I shoot a Kodiak Mag I got from Doug77. It's great shoots where it should and I can draw the 50# pretty good even with a repaired shoulder. But I keep seeing all these Super K's and folks sayin how great they are. I havent shot one so I courious as to what you guys and gals think. What makes them so much better?

It's just my opinion, but they are longer and draw smoother.

Apples and Oranges. Bear introduced the Kodiak model name (someone help me here) in what 1950?. The Grizzly was Bear's first "bear" model, and the Kodiak followed. Traditionally, most bows prior to this time were, by today's standards, quite long.

Improved technology post ww2 saw he rapid evolution of the recurve design made more possible by fiberglass laid over wood limb cores.

In the target bow world, larger, more massive risers were found to be steadier in the hand, but hunting bows, though becoming more "recurved", still trended toward, slim. light grips that hunters had grown up with.

But every few years, designs changed and advanced and the recurve's speed advantages over the centuries old "D" shape longbow became such that longbows nearly disappeared (Howard Hill bows being a notable exception.)

Fred Bear led the way as a master marketer. Promoting bow hunting, and of course his products, Fred well knew he had to keep making improvements to convince hunting archers to buy the new designs.

Through the later 1950's, Freds recurves were still evolving, and in 1959 we saw the 59' Kodiak with exotic wood in the riser, and slightly more mass to go along with a fully working recurve design.

The next bigger change came in 1963 with the "Dogleg" riser design to better utilize the steady-in-the-hand advantages of a more massive riser. But it was kinda ugly most thought, so for 1964, the Kodiak riser was redesigned to be more rounded and well, sexy looking. But it was rather plain looking.

Remember this was a time of big flashy cars with lots of chrome and fins, so for 1965, the Kodiak got the more pronounced "horns" on the back of the bow along with a riser made of contrasting fancy wood.

Magazine writers and others were touting the advantages for the hunter of really short bows, and a couple of years before, Fred introduced a 52" shorty. Capitalizing on the Kodiak name as the top of the line (The Cadillac of bows as it was known), they called it the Kodiak Magnum.

Field and target archers could have a 64" Kodiak or Kodiak Special. Hunters could opt for the 60" Kodiak, which was "short" to many; or if a real shorty was the desire, the K-mag filled that niche. (With the less fancy Grizzly at 56" or 58" filling the length gap.)

Bear sold a bajillion K-mags as THE hunters bow. And most were used by once a year deer hunters. Serious archers though, tended to stick with longer bows as simply easier to shoot well.

In mid 1967, Bear printed a hunting bow catalog. They took the design of the 1965-66 Kodiak and the non-wood phenolic (bowling ball formica) material they'd had success with in the era's target models and re-named the bow the Super Kodiak. The Kodiak Magnum continued. Bear added the Kodiak Hunter between the two initially as a 58", but lengthened to 60" in 68' and to further meet the demand for an even shorter model, added the Magnum 48, although for reasons lost in time, the mag-48 with the same "Oreo" riser overlay was never officially called a Kodiak.

Us Bear lovers tend to think of the 67-69 Super Kodiaks, especially the 68-69 as the most beautiful of all Bear bows (no I won't argue against anyone who gives the "beauty" nod to another such as the ill fated 60' Deluxe).

Over the ensuing years, the 1965 model has changed riser woods, but the bow's basic design has endured. It is simply a very good bow with the added panache of being a REAL Bear bow and the romance and history that goes along.

We can argue till the cows come home as to the technical differences and looks of other top shelf production bows, but I doubt anyone could argue against the 1965-66 Kodiaks-67' forward Supers as being on anybody's short list as the best of the best from that era. (That short list would also have a couple of Howatts, Wings and Brownings on it too.)

So, long way round the barn. The only thing the K-Mag and the Super K have in common really is the name.

R.

Quiver -

This is going to piss a lot of people off (possibly you too).

The SK isn't a "great" bow, it's a "very good" bow, but when you look at it clinically, it's pretty average in performance. I have a '72 #70 and a '73 50# model. (the 50# one shoots a 29" 1916 about 170 fps and I haven't chrono'ed the 70#.) They shoot no faster than other and less expensive bows of that era. Physical weight and balance is also about average.

I think they are good looking bows, but that's subjective.

Think their real draw was the "Fred Bear" marketing campaign. It's what ol' Freddy shot, so it had to be good (great), right?

The flip side is the K-Mag really isn't a great bow (sorry). It WILL stack earlier than the SK and is more squirrellier in hand. (The Super Mag, IMHO was damn near impossible to shoot if you had any where near a 28" draw - again, IMHO.) Naturally those are only problem if your draw length is long enough to make it a problem.

Look, I enjoy shooting my SKs, and they are in fact very good bows, but they ain't the best out there, not then and not now.

Viper out.

I guess what makes any bow good is if it fits you.. I have owned a couple of S.K. and found I shot my kodiac hunter the best....Go figure..

Personal preference. I have around twenty Kodiak Magnums and don't shoot any of them that well.Six or seven Kodiak Hunters, same way. I just like the feel of the handle of the Kodiaks, Custom Kodiaks and Super Kodiaks.

The SK it is been the epitome of the Kodiak design over 20 years of improving.many bowyer are been inspired by that design that you can still find in some customs corrently made.I like the Magnums too,but they have a different use.IMO

In my opinion, no one particular bow is necessarily better than any other. And there certainly is no "best" bow. I think that certain bows will have certain characteristics that may make the shooting experience more favorable for a particular shooter. For instance; the super k has a forward handle design...it remains, along with the black widow, the only 60" bow I can shoot comfortably with a 31" draw.They were never speed demons for most people but with my draw length, every bow is fast so speed was never a concern. The 64" model of the '68 Super k is one of the smoothest shooting bows I own.

The only way to determine if its a good bow for you is for you to try one and see how it feels. They are my favorite vintage bow.

Viper you aint gonna piss me off.I love Bears but I keep an open mind simply because I just dont know that much and that's why I ask this stuff.I figure that you guys have got a whole lot more time puttin arrows in the air and punchin holes in paper and critters too. I pretty new to all this and as I dont have a whole lot of the dirty green and white paper to go buyin bows. I just think it's better to learn from others before you do sumthin real stupid. I shoot lefty so I dont see too many bows that I like around that I can ask to shoot and find out if I like it or not. I've always got straight answers from all the waller's. And like Pointer said ther is no "best Bow" and what works for one may be just crap to another. I would dearly love to shoot a black widow to see if it's as good as some people say it is and I see all this eye candy on the wall all the time and wounder if they shot as well as they look. I for one look for bows that need a bit of TLC as I cant stand to think of scratchin a custom bow I had payed X number of dollars I cant afford.I also love workin on a bow too. doing a little finish work or new rest kinda makes it mine. I know too long winded Take care guys.

It doesn't bother me! I make my own bows.

NTProf What kind of bow do you make? Did it take long?

Well Quiver, a 55# Howatt Hunter (to which I'd have to give the technical edge over the Super-K) went for $99.00 yesterday on e-Bay.

As a Fellow lefty with hands on time with most of the more commonly available models, here's a short list of possibilities:

1. Damon Howatt (Martin) Hunter. There's an entity KMarcheryhut on e-Bay regularly selling NOS (New, old stock) lefty Hunters (current retail over $500.00) and they usually go for well under $200.00

2. Any other Damon Howatt. Howatt's reputation for faster shooting bows wasn't marketing hype.

3. 65' forward Kodiak- Super Kodiak or Kodiak Hunter. In total sync with Viper, not the fastest, just very nice smooth shooters. And a high Ooh-Ahh factor.

4. Wings, especially the early (pre-Head Ski AMF era) Red Wing Hunter, Thunderbirds and Presentations

5. Most any Browning. The 56" Wasp is IMO underrated as a sweet shooting "short enough" hunter.

6. Widows? Fine bows. The company has found it's niche with fancy cosmetics though, and perhaps like the Kodiaks of decades ago, you are paying for the name as much as for a nice shooter.

7. Shakespeares. They might have done better IMO in making the risers less "squarish", but they shoot fine. There's a Super-Necedah on e-Bay right now.

I'm sure others will chime in with one's I've not mentioned, but guys, my advice is based on comparative availability or lefties only.

R.

Gundy -

There's always going to be someone defending their pride and joy. IF what you're saying is true, then you're one of the lucky few who either found a decent one or just hasn't shot enough other bows to tell the difference. A 252 with any trade bow is a good score (assuming you mean on 300 round) but the fact remains, shooting-wise the Super-Mag really was and is crap - and most of them did, in fact stack well before 27". Posting pictures of targets or pretty outdoor scenes of a bow really doesn't mean anything on the Internet.

Most shooters in the past and now who have tried one, decided against it in short order. Of course, now we'll get a number of Internet experts tell of how they out shot Oly bows with the Super Mags at distances of over 100 yds...

There are/were very few production bows that really weren't worth shooting, the Super Mag was one of them, IMHO,and yes YMMV.

Not going to get into a debate over this, you can stand by your opinion and I'll stand by mine.

Viper out.

See there Viper...thought you'd not go unchallenged, despite my total agreement on the short stack limited shootability of the mag 48, you ain't gonna convince Gundy otherwise.

as i have said before, you're hand fits IN the older model sk. you're hand holds the newer model.

Gundy -

I made (accurate) statements concerning a bow (or type of bow) that was pretty much known as a marketing ploy in the late 60's and 70's and you go make it personal. Very cool.

FYI - back then, most dealers, (who were actually involved with shooting) advised their customers against them. At least that's how it was in my neck of the woods, maybe things where different in your parts?

Yorktown - Don't sweat it, it's the Internet

Andy - Your Millage May Vary

Viper out.

speaking of internet experts

Guys, don't get all upset that someone feels differently about bear bows than you do..You are starting to sound like the black widow crowd.... Which by the way, I shot my kodiac hunter much better than my widow..

Quiver,

Despite the whizzing contest...there are a couple of very real advantages to the SK. Mostly due to length and changes to the riser design that length allowed.

When they increased the length of the bow, it allowed them to decrease the limb angle, increase fade length, decrease string angle and increase the size of the sight window for better vision. It also allowed them to move the effective pivot point so that the bow is more stable to draw and hold.

All that combines to make it more forgiving of release mistakes and easier to tune with a wide range of arrow/spine/weight combinations. Plus it gives an extremely linear, smooth and comfortable draw even for long draw guys. NOT necessarily better, just easier for ALL bow shooters to shoot effectively and that has NO BAD HABITS.

Which is EXACTLY what was intended for the bow!!!

Of course, with length you loose the field convenience of a shorter bow. Plus, some think that with shorter limbs...the limbs are worked harder. Kind of like the advantage long draw guys get of more time on the string because of the increase string angle. So the K-Mag or even shorter SK may actually be better for normal draw length guys performance wise.

As has been stated, Bear bows were not the best performing bows of that time or this. They are average to good performers compared to other production bows of the time. Which ain't bad. They weren't even the prettiest or most fancy. What the SK delivered was an easy to tune, easy to handle, reasonably fast, VERY SMOOTH, good looking and competitively priced bow.

They just flat deliver!

And that's what Fred Bear wanted!

JD,

Guys I didn't start this tread to be a pissin contest over bear bows. Now That said I dont think Bear bows are crap. I havent shot much being new and all. But i can hit the target at about 15 to 20 yards and my groups dont look near as good as Grundy's. But I do get to droolin when I see some one put up pics of their latest (I got this for $1.00 at a pawn shop or from my custom bowyer) I was just wondering if the heavyer mass made for better shooting or if the size made the draw better? I've seen alot of youtube vid that showes some pretty good shooting with bears and other bows.If you guys want to have your own arrow throwing contest go for it and HAVE FUN!!! thats what it's all about. I have the most wonderful moments of my life being with my son and daughter in the yard or a walk in the wood just having fun. Better bow or not. My son will be shooting a Pearson that I am getting from Bearbowman his sister will shoot his ond wheelie bow untill I can get her something better. But ti's all for the love of archery and each other. I use to get into this all the time when I rode motorcycles(I still do) but i found that it's all in how you see yourself. I found I started to enjoy myself a whole lot more when I stopped thinking of what every body else thought and how I looked to them and just started to have fun. We chose to shoot traditional others dont in the end we both have fun and the deer is in the freezer. It's easyer to shoot a wheel bow but I chose the traditional path. Is it better (no) it's just my way. So if any one wants to go off topic or get personal please do it with pm or e-mail. Im just tryin to learn from alot of good people here on the wal.

I thought that Freds Bows were it! Until I bought a Damon Howatt Hunter and a Damon Howatt Super Diablo back in the late 60's then I found out just how good I could shoot.

I've shot about every model of hunting Bow that Bear ever made and love to hunt with them but the old Super Diablo is the bow I still have the most confidence in my hands.

I've made some awlful good shots with a Super Magnum so I can't say their not pretty good shooters but then again it might all be in who's doing the shooting of these little beauties.

I can shoot the 1971 and up Kodiak Hunters much better than any of Bears other models for some reason.

Dont sweat it QuiverT...we know what you mean...well most of us anyway. As to what you were wondering...yes, the mass weight will help with accurate shooting...ever see an olympian's bow? they have three stabilizers on them...one that points way out front and 2 more that angle back toward the shooter...it adds weight and helps to hold the bow steady. Same is true for compound bows...havent shot one in 20 years but I always shot mine better with a 4oz stabilizer on it. And yes a longer bow is easier to shoot more accurately...except for Gundy apparently...lol. The longer bow allows for less pinching on the fingers when you are at full draw. This should allow for a cleaner release so better shooting is likely. I shoot all of my longer bows better than my shorter ones.

I gave a supermag 48" to a friend of mine years ago...my cousin gave it to me ..it was left handed so I traded it for some arrows. My friend, who draws under 27" had a real hard time with the finger pinch...he traded it to someone with an even shorter draw.

Pointer Thanks a bunch. I dont have a problem with finger pinch as I shoot three under.It seem to help after I had my shoulder worked on. Rotator cuff torn. They stuck a insert like a drywall insert in the bone and tied it back in place. I had only just started to shoot and had to wait a year with rehab and all. I snuck in a few rounds here and there when the better half wasnt watchin. I sure wish I was around when you got into a givin mood. Let me know if that mood ever strikes you again.just kidin! I'm gonna head home today lookin forward to shooting with my kids. I know if I keep shooting I'll get better and have a bunch of good times too. it's guys like you and all the wallers that kept me going when i couldnt shoot. I'm gonna still keep lookin for that barn find or garage sale that gets me that SK or Widder or what ever. But that why we call it hunting.

I like my old supermag. I'm not an archery expert. I think it shoots okay. I would point out that there is a number of production bows regularly worshipped here that have been out of production for decades and the old piece of crap supermag is stll available. Thank goodness everyone interested in archery isn't an expert, huh? :)

I own a bunch of vintage bows and I must say my super kodiaks (1970, 1972, 1975) are probably my best-shooting bows, at least for me. My Head-Ski-era redwing hunter comes in a very close second - almost the same really. My damon howatt hunter is harder for me to shoot consistently - it seems to be a bit more sensitive to imperfections in form and release. That I can't shoot my 58" hunter well is probably more about ME than it is about the bow.

Is the Super Kodiak the best-performing bow? I don't know, but I sure do enjoy shooting mine.

I had a kodiak magnum, 50lb @ 28". At my 30-inch draw I couldn't shoot it worth a darn. Too bad- a very cool-looking bow! I just couldn't make it happen. I'm sure some folks could master the kodiak mag with lots of practice and talent - heck, there are plenty of archers that can shoot circles around me with their Howard Hill longbows!

Back to the original topic, SKs are nice, I shoot a '68 and 64" and have been quite happy with it . It is not the fastest, but I can shoot respectable groups with it as it is comfortable at my 27.5 draw. I admit the looks are what sold me on this one. Just try one as the resale on earlier ones is quite good.

I like the SK because it shoots where I look better than any other. It fits me. I've had a few of the 48" magnums, and I like them, but I can't shoot them well. The finger pinch at full draw precludes a smooth release. Also, any mistake in release is magnified because of the short limbs. But they certainly look wicked, and are deadly from a tree stand at short distance.

the thread is about super kodiaks, right? whats all the noise about the other bows then? egos..egos..egos.. get over it. the bears were middle of the road back then at best, just good salesmanship.

I shot alot of arrows thru my Super mag before i sold it.Truth is i shoot better with the other Bears.In a list of a thousand bows ranked by performance and shootability ,someone's favorite bow is going to come out on the bottom half.I like the Howatt Hi speed better than the Bears-personal preference.Bears were not super fast...so wha6?

Ive given all of em away that I've owned. Unless its the 64" they stack like crazy at my draw and are slower than most at my draw. They're beautiful bows but I just never cared for em. Theres one I'd love to have but its a 64" bow. They seemed to do better in speed and smoothness at my draw. I must say the 64 kodiak shoots alot better at long draws than the other kodiaks and super kodiaks I've shot. Around here back in the day wings, howatts, staghorns, T&W, and black widows were the popular bows. Mostly gun hunters bought the bears where I lived. Its like the whitetail hunter being the best selling compound of all time. But you never saw em in the woods, they were probably the worst shooting bow made.

I do appreciate some of the subtle digs on the bear bows.. Fact is, they can shoot better than anyone that has posted here.. Sooo dig away,, Kinda like the tone deaf kid braggin he has a les paul... What ever .

I never owned a Super K so can't comment on it. I do own a 57 Kodiak that shoots waaay better than I do. My brother has a Griz that's not a speed demon but is very smooth and easy to be sonsistent with. In my opinion you can NOT go wrong with a Shakespear bow. I have a couple of Howatts and Really like them but they are much harder to be consistent with.

I remember watching my uncle shoot his 48" mag Bear. He had a 31" draw and the top limb folded on release after about the 10th shot. The string ripped his watch right off his wrist. This was around 1973-74. brand new bow.

Carl

Any bow shoots better than the guys shooting it. Still doesn't make it comfortable to shoot, or a good performer. Maybe at y'all draw lengths they're fine, but not at mine. Nite all

So Viper 'n Gundy -- when are you fellas planning to have the great shoot out, er, or is it a great shout out!!!!!!! I'm putting my 2 cents on Viper ----- but, then again.

Guys, I can't outshoot anyone, well I did beat my wife once if that counts. I have two K mags and one K hunter that I hunt with and a browning wasp. I like them all.

A person ends up in jail, whenever that happens around here.

I have a new SK that is right up there with any bow that I have ever shoot. Smooth and hits where I look. I don't know what other thing to look for. I'm looking to hear about the shoot off!

I like the way they look but I shoot lighter weight bows and they are just too slow for me.The older,nicer bows need b-50 string on them.I feel I would need to go up in weight to hunt with most any Bear bow I have ever shot.I am not willing to do that just to shoot a certain bow however. jmho

I had a 64" SK, a '71 or '72. Beautiful bow, handle and riser design work great. When compared to even run of the mill bows, (Wing Gull, ChekMate Kings Pawn, 63" Herters) cast was below average.

Bear bows have a great reputation and heritage. People enjoy them, have confidence in them and at least in the used market they represent good value. But like Ford vs. Chevy, Bud vs. Miller, Levi vs. Wrangler, what makes a product "so good" is frequently not so much to do with the product itself.

I've owned a couple of custom bows; shot Blackwidows, Brownings, Jeffrey, Bighorn and maybe a couple of others. My "go to" bows are a Bear takedown with 70lb limbs and a 1970 73lb Bear Super K. Compared to any of the other bows I've mentioned that I've shot before, my two Bears are just as fast, just as quiet and have put many deer in my freezer. Works for me.

When did the super Kodiac become "So good" I found it to be a medocre effort at best.

Browing had a clone copy of the super K and that was simply awful.

I like all that is involved with the Bear archery company, as far as their trad line goes.

But the Super K is the Ford pinto of their line. I know lots of people bought Pintos lol.

Best short bow Saluki,

I own a 72 Super K and it shoot very nice. It has a smooth draw and no finger pinch drawing 28". However, my Preditor Hunter shoots better for me. It puts the arrow where I look. This is because it fits me. Funny, the Preditor is off the Super K design but with late model materials and craftsmanship.

Viper is right, the Super K is not the best, but a good bow. The best bow is the one you shoot well. Every one is different.

Shoot many and you too will find the perfect bow.

Bear bows became so popular after Fred passed.

I shoot a current Super K, it's two years old now, I bought it new. I started with a Kodiak Hunter in the early 60s, & have a soft spot for Bears. It's not the best bow I have, & certainly not the fastest. I have a Blacktail Elite, & a Fox High Sierra that are both faster bows. I shoot a Howard Hill LB too, but I kind of like the Bear. Nostalgia? Probably, I do think the Super K is a good bow, is it a great bow? Well how is greatness judged? How long is it in production?

Enjoy, Frank.

The Bear SK is a very good bow. I've owned a couple, a 45# @ 28" and a 62# @ 28". The 45#r was a very smooth drawing easy bow to shoot, nice manner's and all. The 61#r could send an arrow down range faster by 20fps. than a very famous custom bow, much to the chagrin of the owner. I understand the SK isn't a great bow, but beauty and everything else is in the eye and arm of the owner. Sometimes I'm sorry I sold them.

The Bear SK is a very good bow. I've owned a couple, a 45# @ 28" and a 62# @ 28". The 45#r was a very smooth drawing easy bow to shoot, nice manner's and all. The 61#r could send an arrow down range faster by 20fps. than a very famous custom bow, much to the chagrin of the owner. I understand the SK isn't a great bow, but beauty and everything else is in the eye and arm of the owner. Sometimes I'm sorry I sold them.

I love the nostalgia of the SK.... Does not perform as well as today's bows but hard to knock what Fred used to take down game in his day....

The people that want them is what makes them so good in my opinion.

They sold more whitetail hunters than any other compound made since also, does that mean its the best? Every gun hunter around bought bears back then. I'm not saying they're not decent bows. They just aren't at my draw for me.

Even Fred was not a fan of the Super K. This info came from Charlie Kroll, when I spent a day shooting with him 10 years ago!

Glf....What is your draw length?

Some of this stuff just cracks me up...how some folks will state that any particular bow is not good in comparison to any other particular bow...how a particular bow was only popular at a certain time or that there was a real popular one that didn't kill deer and nobody hunted with it...lol...it's really comical.

Since QuiverT...remember him?...the fella who started this thread, said he's relatively new to this,...I hope what he comes away with is what we all know to be true...he needs to shoot the bow for himself to see how he likes it and to determine if its a great bow for him.....it sure has been funny to read though...lol

Ok, I have never shot a bear listed . but I have a Shakespeare super neceedah, 60# / 54". how would that compare?

I shoot with GLF and his draw is 32". He is avery good shooter.

what NO PICS?

You're right Gundy the late 60's bows were the most beautiful bows ever built. If you read my first post I excluded the 64 in what I was sayin. They shot and still do shoot great even at my draw. Oh n the 350,000 was in 76. That included the compounds. Recurves were about gone by then. In 78 I joined the Ohio Bowhunters Org amd went to shoots every weekend without seeing any recurves besides mine, the OBA presidents, and Roger Rothaars till the mid 80's.

Oh n if ya wanna talk numbers, Pearson was putting out 3000 bows a day 0r 783,000 per year, allowing for weekends,lol, and 4000 doz arrows per day back in 1963 when everything sold was recurve or longbows. Y'all gotta remember that these bows were sold world wide. This has turned into something it's not. No ones saying bear bows aren't good bows. I only said the kodiaks n super kodiaks weren't at my draw, thats just my opinion. And that bear bows were never so popular as they are now at any time in since 66 when I got into archery.

I just recently gave a sk to a friend of mine it was a righty im a lefty the sk was a shooter for me but looking for lh takedown. open to suggestions seen alot of custom that look great but what really matters do they shoot.a few im been looking at are blacktail,shaffer,cari-bow, widow ??? don,t mind paying for a custom i just want a good one that preforms well.and yes i understand it has alot to do with whos shootin.

4000 DOZEN ARROWS A Day???? THATS 1,044,000 DOZEN A YEAR WITH YOUR SAME FACTOR. i DOUBT IN 1963 THAT MANY ARROOWS WERE SOLD TOTAL, NOT JUST DOZENS.

I DIND'T KNOW Ohio Allowed for medical marijuana cards.

just thought I'd throw in a pic...

Ok, I addressed Quiver's question in my first post and since this ain't going away. So HERE!

Hello. My name is JD and I'm a Bearaholic. It's been 3 days since I shot my last arrow...and I'm jonesin'. LOL

Seriously, that is a FULL LENGTH 32" Easton Stalker in the pic that I bought to have something to shoot when I got this bow. Oh...and there is a 125 grain field tip on the end of it. If you'll notice...you don't see hide nor hair of either out the front of the riser.

And yes, I'm anchored with my index finger in the corner of my mouth and I am a FINGER TIP, static release guy. Not a deep hook shooter. I have a legitimate 32 1/2" draw, but it could be worse! LOL

By the way, the bow...it's a 64", 1972 Bear Super Kodiak. The reason I love mine? It's the ONLY bow I was able to find at the time that didn't stack so bad I couldn't draw it, wasn't afraid the dang thing was going to snap if I did and wasn't going to cost me the first born. ;~0

Shot Hoyt, Pearson, other Bears of different lengths...including a 60" SK, several 62-64" customs and NONE of them were as smooth/linear to draw and comfortable in the hand at my draw length as the old SK. Or as FAST!!!

At my draw, it's right at 70#s. I've shot it side by side with one of those fancy 70# @ 28 Black Widow bow with the limbs on the back of the riser. Don't remember the model, but my friend was shooting 30" gold tip carbons with no weight and 150 grain heads. I was shooting full length Easton alloy arrows and 100 grain heads. The old bear was just as fast as that Widow. And penetrated 1 1/2" deeper, every shot!

Now I don't own a chrono, but I'll bet at my drawn to poundage compared to equal poundage...it's gonna be as fast as about anything today.

I know one thing for sure. I just had to go to a release and sight pins because I can't practice due to an elbow injury and it shoots FLAT. With the 34" long 2216 XX75 Camo Hunters I hunt with...it shoots DEAD FLAT to 17 yards. Same pin at 10 yards as 17. And it will drive tacks!

And the same pin I shoot at 20 yards...is the same pin I use at 30 yards. I don't know how many other bow will do that, but I know for fact my old compounds won't!

Guys can say whatever they want, but Bear produced a SUPERIOR piece of bow technology in the Super Kodiak. Bear intended to deliver a hunting bow with target bow accuracy and superior shooting characteristics for the widest range of shooters...and it delivered!

Were there then or is there currently a better production bows than my old 64" SK? NO...absolutely not at my draw length! Not a single one that I've found.

Are there customs or semi customs that are better at my draw length? Absolutely! I've shot a couple lately. But they are at least 3 times the price I gave for my SK.

So I repeat. Hello My name is JD and I'm a Bearaholic. LOL

JD,

Heres a photo of the Super Kodiaks 1967 thru 1969, you have to admit they are classy looking recurve that perform well enough.

Maybe the question should have been Why are they so popular?

Hi my names Terry and I'm a Bearaholic and aint no 12 step program ever gonna cure me. Cuz I just dont want to be cured. JDB you have it dead on.I was at the indoor range the other night with my old k-mag and a few of the guys were kinda lookin down their noses at me. that was untill I put three just were they should be. I guess gettin pissed made me focus more cuz I have never shot that good. The K-Mag at 50# shot just as fast as the custom boys. I started this thread to find out if it was worth it for me to look for a SK to go with my K-Mag and the answer is yes. I hear alot of people on this thread some just cant stand Bears but some of us just fall for the look and the feel. I know that there are folks that can afford "better" bows but the Bear was and is a working mans bow and always will be. I'm gonna let this thread stay alittle longer before I close it so some more people can have their say. But I want to thank all of you guys for your help. I know this wont be my last thread on the wall. I just cant express how great it is to have this place and all the people. Thanks

You know I don,t know enough about bows to advise anyone, mostly what I am is a hunter, since the late sixties, I just enjoy shooting the stick and string, I do it for fun as well as keeping me tuned up to hunt, I will say this I had a 69 super kodiak and the dumbest thing I ever did was sell it, I have longbows that are faster, my herters recurve was alot faster, but something about that super kodiak was magic, I shot alot of game with it, it was smooth, quiet, the grip fit perfect, it was balanced perfect fo me, so gentlemen there is more to performance than speed, the Bear had it all,

Man, I love these posts. Folks get so wrapped so tight over such funny and subjective things.

QuiverT: Here's the scoop: Folks who have SKs and shoot them well like them and rave to others about them. Those who don't like them, don't rave. I rave about other bows because I prefer them.

And understand WHAT they are raving about. Every descent recurve bow out there, from the lowly Samicks to the sky-high customs, are all 90% exactly the same -- they all shoot a reasonable weight arrow consistently with a fairly high efficiency ratio. Don't believe me? Take a look at the reports in TBR on on Blacky's website and point out all the bows that stand out as poor performers. Besides, bowyers who make dogs disappear quickly...

So, the remaining 10 percent is what all the fuss is about -- personal feel, personal fit, personal taste, personal expectations, etc. The SK's are not "so much better" than any one of two dozen bows out there, and in terms of performance (efficiency, stability, etc.), it is probably pretty middle-of-the-pack. Don't get me wrong here - - if you like the SK and shoot it well, rock and roll. But THE most important factor in a successful archery outcome is the shooter, followed by the arrows, and lastly the bow...

I started shooting with a 69 Super Kodiak model bow as a kid. Have many other bows. The Super Kodiak hits the target with what it takes for the longer draw hunting archer! My hands will be carrying one this hunting season. Could buy any bow model I wanted and this is it. Good hunting.

Well I don't think it's that folks get excited over any particular thing, any topic per se, rather I think some folks come to the internet already overwhelmed by life, in some cases to the point of being hysterical, and lash out indescriminantly in their manic frustration. Take for example this passage:

"Pearson never sold 783,000 bows in a year. Your numbers and your mind are whacked. :^)"

Well, it turns out GLF didn't even make that statement, but HIS mind "whacked." What he actually said was true, almost a direct quote, just without citation to its source.

Or here, where is GLF is high on weed, because stickbowhntr doesn't know the history of Ben Pearson archery either.

"I DIND'T KNOW Ohio Allowed for medical marijuana cards."

The arrogance of some people seems to have no limit.

Sources for GLFs comments:

http://www.womenhunters.com/pearson-carol-carver.html

http://www.archeryarchives.com/History.html

http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Ben+Pearson's+name+lives+on+in+2+companies.-a0105370527

My dad sold ball bearings to them in the 60s. My brothers got free bows from Ben personally for Christmas one year. My uncle built at least one of the machines in the plant, had an unfinished Colt prototype off that machine (router to cut handle profiles), part of which (it blew up) is in the corner of my shop right now. All this before my time but testimony to just how big the company was in it's heyday.

I realize it's frustrating when people spout off about topics they know nothing about, especially when they make it personal as in these two cases, but you just have to take all in stride. I think it makes surfing these sites more fun, to see a guy make a fool of himself occasionally. After over a decade, just bow and arra posts turn a little boring.

Then archery archioves are wrong. Pearson was byu far the worlds largest archery company, plus they made alot of other things such as boats......http://www.archeryarchives.com/History.html

"By 1963 the average daily output was 3,000 bows and 3,000 to 4,000 doz. arrows"........"At the 50th anniversary party for Ben Pearson Archery, Governor Bill Clinton was presented with the six millionth manufactured bow and the 200 millionth manufactured arrow". You're right, the total up to that point doesn't figure to the amount of bows they said. Maybe that was only 1 or 2 years, who knows. At 3000 a day you could reach 6 million pretty fast. The arrow numbers seem to match up tho.

Funny I could sit n tell Fred Bear why I didn't like to shoot super k's, but on here its sacreligious,lol.

3000 bows a day, 5 days a week, 52 weeks a year is 780,000. Your math isn't far off Gary, just one extra day of production. Maybe they worked on an Saturday once in 1963.

Folks get real fond of their romantic notions I guess. I know you and I have had the "Fedora hat" fight ourselves, maybe about FastFlight? Let it go buddy.

GLF,

What was the title of this thread? "What makes a Super Kodiak so good?"

I don't think it's so much whether or not you or anyone else likes them. It's that so many can't help but commenting to a thread that is not about the subject of the thread!

Quiver wasn't asking for information on why you or anyone else liked other bows. He wanted to know what advantages people thought the SK had over his K-Mag.

Seems a pretty easy concept for me, but maybe I'm wrong.

If someone speaks up and says NONE the K-Mag blows it away or the Kodiak Hunter is far superior...then that's lagit!

But DO NOT be surprised when you go off topic and out of your way to spin a personal bias into a thread and someone jumps you for it.

You have it coming!

JD,

Comon now Gary....Not everyone has long monkey arms like you do.. 64in. isn't too long to carry in the woods.. That is a short longbow.. lol.. I didn't think you were doggin anything for the record.. Just expressing an opinion on what works and doesn't work for yourself..

;-) I'm chill Gundy. I saw your smiley. I was baiting you, because you got all froggy with Wiper, because the CF post yesterday seemed to get a rise outa you, because it's Friday and I'm bored and figured you'd be ripe for another strike. Your response was disappointing, to be honest. LOL It's the internet bud, never take any of it seriously. If we ever meet, and you don't punch me first, I'll happily buy you a carbinated beverage as my pentance.

The Ben Pearson numbers are legit, unless you can produce a citation to the otherwise. Why not just be a man and let that fact remain? What does an ebay search have to do with anything? Seriously? I can't imagine a more irrelevant response.

But an idea might be, BP made a butt load of all wood bows, all glass bows for that matter most probably those little chidren's archery "kits" actually. Nobody ever said the bows weren't crap, only that they made a butt load of 'em. Maybe that's why you don't see 'em on ebay. They ain't worth the trouble.

Think folks like the grip on SK's, but any bow can have powerful medicine or strong mojo in the right hands.

My 1971 45lb SK with fast flight string with shoots 468 grain arrows at 165 fps at my little 28" draw. Think that is not remarkable, but certainly not blazing.

I really like the grip on SK and the grip on predator recurves is similiar and I like those bows as well.

Manybows those are some sweet SK's you got there. real nice. By the way guys the wife is ticked at all of you. she keeps having to wipe up the drool on the desk. I also droped a hint that I might be lookin for a new bow. I dont speak spanish to well but I'm sure some of what she said cant be said in polite company. a whole lot of cahbrone and penche this and that. Looks like I might need to go for a camping trip soon. sweet!!!

I gotta give kodiaks n super k's credit that they're the finest looking bows ever made, and probably have the best feeling grip. Thats why I've owned so many. Trying to find one that was comfy at 32" draw. One day I'll find me a 64". They were made for unlimited draw and seem to be at my draw what the 60" ones are at shorter draws.

Yup JD I probably did,lol. What I was trying to get at is that they're probably not any better than any other bows so nothing makes em better. But after rereading his post I see he meant better than the k mag. More length, the grip and looks is what makes it better than a k mag. If you have a short enough draw the length doesn't even mean that much.

I like em too look good and shoot even better bd

Price of tea in China?

JDB, They didn`t make a Super-K 64" in 1972. `70 was the last year for 64" Don`t know what youv`e got ,possibly a `70 that had a stab bushing installed as an option. A lot of people don`t know that an accessory stabilizer bushing was a factory option starting in 1968. It became standard equipment in 1970.

I like my '70 Super K.

Got it in a trade with cacciatore.

45#@28".

Yeah, I know what most all of the literature says Trad, but the Bear folks said they did produce some on order after 1970. I contacted them when I got the bow trying to date it and they seemed to think from something in the serial number on mine that it was a '72.

It is the 2 piece future wood and maple riser. So it can't be older than '70.

But who knows. Bear "officially" discontinued the wood handle Take Downs in '72, but there WERE wood handles sold all the way to '76. Bear was good about doing that stuff.

I wouldn't know one way or the other for sure cause of that wacky numbering system they used after '70. LOL

Yep, your right. That is a factory stabilizer bushing. You could order them with the 3" Hunting Sight, Fred Bear hunting bow stabilizer and quick connect according to the catalog page they sent me. If I remember right, they told me there were other options you could get on the SK's that weren't in the catalog.

Would NOT have a clue what those would be...unless it plunger style rest and that sort of thing. Oh and quiver bushings if I remember right.

Wish I knew for sure. It's not going to be that long till ALL the guys who were around back then at bear are gone and that kind of stuff will be lost for ever!

Wish they'd done a better job of documenting all that stuff.

JD,

1970 1971 and most 1972 Bear Super Kodiaks are all the same bow well not the same bow but the same form same everything. 1970 had no stabilizer bushing(but a bushing could be orderd)and the silk screen was on the back of the top limb.So if you orderd a 1970 with a stabilizer bushing it became a 1971. 1971 same bow but they all came standard with a stabilizer bushing silk screen still on the back of the upper limb. 1972 same bow has the stabilizer bushing and they moved the upper silk screen to the belly side.Yes I've seen several 1971-1972-ish SK's in 64" bd

looks like several of us looking for 64" ones...L.O.L.

I'll be the first fish to bite on that. Any body got a lefty 64" SK they dont need? LOL !!! After all this talk of how good or not good the SK is I'm just have to see for myself. I didnt know starting this thread would make me want to try one.So for real guys does any one have a lefty SK out there fro trade or sale. I dont care how it looks solong as you can shoot it safely.

In the past I've bid in excess of $550 for 1968 and 1969 left-handed SKs on e-lame - I've always fallen short. Still looking and hoping though.

The 1970 and up SKs are a bit more affordable - I have a 1970 (60lb), 1972 (50lb), and 1975 (55lb). Sorry - not for sale.

I know the 64" SKs are out there, but I don't remember ever seeing a lefty come up on the auction site or on the Leatherwall classifieds. I don't think I've ever seen a 67.5 in a lefty, although I know they are out there. They must have all been 'collected out'. There must be a better resource to find this stuff!

Anyway, back to the original thread: I've owned several bows throughout my life (all older classics, never owned a custom). the SK is a fun and easy bow to shoot - hits where I look, etc. It's fast enough! Heck, Mr. Bear killed a polar bear with his. And the relatively narrow grip suits my shooting style. To each his own, but in my opinion Fred Bear really hit it right with the SK; it works, and it's easy on the eyes to boot. FYI, I also own a 1966 Kodiak - yes, it looks like a SK, but it's not the same bow, the grip is totally different. I much prefer the SK to the 66 Kodiak (granted, I have only shot my one example of the 1966 Kodiak - conceivably others could be different).

Thanks Goldentrout_one. I found one in the back pages of the classifieds. I'm hopin to get it. It's a newer one with the straight wood pattern. the angled wood pattern is nicer but I plan on going to the field with it so I dont use real pruty bows. I just cant see having something I'd get all nuts about when it got dinged. Off Topic I know!!!!

Well...... The Super Ks may or not be a great bow, but I'm going to grab mine & go hunting in just about 21/2 hours! Lord Willing. Yea I kinda like mine.

Frank

Good Hunting Frank. Be safe. Terry

Ben Pearson was a great man.

Unfortunately, some of his factory workers could be a little less than great.

My first "Old Hickory" cheapo kid's bow Christmas special from the 60s twisted better than Chubby Checker.

A few years ago, I lucked out on an ebay Pearson Mustang pretzel that "twisted the night away" and still makes me cringe.

The Super Ks, even the last "generic" ones sold from Sears, were super.

(Sorry Viper, I can't stop myself from typing this):

Seacrest out.

Someone commented on seeing more Bear Recurves on Flea Bay than Ben Pearsons and the reason for that might be that most of the old Pearsons delaminated-busted years before Flea Bay ever came along.

Pearsons were famous for coming unglued years ago and that reputation scared off Bow Buyers back in the 60's.

Ben Pearson had one recurve that could really shoot an Arrow; that was the 60 inch Knight they produced in the 60's, sold under their Golden Soverign line.

Someone said the Super K's would not perform with the modern bow designs, but I say bull-puckey 8^)))). You put fastflight aside and they can hold their own with any bow of like design. We give way too much credit to modern design (when did that happen), when it is actually string material that makes most difference.

That said....there were bows that performed better as far as outright speed, etc., goes. I will say that the Super K is one of the easiest bows to shoot accurately in the field....perhaps because old Owen Jeffery had a big hand in the trimmed down design of the Supers. Call it what you will, they are extremely classy looking and, in the field, point and shoot as good as any bow ever made. Just my opinion of course.

I am with you George the string does make a big difference and not all Bears are identicle in performance, but I love the Bear bows, here a nice photo of my old Bears.

When I was just starting out bowhunting in 1962, I still remember the most experienced archers I knew, and they were in the game for many years, said the Bear Bows were good but not the fastest. Many shot thr Root Bows as I remember. I had a Root back then, but not too intersted in speed as I was just learning.

well to kind of some it all up.Bear bows the best shooters ? maybe.The best lookers ? maybe....but they were not cheap back in the day is why lots of guys did not shoot them they could not afford a Bear and had to settle for a lesser priced bow bd

What Bowdoc said. In 1961 you could buy a Kodiak for about $79.00; however, the average wage here in rural Pa. was about $50.00 a week, and that wasn't take home pay. You could buy a Root or Shakespeare for about half that price.

Manybows-where did you get the strikeplates for the 67 and 68 SKs?

I have a 38# SK that was given to me by a compound shooter. I have enjoyed shooting it the few times that I have decided to grab it from the rack. I think it is a very pretty bow and at 58 inches it is still a very smooth drawing bow that at 38# is a pleasure to shoot all day long at 3D targets.

However, I am not a speed buff. With 28" carbon 500-apine arrows I estimate this bow shoots between 160-170 fps, maybe less. 3D speed apecialists in my club like ther bows to shoot 190-200 fps or more so I realize that my SK is too slow for guys that like speed.

3D Speed specialists. Now that's funny right there, I don't care who you are 8^))))))))))).

The Super Kodiak is also a 60" AMO bow (A few were made 64" AMO), so it's not 58". And also, at 38#, 160/170 is more than respectable with dacron strings and that arrow. With a fastflight string that bow would be very fast....even for 3D speed specialists...whatever that is. LOL.

Greens,

You pulled that thought right out of my head! I think a good analogy would be the pre-64 Winchester 94s and Model 70 rifles - both over-the-counter products for the everyday man, but are nonetheless very collectible and highly desired (and expensive) - and for the exact same reason you previously stated.

those look like some kind of black and white calfhair strikeplates? Is lamont working I thought he was ill?I'd like to get some.

I shoot target archery in the winter in pa.I have owned and shot many vintage bows over the past 50 years. I even have a couple ilf bows for target shooting.Ford ,chevy dodge,it is a personal thing.BUT opinions are like you know what ,and everybody has one.SO HERE I GO.I like the the 60,s bear kodiaks,along with the red wing hunters,and damon howatt hunters and coronados.I shoot them all equally well.Find out which bow fits you, shoots with good speed, tunes well and shoots best for you.Bear 1960,s kodiaks will shoot with the best of them.

I love the the Vintage SK's. Might not be the fastest, but they are very smooth. They scream vintage traditional archery. The Kodiak Hunter is also a great buy. Not crazy about the new bears. I had bad luck with a couple. I would recommend a vintage Kodiak or SK. 59-76. Good luck.

I had a chance shoot a SK (64”) last summer. It was ok. Liked it well enough. I don’t think it shot any “ better” ( smoothness of draw, speed, etc) than a 1967 Bear Tigercat I used to own ( sold it). The Sper K didn’t wow me, but it didn’t turn me off ( I draw 29.5+”).

The Super K definitely was outclassed by my 1962 66” 41# Bear Polar. The Polar was smoother, faster and had some “wow factor” to it. ( the 1962 Bear Polar was built on the forms used for the Bear 1961 Kodiak Special). My 1959 Kodiak Special was about as fast as the Super K, but my KS just plunks them where youlook, and is butter smooth.

Now, for non-Bear bows, I’ll take my Wing Archery Gull (1967, 64”) in a heartbeat over the SuperK. The Gull (43#@28”, and about 47#@my draw length) is QUICK, and SMOOTH. That’s my choice in this horse race about a wooden vintage bow.

The shortness bow I’ve shot is the Wing Red Wing Hunter ( 1967, 47#). Smooth draw to 29.5”+, and quick.

Would I buy a Bear Super Kodiak? Not at this point. The bows I have meet my needs, and my test drive of a Super K was a shoulder shrug. That’s not bad, it’s just not enough to motivate a purchase.

Some may not like the following statement, but I’ll take my 64” Samick Journey ( or the Spyder XL with it’s slightly smaller grip) over the Bear Super Kodiak...which is what I did.

But, I’m not a Super Kodiak opponent, but I would take one if someone willed it to me.

Like the Kodiak hunter and the martins,never shot a S.K.Maybe some day I'll have an opportunity too.

"But I keep seeing all these Super K's and folks sayin how great they are. I havent shot one so I courious as to what you guys and gals think. What makes them so much better?"

I don't know what you compare to, but I will tell you why my '76 SK is a very good bow: - it has a very good size sight window for a 60" bow - it is light and yet it has presence in the hand - it has a slim medium wrist grip - #57@28" it shoots a 540gr with 174fps using Dacron which is above average for bows made 50 years ago. - it points naturally (I did my best PR 269/300 NFAA round with a wood bow shooting of the shelf split fingers) and is very stable for me.

Is this SK a SUPER BOW? No.

The love the grip on my Super Kodiak. So far I have liked the grips on all the Bear recurves I have shot

I had a 1969 SK that was 50#.

It was my first bow and I took my first deer with it.

I then bought a Howatt Mamba and rarely shot the SK after that.

The SK was stable due to the weight and I could shoot good groups but it was quite slow and heavy to cart around, especially with a bow quiver. I could shoot just as accurately with the Mamba.

I tried all sorts of arrow combinations but still had mediocre performance.

I eventually sold the SK.

So if someone asked me " What made it special?" my answer would be, based on my first hand experience... " Not much."

Other than the flying splinters, comparable Heters bows were better than the Howatts or the Bears.

SK's are great because that's what Fred shot. He wouldn't have shot it if it wasn't a great bow...

Right?

Did anyone mention that the super Ks are very sexy looking? Especially the 67-69 models. Great curves! They also have a symmetry and balance of design that no doubt helps make them stable shooters. But it think it's the looks that people love. Those bows could easily be in a museum of modern art along with other artistically designed objects.

Whether a bow is a great shooter or not depends on how it fits you. For my hand, I can pick up a 1961 or 62 Kodiak Special or Polar and shoot it well... even with the first arrow. They are pretty fast also but speed is not nearly as important as consistent accuracy. Find the bow that fits you just right without having to think about how you're holding it and you'll have the best point and shoot bow made.

Idk I’ve never understood the bear thing. I’ve never shot one that shoots better than what I’ve got. On most of em the shelf is too high too. Think it’s nostalgia that’s got ya

I like them, but don't have one anymore. Good shooters

I have a 1966 kodiak with a low stretch string it is much faster than a lot of customs I have had. It isn't the best in any category but it is very well rounded.

I have an '06 Super Kodiak that's one of the two smoothest bows I've shot (the other is a Herter's Perfection Mag) and it shoots great but, with my short draw, I just don't get the performance I feel I should get from it. I'll probably catch some flak over that statement but it's my opinion. If my friend doesn't come up with the money next month it will be for sale.

Starting in 1967, the Super Kodiak was slimmed down with the help of Owen Jeffery, and made more comfortable in the hand in my opinion. As for performance, you hear a lot of stories, but if you compare to like designs, they are just as potent as any of that ilk. As for shootability, unlike pdiddly, I can't shoot those Howatt Mambas worth a hoot, so I wouldn't trade a Super Kodiak for one or even two. It's all about fit and comfort, and get that performance thing out of your noggin. Nothing on earth that a Super Kodiak won't kill, when in the right hands. I think Blacky Swartz showed they were only a few fps behind the Black Widow, so don't understand this 'poor performer' mindset. It ain't so.

I shot a Kodiak Mag Takedown in the 70's, went to compounds in the 80's and a few years ago went back to the takedown. Last year I bought a Super Kodiak. For me, the SK is so much easier to shoot well, that I sold the Takedown. I think that is the reason the most folks like their Super Kodiak's, they are good shooters.

Try a Super Kodiak. If you like the KMag you’ll love the SuperK. Not the fastest bow ever made by a long shot, but they are easy to shoot well and easy on the eyes. Take a look at the profile of a Super K, a Bear TD, a Custom Bighorn, a Pittsley Predator. You’ll find they are all very similar. All good bows.

" I will say that the Super K is one of the easiest bows to shoot accurately in the field....perhaps because old Owen Jeffery had a big hand in the trimmed down design of the Supers. Call it what you will, they are extremely classy looking and, in the field, point and shoot as good as any bow ever made. Just my opinion of course."

Yep :^)

This thread has a lot of posts. I usually don’t click on Bear threads but I did. I read as far as Vipers post and he’s dead on. Their good not by any means great. Certainly you can shoot whatever you like and you can take my share of Bear as well. Just not my thing

Bowguy...agreed...took my first deer with a 1969 Super Kodiak

Then I got a Howatt Mamba and realized what an under-performer the SK was.

I could shoot well with the SK...came as no surprise given the weight of it but it was no barn-burner and a PITA to carry around.

Traded it...

My SK does not under perform any of the customs I have owned over the years. Shoots as good as any recurve I have owned.

The 1962 Kodiak Magnum, with its simple handle forward, short fat limbs, cool looking design, excellent and comfortable feeling grip, and dark fine grain Brazilian rosewood riser which had some good riser weight, in my opinion, is the best looking short recurve bow ever produced. Mine was real easy to pull to anchor when I first started shooting and the draw weight was over 40 percent of my body weight. It was an easy bow to learn how to shoot with as well, or to take down ravines or up into trees. Got more complements on how good that '62 Magnum looked than I ever did my '63 Tamerlane, which also had good rosewood in it. Always had bows I could be proud to sit on the porch with.

Heard about the stacking but my Kodiak Magnum was smooth as butter, especially compared to some Ben Pearsons, Gorlys, and even a few black painted risered Black Widows, and other bows I saw and handled in the early sixties. Smoothest short bow I ever shot. However, do have a plain jane Head Ski Red Wing Hunter now which spits out arrows as well as the Kodiak Magnum did, and maybe even faster, but its plum ugly and doesn't have the heavier rosewood riser compared to the '62 Magnum. Sure don't need another Magnum now, as my bow rack is full, and my Hunter will be even better 'cause I don't have to worry about getting it scratched. But, the '62 Magnum was the best short recurve bow ever made...… bar none (best looking too).

I can not believe the Take down has not been put into this thread....

Need side by side pics! That show up!

I read this thread last night after spending some time on my range with my 50# Super K and some 2114's.

I agree with George, they are excellent shooting bows.

Isn't it great to have choices. Performance seems to be thought of here as just speed. Another bow is faster so it must be better. So be it.

To me performance is a multifaceted term, and that includes just plain comfort, speed, control and ease of shooting. I'll take a Super K in those areas and I sure won't be taking a back seat when it comes to game-getting or flat out accurate shooting.

owned bw customs bob lee customs longbows, bear takedowns metal and wood had been Kodiak hunter till I final got another older sk just fits my hand, shoots where I point, it just works for me and that is all we can ask dr

I,too, just shooting my '62 SK. Man that zings an arrow right with some of my customs. I think I'll always have a '62 in the stable. Very underrated.

They are pretty and have been a popular work horse over time.Super rocket speeds they are not noted for.My wife has Sabo hunter that gets 200 + fps but how does that work?I am not too sure but the limb design is different quite a bit.It was never bought for speed just to up grade my wife with a bit with a better bow.Just one of those gems out there and more obscure makers produced better bows than a Bear at various times. .I still love my old York tracker slow but strong and reliable.My best suggestion is to try out the Sk 's and see if you like it.After all it needs to give you pleasure and not others.I agree with Viper OSR

IMHO, performance in a bow has to strongly factor in speed which equals better cast. If I can achieve the same or better accuracy with a bow with better cast the slower one drops down the list as a keeper.

My SK was the much sought after phenolic 1969 model...it was made like a bowling ball and felt like a bowling ball when I toted it over hill and dale still hunting.

That was one of my biggest objection...the sheer weight, made worse with the addition of a bow quiver.

I would buy one but I haven't found a Gainsville made SK yet that had a decent grip. The shelf is WAY too high, throat is WAY too skinny. It can be done without costing one dime more.

Saying the grip is made for the average hand is bull.

It looks like not all SK are equal. My '76 has the grip as good as my DH Mamba. These 2 bows are my favourites.

I was going to say the same thing in a bit different way.

I love my Kodiak Magnum which is a a 1962 model. I have had other KM bows but I they are not quite the same.

I have had 3 different Super Kodiaks yet the only one I have kept is my Black Beauty. I like that particular one because I simply shoot it well, probably because of the high mass of the phenolic.

I have never shot a Kodiak Magnum very well or consistently which I why I regard them as a short range moose bow.

Conversely I would probably take the right shot at a deer with the SK at longer range than any other bow I own.

DDave

The Super Kodiak is just a straight up good all around bow

I also love the 1976 Blue line SK. My go to bow. (old Blue)

I love them them all.Kodiaks, and sk's I am trying to get one of each year. minus the copy years. 4 more to go.

When I grow up I want to be able to shot one like Jeffers can!

What makes Super Kodiak so good ? Well for me I like the way they look. I like the way the grip feels. And I like the way they shoot for me. :)

My hunting rig for this year.

1972 Bear Super Kodiak ( factory camouflage ).

55#@28"

Bear single spring arm converta quiver.

Cedar arrows.

Nice rig, Frank

Thanks Ken

This year at Denton Hill i noticed a lot of guys with kodiaks ,and super kodiaks in their hands.Their were also a lot of them for sale by vendors. Met one older fellow who had a 64 kodiak, and was really proud of it.I have the same bow. Like it or not they were, and still are very popular, and also have good resale value, and point, and shoot well.

If you have already registered, please

sign in now

For new registrations

Click Here