Has anyone else noticed the change in Martin Hunter risers over the years?

The picture shows my 1993 vintage Hunter, which I bought new in 1993.

This differs from the current version.

Sometime in the mid 90's there was a subtle change, and then the newer ones were more streamlined as opposed to the older models. I don't think it was anything other than riser shape.

Yeah

I think its just the riser that changed.

It seems to me that they looked like my 1993 in the 1970's but I wouldn't argue that point, that was a long time ago and I scarcely remember last Tuesday.

For general interest, here's a draw curve I made for this bow.

It is marked 41# @ 28" but I measure 43 @ 28"

I have a 30" draw

Howatt seems to have a reputation for being a bit heavier than marked, although Mr. Hatfield will come on here and vigorously dispute that (my Howatt Hunter, a late 70s era 58" version), measures spot-on with my scale. Oh well - I have a 1969 Bear Super Kodiak that's marked 45 lb, but actually scales at 53 lb (and it says "53" under the strike plate!!!!).

I don't think Larry would dispute that; the general going advice for buying (pre-Martin) Howatts was "Buy what's marked 5# lower than the actual poundage you want. If you wanted 45#, buy one marked 40#...more often than not, it'd be 45#

Post 2007 Martin Hunters were always around the marked weight, in my experience. Seemed to stack less, too

Hmm.... I did not know that. Did Larry actually dispute that the Hunters were marked incorrectly? Or, did he say, "if you think you want a 45 lb bow, get a 40 lb bow....". I always got the impression that he insisted that the bows were marked accurately according to AMO standards.... now I want to go home and measure my two Howatts....

Kent, interesting that you feel the post 2007 bows don't stack as much - my 58" Howatt Hunter is the stack-o-matic, really unshootable for me at my 30" draw. My mid-70s vintage Howatt Hunter, 62", not too bad at all, but I get the impression that 30" is really the limit of this bow.

I didn't mean Larry Hatfield said that; heard others say that advice about buying old Howatts

All my Hunters were 62; older Howatts stacked for me...newer ones felt smoother to me

If you have a Howatt bow with the little curlyQ lines, it was marked 3# lighter than the actual weight because people weighing the bows at home typically weighed the bow also and drew longer than the AMO standard. We never ever marked a bow heavy for any reason. Last time I'm going to try to set that BS straight. Sure, there were cases when the tags got mixed in finish and bow weights were placed wrong on two bows, but we worked on a within 1# standard.

I have about half a notion that my #55 is marked a little bit lighter than it really is, but I’ve only weighed it once. Don’t really care, though - we go way back now. Still owe it an Elk ;)

Larry

" people weighing the bows at home typically weighed the bow also and drew longer than the AMO standard."

Yes, the error was all mine.

I checked out a draw weight measuring chart and re-did the weight check following the chart closely and it came out at exactly 41#

My Hunter has the thin laminations in the riser, which I hope show up in the photo. I have read the laminations are maple but I'd be interested to confirm that.

I am the original owner, it has been stored properly, never dty fired, strung with a stringer etc. and is like new, I am planning on making sure I get some more use out of it.

Yeahhhhhh I've measured tons of Howat and Martin bows and if you actually use the moving the string 26.25" from the deepest part of the grip measurement which is AMO standard, they are typically within a pound.

Yeah, this one is bang on by the proper measurement.

I have a question for anyone out there who has seem, or owns a Hunter made in 2017 or 2018, how do they think it compares to this 1993 version, or the older bows as far as shooting goes?

I have seen a few and they looked good but I did not have the opportunity to try one.

My bow id a Dacron-only proposition, which is fine, it is a nice "shooter" and does not seem to stack at my 30" draw.

I have 20 Howatt's and have owned another eight. They range in age from 1953-2007.

The draw weights were all accurate when measured properly, accounting for the weight of the bow.

Yamaha YG68...the riser is maple laminations. What is the first number in the serial number? It looks like a 2 but the picture is fuzzy.

fdp: "if you actually use the moving the string 26.25" from the deepest part of the grip measurement which is AMO standard"

I wonder----could that be the reason why there were so many misperceptions about (older)Howatt poundages? Maybe many thought they should have been using the 28" and not using the 26.25" AMO standard?

"What is the first number in the serial number? It looks like a 2 but the picture is fuzzy."

The full number is 22871

Owned 14 Howatts over 38 years.. all within a lb of marked.. my 92 Hunter I huny with now is bang on 65.lb...

My younger brother, and I have owned 4 Hunters, a Balboa, and a Bandido, that are all marked correctly, and still hold their own with the best of them.

Thanks Yamaha...it was actually made in 1992. They made that riser layup from 1985- 1994. I had one and they, like all Hunters, were a nice bow.

Where in Ontario are you located?

"it was actually made in 1992"

Thanks for the memory reset, I thought I ordered it in 1993 but that was 25 years ago and I can't recall what happened 2 days ago ;)

I must have ordered it in 1992 because I ordered it through the Archers Nook in London Ontario when I lived there, it was old stock because I ordered the 41# and they made it for me.

I am in the Niagara Region and am a member at the Niagara Falls Archery Club.

Another point to consider in measuring draw weight, are you deleting the mass of the bow if you are hanging the bow while measuring? If you hang your bow on the scale, it is already measuring 2#-3# before you are even starting to draw the bow. If you are measuring by pulling up on the bow, or using a fixture to hold the bow while the draw measurement is made, the measurement should be accurate.

You don’t have to figure the physical wt of the bow. When it’s hanging on the scale, the bows wt is just starting the draw cycle. In other words, if the bow weighs 2 lbs you only have to pull down with 48 lbs of force to get a 50lb bow to 28 inches.

MP

Kent I've always suspected that was the case.

I believe the slimmer riser started in 1997. I own serial number HH7188, it has the newer style thinner riser, reinforced limb tips, brown glass and a purple accent stripe maybe purpleheart?

Prior to this was the full purpleheart riser for 95-96

85-94 maple laminated riser

Other information I've been able to find is 58" Hunters were available for a few years only late 70s to early 80s after production of the Hi Speed stopped and before the introduction of the Mamba. The 58" Hunter is not just a renamed Hi Speed, I have HH0001 and HS31788 and the risers are distinctly different, the Hunter being chunkier in the riser below the grip. Also my Hi Speed has the curved stripe, I think this was only for a few years in the early 70s?

jonnyboyws6

Your 58" Hunter is a 1980 and your Hi-Speed is a 1973...the curved stripe was made from 1972 until 1974 with a couple of hundred in 1975. I posted a pic of one of mine.

That's why the risers are so different-they were different designs. The 1972-1975 Hunters has identical risers to the Hi-Speed.

They discontinued the Hi-Speed in the mid-70's and, as you said, I think the 58" Hunter was intended to fill that niche until the Mamba debuted in 1985.

The purpleheart Hunter was only made in 1995. I have never seen a 1996...that's when the "slimmer riser" bow you describe first appeared.

I will tell you one thing about the Hunter's. The limb profile was always consistent, despite the riser changes.

Attached is a picture of a 1992 beside a 1960 Hunter.

Same profile...in 1961 the laminations became double tapered and were up to 2011.

If it isn't broken, don't fix it.

If you have already registered, please

sign in now

For new registrations

Click Here