Having some warm and windy weather, so hunting not happening today. Thought I would get some opinions on hill style bow shooting accuracy. I have found that I can pickup a random unknown hill style bow and shoot it with decent accuracy more so than a recurve or hybrid design bow. I personally believe for me that the arrow is closer to the eye because they are usually not centershot and with a straight grip, the hand can be moved to the point where the hand is nearly touching the arrow. I also believe that the longer length helps on shots where I am not aligned properly. I shoot hybrids also but find that my accuracy is dependent on having to take more time at full draw getting all my mechanics in order before releasing. With an asl I shoot much quicker, more like snap shooting. Not on purpose, just seems to work. Any of you believe that centershot and past centershot requires more practice to get used to? I realize that centershot certainly accepts a broader array of spine options but it also moves the arrow shaft farther from the eye. I'm sure that most fall into the centershot category and I appreciate centershot shelfs but they always make me shoot right if I don't have a decent practice session. How about yall?

One of the bows I shot best instinctively was my 1982 Bear Custom Kodiak. That thing was crazy good at hitting where I was looking with seemingly little effort from me. If I was to have just one nowadays, it would likely be that same bow or a newer model like it. A bow has to fit you well, and you have to enjoy shooting it.

I can't shoot those Hill style bows well without a lot of practice myself. By the time I am fairly accurate, my elbow is throbbing from pain.

Shot Hill bows for years and while I got pretty okay with them, when I started shooting recurves improvements in accuracy were immediate.

I’ve said before there is a reason they have a separate class for longbows and it’s not they are outshooting recurves. Having said that I shoot my short hybrids quite well.

I've shot Hill styles for over 40 years and shoot them pretty well simply because they fit and it's what my mind and body are conditioned to shoot. I shoot all bow styles but my best shooting is usually done with a Hill style simply because it fits.

This year, I have been getting back into bow shooting and bowhunting after a couple or three years off. Before I shot and hunted with a Martin Hatfield Takedown recurve for several years and killed deer with it, but that bow finally become too heavy for me. Now I have been experimenting with both longbows and recurves of lower poundage then the old 60# Martin. I thought I could shoot the Martin pretty good back in the day. And I am just now starting to get most of accuracy back, but still struggling.

Some days I think I shoot my Norther Mist Ramier better and somedays it's my Black Widow recurve. But to be honest, I think I shoot my Bear K Mag better than either one. But overall, I think I just shoot recurves better, but maybe I really haven't given the Longbow it's due. And the other funny thing is the K mag doesn't seem to be very picky at all on arrows. But I haven't bare arrow tuned it yet, but anything I have with fletching on it, seems to fly pretty good out of it.

So, I just don't really get it! I have always read how short bows are supposed to be harder to shoot well, etc. It has a deeper (higher grip), than any of my others. Maybe it fits me better, I don't know. More experimentation and practice are needed, I guess.

Not sure what you mean by center shot moving the arrow farther from the eye.

"Not sure what you mean by center shot moving the arrow farther from the eye.".....me either.....

Cut to center (center shot) means that the arrow shelf is cut to the center of the riser.

I shoot the Hill style bows the best. The long string angle is more forgiving of my finger errors, the thick limbs are hard to pull out of alignment, they are just more forgiving for me especially under hunting when my stance and angle to the quarry isn't perfect. I find recurves and shorter bows more sensitive.

"I’ve said before there is a reason they have a separate class for longbows and it’s not they are outshooting recurves."

Doesn't that come with wooden arrows?

The thing with Hills is that they are frozen in a particular format. It isn't credible that if you take a bow that is X, and then put it up against every other bow option and improvement that exists within the single string world, that X is going to be a winner.

I don't know exactly what Hill claimed, but what I heard was him claiming that his limb format was more forgiving. I mean, is it credible that not using a metal riser, not having any choice in grip, not having any centershot, means of mounting sights due to lack of window, etc... is going to be a winner? Hill made more bows and arrows, and innovations in gear, than most on this board, was he that stupid?

--------------------------------

Now if you are down to the limbs, I would make two contentions. I think it is perfectly credible that his limbs are more forgiving than other designs, and I would also say that nobody has proven otherwise, or really even has the means to prove it.

A basic factor in modern day archery is that we have no way of even measuring accuracy. Most rifle, even pistol reviews will have and MOA claim, or a 25yd claim. I have never seen that in any magazine in archery in over 50 years.

To claim a bow is more forgiving is to in addition have a claim attached to the accuracy potential that the bow is more accurate when human factors are added. You can look at it two ways, it is completely impossible to prove, and that it is so individual that when Hill said it, it applied only to him.

----------------------------------

With something like FITA, the bows are so crap at forgiveness, they have to have about 5 sets of training wheels attached to them in the form of sights, rests, grip, forward and other stabilizers and clickers. Whatever that may be, it doesn't show any confidence that the bow is fundamentally stable or forgiving.

------------------------------------

And then there is the question of how many points there are in forgiveness. Suspension systems on vehicles are what I Would call forgiving, and the effect is massive. Almost all the points on something like a car or bicycle. So is that what we have with bows, or is the total value of forgiveness on modern day bows, .001% of your score. So then we are talking about something Tiger Woods might be aware of with his preferred driver or putter, not something that means diddly to the average golfer.

I just like an ASL best, most fun to shoot for me. I also like shooting my various receives and selfbows, but the ASL is my favorite

"Most rifle, even pistol reviews will have and MOA claim, or a 25yd claim. I have never seen that in any magazine in archery in over 50 years."........all a marketing department would have to do is to have the R&D folks put the bow in a Hooter Shooter and touch off a series of groups at a given distance. Same thing. A rifle may have the POTENTIAL to shoot a particular size group at 100 yards but that doesn't mean that Tom has the ABILITY to shoot that group.

When Hill said the longbows were more forgiving, easy on the draw, more stable, etc. for hunting when one doesn't have the time to get set up for a perfect shot. He meant in hunting situations that were caused by stillhunting and stalking. Not sitting in a blind or tree. He gives examples of shooting grouse in a tree and all the body positions needed to get off the shot, and also talks about running game or shooting in varied body positions and still getting one accurate shot off. He compared that to target shooting where you are standing at a line, taking your time, shooting with good form, etc. He said in those conditions, the recurve was a better bow.

So nowadays when people can take the time needed for a shot because they set up the correct distance, the correct angle and such of the treestand or blind, and only shoot when the animal is in the perfect position, they are imitating the situation that is prevalent on the target shooting line. They can take the time needed or pass up the shot. They have the time to make sure the hand is gripping the bow right, their fingers are placed perfectly on the string for their fixed crawl, they go through the steps of proper form and back tension and pull through release and on and on. That is the target shooting mentality that Hill addressed.

For hunting Hill stressed the need to be adaptive to moving targets, quick shots, no warmup, no proper form/body position, possible bad/quick release, taking the shot presented at the moment and not waiting..and so forth. That was bowhunting mentality per Hill.

Todays hunting mentality is to take the target approach to the woods and make it work by proper set-up or pass up the shot. That's why a lot of today's hunting archers are really treestand whitetail hunting archers. Get them out of the tree or out of the blind and hunt western game, or Alaskan game, or small game and/or birds or really anything while on their feet and they can't make the shots that the old timers proved was possible with the Longbow or Recurve (in the case of Fred Bear, Pearson and others).

Hi Silentstik, to answer your original question, I haven't thought about it but I think you're on to something...assuming I understand you correctly. It sounds like you're talking about relative accuracy (pointability), not absolute accuracy. With a Hill style bow, your hand is laterally closer to the arrow, which means when you draw and align to a target, the arrow is naturally closer to aligning with your eye (laterally speaking) as you don't have to compensate for the centershot or grip offset of a typical recurve. That's probably why Cravotta created their offset risers which laterally move your hand close to centershot.

Nate, while I’m not a big ASL fan I agree that most are not prepared to make quick shots and when pressured to do so choke an blow the shot. Mainly because they don’t practice that way especially at 3-D shoots and other target events.

Bowlim, did'nt mean to get you in an uproar. As for shooting 3d, I do okay with all my bows, but nothing really great. I'm first and foremost a hunter and practice practical hunting shots that you actually find yourself facing while hunting. Such as fast shots where holding and getting everything perfect cannot be done. 3d shoots offer some sembelance to hunting situations but are a far cry from the real thing. I have shot with some real bonafide shooters/hunters. One thing that was said that makes perfect sense is you have target bows and hunting bows and they are usually not good at both. Sunsethill said it best in his reply. Deer in my neck of the woods don't pose for optimal shot opportunities. Unorthodox shots are to be expected and are the norm. Not reaching full draw due to severe angle, yep, happened a month ago. I don't own a bow that I can't hunt with. My hunting may be different from others. I enjoy shooting 3d but my methods for practice are not just standing and shooting. I shoot lying on my side and a myriad of positions that most people would find too uncomfortable or not practical. Some bows work for hunting this way and some flat don't. Forgiveness due to not being perfectly alined is a paramount quality of some bows and the downfall of some. Thats my opinion and you may find something else works better. As for why they seperate classes, some of the contraptions called traditional bows requires a seperation. I can say the best shooters recorded in history shot longbows, the likes of the Wilhelm brothers, Howard Hill, Byron Ferguson, and thats only a few. Why is that?

Todd, correct. But that idea of hunting was how most everyone hunted back then, whether longbow or recurve or Pearson semi-recurve. Ol Ben, Bear, Hill and a slew of hunters did it that way and we're successful, it's just that they practiced with their chosen equipment.

Interesting to note: Pearson, Bear and Hill were high level target shooters in their day but didn't take that form to the woods to hunt. Their hunting form was fluid, fast, and they shot game as they found it, not setting up the hunt scenario to fit their form as is the case today

Thanks Sunset and Bowlim for the critical perception, helps me remember that the bow is about 2% of the hunting equation, although a 2% that cannot be overlooked.

My Howard Hill Big 5 is the most fun to shoot bow I own.

I don’t understand the idea that certain styles of shooting leave people unable to hunt Alaska , out West or quick shots on small game ? Imho that has little to do with equipment choice or shooting style ‘.

South Cox , Dougherty, Denny Sturgis, Yien , Snyder, Randy Cooling , Larry D Jones , Rik Hinton to name a few seem to all have a straight arm , vertical bow style of shooting , some of them shooting 3under . They all seem to do okay lol.

I watched Rod Jenkins shoot at rabbits about as good as anyone I’ve ever seen . Straight up bow , 3under … he was crazy accurate and uncannily fast on these fast moving critters

Intention has far more to do with success afield than shooting style or equipment .

Concentration of game and where you hunt has the most to do with success. You can be skilled and have great intentions, but if the game is not there your still going home empty doesn't matter what you carry if your not shooting it.

It's funny how some people will continue to denounce target shooters, who may be great hunters as well, as unable to hunt in the woods with their style. Steve Gorr comes to mind pretty quickly as a top notch target shooter, and an equally top notch bowhunter. Doug Chase is another. May also add Paul Shafer to that list as well, a guy who used plastic vanes and a flipper rest and pretty much a vertical bow style.

Ann Clark was another one, a lady who got into archery to be with her husband then went on to win several National Championships as well as take many animals, and there are dozens of others of old and many still going. You can do anything with a recurve, or any other bow, that you can with what you call a Hill-style longbow. It's the archer, not the style.

Yea I’d say you would have to be a good target shot to be a good hunter. In other words, you have to be able to hit the animals you are hunting and that requires that you be good on targets

Howard won 196 Field Archery tournaments in a row.

Who denounced anyone? Who said good target shots can't be good hunters? Geeze. I was just pointing out because someone kills a lot of stuff, doesn't necessarily translate to "better" or more efficient. I know plenty of guys who only take broadside shots at 10 yards from a blind over bait in a managed area and kill a ton of stuff... are they better hunters? Not necessarily. Those guys listed above are mostly "industry guys" with more resources and opportunity than the average Joe. A hammer hits a nail better than a rock but both can get the job done. It is easier to swing and hit a flying duck with a shorter barreled shotgun, but a long barreled one is better for squirrels. I've killed both with both....is one type better suited? Skill of the archer and and what they are comfortable with plays a huge part in accuracy. I like simplicity and flexibility personally but others maybe not, but maybe the situations they use the tool in are different. We all do things harder or we would be shooting xbows or guns. The bow is 2% of the equation...yeah...I agree. I like having the option of being able to shoot a reverse cant. 3under guys may struggle to keep the arrow on the shelf there. Is it worth it to you? You need to decide.

I wasn't telling anyone that you can't take the target style of shooting into the woods, but the advantage of using the Hill style of bow and shooting method allowed for more flexibility per the hunting methods used when Hill was writing. I know Paul Shafer used a recurve, aluminums and vanes off an elevated rest...he also shot fluid, fast and instinctive like Fred Bear. His shot process was not a target style where everything was set up just so in order to get the shot. He could and did shoot running animals, he adapted to the shot situation. That's where I'm coming from. I'm good friends with and have hunted with Rik Hinton...that guy is a fantastic shot and is an elk killing machine amongst other success in the field. However, his shooting style is slower, more static and he does hold the bow at full draw. He could be using a compound just as well. So...he has to set up his shots in the field to accomodate his shooting style and that limits the flexibility of the system that Hill was promoting. I've also shot and hunted with Doug Chase...same type of shooting as Rik. Great shooter but deliberate setup.

This more deliberate target style shooting approach can be very good in the field where there are multiple days to hunt (Rik takes 30 days to hunt elk), lots of game opportunities and possibly lots of friends helping set up shots (like South Cox has on his video'd elk hunts). This hunting approach is from a deliberate standpoint. These guys aren't just going out, still hunting through the woods, taking the first available shot opportunity at an animal if the shot requires getting down on the knees, shooting with a horizontal bow through brush, or shooting a jogging deer as it goes by at 15 yards. They can't pull off those shots because of the way they approach shooting and that limits them. Then you start hearing the ethical attitude come out and they say you shouldn't shoot those shots. Well, if your shooting style was conducive to making those shots and you were well-practiced at them, then you can do it as you get those opportunities. That's what Hill was saying in his book

The thing I noticed about my Hill bow when I got it was Lbs for Lbs of draw weight it seemed "stiffer"( best word I can come up with) than my r/d bows or recurves. It's like with the narrow thick cross section limbs,it recovers from full draw faster upon release and the arrow speed is faster to my eye,like tension is prebuilt into the design. It's light in the hand,fun to shoot,easy on the eyes strung or unstrung, what's not to love about'em? I love mine.

Yea I set my shots up in the field by scouting and find out where the deer are and set up for him. No way am I good enough to go in these WV mtns and kick up a deer and shoot it on the run. I’m fact it is laughable. . I want to kill deer not run em off .

Yea I set my shots up in the field by scouting and find out where the deer are and set up for him. No way am I good enough to go in these WV mtns and kick up a deer and shoot it on the run. I’m fact it is laughable. . I want to kill deer not run em off .

Now Still hunting is laughable? I’ve killed 2 by sneaking up on them across the river in MD this year. The idea is to not have them see you or make them run off.

Now Still hunting is laughable? I’ve killed 2 by sneaking up on them across the river in MD this year. The idea is to not have them see you or make them run off.

The idea is to kill em. I just wait patiently. They will come. LOL I can not sneak up on these WV deer.

That's a good one "Bumper".

Maybe the real problem is that the frog is doing what comes natural but the bird keeps flapping and taking a dump on the frog for not trying to be a bird. Perhaps they each respectively just keep jumping/flying flying and agree that the two approaches just don't mix very well.

Are we done trying to herd the cats' opinions on Hill style vs. target style and which is better for the planet? The cats are winning and the litterbox stinks.

Nate Knows his longbows and all things related to Howard Hill and John Schulz and thanks for sharing Nate.

I have owned many bows, mostly target recurves. Not many Hill bows because I did not need many. Nowadays I mostly shoot a light Howard Hill bow mostly for the simple pleasure of the simple design. It is pleasant to carry in forest and field, quiet, easy and comfortable to shoot.

I used others in my competition years but there are times when I am so well bonded with my Hill bow that I know my shot will be uncannily accurate. It gives me more simple pleasure than any other. More of them have been made and sold than any other style, and many men have owned several or many,

You should get one. A man has to know. - lbg

I shoot swing draw in my own poor adaptation of the Hill and Schultz style and have ever since I was a little kid watching their films and trying to mimic their form. I own several Hill style bows, a r/d longbow and a couple recurves. Which one is my favorite depends on what day you ask me lol. I tend to think of my longbows and r/d longbow as more forgiving of faults in my releases at times, but other than that I can pretty much switch back and forth between any of the styles of bows I have without it screwing me up too bad. Nothing a couple rounds of practice can't make up for atleast. The important thing for me personally is that a bow has a smooth or "even" feeling draw force curve. Too much perceived weight on either the front or the back of the draw screws up my rhythm!

I shoot swing draw in my own poor adaptation of the Hill and Schultz style and have ever since I was a little kid watching their films and trying to mimic their form. I own several Hill style bows, a r/d longbow and a couple recurves. Which one is my favorite depends on what day you ask me lol. I tend to think of my longbows and r/d longbow as more forgiving of faults in my releases at times, but other than that I can pretty much switch back and forth between any of the styles of bows I have without it screwing me up too bad. Nothing a couple rounds of practice can't make up for atleast. The important thing for me personally is that a bow has a smooth or "even" feeling draw force curve. Too much perceived weight on either the front or the back of the draw screws up my rhythm!

well i sure am glad that i can choose which bow i want to hunt with without all the confusion.

i never have really thought i had to shoot my recurves or have to have that target stance while using them.

sometimes i match the bow to the conditions i'll be hunting. Tight quarters i might choose a 52" recurve.

spring gobblers maybe the same.

If i'm going light, just bow and quiver and stillhunting it will almost always be with a asbell type back quiver of my own design and a hill style longbow.

but....i often use longbows in a treestand, and i've used recurves on the ground, and i kinda do what i want to do, What was the question again?...ah yes...Hill style bows.....yea, wind is really howlin outside, leaves are quiet from recent rain...good day to grab a longbow and stillhunt.

yessir.

I think everyone should grab a back quiver full,of arrows , a straight longbow , a few mates and spend a day roving and stumping in the woods .

A. The best place and way to sort these dilemma’s

B. A great way to ensure that you are still breathing and happy. If you don’t have a big smile on your face by end of day , a few broken and bent arrows, some funny stories and an appreciation of using these wonderful bows at everything from 5 to 200 yards … well, best see your doctor . You may not actually be alive

….

" I can say the best shooters recorded in history shot longbows, the likes of the Wilhelm brothers, Howard Hill, Byron Ferguson, and thats only a few. Why is that?"

That's a broad statement. These guys were and are great at what they do or did but they are not the best shooters recorded in history.

BenMaher, right on buddy.

,,,,,,,,,,,,well, best see your Dr,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,ain't that truth.

All I know is that the more I shoot different bows, the more doubts I have about what is a forgiving bow, what is an accurate bow, etc. I have read about how much more forgiving a longbow is then a recurve for over 40 years, but I am not really convinced that there's any truth to it.

I think some of these famous bow shooters, trick shooters, etc. just had a lot of natural ability, and built upon it, by shooting the bow a hell of a lot, and could have done it with either style of bow. There is something about getting the arrow down close the hand if not actually on the hand, but on the hand or maybe a 1/4 to half inch above the hand, I find can be compensated for. But this extra forgiveness of the longbow vs. recurve is lost on me. But I keep trying to find it, and buying longbows, and recurves, etc.

But if there is such a thing as more or less forgiveness between bows, I think maybe I find more variations between different recurves, then between recurves vs. longbows in general.

And I wonder about grip styles of longbows. Is there really anything magical about the straight hill style grip vs the locator grip?

Howard shot mostly, I guess, the straight grip, and Feguson shoots more of a locator grip, I think. And Fred Bear, while I don't really think his shooting skills were in the same class, as Hill and Ferguson, but he still killed a lot of game, and made some amazing shots in the field while hunting with his various recurves and the recurve style grip. Bear still made some great shots on game, while under pressure, and collected some fine record animals. And admitted he was a self-taught snap shooter, but then again, I do remember he also won some target matches in his day.

And then of course, you have several later, barebow compound boys that have racked up amazing list of grand slam north American kills of big game. I only mentioned them because they still shot without sights. But would not the qualities of a so-called forgiving bow, still be important to them also?

I wish there was a clear winner, so I could sell all of my current bows and buy one.

I wish there was a clear winner, so I could sell all of my current bows and buy one.

Amen. Lots less clutter :)

Yep, and agonizing on which one to use.

The recurve is more forgiving for some people and the longbow I more forgiving for others.

It is amazing how many of you confuse yourself with some mythical being, but if you believe that so be it, I guess!

Bob

My comments were to explain what Hill was saying is a forgiving bow in the hunting arena he experienced, and how it applies in hunting situations we may or may not face today. If you never get out of a tree and can set up all your shots just so, then it really doesn't matter if you can shoot a bow that may be more forgiving in a contorted position on a running deer. So you have to take what applies to your needs or wants.

Hill also said that if an average shooter shot an average bow (the same bow) all his life, he would become an above average shot. Meaning...stick with a bow, learn it and don't change equipment and you'll end up being a better than average shot because of familiarity. But which traditional bowhunter nowadays wants to limit their shooting to one bow or one bow style? It's funny because other upper-tier sports people like golfers, or clay shooters or firearm target shooters are loathe to change tackle and set up new...even Oly quality archers don't change tackle much. Consistency breeds shooting accuracy...and yet some bowhunters change tackle multiple times during a season and wonder why they are searching for the right one? I dunno...

This was Bob Swinehart's take on the subject from "Sagittarius" chapter 9: Why does he use a straight-end bamboo longbow? Because it gets the job done in hunting situations better than any other design or bow material. Here are the specific 8 reasons given:

1). Long length means geometrically less deviation potential at distance. Less error in the trajectory of the arrow. More forgiveness in the release under hurried or unorthodox situations. A poor release may still kill the animal, whereas with a shorter bow the same error may prove a miss at 30 yards.

2). Strength and dependability. Tempered bamboo Straight ended longbows have 75% of the strength of the bow in the wood and only 25% in the fiberglass. Other models with hardwood cores and wide flat limbs are just the opposite, and fiberglass is easily fractured. So if a bow is nicked or dropped on a hunt it is more likely to fail completely if the glass if holding a majority of the weight. A similarly damaged longbow may survive as there is not as much stress on the glass.

3). Unorthodox shooting. Shooting from odd or awkward positions is easier with the longbow. The action and design of the longbow helps in these situations, and if similar shots are tried with a short recurve they would not work "Half as well".

4.) Quiet. The design of the bow makes for the quiests bow of any according to Bob. This important aspect when shooting at game is often overlooked by folks with "twangy" bowstrings. If there is any background noise or a slight breeze blowing his bow is hard to detect at 10 feet. His friend's recurve, "Wow, .....he alerts every animal within 100 yards". Bob did hunt with recurves from time to time.

5). Heavy Arrow. Longbows can accurately propel a heavy shaft much easier than a short bow or recurve.

6). Stringing. Easier to string without tools, especially heavy bows. While a recurve is more likely to be twisted or damaged upon stringing.

7). Carrying. the bow does not snag up on foliage like a recurve who's string lays over the curve of the bow.

and un-numbered #8. He can stuff 3 bows in one tube for transport, whereas only 1 recurve would fit.

I'm shooting a 68" string follow lately. It weighs 14 oz, the deep core limbs pull 30" and casts a cedar arrow just fine, stable consistent shooter, very quiet, strings easily and can be unstrung and doubles as a walking stick. What's not to like.

I do agree with the statement that hunters shooting the same bow shoot better. Guys just have to find the magical bow. I’ve done that myself but not anymore

They just fit me

And feel natural to shoot

Just seem to shoot better for me

longbows are definitely quieter to shoot, and don't hang up in brush much. And they are a lot easier to string without a bow stringer

I do like that about longbows.

I do practice awkward position shooting a lot with both longbow and recurve. And I have seen others do some pretty awkward position shooting with recurves. Some recurves work just fine for me, in that realm. However, I do think that is where the short recurves really shine for me.

I think that comment by Howard Hill on shooting just one bow makes a lot of sense, if a man can be satisfied shooting only one bow. But he has to actually shoot it and practice with it a lot, IMHO, or it's not going to matter much.

For me I shoot recurves/reflex-deflex bows a little better. I shoot Hill styles bows most of the time and I can't explain why but I have more fun shooting them.

i'm not sure if i can say one way or another, which i shoot better, recurve or longbow ? both pretty equal.

if i had to pick one though, i'd go with a longbow, not a crossbreed, or hybrid..but a longbow.

very light in the hand, i like that.

very quiet, i really like that...

point very well..like that.

puts the arrow right over my hand, at least the ones i build for myself.

very stable limbs, especially the heavier # longbows.

i actually shot my buck this year with a little 52" recurve, but now i'm back to carrying my longbow... I managed a buck and two doe so far wife says we could use more...guess we'll see.

I think just about any bow at deer killing range will work for different styles of shooting a bow. But for me, I notice with a mild longbow design, a flubbed release doesn't seem to effect my shot placement as much. I don't shoot with a methodical style but I try to be consistent with my form. That's just my personal observation and I'm referring to hunting a live animal getting off a shot from various positions. Lots of of folks have used recurves n longbows successfully fir hunting, guess it boils down to what you prefer.

It's all about what you are comfortable with, prefer, and stick with.

Stacey Groscup who was about as good as there ever was shot recurves (short ones) with unbelievable accuracy.

Fred Bear actually did shooting exhibitions for exhibit space with a recurve. And he was no slouch at it.

Ben Pearson, maybe one of the most under rated of archers used a recurve.

The Wilhelm brothers used all manner of designs.

Chris Brackett used a compound.

Bottom line is the string pulled is the difference.

If you want to shoot like those guys, you have to be willing to practice lime those guys.

I think my best method is a combination of swing draw and secondary aiming method. I do my best shooting by swinging my arrow to the target while also seeing my arrow in my secondary vision and releasing the instant I get to the spot I want to hit.

My worst shooting happens when I draw and hold for much longer then a second or two. But then again, if I have a bad day, and I am not shooting very well, and I seem all over the place, I remember to focus on my anchor somewhat and I do kind of aim my bow with my bow hand and secondary vision, by imagining that I am holding a pistol in my bow hand and the arrow is my gun barrel. Actually, this works really good for me, maybe because I shot pistol and revolver combat matches for many years.

Babysaph, of course there is no way you are going to sneak up on a WV deer and kill it. If you tell yourself something is impossible, then it will be. People told me that it was impossible to stalk whitetail In Wisconsin so I proved them wrong by killing a big doe in her bed at 5 yards. These are people who have lived and hunted there all of their lives and I’ve only hunted there a couple of years. The difference is, I grew up stalking deer and they grew up being told that it didn’t work. People would rather sit and let success come than go out and learn how to be successful the hard way. With the right determination and practice, anything can be possible.

They work fine all the time and stand up to all kinds of abuse. They are quiet and are very consistent even when we are not. They are killing machines period.

Kisatchie, I don’t believe bluesman claimed to be shooting an ASL. He was referring to longbow vs. recurve and a hunting situation that warranted quick Hill style shooting.

I believe when it comes to bows it's personal preference.

I like recurves, longbows, I owned and shot many styles and I think they all will do the job. My personal opinion,I like very mild reflex deflex and Hill style bows...not for any nostalgic reasons but over the 47 years I've shot bows, for me the Hill style n mild R/D bows are easier for me to hit what I'm looking at within deer killing range. For others, it may be the total opposite.

Any style bow will work if the individual is motivated to shoot that particular bow...and not all bows of the same style are created equal. I'm speaking in general.

Hey Ben, that's the best post I've read in some time. You hit the mark mate!

My experience mirrors yours TGbow.

I've gone thru the gamut of bows, completed the circle and am back with ASLs and mild R/D bows. All straight grips even my only, lonely one recurve..GN Ghost.

I never really gave it much thought till the other evening. I believe i tend to shoot more instinctively when using my Hill style bow.

I don't want to start a big longbow vs recurve war here because this isn't a bonified actual fact and i'm sure differs between individuals.

I would consider myself a gapper, however i have been shooting so long i just don't think about my gap usually.

But shooting my longbow, (Hill style) i find myself walking around the yard flinging arrows purely instinctively, without thinking about it, or realizing i'm even doing it.

I never really thought about it till the other night, but i think i shoot the two meaning recurve and longbow a little different without even realizing it.

Some of you that read this, especially the form fanatics, are going to over analyze that, that's to be expected, but quite frankly will not change the way i shoot.

I can take any bow, and literally shotgun barrel the arrow, and shoot pretty good, i can also just vaguely use the point, or maybe not even notice it at all.

I noticed the other evening that i tend to drift to the latter style with my longbow without even realizing it.

Not saying you can't shoot a recurve instinctively, not at all. Just relating my experience that all.

We often discuss form shot sequence etc...and it's all good stuff. But truthfully i never think about all that stuff, i just shoot my bows.

I'm not a guy that shoots exactly the same every time with robot precision.

I shoot all kinds of ways. I might swing draw one shot, and the next shot practice drawing like i often do when hunting and game is very close....very, very slowly, with my bow arm pointing toward my quarry, or i might shoot fast, and i like shooting at stuff in trees..lol

I might stand like i'm at the lancaster classic, or i might kneel, heck i've even shot my longbow, laying on my side..just for kicks.

I usually just roam around the yard shooting and almost never shoot more than one arrow from a spot.

I just realized i tend to shoot more instinctively with my longbow without even realizing it, it just seems to naturally start happening.

just me...you might differ entirely.

If you have already registered, please

sign in now

For new registrations

Click Here