows are faster, and more efficient,and why folks choose a bow over a gun...Because it's just what "WE" prefer...Ya gotta love the weapon that Your shooting, right?...;).....Take care........Jim

Increasing arrow weight does not a make a less efficient design more efficient than a more efficient design. A bow that is the fastest with a 350fgr. arrow will still be the fastest with a 700gr. arrow. The difference MAY not be as great, but there will still be a difference.

Brace height changes as well as string type/weight may sometimes be more important than small bow design ifferences.

" Quote" Increasing arrow weight does not a make a less efficient design more efficient than a more efficient design. A bow that is the fastest with a 350fgr. arrow will still be the fastest with a 700gr. arrow. The difference MAY not be as great, but there will still be a difference.

For all practical purposes I would agree with you when it comes to hunting or target bows but right at about that 350 grain mark you will see bows designed for light arrows start to pass bows that were more designed for hunting weight arrows just because of efficiency. You will mainly only see this when comparing a flight bow to a standard bow so it really is irrelevant in this conversation but theoretically possible.

So badger that would be the "dry fire" speed that Dan Perry talked about I assume?

Along those lines, dry fire speed is actually dry fire, just going from 150 grains of arrow weight to 120 grains makes about 20 fps difference. I have a little osage flight bow that will hit 300 fps at a little under 130 grains. I can't get 130 grains to fly very well so it is irrelevant. But you can see how much difference arrow weight makes as arrows get lighter. Most regular length bows start getting very inefficient below about 7 grains per pound and the lower you go the worse it gets. The last several years have seen r/d bows take a big jump in efficiency and the difference is not quite as dramatic as it might have once been.

Harpman, I would have to dig for the exact numbers (and will if you wish) but your estimate of the reduction in arrow speed by adding 113 grains in weight are off.

In chronographing a 43# @ 28" 68" long ASL with slight reflex, the difference between a 525gr arrow and a 675gr arrow was in the ballpark of 8 FPS.

That's the beauty of those bows (in addition to those stated by longbowguy). Throwing heavy arrows with efficiency is their reason for being!

Bob has the experience........Good theoretical discussions...enlightening My longbows get just over 150fps with my short draw

Marmot, if you are starting at around 10 grains per pound typically a bow will loose about 7 fps for the first extra grain per pound you add and slighlty less each time you add an additional grain per pound. When you go down 1 grain per pound you will gain about 8 fps for the first grain per pound you take away and then slightly more with each additional grain per pound subtracted.

If you start with a heavy arrow in a recurve and the reduce weight, you may gain a lot of speed, especially if you go very light. With a longbow you will not gain so much from reducing arrow weight. Those long limbs can only accelerate so fast.

Longbows are more about power than speed and need enough arrow weight to do their work well. - lbg

Chronographs are the bane of the modern archer. It's amazing how we just hobbled along all those decades without the ability to test our FPS every single day of our life. Oh....the humanity..8^) Yes....I know all of the come backs: It helps with our tuning. It tells us if we are at our best set up. It makes us want something better and faster. I should buy one. No, no....stop me now. (((

"Those long limbs can only accelerate so fast. " Depends on the design of the longbow. I set the 50# American longbow record shooting a 66" longbow that is designed so most of the limb is static after bracing the bow. Only 9" or so have to recover. Shot wood but only 3-4 grains per pound.

______________________________________________________________

First off, this is Marmot Eater AKA Longcruise. I had forgotten that I had ended up with two registrations with Stickbow many years ago when my computer crashed and I could not get signed in. When the site did not somehow remember me today I had to frog around to find my registration info and the only info I could find was for longcruise. ______________________________________________________________

George, I chronograph every bow I build as well as every bow I can lay my hands on. Also before and after every modification to an existing bow. It tells me a lot about my design. I'm not chasing speed at all, only design results. I could care less about ultimate speed. If I did I would not be building and shooting longbows.

In the old days bowyers were very interested in "cast". With a chronograph I don't need a 300 hundred yard long field to compare bows or to determine what the cast is

I dug up the speeds on the bow I mentioned above.

First off, is a correction on the arrow weights. The arrows for this test were 520 grains and 650 grains. The speeds are an average of three shots with each arrow.

The bow specs are; 43# @ 28" 68" long ASL with slight reflex.

520 grain arrow 164.86. 650 grain arrow 156.73.

So, in this case an increase of 130 grains of arrow weight resulted in a loss of 8.12 fps.

My other bows of simililar design show similar results

In fact, a 69" 34# ASL of similar design shooting the same arrows shows only 5 FPS difference with speeds of 148.9 fps with the 520 and 143.9 fps with the 650.

"Chronographs are the bane of the modern archer. It's amazing how we just hobbled along all those decades without the ability to test our FPS every single day of our life. Oh....the humanity."

Yeah, like those guys with longbows at Agincourt had no idea what the cast of their bows was, and short was just as good as long.

If you have already registered, please

sign in now

For new registrations

Click Here