I just traded to get a very nice 1968 Groves Spitfire Magnum from Bighorn on this forum, and I've been enjoying comparing it to the 1969 Spitfire Mag that I already had. The real fun of it is that they are both listed as 52# bows in the specs. However, the specs don't tell the whole story.

I had always thought my 1969 Spitfire was a bit on the sluggish side, at least compared to its reputation for being one of the very fastest bows from the 60's. When I tested its cast compared to other bows of equal weight, it was good but not great--a few yards behind bows like the Howatt Monterey, Browning Safari, and Tice & Watts Spartan Hunter.

I also didn't especially like its grip, and spent quite a bit of time and elbow grease making the grip narrower, and re-shaping the riser. I'm sure I removed two or three ounces of wood and phenolic in the process.

However, as you can see in the photo, the untouched 1968 Spitfire is a much trimmer riser; narrower in every dimension than the 1969 even after I had whittled that one down. This was the first pleasant surprise.

The next surprise came when I put them on the scale. The 1968 bow was a full two pounds heavier in draw weight than the 1969, despite their identical specs! I've heard stories about Harold Groves under-reporting the weight of his bows a whisker, so that they would always be a bit faster than the buyer expected...maybe this was the case with this 1968 bow. At any rate, I wasn't complaining; 54# was just fine with me! The 1968 bow is on the left; you can see the "8" and "9" as the final digits in their respective serial numbers.

I thought you may be talking about a new dog breed.

Both bows featured Harold's pet technique of using riser shims on the belly side, as a way of shortening the working limbs but also reinforcing the fadeouts. When I first looked at the bows, I assumed that the 1969 riser was longer...but when I measured the actual distance from shim end to shim end, the 1968 bow measured two inches longer. This is entirely because of the longer shims used on the 1968 bow.

Here's another look at what I'm describing--even though the '68 riser is shorter to begin with, when you add in the length of the shims, it becomes effectively longer. I will add that both of those shim-added riser lengths are much longer than you'll usually see on a 60" bow. Once you get past the shims, both bows have the usual single lam of rock maple for a limb core.

As you can also see, even after all of my rasp work, the 1969 bow is still a bit heavier than the untouched 1968 bow.

Here's a look at the sidewall through the sight window--again, the 1968 is just a trimmer bow. When I measured around the neck of the grip, it was a quarter-inch less than the 1969. That extra quarter-inch of finger wrap makes a delightful difference in how the bow feels in my hand.

The last step will be doing the flight testing. We've been plagued by too much wind of late, but nonetheless my early results have the 1968 Groves, at just under 54#, out-casting my 55# 1966 Ocala by a solid 5-7 yards--a much more impressive display than I'd ever gotten from the 1969 Groves.

Those are purty bows!!!

I'd be glad to dispose of either one for you. I'll forward my shipping address;-) Seriously though, that is very interesting info! Thanks for the insights!

Very cool thread. I like the bow comparison and pics.

Good write up and interesting. Thanks

This illustrates some of the challenges to creating a database of bow performance such as Jarhead was recommending in a recent thread--in order for the numbers to be meaningful, it will be absolutely essential to check every bow's draw weight at the shooter's draw length, and to make sure that the shooter doesn't overdraw in search of higher speeds. Specs are not to be trusted.

The real pity in all of this is that Frisky no longer has his 54# Deathmaster. There's little doubt in my mind that if I stopped in Minnesota on my way to Colorado next year, this 54# Groves would soundly trounce his DogMaster--if only he still had it! As it is, we'll just never know.

great write up. i just learned a bunch. btw the spitefire 2 i have is faster that one at 50# :) but debatably not nearly as pretty.

I want to hear how fast that miserable Deathmaster was. You know, the one you just took Bighorn to the cleaners with.

Joe

I have those power lams extending my riser on my Sentman longbow. I also had them on Jim Brackenburys bows. He said they extended the fades and made them working fades and added speed.

Looks like this is going to be another fine study Prof. Hardy! Really nice bows. Lance

Nice bows.

GLF, I think that makes sense about the fade extenders. When you think about how many bows will show some kind of stress in the glass right at the fadeouts, you can't help but think that it's a good idea to spread that force out over 3- or 4-inch band, rather than have it all at one point.

Frisky--that DM I just traded to Bighorn was too much bow for me, LOL! It was rated at 62# at 28", and by the time I drew it an inch and a half past there it was close to 65#; I was afraid either the bow or I was going to pop a gasket. I didn't have any arrows that were spiney enough for it, either; so I don't really know what it was capable of.

Mike, you should post a pic of that Spitfire MAG II of yours...we can turn this into a Spitfire thread! And yes, no matter how fast it is, this '68 of yours--I mean mine-- is prettier! ;-)

I also have a Spitfire Mag III--in fact, it's the first Mag III that Harold ever made; serial #001. I'll get a picture of that one up as well. In fact here's what it looks like before assembly.

Sadly, at 64" it's 2" too long to be allowed to stay here in New Bowmania. The rules about these things are almost ironclad, here in my imaginary kingdom, so it's got to go somewhere else.

heres some pics. it could be available to the right home... just saying... it may be the most consistently accurate bow ive ever owned.

wrong pic on #3

this one shows the brown weave glass which i like

frisky. i couldnt get a speed on it because it caught the chrono on fire! actually its really excellent. grip is thinner than my rocky dm. and that thing is super smooth and not stacky at all out to my 29.5” dl. certainly not slow. very quiet and its not even tuned. it would be a pleasure to carry up a mountain chasing elk. very fun bow to shoot.

Great ruminations!

I had Jimmy Elrod radius the shelf of my 53# 69'...Harold liked flippers.

Are you gents still shooting B-50 ?

I had that same problem with that DM! The arrows were cedars when I shot them, but they were carbon by the time they got downrange, LOL.

Nice! Looks like the beginning of a collection for sure. That '68 looks lean and mean.

Very interesting. So I guess this proves that there is no such thing as XXX model is the "fastest" bow ever made. Now when someone claims the "fastest" bow, they will have to qualify it with the year, as well as exact bow specs at true draw length and arrow set-up. lol

I just had a thought, has your testing shown a performance difference between shooting in the summer and shooting in the winter?

im using 14 strand b55 on my mag 2. the string that went to kerry is b55 14str as well not sure if he left it on there though.

John and Mike, I switched the B-55 string to B-50 just for comparison purposes. I shot the "new" '68 Groves, pulling 54#, against a 1966 Shakespeare Ocala at 55# and a 1962 Howatt Hunter pulling 57#. The Groves outshot the Ocala with both cedars and carbons; it also matched the Hunter with carbons but was 2-3 yds. short of it with cedars. So it's got some serious zip to it.

great data kerry.

I suppose as long as we're talking Spitfires I could show you the 1959 purpleheart one that I had, once upon a time. This bow--61# on a 56" frame-- was one that helped convince me that a bow's draw weight shouldn't exceed its length. It was a pretty thing...but in the last 2" of draw for me it went up to 69#.

cool curves to that bow

Harold's bows were one of only 2 recurves my dad would shoot.

Mine has the brown weave glass. The ledge above the grip crunched my thumb knuckle a bit so I very nicely reduced that and the palm of the grip a little so that it rests squarely in the hand with no squirming. I have always wondered how old mine is, it had some finish flaking on one limb a little, an easy fix and I needed to freshen up the fish where I removed material any way. I have never run it through a chrony, but at 47 pounds marked it is faster with the same arrow by a noticeable margin than my friends Bear takedown and my Wing which are both five pounds stiffer.

I'd love to see what the Spitfires looked like in the early 60's, but I've never yet seen one from that period. The Spitfire Mags from 1968 onwards are fairly numerous...does anyone even know when the Spitfire Magnum was first introduced? Or if that was the first model that he used phenolic on?

''' Did anybody visit Groves when he was seriously into mass production? How many workers? ...the shop looked like it'd hum with maybe 3 full time.

I think production, except for individual "custom orders" like two of mine (Mag II and III), was over with by 1995 when I met him...had maybe one-and-one-half workers, the one being Jimmy Elrod. Harold did show me how a Dynastressed limb was built but Jimmy seemed responsible for all of the craft by then. Seemed like father and son kept distance until well after Harold passed.

Saw one of the son's post-Harold bows: wasn't Dynastressed and riser was only a single piece of (maybe) maple. Looked like a tame version of my girlfriend's Wing Gull.

The only Groves I have now is that 68'. I wish my Hoyt Gold Medalist had Dynastressed maple limbs...but Harold told me the only better limbs would be foam, like my Hoyt :-)

Great thread! I've owned both MagI and MagII models that I wish I'd kept. Probably just as well since they were both upper 50# draw weight. Would love to have a MagI or MagIII in 45-50# range.

Great thread Kerry...interesting that the risers were so very different. Much finer lines on the 1968.

The riser wedges remind me of Harry Drake's designs...very effective!

Lowcountry asked a few posts back if I saw noticeable differences in cast with summer vs. winter testing, and the aswer is an emphatic yes. Air at 0º is about 20% denser than air at 72º, and it really knocks the distances back; usually around 5-10%, when I shoot in cold weather.

My marked at 47 spitfire is just under 49 pounds with my weights, 50 pounds at 28.5". I want to see some numbers from a speedograph. Frisky needs to know.

Here's another 56" Spitfire...a very early one.

I will look at the fades and see if they were extended.

The fades were extended a bit but it was not with an additional lamination as seen in Kerry's bow.

Beautiful...never seen one like that...whats it pull?

Beautiful...never seen one like that...whats it pull?

No "horns" on the 56' apparently.

54#...very smooth.

If you have already registered, please

sign in now

For new registrations

Click Here