Well, as I said when Thumper made his post about this time last year, I'd make up some low-stretch strings and do some comparisons. I've had some bows through my shop, my own builds, reworks, refinishes, etc so I pulled some date of bows that were as similar as I could.

Disclaimer: I shot all these arrows, around 150 shots for the testing. My standard speed range per set was 2 fps. On those I took the speed most common. On the sets that were greater than 2 fps. I took the average. Out of the entire shooting session, my need to average was only about 6 or 7 sets. I shoot a dynamic pull through release, no hold, but I touch anchor consistently as taught by John Schulz. The consistency shows in my speeds. Multiple times during the shooting I shot the same speeds 3 times in a row, but usually the speeds were the same 2 out of 3 with 1 fps spread. I was using the local archery shop chronograph, set up with it's own lighting system, not subject to variables. I shot from 2 feet in front of the device. I used a self-made Hill style glove with inserts. I draw a consistent 26 3/4"-27" max, and shot with my normal shot routine just as I would when shooting at an animal in the field. I did not hold at full draw whatsoever to make sure I was at a complete anchor, but relied on my muscle memory and repetition to get these consistent speed results. I wanted real life results, so this test is mine. I realize others' tests of longbow shooting may be vastly different from mine, or maybe not so much. That is, as always, up for debate and discussion, but I welcome anyone reading this to test their own Hill style longbows, bowyers included, and list them publicly as I have done here for the interest of those who'd like to see real life speed tests from guys who use their standard equipment.

The bows I build are string follow, deep core Hill style longbows. Deep core meaning that on a 50-55# bow, the limb depth is typically 5/8" at the end of the fadeout. Standard tip depths without inserts or overlays are typically 7/16"ish. There is two ways to build resiliency in a limb. Depth of limb core or built-in stress aka reflex. I prefer to build like the old time English longbow makers did, with deep-cored limbs tapered out to get the desired tiller. To add flavor to the test, I tested a couple of other bowyer's models, popular with the masses.

For a brief history lesson, I read back through old Longbow Digest issues. Most of the tests done on straight-end longbows back in those days either followed Hill's formula of 7 gr. per pound, or sometimes 8 gr. per pound. I finally found a couple of tests done by very respected bowyers that were closer to the bow weights I used. Back then most guys shot heavier bows than nowadays lol. Frank San Marco (yew Traditional longbow) and Ted Kramer (Hill Big 5). They used B-50 strings back in the day. The San Marco bow at 64# @ 28" shot a 7 gpp arrow at 179 fps. The Kramer Big 5 at 64# @ 28" shot a 7 gpp arrow at 180 fps. The reflex backsets were 1" and 1 5/8" respectively.

I bring this history up because back in the day, most guys shot cedar arrows out of these kinds of bows and a lot of these hardcore guys shot using Hill's formula of 7 gpp whether they realized it or not. Jake Powell, for example, a phenomenal hunter from CO. used a 65# Pete George longbow and arrows around 400 gr. with arrow speeds approaching 200 fps shot more elk than most guys will ever hunt, along with moose and the rest of CO's big game. His success showed what other's knew back then...they didn't need arrows of 10 gpp to shoot most animals or tame down a bow. After the Ashby studies and the interest in African game hunting and other things like the decline of cedar for arrow use, the available arrow materials became heavier and heavier, along with heavier heads to go with it.

I decided for my test to shoot the arrows I like to use. Around 9 gpp more or less is what I use for hunting. It's a nice weight, not too heavy or light, the gpp used by AMO for testing. It's always served me well and gave a consistent basis for this test. I used 4 different string materials, all flemish twist, all brace heights with 1/8" +- of 6". All bows tested were 66" nock to nock. No silencers were used. A couple of bows were not tested with the low stretch strings because they were customer bows, with very narrow tips between the grooves. In the case of the Schulz Trophy Hunter this was only 1/4" so I stayed wit B50 only on that bow and one other.

B50 18 strand (191.6 gr.) B50 16 strand (175.4 gr.) BCY 452X 20 strand (127 gr. just because I like the feel better this thick) and Fast Flight Plus 12 strand with padded loops (104.8 gr).

Here we go: :)

Schulz Trophy Hunter, 1/2" reflex, 57#@27" 484 gr (8.49 gpp) 166 fps with both 16 and 18 strand B50

Howard Hill Cheetah, 1/2" reflex, 55#@27", 484 gr (8.8 gpp) 168 fps B50 18 str. 169 fps B50 16 str. 170 fps 452X 173 fps FF+

Sunset Hill, 3/4" string follow, (stiffer tips) 50#@27", 455 gr. (8.43 gpp) 164 fps. 16 strand B50

Sunset Hill, 5/8" string follow, (softer tips) 52#@27" , 460 gr. (8.84 gpp) 165 fps B50 18 str. 166 fps B50 16 str. 169 fps 452X 170 fps FF+

Sunset Hill, 1" string follow (softer tips), 54#@27", 484 gr (8.96 gpp) 168 fps B50 18 str. 167 fps B50 16 str. 171 fps 452X 173 fps FF+

Sunset Hill, 3/4" string follow (stiffer tips) 56#@27", 504 gr (9gpp) 168 fps B50 18 str. 169 fps. B50 16 str. 170 fps. 452X 175 fps. FF+

Sunset Hill, 5/8" string follow, (stiffer tips) 58#@27", 520 gr (8.97 gpp) 170 fps B50 18 str. 170 fps B50 16 str. 170 fps 452X 175 fps FF+

So...Straight-end Hill style longbowmen...Draw your own conclusions, this thread is open for debate and sharing your experiences. I know each person's shooting form, release, bow arm recoil, equipment, etc can play a large part of their bow performance, arrow speed included. Certain bow limb designs work better for certain people. Some are more forgiving of certain things. One guys slow bow shooting 158 fps with a performance string can be shooting 168 fps with B50 in another's hands at a different time and using a different chronograph. When Thumper did his test last year, a 2" backset bow in his hands and shooting style didn't shoot as fast as a less reflexed limb bow of the same manufacturer and barely was faster than a heavy string follow bow. That shows how close actually and how subjective all this testing can be, and how careful we should weigh what goes out there as fact from certain testing sources. Once man's Mustang is another man's Pinto.

One thing I have noticed over the years and these tests confirmed it to me. The string weight of various materials doesn't do a whole lot for a thick limb Hill style bow. Maybe a flatter limb straight longbow, and most definitely a d/r or recurve bow they do help. The FF+ string was almost 1/2 the weight of the B50 18 strand and I only got a max 7 fps out of one bow. They both feel good at the shot, but the 12 strands need silencers. So then you're back to adding string weight and probably reducing the arrow speeds to a negligible difference. I like the lower hum of the B50 and I switched my personal bows to 18 strands when I noticed John Schulz shot 18 strands on his 40# all bamboo string follows. By this testing, not by watching arrows fly or by thinking "those arrows are hitting with authority"...but real testing, my arrow speeds only increased at the furthest range from heavy fat B50 to light FF+ an increase of 7 fps with the average at 5 fps. This tells me either the bows are being very efficient at this thick limb design and the variables of string material, stretch and weight aren't that great, or that the usual testing we see from guys is with the high performance bows where every little ounce of weight and smaller percentage of stretch can make a noticeable difference....I don't know.

Now the info is out there, for you all to debate. This is my findings. Why don't you post yours

Forgot to add, all bows were all bamboo and glass except the Hill Cheetah and the 58# which is bamboo, tempered hickory and glass.

Thanks for that info! (Especially on the cheetah)

Thank you Nathan for all your work. I'll just pull up a chair next to the fire and listen. It should be fun.

Very interesting and well put together. I am going to have to read this a couple of times, but it seems with all the variables in strings, the best you can get is about a three percent increase in speed with the bows and strings tested at the top end.

Thanks Nate, for adding some good data to our knowledge and discussions.

One other thing I forgot to add. The old Hill archery ad saying a bow should shoot 115 fps plus the weight of the bow was written back when most shot 7- 8 gpp arrows and backset bows....string follow glass bows were not even being produced. In today's world of 10-12 gpp that's not realistic to promote

This is a great post, Nate. Thank you. I'd be very interested in differences between 18- strand B50 and lesser strand Dacron. Craig Eakin once told me he puts 12 strand B50 on all HHA bows up to 55#. I'd been following that suggestion for a long while, until recently giving B-55 more of a go.

Great thread and I'll just listen! My 1st ever ASL is coming soon so I'm all ears! I appreciate your time and in depth report!

Thank you for posting these Nate. They are very respectable and finally someone who is not shooting 10 gpp from heavy-ish ASL!

Very interesting data.

Thank you for posting your results and putting all the extra work in to ensure as accurate of a result as possible.

-Bones

Great info Nate, the few times I have shot my straight limb longbow’s through the the chronograph they all shot from 160 to 170 fps with a 8 to 9 grain per pd arrow. With good arrow flight and and good sharp 2 blade it is capable of taking even the largest North American game in my experience.

Bravo Nate! That shows some trends consistent with my experience and tackle.

So the low stretch strings were both sk75 material?

Thanks Nate, very down to Earth results for the Hill thick limb bows, And I love them too.

Thanks Nate; your tests kind of mirror mine over the years. I do shoot a heavier arrow and 15 strands of B50, but we are within a few feet/secs.

Bob

Salute'

Back in 1989, I made a straight limb bow, 68" and about 58#, along with much help from a friend. Anyway, it shot 173 through a chronograph at the Pa. Bowhunter's Festival back then. Seems like a consistent pattern. Arrows were about 9-10 gpp.

Interesting, thanks for posting the results. I do always wonder about efficiency depending on draw length. For example 2 bows same weight but one is at 28, the other at 30. Would the same weight arrows shoot at the same speed? I am guessing the longer draw (same draw weight, same arrow weight) would be faster.

Great information Nate. Thanks for provided it. I am curious of any differences between B50 and B55 in a deep cored bow. Anyone have that info. I have always shot B50. Thanks

Judging by the results of the different strands of B50 and 452x being practically identical, in a deep core longbow there's probably not much difference.

There's a lot of straight limb bow designs that aren't deep cored. By that I mean probably 1/2" deep or less at the fadeouts. Those types of bow models that get tested are always with low stretch strings of various materials. This thread is to sorta challenge some guys who have their favorite straight end longbow to shoot with their preferred low stretch strings and compare to B50 or B55 and post the results. It's not like you can't handle the feel of the string for a few shots through the chrono lol.

When I shot all these arrows through all the different bows and different strings, there is noticeable feel difference between strings. And maybe because one feels softer or one feels stiffer or snappier the perception is a faster or slower arrow speed. The Chrono didn't lie, there's very little difference in these deep core bows built like they used to be built. Even back in the longbow heyday of the 80's the bows were deeper cored than most bows today.

I don't think the type of string or weight of the string makes much difference with a deep core Hill style bow. I do think it makes more difference in a flatter limb straight bow. I'd like to see someone post their results to that effect. Any takers?

I have a question about strings Nate. You mentioned the low stretch make some noise. That I can understand. Does it make the bow vibrate? I am trying not to use that word “hand shock “ so please bear with me. I hear conflicting reports about this subject. Does FF string lessen or enhance vibration or “hand shock “.? I would also like to thank you for posting your results here, those figures aren’t all that bad and not much difference between a LB and a regular recurve.

"I don't think the type of string or weight of the string makes much difference with a deep core Hill style bow. I do think it makes more difference in a flatter limb straight bow." Very interesting, indeed.

I switched mostly to low stretch strings, as much for their reduction of hand shock as perceived gains in speed. I'm not particularly bothered by hand shock and don't find it uncomfortable, but I think I feel less of it with low stretch strings. Of course, it may be all in my head. Did you detect any differences at the end of the shot between the two types of strings.

Most of the anecdotal tests posted here and elsewhere over the past several years touted larger speed gains of low stretch strings over dacron. Your results show the speed gain is pretty small (at least for deep cored Hill style bows).

After looking at your results, I'll definitely be giving Dacron a try again. Any guess as to how a 12- or 14-strand dacron would stack up against the 18- and 16-strand strings? They would be lighter (which doesn't seem to make much difference on the deep cored bows you tested). They may also stretch a bit more, which may or may not make a difference.

None of the bows I tested had any different feel of vibration or shock with the different strings and the low stretch strings didn't lessen any "thump" because there wasn't any to begin with. The FF+ had a quicker snap feel to it, but it also felt light and the 18 str b50 felt heavier but had almost the same quick snap feel to it.

Thanks much for the time and effort involved in doing this and posting your results.

Really appreciate fact/data/numbers based info especially when there is so little of it online!

Kudos for a job well done.

Very interesting. Thanks for doing the testing.

Chuck: "I am guessing the longer draw (same draw weight, same arrow weight) would be faster."

That is very definitely the case if comparing two identical bows with the same draw weight at those comparative draw lengths.

It is also true if the same bow is shot at those draw lengths with identical GPP.

It can be seen in the FDC curves.

Those are impressive speeds. And REALLY impressive consistency from shot to shot.

“The old Hill archery ad saying a bow should shoot 115 fps plus the weight of the bow was written back when most shot 7- 8 gpp arrows and backset bows...”

I think the only way to get those results is if you basically assume that all arrows weigh about the same. Same arrow, 5 more pounds, +5 fps…. Seems at least plausible.

Makes perfect sense that deep-core limbs would benefit less from a lighter string, because the string is a smaller fraction of the total load under acceleration, so the %change in load is relatively trivial. My Bamboo Viper is really a flatbow, and it’s fast in part because the limbs are very light relative to draw weight.

Also makes perfect sense that guys shooting higher poundage would be comfortable hunting at lower GPP - a 490 grain arrow is a 490 grain arrow whether you’re shooting #35@14GPP, #49@10GPP or #70@7, but the last will get there first, and with considerably more momentum. Works for Rick.

Well I ordered my Hill Cheetah with a dacron string at Craig's recommendation. After this thread I'm even more glad I did! I've used both types on recurves and my one r/d LB. Chrono test comparing the two on those, best my memory it was closer to 10fps+- avg. But really I had settled upon dacron naturally on an old bear recurve and preferred it for quietness and care of the limbs. Only thing I don't like about dacron is BH creep, but that's no big deal really for me! I'm no speed freak. Cheetah & Dacron sounds even better to me now! Thanks for the thread Nate!

David;

I think you will find the so-called BH creep with B-50 is more do to how the string is made than anything else. Part of the problem is the softer waxes being used today instead of PURE bees wax when making a Flemish twist string, after the initial stretch of a new string you should not see any so called creep if the string is properly made.

Bob

Aromkr I'm sure you're right about this. When I first got a 71 made Bear Kodiak Hunter in I believe 2002, the strings I used, b50 of what origin I don't recall, where as I was used to. Then I had Steve (Bearbowman) Smith make me 2 identical Fleish twist b50 strings, aprox 2003 or 04, to match the bow. Those strings pretty much settled into a steady length that I didn't have to recheck & twist, as long as I followed my normal routines, plenty shooting practice, pretty much a day Afield, then unstrung when done. I have no problem with that!

Nate, thank you agian for your help. The information you have provided is worth saving for my future use .

To me, seems B55 BH stabilizes slightly quicker than B50 does.

interesting to see not much speed difference when actually measured

-kinda confirms what I figured shooting my longbows just by cast across a field and grouping in a target

not really a speed guy as I tend to like the littler more snappy feel of the Rhino string I have been using or D-97 -but I do like a thicker string- tried the skinny padded but just did not feel right

the B 50 felt a little more softer or rubbery to me than the harsher (snappier) FF but that is just a personal thing they both shot well but I do note a feel difference to exaggerate it the B 50 felt more like mild after shocks on release and the FF more like a fast uptake

but really that was minimal just like the speed difference

I've shot 18 strands B50 on my bows the last couple of years. I remember Hill wrote about a good longbow "carries a heavy string" and I observed Schulz shot a much thicker string than needed for his 36-40# bows. He actually filed out his 5/16 Mercury nocks to fit the 18 strand string. Why, I asked myself. Then I thought about the poly ropes I use in my business. Thicker rope has greater breaking test strength and has less stretch. I don't need to change material, I just go thicker. So I thought this premise may have something to do with performance on a deep limb longbow, which is the bow type that Hill had his experience with way back when.

Anyway, switching to 18 strands from my usual 16 felt tighter, less vibration upon the release and quieter. And the results say just as fast as a 452x string. Not saying a 12 strand 452x may shoot speeds similar to 12 strands of FF+, but that tradeoff of getting only 5 fps and having to add silencers was a downer in my opinion. There are guys who like to tune every last ounce of performance out of their setup and draw length and that's fine, but I'd venture a guess that most guys shooting these deep core longbows and wood arrows are also shooting shorter draw lengths like me, so these were more realistic results

I had requests to see my shooting form in relation to these tests. This is a Vimeo link to a video I did a couple of years ago. For those interested, the password is sunset hill

https://vimeo.com/757052031

Thanks very much Nate.

My first comment, I expect I will have others, is that a lot of these setups produced 160 to 170 fps, give or take. There are a lot of ways to get there with various draw lengths, draw weights, string fibers, and arrow weights. That is what I shoot.

That is the speed that gives me my favorite sight picture, where I shoot best up close, at 20 yards, 30, 40 and 50. I have set up bow and arrow combinations that do that with bows drawing at from 30 to 55 pounds. So I can switch with little mental adjustment.

In the longbow classification and maybe in the simple recurve classification that is the sort of performance and trajectory that has won national and world championships and taken mountains of game.

Again, there are many ways to get there, and I have tried many. The Howard Hill design and its variants is not the most efficient way to get there, but I find it the most pleasant and satisfying way to do it. With cedar arrows.

We do this not because it is easy, but because it is hard. - John Fitzgerald Kennedy

Thanks for your time, and effort Nate.

Your results are what i would pretty much expect.

I do not like the feel of skinny strings, and i still prefer the feel of a well made b-50 or 55..(i make my own)

I am not one to haggle over a few fps.

But i am open minded enough to realize that there are some that want to tweek every bit of performance out of a bow they can, and actually prefer low stretch skinny high performance strings, etc..

But your test show that often times in our endeavor for "more" and "better" and "faster" and striving for perfection and performance....we sometimes haven't really gained all that much.

moral of the story?.....choose your bow...your style..your string..your arrows...and be persuaded in your own mind.

thanks again.

Good info. Thanks for sharing Nate.

crickets.... ;)

Well, I was sorta hoping that someone would dust off that B50 string, put it on a Hill style longbow and do some testing to see how it compared with the low stretch strings they preferred for actual real life arrow speeds when not talking about d/r, recurve, or flat bows. I declared the thread to be debatable, so we could share actual info, for guys to post actual numbers of how super efficient their Hill style longbow is, whether backset or straight or string follow. There's guys out there who say their bows are super fast, super efficient, etc. and in the interest of sincere info sharing it would be interesting to "talk shop" with the bow builders, bow owners or testers, but all I've heard is silence....

Nate, I have a Hill style under construction. When it's done I'll make a B50 string and a low stretch string and do some chronograph comparisons. It will be a couple weeks since I'm leaving home for a while.

I don't have access to a chronograph but as I said in my above post

"-kinda confirms what I figured shooting my longbows just by cast across a field and grouping in a target"

there was no real notable difference in FF vs B50 other than a minor feel thing upon release

I'm just attached to an ASL for what it is - if I wanted speed I would get a super curve - but that would not satisfy my mind set

Yes Nate, I’m like Andy, No chronograph, the feel of the bow on release and good tune is what makes my motor run, I do enjoy your testing , Thanks and will look forward to others that do like testing.

Thanks Nate. I used to shoot fairly heavy bows but as age got to me and I dropped weight, I kept shooting the 18 strand string as it fit my speed nocks with the serving I use and worked fine. Also I knew Howard hated delicate strings and you can't go wrong following Howard's recommendations. For the guys that like fur string silencers, I couldn't see any speed drop with my chronograph.

Great post Nate . Hope I don’t open a can of worms, but how about differences in Corr Woods?

“Thanks again for sharing and providing us all with actual quantifiable data. That kinda thing tends to be taboo here in our little corner of the archery world for whatever reason.”

“There's guys out there who say their bows are super fast, super efficient, etc. and in the interest of sincere info sharing it would be interesting to ‘talk shop’ with the bow builders, bow owners or testers, but all I've heard is silence....”

Am I imagining things, or is there a trend here?

;)

Everybody wants to believe that they have The Best; even those who profess not to care. So a lot of guys here will tell you that speed is not what matters to them, but they either don’t want to know or don’t want anyone else to know what they’ve got, for fear that what they have (and are fairly happy with) turn out to be “less” than they believe it to be.

Whatever became of the Walk The Talk guys? They were the difference between a bunch of 50-year-old guys talking about how fast they were in high school and a bunch of runners showing up at a track meet. The Old Guys can be amusing, if you’re in the mood for it, but it’s not a great source for factual info.

So thanks for the good data. Always appreciated by those of us who deal in facts.

Dan, I was hoping for guys to input their hard data with various limb materials to show and tell what their bows were doing. Different core woods might definitely show some variances. The bow I tested with a 2/3 core of hickory was a little faster than all bamboo, which may be a deciding factor for fellas shooting lighter bows.

I don't care two licks for how fast my bows are. But when guys are saying that "X" bow is substantially faster than "Y" bow, and we find out that "X" bow is using a 12 strand skinny string drawn to 29"...is the performance due to bow design, string material, long draw, what? Or is that stated speed subjective as well because it was done on a shadowy day or with inconsistent lighting? Lots of ways to cook the books and give out data that sounds good but might not be totally accurate.

That's why I spent the time doing the research. I wanted some fellas to come forward and do some quantifiable testing that they're not afraid of posting publicly for everyone to see. (or post some findings of bows they've already tested) It's not an act of shame or anything, just some conversation material to talk shop about what and why works for the Hill style of deep-cored- limb bows. So far, the only real data being put out there for what is called ASL bows is not on bows that are very much Hill style. They are more rectangular flat-limbed type bows. And that is also the case with recurves and D/R bows...lots of data out there for people to see. Not so much with the Hill style of bows using narrow deep limb cores.

One thing I learned from my tests...string material with this type of bow does not appear to have a huge impact on arrow speed, no matter what the perception is when the arrow is shot. I was hoping for some other data input from shooters giving perhaps some different perspectives...anyone?

Nate, Very interesting test and results! Thanks for taking the time to do it and for posting the results with the great detail. I never have cared how fast my bows are, but it's fun to see what you came up with.

thanks for sharing

As far as I'm concerned ,shoot them and have fun

thats what I do

the data is nice to know -but with my short draw and mind set I just enjoy what I have for what it is

Thumper...test what you've got. (which you've done using low stretch strings)

Miller, JD Berry, Howard Hill, Henck, Sunset Hill, Northern Mist, Bivouac, St. Patrick's, Lightening, Mahantango, maybe I'm missing some...these are current bowmakers saying they make ASL bows. Well, Hill style bows are a little smaller subset (more precise if you will to the Hill heritage), being more deep core, narrow limb, shorter riser, no reverse handle, and usually more trapped in limb cross section. Of those bowyers just listed, most make a bow similar to the original Hill style.

And the past bowyers' bows are still out there and being shot...Schulz, Maulding, Armbruster, San Marco, Cole Old Timer, Quillian Traditional, Pearson Ol'Ben, Fred Andersen, Watson Mountain Man, Maurice Cash, Meigs, Kramer, John Tangredi, Don McCann, Strunk...probably lots of others and most of these bows are narrow deep core Hill style bows because that's how they were all made back then.

It's been the late trend to build bows more flat and rectangular and use low stretch strings and say how much better these ASL designs are compared to the old fashioned Hill style bow. Are they? This is just a conversation starter to have guys shoot these bows and compare results of performance of real numbers using various strings from various bows of various limb materials and see how they all compare. Real data done in a controlled environment with some constants.

Your original test last year, Thumper, got me thinking about this and how no one ever tests this style of bow and gives real data. They just say how great a bow is, how great it performs, with heavy arrows or whatever and that is a vague at best.

With all the quietness surrounding this thread, I'm getting of the opinion that most fellas that shoot a straight end longbow really care little about the efficiency of the bow and are more concerned for how it feels compared to a d/r bow or recurve. If all the Hill style bows start feeling like another type of bow because the bow construction and string type dictates it so, then we've been losing the heritage of the Hill style longbow.

Thought of a few more... Fairbow, Archi longbow by Milesi, 7 Lakes, Two Tracks, Challacombe, Dell Allen High Country, Pete George... Not to pit bow against bow, or bowyer against bowyer. But to just see in real data what makes these bows perform, are the new bows better than the old ones, are the strings making the big difference they say they are, is backset the huge performer versus string follow it's purported to be, is carbon on this type of bow a performance enhancer, is bamboo a dog compared to elm or maple or yew... Those kinds of things can be interesting to find out if guys would participate.

Thumper.. you've already done one series of tests, on three different bowyers' models. I'll send you some B50 strings free to test those bows again ;)

Well, got out most of my bows Nate and shot them through my chronograph. Not really sure what I was going to prove since I only have a low stretch string for one of them. All the bows were shot with 16 or 18 strand B-50 string. The one bow, a Mahantango, I had a pretty heavy low stretch string of some kind for it and the low stretch string shot on the average 4 fps faster than the B-50. I shot the same arrow through all the bows and it weighed 537 grains. Also I weighed all the bows on my scales and some were a pound or two over or under the marked weight. One surprise, I just bought a Jerry Hill bow that was 50# and it was surprisingly slower than my Jerry Hill 54# and 53# bows. I have a 27" draw. All speeds are averaged.

Jerry Hill 50# 143 fps Jerry Hill 53# 151 fps Jerry Hill 54# 153 fps Kramer Autumn 59# 160 fps Osage bow Fate 57# 157 fps glass bow I made. Osage bow S Chance 57# 155 fps glass bow I made. Mahantango 54# 150 fps 21st Century 54# 157 fps r/d longbow for comparison to the ASL's Osage r/d bow 53# 153 fps glass bow I made.

Erik Hoff (St. Patrick Lake) has done testing with his bows, and Cody Greenwood has tested ASLs of various flavors, including bows from at least 3 or 4 different bowyers, possibly more since I haven't checked in a while. Either of those guys would probably be happy to talk to you about what they found.

Hi Gordon, that's exactly perfect. Thank you! It would appear that your JH bows which are known to have a pronounced backset and the 21st Century bow know for high performance are not shooting really much different than the Kramer or the bows you built. It's amazing how close in arrow speeds they are shooting with the different designs. Are all the bows backset models?

Interesting and insightful Nate. Appreciate your taking the time for this, rather time consuming I would think. I'm shooting a 43lb. Hill Tembo 12 strand B55. I might just order a 16-18 strand string just for my own little experiment.

Yes Nate, all the bows have a small amount of backset, an inch or less. The Jerry Hill form used on the PSE/Jerry Hill longbows doesn't have as much backset as the Wildcat models. I was disappointed that the 50# Jerry Hill was ten fps slower than the 54# Jerry Hill off the same bow form. Doesn't really make sense to me but I tried it again and again with the same results. The 50# Jerry Hill is wonderfully quiet though.

Wow! This right here is the most in depth Chrono analysis I have ever seen. I just shoot with whatever 30 different arrow weight/ spines I have and roll with the one that shoots best.

Thanks for the ones who've added input to this thread. It was worth a try to get some involvement. I guess now I know that most longbow guys that are on LW really don't give a hoot how well their bows shoot with real data from one medium to another, from one type of string to another or one limb design to another. They're concerned with how it feels and if the arrow goes where it's pointed. I've had some pm's where it was noted that some of the hyped fast performance straight-end bows really weren't, and some high end d/r bows didn't shoot faster than the homely straight sticks, contrary to what is advertised. Thanks to those for that info. From the relative silence, I guess we can deduce that the shooters that have access to different string materials, different longbows from various builders, chronographs, and such don't want to post their data for all to see. I guess they're pleading the 5th lol. Anyway, it was interesting. Thanks fellas.

I don't have a dog in the fight but I would say if you are a hunter and can kill game with your setup the rest really doesn't matter. JMO.

Very interesting and informative Nate, but I’d be willing to bet most of the “Hill Style” devotees don’t own a chronograph.

That's my case. Sold my chrono long ago after committing to Hill style bows only. I was putting 12 and then 10 (padded to 12) strand B55 on all my 45# longbows w/out string silencers. I recently bought a Mahntango Red Tail (have had 2 previously) and that bow with Jimmy's D97 string really impresses me. He did install fur silencers (very light) and that is the quietest best performing (for me) ASL I've shot date. Could just be perfect specs for me for a change. But in the 2 months since receiving it, I have not adjusted nock point or added or removed a single string twist. She is silent and shoots a flat arrow. Best behaved backset I've owned. If I had to guess I'd say it's 14 strand padded to 16 maybe?

I look at an ASL from a different perspective than shear performance

Histroy has clearly shown there is enough performance there to even hunt African size critters

the advantages of light to carry, easy to string and un string, maneuverability, forgiving of off position form, durable ,good for moving shots off set any minor performance gains

but thats just my thinking- and just more fun to shoot

I have total confidence in mine

If Elijah were to tell me I was gonna have the worlds biggest buck cross in front of me next season I would be carrying my ASL with out any doubt

I found it very interesting and informative. I think many people are reading and digesting your information -- such as your research and notes regarding arrow weight -- even if they are not commenting. In my case, I have not used that particular kind of bow and therefore do not have anything to contribute to this discussion. Thanks for your efforts!

Nate, your thread intrigued me but at the time, I didn’t have much time. At least I wasn’t in the mode of tinkering with my kit. Anyway I did today. So for whatever it’s worth, here is what I can add:

Bow: 64” stringfollow takedown Howard Hill Wesley Special, 56#@27”, drawn to 27.25”. I don’t have a bow scale, so I’m calling it 57#.

Arrows: #1, 430gr @ 7.5gpp. #2, 592gr @ 10.4gpp, both 27,5” long bop.

Strings: #1, 15 strand 3-bundle B50 @ 172grains. #2 12 strand 3-bundle Force 10 (sk99 dyneema) with loops padded to 18 strands @ 92grains. Both made by me using pure beeswax, stretched and shot-in this afternoon. Nock fit is very similar but I used different serving materials to get it so.

Brace Height: 6.25” with both strings

String #1 averaged 176.1 fps with the 7.5gpp Arrow #1, and, 159.8fps for the 10.5 gpp of arrow #2.

String #2 averaged 188.1 fps and 174.3 fps respectively.

A couple observations: First, the lighter arrow #1 (.500 carbon) was borderline weak with the 12-strand Force-10 string but WAAAY too stiff when using the B50 string. Second, and this may be an artifact of my bow being both shorter 64” and a stringfollow, but there seemed to be a few more fps between string materials.

Good info there. A pretty good bump up using that low stretch.

Kyle, thanks for your input. Which string makeup do you use everyday?

It is very interesting to see the difference in speed output based on the different strings. Either your bow really likes the skinny dyneema or really dislikes the B50. :) Also of note is the shorter bow length of 64" being drawn to 27" is like drawing my 66" bow an inch further which as people know, increases bow performance to get those limbs in a tighter arc.

This kind of info is real. It gives people wanting to know the performance data of ASL bows versus other types of bows. The data presented showed how someone can tweak a straight limb longbow and get some real good results. It depends on how someone wants the bow to feel and perform. It's nice to see some data other than "this bow shoots an arrow with authority"

My daily driver strings are dyneema. And to be perfectly transparent, I’d bet that some of the performance gap would close if I shot that B50 string more than just the afternoon I made it. My experience is that B50/D97 do take longer to settle in, and, that is of several reasons I have come to prefer dyneema. Next chance I get I will twist up a 14 and maybe a 16 strand dyneema for this bow which should really dial in the lighter arrow.

When I shot fast flight strings as a daily thing, I needed arrows spined 15# over my bow weight before cutting them to 27" bop. Hard to find 11/32 arrows spined 75-79#. With B50 I can use 11/32, 65-69# spine out of 56-58# bows before cutting them to 27" bop. So there is the factor of using string material to fit/tune the shaft material of choice.

Yes, your string experience parallels my own. However, unless I’m compensating for heavy points, I don’t find myself in need of heavy spines. To illustrate with some more real data: Here are 3 arrows that I can and have shoot out of this bow using the dyneema string: #1 is a 27.5” 61# spined cedar that weighs in at 468gr. Arrow #2 is a 27.5” .500/62.5# spine carbon at 430gr. Arrow#3 is a 2117 that spines at 80# on my Ace Spine-Master and weighs in at 582gr. (Note: I know that a heavier weight is used to spine carbon, but for the sake of this comparison I just used the standard 1# weight)

I’m this first picture I have shot all 3 arrows using the dyneema string at 12yds in my back yard. I repeated this several times and got this same horizontal impact pattern. Nevertheless, I already know from experience that a few twists of the string will tune-in just fine with broadheads.

I then got curious and strung up the B50 and repeated. I had to twist up the brace height about a half inch, but after several cycles the same horizontal spread wasn’t there. Maybe it was me, but the B50 seemed to cluster all 3. Here is a representative photo.

Oh, and before I forget, the bow is cut 5/16 or .3125” off center.

nice real world stuff for me thanks

you got nice speeds and I think the 64" ASL's seem faster as to a 66 & 68" I have but I only have a 26" draw at best

So does that mean the B50 was more forgiving of your form? Interesting to ponder. My feelings are that the stiffer/less stretch the string material, it's also less stretch at the fingers and maybe a bad release is accentuated. Maybe the softness of B50 is more forgiving of sloppy releases or a release that is performed when the body isn't quite in textbook position during a hunting shot. Things to ponder ...

I haven’t read this whole thread in a while but what are thoughts on Flemish vs endless loop as well? In either B-50, B-55 or some modern non stretch material. Thanks

I’m not quite sure how to take it. The 3 arrows are completely different materials/spines/point weights/etc. but dynamically close and all work in this bow just fine. The right left spread with the dyneema was always in that same order (wood- carbon-aluminum) so I was inferring that to spine and other differences, not release. Those very same arrows with B50 were erratically flying till I raised the brace height considerably— which I’d expected—but then the grouped rather than string left to right. And that’s all I had time for today. So is the B-50 more forgiving of spine? I don’t know. I’d certainly have to shoot more and further to draw any conclusions.

Okay, after some further thought on this, I’m not sure that shooting three different arrows off two different strings really amounted to anything meaningful. So, for whatever it’s worth, this afternoon I adjusted the brace height on both strings until I got straight flight with ONLY the carbon BARESHAFT. Here are my results:

12 strand Force-10 Dyneema string: Brace Height 6 1/16”, 10-shot average 186.8 fps

15 strand B-50 Dacron string: Brace Height 7 1/4”, 10-shot average 177.1 fps

I don’t think the difference in speed or brace height is any surprise given the mass differences and non-stretch vs stretch properties. But with over an inch in brace height, there is no doubt a difference in bow poundage going on. I don’t have a bow scale handy or otherwise I’d include that metric here as well. It would be interesting to know the difference. Nevertheless I’m attributing the variance in fps’s from the other day (which were measured at the same brace height) so to a slightly lower brace with the Dyneema string and a higher brace with the B-50 in todays testing.

NOTE: My carbon arrow is only about 7.4gpp in this bow, so it’s at least a grain lighter than Nate’s bow/arrow testing at the beginning of this thread. Yes, I’m getting very good velocity but no magic or free lunches here, just sayin.

Kyle. When I shot these arrows for my tests I was shooting through the Chrono at 3'. I didn't tune my arrows for flight. I kept the constants as close as possible so I shot the same brace with all strings, knowing that it probably changed the arrow spine tune but didn't care because I wasn't going for arrow flight in this case. It'd be interesting to know what your difference in speed would show with that latest setup if the brace heights were the same.

Nate, just look back to my first post using this bow *before* I got the bright idea to confuse things. Those speeds are all using the same 6.375” brace height and different strings. So those are the speeds you’re after.

Thanks. That indeed shows info about these supposedly slow straight sticks. Some models from different builders will show great improvements using different arrow weights or string materials and so far, the tests that have been shown, including Thumpers from a year ago, that there is a wide variance from builder to builder as to what the bow is capable of performance-wise in different hands. To hear of some claims that a particular bow is the "best/fastest/smoothest"... Well maybe it is for that person using a particular string and arrow weight compared to others, but it wouldn't be that way for someone else. I think data like shown in this thread shows the real world scenarios

In today’s world of high performance materials, designs, and expectations these straight sticks are becoming the Rodney Dangerfield of bows. Nevertheless, appropriate arrow weights (7-9gpp) and well designed “naked” strings (your material may vary), illustrates how the ASL lives up to, if not exceeds, the historically claimed performance levels.

Ps. Also, note that my carbon arrow is only .25” longer than my draw length. It took some thinking and tinkering (logically) to get there— but not copious amounts. Hence, IMHO it is completely unnecessary to shoot a full length carbon shaft, unless that is by choice.

Pss. The 3Rivers dynamic spine calculator shows this carbon arrow (80.2) as almost twice the relative number of the bow (46.8) and estimates the velocity at 208fps! Lol but it nailed the weight, foc, and gpp with amazing precision.

Well, I don't have a lot of data but I have some well considered opinions. One is that those of who love American longbows either are not interested in chronographs, or can't figure out how to use them. I am in both groups.

First, I use original Fast Flight to twist up Flemish strings, 15 strands, for any bow made after about 1975. I use B-55 for a few golden oldies, target recurves made to about the same thickness, maybe 12 strands. I prefer the handling qualities of Fast Flight and that it settles to length much quicker. To my ears it is quieter, and the shot feels crisper. (Tip: I twist them up with straight beeswax, burnish that with leather, and then go over the top with candle wax, burnished. That produces a slick finish that does not attract dirt or get fluffy. )

Are these strings fast? I once got a new Hoyt target bow with a factory string. I twisted up one of my strings as a spare. At the 80 yard target I wanted to test it so I held a bit higher than for the Hoyt string. Whoosh! Clear over the bale. So yes, a tightly made Fast Flight string can be as fast as a good endless loop type string, or faster.

I competed with a carbon backed 21st Century Edge longbow, reflex deflex unstrung, D profile when strung, 70", 42# @ 29". I hunted with a Howard Hill Tembo, 70", about 50# @ 29". The Edge has probably won more international competitions than any design, smooth, sweet and fast. At 60 yards I held lower with it three fingers under than I did with the Howard Hill split fingers. At the Marked 3D nationals, which I won, it chronoed with a 500 grain arrow at 164 fps. My point-on range was nearly 60 yards. Second place was taken by a huge man shooting an 80# Hill bow. His arrow speed on the same chrono, 164 fps. He looked very unhappy at that so I told him he must have short drawn. He said 'yeah, yeah, must have'.

But wait! I have more! Four time world field archery longbow champ Larry Yien used to post on here. He shot a 21st Century Edge, no carbon, 50# nominal but drawing less than 28" I believe.

Four time world field archery longbow champ the late Steve Morley also used to post on here. He may have also shot a 50# Edge, drawn less than 28". They had great form but were not large men. Mr Morley reported on another European world archery champ who shot an even slower arrow, in the 150s as I recall.

The last I heard, a few years back the world record for field archery, i believe for the long course to 80 yards was held by an Australian archer with a Howard Hill style bow and nobody knows who made it. There is no patent; anybody can make one.

Finally, one more story. One day I was out on my clubs field archery range with my Howard Hill Tembo backed with rattlesnake and I fell into the 'zone'. Through 8 targets I was well above world record pace. I came upon a young couple with longbows, just arrived from France. Of course we had a lengthy chat, Then my next target was 50 yards, easy peasy. I missed all four arrows, Fell out of the zone.

Moral: these bows are not efficient, but they are very pleasant and challenging to shoot. And they can be shot extremely well; it is just harder is all. If we wanted easy we would be doing something else. - lbg

Better get one. A man has got to know. - lbg

Better get one. A man has got to know. - lbg

I don't think you can shoot and ASL and then worry about speeds.

When I ordered my new HH Cheetah, I was in no ways concerned about all this, the speed & performance. I was already confident of 20 years of reading posts just on here of comparisons, and I must say I was ready, even expected some loss in performance & trajectory! I've only been shooting it over a week, but I've took off to some good lonesome shooting grounds loaded with FP's, Judos, and BH's, shooting first for my own adaptations to this bow, which have even less than I expected. In finally trying some BH arrows that will be my hunting arrows in this bow, arrows that average around 515grs, I still can not tell any real loss of trajectory out to near 30yds, and actually with all my arrows, fp and Judy's! So this morning I curiosity got me and I set up the chrono. And already had the results to compare it to my R/D Chaparral Kaibab and Bear Kodiak Hunter. Best comparison is my Kaibab, at aprox 50# +- 1lb, shooting a 11.2 gr arrow @ 152fps. My Cheetah is 43#@28", I draw at least 28.5" so my figures are a 44# bow and I was able to try an arrow that figures 11.2grs per # exactly. It shot at 154fps average, every shot a consistent 153-155fps. And the Kaibab with a FF string and the Cheetah a B50 string. I AM IMPRESSED, and very much surprised! My Kodiak Hunter, by memory, shoots the same arrows an average of 3-4 fps faster than the Kaibab it with a B55 string. If I remember right? HH said his bows would shoot an arrow 110fps + draw weight. I always assumed that figure based upon 10grs per pound?? And if this statement is wrong anyone correct me?? But most bows performance are based upon 19grs per pound I'm sure, so at 11.2grs per # the Cheetah is above par @ 154fps! I don't get into all the number strands, string weight or anything, but my Cheetah does have paranoid SS I made myself, Serving wrapped for a NP. I posted this mostly because I'm very happy my trajectory change is zero, and I'm shooting this bow very well! That's all the performance I care about, but thought this might verify again, the truly good performance of a HH Style bow, I'm a believer now!

Most bows performance based upon 10grs per pound, correction.

It's neat to see the specs. ASLs aren't a design to be top speed shooters, so "speed" is not a big thing for most with the design.

If you have already registered, please

sign in now

For new registrations

Click Here