Turkish tirkesh war arrow replicas

as usually - excelent :shock:

Good Stuff Gokmen,
Google give a little bit funny translation, but pictures say it all:)
Don't you have some replica arrows with broadheads? I'm pretty sure I've seen in on one of your YT videos.

Fine work! The arrows are hollowed?
Michael

Hi

-yes I have also Ottoman broadhead arrow replicas however not a full set, only a few test arrows.
But I will prepare a full set hopefully very soon.
Some arrows in the Dresden Turkische Cammer are so nice,
I think I will copy some red/blue/gold decoration pattern from these.

-Btw, the Ottoman bodkin and broadheads are from my friend Michal Sodja from Czech Republik.
They are high carbon and the tips are hardened.
He is excellent in blacksmithing and knows so much about Ottoman arrows.

-They are not hollowed. (You mean all the way like bamboo?)
I dont know that tirkesh arrows are hollowed, can you show an example?
The hole I drilled was just for the bodkin needle.

-Another thing I want to share, I have an Ottoman anchor point below the chin, which is similar to today's recurve shooters.
My draw length is about 28 inches. With the bodkin +the nock lips the whole arrow is about 76cm.
We see that typical Ottoman arrows are 67-72cm in total.
That means also that our ancestors were smaller on average than us today, or at least me (I am 1,83m tall).
But would the different draw length not influence the whole characteristics and performance of the the bow and arrow?
Shorter limbs travel faster, shorter arrow has higher dynamic spine etc etc?

-Final message: you should all try barreled arrows (endam), the increase in performance is great.
The arrow will be more aerodynamic, lighter for the same length and with higher dynamic spine.
Paradoxically the arrow seems to become stronger by taking away material through barreling.
That's my introduction paragraph in the article; much is said about the legendary Ottoman bows but so little about Ottoman war arrows, they are kind of overlooked.
However there is also a lot of magic and science in an Ottoman war arrow.

cheers

Gokmen Altinkulp

Great infos!
Good question. For to be honest I can?t remember the source about the hollowed Osmanian arrows. Flightarrows are told to be hollowed, I guess Bede mentioned that too and Alan Case posted a build along about hollowed hex-shafts based on infos about Osmanian flightarrows.
Michael

redhawk, are you sure about hollowed arrows? in the kani book are two sorts of arrows mentioned - wooden arrows and some out of a sort of tubular material comparable to bamboo. specially hollowed arrows are possible, but i only know about hollow by material. (material is unknown to the author (hein, in my german version), but the same material used in arabian countrys. hein estimates Arundo donax as the material.) just out of curiosity.

Just for your interest gentlemen, Jaroslaw Belza shot Turkish war arrows with his air cannon and got distances between 300 and 400 meters, corresponding to the draw weight range typical of Turkish war bows. I made (hardwood) shafts and he made excellent, hand-forged arrow points. These were the same arrows he used for his metal penetration tests I briefly mention in my book. The arrows were barrelled and had low cut feathers, the max. diameter was (if I recall correcltly) about 8mm. This not to say the war arrows could penetrate metal from that distance, but still quite impressive.

Adam

Absolutely! There is a lot to be said for writing something short and quick about J.Belza's tests. I can only hope that one day he will publish it all.
Gokmen, I'd like to concentrate on business ends of you arrows for a while. You say something about brass/horn washers but I don't see those on the pictures. Is that a standard feature of war arrows? I know washers are sometimes associated with target missile's but again not all of them since I've seen some puta arrows without those. I find horn washers very useful as they keep shaft integrity and reduce breakage/splitting the point ends.

thank you uli, and sorry for the interruption.

the horn ring can be seen e.g. in this pic. In Ottoman war arrows there is usually sinew wrapping or these brass or horn rings near the arrow tip without sinew. It functions as a suspension between the arrow tip (temren) and the wood.

I chose to make a sinew wrapping but suggest that one should experiment with brass/horn rings as well.

G?kmen

Gokmen,

How did you drill the hole for inserting the arrowhead into the shaft? Does anyone know ancient technique? Is it possible that some kind of red-hot awl was used to ''burn'' the hole?

Best regards

they drilled the hole with a hand drill !

We must not think that they were primitive in Ottoman times.
They just did not have electricity.
And sometimes I wish I had the skill they had instead of electricity.
I used an electric screw driver fit with a drill bit.
I set it on a slow level and kept turning the shaft so the hole is accurately in the middle.
The last centimeter or so you would not drill but fit the temren (war arrow tip) in and let the arrow fall on wood or similar to hammer in the last bit of the needle.

There is one piece of text which is a bit unclear though, in Mustafa Kani's Telhis. He writes to heat the temren and fit it this way. However our friend Michal Sodja, who is an experienced blacksmith said that would ruin the hardening of the steel. I think Kani's information might be wrong, especially because it was written at such a late date, long after battlefield archery had died out for the Ottomans.

(Btw it would be good to create a Turkish/English dictionary for archery related terms and their pronunciation)

G?kmen

Thank you for the nice explaination Gokmen. When i asked about drilling the hole i didn't mean that ancient people were primitive, opposite. I did mean that hand drill could damage shaft if diameter of tip of barelled arrow is small, though in the hand of well experienced craftsman it would be impossible.
Best regards,

You could attach a head first than taper the point end...
What is the diameter of the typical war bodkin/brodhead tang? What length?

Are there any english translations available of Kani's treatise?

btw, I recently did a breakage test with an Ottoman broadhead arrow, then cut away half the shaft near the temren. Here is the pic.

The needle+the wood+the sinew with hide glue make the arrow near the temren very strong even though it looks thin..

Gokmen wrote:

Hi guys

About a year ago I made Turkish war arrow replicas but forgot to share here.
So in the hope that it will be of help for others (or at least inspiration) here is the article on how I made them:
http://www.atli-okculuk.com/2011/11/tur ... -yapm.html

It is in Turkish but you can translate it with the button on the top right and hopefully it will give you a not too crazy translation.
For any questions you can always ask me.

One is a '?avuş oku' an officers arrow=whistling arrow.

I shoot them with my 82lbs Grozer Biocomposite short Turk and they go very straight and fast, almost like carbon arrows shot from a compound..
I didnt try penetration tests yet.

cheers

Gokmen Altinkulp

Hi Gokmen,

great article, thanks a lot - it has become my inspiration these days ;-)
For quite a long time I am fighting to create perfect biconical turkish arrows and one of the main obstacles is drilling a hole for a needle point. Your article (together with Mysa's and Elev's personal advices) made it finally possible for me to drill very fine symmetrical hole.
However still I do not possess any such a needle point, so I decided to use normal target point and to strengthen the foot of an arrow by substituting the needle with some piece of metal needle, wire or even a screw. Do you think this would also supply the hardness of the arrow's foot towards the point itself?
Thanks a lot for your possible answers.

Would you be so kind and tell us what is your way to make perfect central hole to accept tanged head?
Pictures are very welcome:)

Looks like very original, good job.

Tebrikler G?kmen, ?ok beğendim. ?ok selam

Cem

Well, I have just finished one shaft, so perhaps the pictures will come later on.
But my way is as follows.
1) Make the biconical shaft :-) (I make it to have the end points thin - about 0.6/0.5cm in diameter)
2) pierce the very middle :-) of the shaft's cross section with a sharp awl
3) drill the whole with the thinnest auger you have - mine is 1mm. It proved to be crucial to turn the shaft with the other hand while carefully drilling - this eliminates a lot missing the axis of the shaft
4) now you have thin but exact :-) starting hole
5) you drill then with thicker and longer augers in succession - you drill just a bit (1cm) and then you put the auger out to remove the sawdust remaining on the auger, otherwise sawdust would cumulate inside a hole and you crack the shaft :-)
6) drill finally the hole which is little bit shorter than the needle you plan to insert
7) put the needle in while carefully screwing it into the hole and finally press it to fit and fix it within the shaft

Well, I really do not know if this is the correct approach or not, however it works for me well.

Hi all,

I am experimenting with barelled (=biconical) shafts and my results do not please me. Usually I am starting with Stu Miller spine calculator http://www.heilakka.com/stumiller/ to calculate the dynamic spine of my finished arrow and I am following the values emerging from there.... and yet my barelled arrows are not exactly precise as I would expect them to be.
Recently I have been quite careful in calculating, weighting, trimming, shaving, polishing to produce the following arrow (not so nice, sorry, but decoration was not a target ;-) )

[external image]

1) Bow 73#/28'' grozer turk bioc
2) my draw length 28"
3) point 80gr
4) needle 7cm, 70gr
5) spine of raw cedar shaft 75#
6) BOP 27.5"
7) barelled: feet (towards the point) 36cm; from 11/32 to 0.6cm ;
neck (towards the nock) 12cm; from 11/32 to 0.5cm
8 ) bakkam nock (cow horn)

And my arrow flies down to the left from the aimed point :-( (drawing with a thumbring with my right hand)

So: is there any direct - mathematical - relation between the three parameters of an arrow?
1) a spine of a cylindrical shaft before any shaping
2) a length of a needle
3) exact proportions/lengths of the arrow's feet and neck trimmed to barell?
I am sure such a formula must exist, I can't imagine old turkish cratsmen to trim/shave/finish arrow, then shoot with it and based on the shooting go back to trimming/shaving/finishing.
So such a formula must exist, however I do not know about it ;-)

lukostrelec wrote:

I can't imagine old turkish cratsmen to trim/shave/finish arrow, then shoot with it and based on the shooting go back to trimming/shaving/finishing.

I am pretty sure they did that:) many, many times!

Daniel wrote:

lukostrelec wrote:

I can't imagine old turkish cratsmen to trim/shave/finish arrow, then shoot with it and based on the shooting go back to trimming/shaving/finishing.

I am pretty sure they did that:) many, many times!

Really? :-D Do you have any historical reference proving it? ;-)

I doubt it, seriously, as it would had been totally impractical and time consuming. Arrows were and are projectiles, the old masters needed to produce hundreds, thousands of them, often in a short time, they surely had to have some - perhaps hidden - calculating formula, or just some simple rule of thumb, so to speak.

Hundreds of years of trial and error and lots of opportunities for field testing is what they had for sure:)
And ones the best formula was found they took off from there. I'm looking at Tartar arrows from Dresden collection - oldest, XVI century ones are much the same as the ones from first half of XVIII century. There are some differences but very small ones, and all arrows share the same main features.

Ok, then, yes, as many other human endeavors, they too draw the principles of their art from success and failure until they reached "the formula".
So, any clues on "The Formula"? Perhaps drawn too from success and failures nowadays? ;-)

lukostrelec wrote:

3) point 80gr
4) needle 7cm, 70gr
arrow flies down to the left from the aimed point :-( (drawing with a thumbring with my right hand)

Do you experience the same problem with lighter head? Looks like you're putting a lot of weight upfront (point, internal footing plus wrap)

Well, this was one of my thoughts too, but I don't think so (after much thinking ;-) )
The combined weight 80gr + 70gr = 150gr. It is heavier than usual standards (100, 125gr) however it is the weight of one of the points I have used before on cylindrical shafts and arrows flew fine.
Wrap is from hemp and it is light.

I would not like to go down with the weight because of FOC - now it is around 12 to keep my arrow flight straight.

I guess I have trimmed the shaft too (much or less???) to get a barrel. Now the shaft is trimmed to oblong cone on both ends and it has cylindrical part to have the biggest spine on the place where the arrow will leave the bow.

diameters: 0.6cm-----------------11/32"====11/32"---------0.5cm
lengths: 0----------------------36cm=====58cm----------70cm

On one of the previous experiments I have trimmed whole shaft to have continuous barrel from the point of 'brace height' towards both ends of an arrow. Judging at least from the pictures of the old Turkish (flight) arrows this was the very shape they had used.
However some fellow archers I have consulted trim shafts just at their ends, nobody (to my knowledge) is manufacturing totally continuous barrel...but I would like to ;-)

But to answer your question: no, I did not still experience it with lighter arrow head as I have not done such an arrow still ;-) but I have not good experiences with too light arrow heads as a tail of an arrow starts to wobble too much.....

I do tarz-i has (war) and kiris endam (target) profile arrows. I guess you could call it continuous barrel taper as I work whole shaft not just the ends as you say some of you fellas do. It it obviously hard to tell where exactly does the taper starts - goal is to arrive with smooth, parabolic profile of the whole arrow. If I take measurements of the taper for the given 32-34inch arrows (like tartar ones) length of the taper would be approx 14inches from each end with 4-6 inches in the middle being parallel. I use lighter than standard heads and that works fine. Now, for the shorter arrows like Turkish ones I learned that both tarz-i has and kiris endam work equally good. Again, stiff shaft, perfect taper, light head are main features. I shoot these arrows from bows weighting from 45lbs up to +75lbs and they fly very well.
Something that I haven't jet try is bark wrap to protect sinew reinforcing pile end. I haven't seen any modern reproductions with original ingredients (sinew + cherry bark) and synthetic fibers often seen don't look good.
Have you try it? I presume you might have since you use hemp...

Thanks a lot for your response, Daniel. At least you gave me more clues....as many masters either do all the crafting intuitively or they are hiding their achievements ;-)

Daniel wrote:

If I take measurements of the taper for the given 32-34inch arrows (like tartar ones) length of the taper would be approx 14inches from each end with 4-6 inches in the middle being parallel.

in the middle of the shaft? I am "centering" the barrel around the brace height to have the spine of the raw shaft at the value corresponding to dynamic spine results and thus to effectively overcome the archer's paradox (M??a has advised me to do so). Why do you center it around the middle of the shaft?

Daniel wrote:

I use lighter than standard heads and that works fine.

What exactly are the values?

Well, some of my archery fellows really do sinew+cherry bark on arrow points using natural sinew glue etc. I will not point at them directly, I just say that they are real masters and at the same time ATARNet members ;-)
I am just preparing my sinew bundle to do the likewise to propel myself at this next level ;-)

:D cherry bark ...

[external image]

birch bark

[external image]

Bakkam vith Hawk feathers. Sinew in all...

[external image]

yeah, Dusan is the fellow ;-)
beautiful, indeed.

Dusan, the points on the 1st picture - are they the puta points? horn/ivory/bone ones?

this is puta vith steel points.
Bone,brass pad,sinew is that

[external image]

I will not give you any scientific answer for two reasons - First I don't believe I could come up with anything better than what was already discovered long time ago, (at least not in a lifetime:) instead I prefer to spend my spare time to learn as much as I can from what's available about those interesting weapons of the past. Tartar arrows that I have seen in Czartoryski Museum in Krakow are middle centered in terms of the shaft profile. They are much longer than Turkish war arrows, and those to have even length tapers. Some sources (Arab Archery) say that classic barrel taper is the best overall shape. X10's for recurve shooters are classic barrel tapered but again their compound bow equivalents X10's protour are tarz-i has profile...
Now the second reason - I do not believe that spine had ever been such a important factor in Eastern Archery. Again no science to back this up only my humble experience and few hundred arrows made. I see if I do everything right and the release is sharp the arrow doesn't touch the bow at all and doesn't bend much either. Well matched parallel arrows fly very well, tapered fly better (and they don't have to matched nearly as good to the bow) barelled arrows fly the best.
The points I use are 70-80grains (turkish war bodkin heads are within that range from what I know) kustom made tanged piles. I use horn washers between the base of the point and the shaft. Shafts dimensions are 7mm at the thinnest point of the nock end, 8.7-9.1mm in the middle (or thickest part) and 6.5-7mm at the pile.
Attaching two photo samples of Tartar arrows I based my experinces on.

Thanks a lot Daniel to have a patience with me ;-)
Well, I will make some arrows based on your recommendations.
As you have pointed out a bowman in Arab Archery states that the symmetrical barrel is the best shape of all. Now it seems more logical to me as the forces of the release bend the arrow physically symmetrically and the barrel would compensate them in the best way if it is symmetrical too. Thus the spine will affect the flight less, while the overall weight - causing adequate force opposing the bending - will play more role.
Thanks again, I will work with better knowledge now and perhaps I will be able to post a picture better than the newbie one ;-)

Dusan, your arrows are really pleasing to an eye ;-)

In China, they used a heated wire of similar diameter to the tang of the arrow head.

I have also seen pictures of a drill bit mounted on a block of wood. The arrow shaft was centred on the tip of the bit and spun backwards and forward between the palms of the hands. With a little practice you can become very precise doing this. I find that power drills often wander along the grain of the wood going off-centre in the process.

Making little ferrules out of bone or horn can be made easily by drilling each piece with a quarter inch hole and mounting them all on a pen mandrill (the type pen makers use on a lathe). A dozen or more can be made at once with uniform diameters and profiles. If they move around on the mandrill, you can glue them together first with a water soluble glue like hide glue and soak them apart when the shaping is finished.

(Somehow this is out of place. It refers to making the hole for the tang. Incidentally, the hole was made before tapering the end in all the references I can find. It is easier to work with the full diameter shaft and the centring of the hole is an aid to the tapering.)

I believe both methods are equally good provided you are skilled enough. Spinning shaft around drill bit is a good way to achieve perfectly centered hole. Starting with larger diameter shaft is probably a little bit easier since you can shave tiny misalignment down to desired diameter of finished arrow. But is not a big task to make a hole in already tapered arrow - all you need to do is to make pilot hole in exact center. I do that with sharp, pointed utility knife. Next step is to turn pilot hole into conical one. Small, just enough so that the tip of the drill bit fits into it. Ones the drill bit sits in the center you can go dipper to desired depth of the tang. Regarding arrow wood as Bede pointed out some species are easier to work with than others: conifers are definitely trickier than poplar for example. It has something to do with growth rings. I go around that potential problem using horn washers. Small piece of horn is glued to the end of the shaft, rounded to the diameter of the arrow, than tang hole is drilled through. Horn washer gives much needed uniformity and also, to some degree acts as a suspension.

From what I have seen, the hole is made first and then the shaft is tapered down towards the edge of the hole. This is the preferred method for sinew wrapped feet on arrows.

I have Turkish arrows where the tanged point in mounted through a series of horn and bone washers which fitted around a tenon formed at the end of the shaft. I have Indo-Persian arrows where the reed has been scraped thinner near the point and thin metal rings in different alloys have been fitted over the end of the shaft flush with the original surface of the reed.

There are arrows in Karlsruhe which have flat-ended shafts that appear to have had horn washers that were fitted flush with the end of the shaft, but the horn is missing probably due to insect damage. The arrow heads were small bodkins which would not have exerted much sideways pressure on the shaft as they hit their targets. I have not tried to reproduce this structure and test it yet.

Thanks Bede for your input. I'm trying to clarify this. Somehow I don't get it: "washers fitted around a tenon formed at the end of the shaft".
What you are saying is that a tenon is formed to accept washers (by the way - are they flat just like screw washers are, or do they look more like small rings?) than a tang is inserted into the hole made directly in arrow shaft itself? This way washers don't have any direct contact with the tang only with the arrowheads shoulder. That would be much the same as the ferrule method used on Indian reed arrows...This doesn't give much of the suspension to the arrowhead (since the head doesn't sit only on the washers) acts rather as an aid to reduce sideways movement upon impact and it prevents splitting the end. I can see an analogy to carbon arrows footing method were aluminium alloy ferrule is glued over the shaft itself. What do you think?

Hello Gokmen

Your blog is very interesting - I would like to ask a question a bit out of the archery topic ; I saw that you are wearing a very nice ottoman helmet replica. May I know where you got it from ?

thxs !

Hello Gokmen

Your blog is very interesting - I would like to ask a question a bit out of the archery topic ; I saw that you are wearing a very nice ottoman helmet replica. May I know where you got it from ?

thxs !

Daniel,
I think that you are right. The washers are primarily to stop the shaft splitting. The tang is entirely in the wooden tenon which is an extension of the arrow shaft. I have seen X-Rays of Indo-Persian reed arrows, and the base of the arrowhead where the tang begins is not flat as in most arrowheads but an irregular cone that fits into the hole in the shaft. Whether there are ferrules or sinew lashing, they are to prevent the arrow from splitting the shaft on impact. In Indo-Persian arrows, the pitch (whatever form of tree resin it is) holds the arrowhead in place and distributes the force of impact down the shaft and outwards as well.

The small heads in Karlsruhe seem to be an exception. It is clear that the missing washers must have sat on top of the shaft and not around it. It is possible that the heads became detached and were reattached to the wrong shafts. This kind of curatorial accident is not unknown in a collection hundreds of years old, but I think that the simpler explanation is that the horn washers were eaten away by insects. the tangs are so small that they had less chance of splitting the shaft as long as they stayed centred.

Of the washers I have seen where their radial thickness was visible, I would say the majority were thin rings, but I have only seen a few so it is not a definitive assessment.

what about to use a thin copper line as a substitution for washer?
one would wrap the uneven parts between the end of the shaft and the neck of a turkish bodkin to fill them, strengthen them and work like a washer....

I don't see the point. If you do everything right there is very little to none room between the base of the shaft and arrowhead shoulder.

Daniel wrote:

I don't see the point. If you do everything right there is very little to none room between the base of the shaft and arrowhead shoulder.

that's the point ;) I would leave a small place between the end of the shaft and the neck of the rap bodkin which will be then filled with "copper serving" ;)

Ok, try it a see how it works

Daniel wrote:

Ok, try it a see how it works

I know, I know :-) that it is quite stupid idea, but I do like to inovate ;-)
Recently I have made a bundle of barreled arrows according to many advices, yours included. I have used rap bodkins made by very talented young slovak smith Simon Abel http://www.abeland.sk/kovac/index.html. I have instructed him in minute detail and I have passed to him great czech article devoted to this topic by Michal Sodja.

[external image]

The first sample of these points have not been hardened. During slovak Tournament of Tournaments in Pacov http://www.lukobranie.6f.sk/index.html I have missed some of the 3D targets in rocky pine-tree woods and hit some of the rocks. The points bent on the neck of the bodkin, but remained intact, I have just bent them back to the straight direction ;-) However what was very pleasant surprise was the fact that the thin part of the arrow towards the point remained totally intact! although being hardly 5mm thick in the place when touching the neck of the bodkin.

before final finish - freshly served with elk sinew:
[external image]

finished, after tournament but without damage:
[external image]
(Yes, I know, the serving is so rude and primitive, please have a patience, I am a greenhorn yet ;-) ).

finished, after tournament but little damaged from the hits onto the rocks:
[external image]
(I was lucky enough that czech agaşi Michal Sodja has finally made for me the best bodkins in the world ;-) so the next arrows will be more durable....)

It could be easily seen that the shaft suffered from damage in the very end place despite the careful sinew serving there. So this is the reason of my idea to supply the washer with copper line - just a try ;-)

I get it now: with forged points it is very difficult to make nice, clear 90 degree angle between the shoulder and the tang. Machined points are very uniform so no problem there. Anyway, the bodkin made by Simon seems to be very long, can you tell us why? And how much does it weight? Regarding serving - for neat look try not to overlap sinew. Can we see the whole arrow?

Well, the bodkin has its pyramid needle 7 cm long. Its weight is about 150 grains.
I have trimmed the cedar and pine shafts symmetrically from 11/32 to about 4-5mm at the ends:
5mm<----1/3 of the length----><----11/32 along the 1/3 of the length----><----1/3 of the length---->5mm.
Finally I have made final more trimming on both ends (gradually of course) corresponding with the length of the needle, thus acquiring symmetrical shaft.
My reasoning was that the longer the needle the better stability and the directness of the point-area of the arrow. For this reason I have pondered about even longer needle, however I have chosen 7cm for "my" smith Simon to be comfortable during the startup.
The serving is rude because I have processed the sinew filaments quite primitive with just the nails of my fingers, that is why they were not perfectly flat when gluing them onto the shaft. Moreover, every new filament have been overlapped so to prevent its loosing.
Here are the arrows, they are of slightly different size because of the input parameters: spine, weight, bodkin weight.
[external image]
And here are the nocks. I have started first with bakkam, but it is quite time-consuming still for me. So I have used some hybrid :-) I have cut small pieces from my damaged bamboo arrows, I made a conical whole in it and matching cone raze on the shaft leaving small flat surface of the width of the bowstring. I glued it like that together, then I served it with sinew and finally made a cut in it just towards the flat end of the shaft. So I have achieved a bowstring to give its force mainly to the shaft itself. Still primitive look but the arrows fly very well and consistent within the bundle.
[external image]

Luko; Before attaching the points, weigh both the points and the arrow. Match the lightest arrow with the heaviest point. A little can be ground off the point to balance the entire arrow. A small nail can be inserted under the nock if the arrow is too light. One gram. This also helps for center of balance. Shafts weight matched to begin with result in the best final matching.

Sinew can be compacted when it is 90 percent dry and also polished by rolling on a very hard surface or by burnishing. Neck sinew makes the best lashings.

For the reason that your sinew at the points wears hard, Mughal arrows are superior with metal ferules instead of sinew. Fine arrows used on targets and shot many times just take too much wear at the points.

There is every variation on tempering. Each part of a point can be different.

Daniel wrote:

I get it now: with forged points it is very difficult to make nice, clear 90 degree angle between the shoulder and the tang. Machined points are very uniform so no problem there. Anyway, the bodkin made by Simon seems to be very long, can you tell us why? And how much does it weight? Regarding serving - for neat look try not to overlap sinew. Can we see the whole arrow?

90?is&#324;t good idea. Arrowpoint with sharp perpendiculary shape between base and tang easy break (or bent, when steel is too soft).

M??a wrote:

Daniel wrote:

I get it now: with forged points it is very difficult to make nice, clear 90 degree angle between the shoulder and the tang. Machined points are very uniform so no problem there. Anyway, the bodkin made by Simon seems to be very long, can you tell us why? And how much does it weight? Regarding serving - for neat look try not to overlap sinew. Can we see the whole arrow?

90?is&#324;t good idea. Arrowpoint with sharp perpendiculary shape between base and tang easy break (or bent, when steel is too soft).

Yes, exactly as we have discussed together when we met last time, M??o. That is why I have instructed Simon very clearly to be careful especially for this part. I have thought, however, that sinew would be enough to protect the touching parts of the shaft and the neck of the bodkin. It was not.
For the next time I am preparing some copper/aluminium plates from old, unusable, coins :-D

Some of the old points I have are almost conical in the transition between the point and the tang. They relied on the compression of the sinew drying to stop the point from being forced back into the wood or reed. I think this shape was to avoid the problem of a sharp angle and the consequent risk of breaking.