wooden flight bows based on ancient designs
Even if most of the ATARNOS will not be interested to much, my way in experimenting with traditional designs for to increase the performance of wooden bows turned out to be a real success.
I call this type of bow flight 137.5, cause the angle of the limbs is 137.5, the so- called Golden Angle is derived from the Golden Ratio. In former times the Golden Angle was highly appreciated for its stability, the Golden Angle is often found in the growing of plants, crystals......etc.
The final inspiration was Marc St. Louis recently posted short elm flightbow with an angle of 155. It shot an 275grs. arrow at 225f/s, 43lbs at 25", this is incredible!
I want to try this!! I thought about it and came to the 137.5 angle and a different way to join the limbs. I just attached the limbs to a handle and fixed them with dovetailed wedges. There are definitely a lots of ways to do the joining, it works cause the thick handled doesn?t bend at all.
The osage flight is 46" in length with a handle made of flowery ash at the back and blackthorn at the belly.It draws 48lbs at 23".
The rowan flight 137.5 is 50" in length, handle made of moutain maple, limbs are tapering from 11/4" to 1/4". Short siyahs of field maple are spliced in. It draws 42lbs at 23"
Bridges are made of mountain- maple. Both bows are heat- treated.
So this design is combining elements of Angular bows, Scythian bows(recurves) and a lots of actual insights about wooden bow- designs based on the works of Tim Baker, Steve Gardner, Marc St. Louis, Alan Case, the ATARNET, the PALEOPLANET..............
I guess this design to be based on hightech- bows like the Kodiak Mag, Black Widow and Adam Karpovicz insights on low- stack designs.
Sorry, I am still suffering from a heavy influenza, so I didn?t felt strong enough for to make the chronos at full draw. But the results are very impressive. The arrow measures 20" in length, its weight is 195grs.
Osage flight: 188.9f/s
Rowan flight: 183.4f/s
Drawn to 23" speed will be 200plus for sure.
Beside that speed- thing these bows are so comfortable to shoot, I?ll never miss them.
I will update you soon, a making of is at http://redhawk55.wordpress.com.
Sorry, the uploading of pics is taking such a long time today, more pics tomorrow or visit my blog
Michael
I call this type of bow flight 137.5, cause the angle of the limbs is 137.5, the so- called Golden Angle is derived from the Golden Ratio. In former times the Golden Angle was highly appreciated for its stability, the Golden Angle is often found in the growing of plants, crystals......etc.
The final inspiration was Marc St. Louis recently posted short elm flightbow with an angle of 155. It shot an 275grs. arrow at 225f/s, 43lbs at 25", this is incredible!
I want to try this!! I thought about it and came to the 137.5 angle and a different way to join the limbs. I just attached the limbs to a handle and fixed them with dovetailed wedges. There are definitely a lots of ways to do the joining, it works cause the thick handled doesn?t bend at all.
The osage flight is 46" in length with a handle made of flowery ash at the back and blackthorn at the belly.It draws 48lbs at 23".
The rowan flight 137.5 is 50" in length, handle made of moutain maple, limbs are tapering from 11/4" to 1/4". Short siyahs of field maple are spliced in. It draws 42lbs at 23"
Bridges are made of mountain- maple. Both bows are heat- treated.
So this design is combining elements of Angular bows, Scythian bows(recurves) and a lots of actual insights about wooden bow- designs based on the works of Tim Baker, Steve Gardner, Marc St. Louis, Alan Case, the ATARNET, the PALEOPLANET..............
I guess this design to be based on hightech- bows like the Kodiak Mag, Black Widow and Adam Karpovicz insights on low- stack designs.
Sorry, I am still suffering from a heavy influenza, so I didn?t felt strong enough for to make the chronos at full draw. But the results are very impressive. The arrow measures 20" in length, its weight is 195grs.
Osage flight: 188.9f/s
Rowan flight: 183.4f/s
Drawn to 23" speed will be 200plus for sure.
Beside that speed- thing these bows are so comfortable to shoot, I?ll never miss them.
I will update you soon, a making of is at http://redhawk55.wordpress.com.
Sorry, the uploading of pics is taking such a long time today, more pics tomorrow or visit my blog
Michael
They sure look fast! Looking forward to hearing results from further tests.
The design is probably not easy to optimalize. I bet the biggest challenge is making the tips light enough while keeping stability.
The design is probably not easy to optimalize. I bet the biggest challenge is making the tips light enough while keeping stability.
Interesting designs. I personally love reading your experiments :)
Looking forward to the full results :)
Looking forward to the full results :)
I hope some of these bows turn up at the Flight Tournament in Utah this year.
Thanks for the comments.
Kviljo, there didn?t arise any problem with stability, as I awaited it too. Maybe its this angle. This kind of bow is so comfortable to shoot, I guess same design about 5"- 7" longer for a "normal 28" draw, will be a real wooden burner for target- shooting.
If I feel better enough there?ll be full draw pics and more chronos.
Bede, I?ll have to test the bows more, I?ve planned to go to the Salts this year, but cause of my bow- classes there is no time for it. So I?ll talk to Alan Case, if he would be so nice to shoot a flight 137.5.
Michael
Kviljo, there didn?t arise any problem with stability, as I awaited it too. Maybe its this angle. This kind of bow is so comfortable to shoot, I guess same design about 5"- 7" longer for a "normal 28" draw, will be a real wooden burner for target- shooting.
If I feel better enough there?ll be full draw pics and more chronos.
Bede, I?ll have to test the bows more, I?ve planned to go to the Salts this year, but cause of my bow- classes there is no time for it. So I?ll talk to Alan Case, if he would be so nice to shoot a flight 137.5.
Michael
A modern/global traditional bow... That's quite something. I would be happy to get my hands on a target-shooting version of the 137.5.redhawk wrote:
This kind of bow is so comfortable to shoot, I guess same design about 5"- 7" longer for a "normal 28" draw, will be a real wooden burner for target- shooting.
redhawk,
I have a question (sorry if it's too rudimentary): is the angle of the limbs 137.5 degrees when braced, or when unbraced?
Justin
I have a question (sorry if it's too rudimentary): is the angle of the limbs 137.5 degrees when braced, or when unbraced?
Justin
This bows looks like work of mi five years old daughter no profesional maker... sorry! Maybe fast, but sure need better design work...redhawk wrote:
Peter
Peto
the question is always the same: What comes first "function follows design or design follows function"? If you want both you need to compromise or invest more time and/or money - I simply think Redhawk did a good job with the available resources in his woods/the Balck Forest.
(R)eto
the question is always the same: What comes first "function follows design or design follows function"? If you want both you need to compromise or invest more time and/or money - I simply think Redhawk did a good job with the available resources in his woods/the Balck Forest.
(R)eto
A flight bow is for shooting and not for hanging on the wall.
Thanks for the comments, sorry for the late reply, I?ve been very busy with my bowery- classes.
I?ve shot the osage flight 137.5 at 22", same arrow- weight, speed is 206f/s, these bows are burning. A making of flight 137.5 is out now: http://redhawk55.wordpress.com
The 137.5- angle is the angle between the limbs, when the bow is unbraced.
A target- shooting version is on the way.
Thanks Reto, but osage- orange is not growing here. I guess this is a design you can do with every well known bow- wood. I think the trick is to keep the string very close to the limbs when the bow is braced, a well thought over treatment with steam and heat and sharp and short recurves. This is reducing movement of the limbs. It?s very important to go for a high drawweight at braceheight.
Peto, thanks for the usual super friendly comments from Slovakia, your second user name is Dusan? Fortunately I have some good friends in Slovakia.
Jack, what?s up with this wallhanger thing?
Michael
I?ve shot the osage flight 137.5 at 22", same arrow- weight, speed is 206f/s, these bows are burning. A making of flight 137.5 is out now: http://redhawk55.wordpress.com
The 137.5- angle is the angle between the limbs, when the bow is unbraced.
A target- shooting version is on the way.
Thanks Reto, but osage- orange is not growing here. I guess this is a design you can do with every well known bow- wood. I think the trick is to keep the string very close to the limbs when the bow is braced, a well thought over treatment with steam and heat and sharp and short recurves. This is reducing movement of the limbs. It?s very important to go for a high drawweight at braceheight.
Peto, thanks for the usual super friendly comments from Slovakia, your second user name is Dusan? Fortunately I have some good friends in Slovakia.
Jack, what?s up with this wallhanger thing?
Michael
I not need second name, Redbird. We are very friendly in Slovakia, but we love good craftsmans work too. If sombody "teach" in Bowyears klass, and call himself "bowmaker" need some craftmans level. You haevnt. Thats all.
Michael; I only meant to diffuse comments about how a flight bow might look to some. Congrats on being brave enough to post your work. Good luck as always and best wishes.
If you post good nice bow in future, I will fitst who praise it ... I think my comments is more friendly like chorus of praise or embarrassed silence...redhawk wrote:
Peto, thanks for the usual super friendly comments from Slovakia, your second user name is Dusan? Fortunately I have some good friends in Slovakia.
Jack, that?s the point, often people are narrow- minded: a flightbow has to look like this and that..........blablabla................
A horn- flightbow needs a lot of reflex, cause of the capablities and weight of the horn, that?s fact for hornbows.
Selfbowyers tried to copy that construction- principle, till Marc St. Louis found out that this is the wrong way for wooden bows: deflex, short movement of the limbs is the way.
Michael
A horn- flightbow needs a lot of reflex, cause of the capablities and weight of the horn, that?s fact for hornbows.
Selfbowyers tried to copy that construction- principle, till Marc St. Louis found out that this is the wrong way for wooden bows: deflex, short movement of the limbs is the way.
Michael
Redhawk, good job. It appears that their "tip leverage" is working great. Do you have any plan to test them with a 10gpp arrow and even with a shooting machine?
Hi Michael, can you elaborate? Precisely how do the weight and properties of horn require the bow to have a reflex? Is it just because the horn is curved to begin with?redhawk wrote:
A horn- flightbow needs a lot of reflex, cause of the capablities and weight of the horn, that?s fact for hornbows.
Hi scp, there is actually a lot of discussion about this design. Yes, there?ll be tests with 10gpp- arrows and a shooting machine, I?m still hoping to finish another one for to be shot at the US National Flights, maybe a bit longer.
The 2 first ones I?ll never give away, even this is sounding sentimental or magic?
Justin, I mean horn?s natural curvature. I never straight horn, the horn?s curve plus the sinew are making the reflex. I?m always looking for the curves I need, it depends on the bow- design. I think for to really benefit from the capablities of horn, hornbows have to draw at least 60lbs.
Michael
The 2 first ones I?ll never give away, even this is sounding sentimental or magic?
Justin, I mean horn?s natural curvature. I never straight horn, the horn?s curve plus the sinew are making the reflex. I?m always looking for the curves I need, it depends on the bow- design. I think for to really benefit from the capablities of horn, hornbows have to draw at least 60lbs.
Michael
Since this is a flight bow, it was clearly not designed for performance at 10 gpp. If it works good with light arrows and it survives shooting them, then I guess it is a good design.
There is one thing I find intriguing in this design: it seams to be very little energy stored in the bow at brace height. The braced and non-braced forms of the bow look almost identical.
There is one thing I find intriguing in this design: it seams to be very little energy stored in the bow at brace height. The braced and non-braced forms of the bow look almost identical.
Horn is heavier that wood. If you have non reflex hornbow it will weight more than corresponding wooded bow, but yet it does not store more energy(*), so it is slower.Justin Ma wrote:
Precisely how do the weight and properties of horn require the bow to have a reflex?
* You can make it thicker and narrower and have the horn only in center. This will decrease the dynamic mass, however no enough to match performance of wooden bow. You can also draw longer, this will increase the amount of energy. (note: stacking)
Dynamic mass Mass in handle does not move, so it is irrelevant for bow performance. Mass in the tips will move most, so it will slow down most.
The lighter arrow you shoot the more will the dynamic mass slow down the arrow. The dynamic mass will collide to the string when the bow has been released. The arrow will contain energy that will send to flight. The energy of the moving mass of the bow, will turn into handshock and make the bow vibrate, eventually turning into heat and heating the bow with non measurable amount of energy.
stacking
to be written
energy of the draw
to be written
I also wonder if the need for reflex vs. deflex at the grip has to do with the softness/hardness of the materials themselves. That is, a horn bow at a given draw weight will be more pliable and less rigid than a wooden (or fiberglass) bow at the same draw weight. Taken to one extreme, compound bows use super-rigid working limbs that are highly deflex.redhawk wrote:
Justin, I mean horn?s natural curvature. I never straight horn, the horn?s curve plus the sinew are making the reflex. I?m always looking for the curves I need, it depends on the bow- design. I think for to really benefit from the capablities of horn, hornbows have to draw at least 60lbs.
Michael
Storm, about the 10gpp arrows you are right, anyway its worth to do the test for to get some comparable data.
The weight at brace- height seems not be as important as to take a lot of care for to keep the string as close as possible to the limbs. According to my opinion this is the main reason for to make such a heavy deflex in the handle.
I hope some others will give this design a try, for to get as much experiences and datas of it.
Sorry Justin, we?ve posted at the same moment.
I think physical weight has much more impact than most bowyers are aware of. The limbs of the flight 137.5 are heavily heat- treated, this is decreasing weight by compressing the structure of the wood.
Every raw- material needs its design.
Ottoman bows are the best teachers for to get insights in the material/ physical weight/design interaction. The Ottoman bowyers have reduced siyahs( look at some fore- runners- Mongolian, Hun bows), length, bending section is very well thought over...........I guess there?ll never be a better hornbow than the Ottoman hornbow.
Michael
The weight at brace- height seems not be as important as to take a lot of care for to keep the string as close as possible to the limbs. According to my opinion this is the main reason for to make such a heavy deflex in the handle.
I hope some others will give this design a try, for to get as much experiences and datas of it.
Sorry Justin, we?ve posted at the same moment.
I think physical weight has much more impact than most bowyers are aware of. The limbs of the flight 137.5 are heavily heat- treated, this is decreasing weight by compressing the structure of the wood.
Every raw- material needs its design.
Ottoman bows are the best teachers for to get insights in the material/ physical weight/design interaction. The Ottoman bowyers have reduced siyahs( look at some fore- runners- Mongolian, Hun bows), length, bending section is very well thought over...........I guess there?ll never be a better hornbow than the Ottoman hornbow.
Michael
I'm in the process of making a Triangle bow for myself -- I'm calling it "Triangle" for now because "137.5" doesn't quite roll off the tongue elegantly. :) Granted, I am a total beginner, so I won't do the v-splicing and such that you do. I plan to steam-bend the tips, but I'm wondering... could I get away with keeping the rest of the limb straight, or should I steam-bend at the working section as well?redhawk wrote:
Storm, about the 10gpp arrows you are right, anyway its worth to do the test for to get some comparable data.
The weight at brace- height seems not be as important as to take a lot of care for to keep the string as close as possible to the limbs. According to my opinion this is the main reason for to make such a heavy deflex in the handle.
I hope some others will give this design a try, for to get as much experiences and datas of it.
Michael
Your post here suggests that I should take the time to steam-bend the working section in order to get the string closer to the limbs at brace.
Do it, sounds always great.
I like the term triangle bow. Steam bend the limbs first, than make your joinery. Or you?ve found a stave which fits your angle.
The limbs have to be reflexed.
Good luck, Michael
I like the term triangle bow. Steam bend the limbs first, than make your joinery. Or you?ve found a stave which fits your angle.
The limbs have to be reflexed.
Good luck, Michael