Flagella dei

I see that they have a nice site; but no photos or drawings of their bows.

S

I found some now (the Hun-bow doesn't seem to have pictures though).

It seems that for some of categories under "Our bows" one have to choose
a sub-category (i.e. "Mongol") before a picture appears. A little arrow-point
in the lower right corner then indicates how many pictures availible.

Some of the pictures where also a bit slow to load into the frame.

There was a dealer here in the mid west awhile ago. A friend picked up a "Mongol" from them. The siyhas seemed a bit heavy(?) When shot it had a sluggish feel to it. More along the lines of a slingshot shooting a heavy stone than the usual snap that I'm used to with a bow.
It was not bad to shoot and kept its end up out to 25-30 yards. As to speed I didn't notice that it was any speed demon. But with a real light arrow I guess it would get up there.
JonR

I have shot some arrows with a Flagella 57@28, the hun model and with a turkish. The bows are laminated fiberglass and wood, with osage siyah and with nice reflex shape.

The hun seems to be much stronger when start to draw, like a 70 lbs, then become very smooth.

It shot with handshock, not very fast, but is very pleasant and I think is a better bow than Toth hun bow (these Toth bows are made with fiberglass limbs and ash siyah).


The turkish model have a C shape. Compared with a grozer turk, at some draw weight (around 33@28 both bows I have tested) is no difference. And very important, these bows are cheap, in Romania one bow cost 150 euro, I think in Hungaria can be cheaper.

The hungarians archers have some speed tests, look here:

http://sarkanykronika.atw.hu/flagella.htm


The bows available today are little bit different relative to the bows picted on this site.

I noticed they were cheap as well, always a major incentive.

Ginni, Do you know what the draw length on the Torok (i'm assuming thats turk) bow is?

Those new bows look even better than the ones on the site, i'm even more tempted now! Pity there isn't a good hungarian to english translator.

Many thanks

Mike

Well the speeds are as a selfbow shoot, so I wonder, what arrow weight did they use?

Mike,

The turk can be draw at 30", so the krimean-tartar; the others bows at 32".

I have here in Romania a friend who is flagella dei dealer and have very good prices. He speak english very good and is a nice guy; if you want you can mail him here:

[email protected]

His name is Dragos.

About the arrows used, I think it was aluminium 2117 at 28' draw lenght.

They look very similar to bows by Kaffka.

I have a bow I ordered directly from Hungary, made by a bowyer named Karoly Lapat. It is a 'Magyar' style and looks identical to the one on the site.

It weighs 62lb @ 28" and seems to shoot fast with a good feel, though it does have alot of initial tension.

Orda Khan wrote:

They look very similar to bows by Kaffka.

They are actually the same - Flagella Dei is owned by the Kaffka family.
Szabi

I wonder if that statement - a Flagella Dei Turk is the same as a Grozer Turkish bow - is completely impartial and unbiased.

Certainly it does not apply to laminated or TRH Grozer bows. I've shot both.

I stand corrected. After talking with my friend,the bow was a Toth not Kafka.

I don't know if this is pheasible or not but anyway,
I think I am right in thinking that there are hundreds of good bows out there, and that many of these bows shoot well. This leaves people who are looking for a 'traditional' bow (insofar as traditional as a english man with a turk bow can be) rather stuck for choice.
how about an article containing a list of bows shot by members of this forum. I don't mean a article saying 'yeah this bow is great' but more along the lines of this bow's arrow speed is, longest distance shot with such and such weight arrow is,. sort of a guide for newbies like me on whats hot and whats not.

cheers

Mike

sbartels,

I have shot with two very light bows, grozer turk base and flagella turk, booth around 33 lbs.

The bows shot almost identical, but I dont know how will shot bows with a heavy or medium draw weight.

Course, the grozer bow look much better, there a big difference between.

Of course the Turk base also has massive fiberglass limbs, so these bows should be roughly in the same league (because of the comparable "technology"). The grozer might have some advantages due to higher loading at brace height, though. But it might not make such a lot of a difference.
The laminated Grozer bows are in a different league altogether (price, too!).

Heres a good site to compare bow pics and prices.
I have delt with Rainer a couple of times and if he has it you get asap.
And his prices are not half bad.
http://www.eastern-archery.com/eukaffkaframe.html
jonR

I can confirm the eastern archery site, Reiner is a real gentleman. I suggested his site to other archers at my club who have since acquired bows from him.
I have tried Kaffka's Hungarian and Mongol models and I have seen bows made by Toth. I would argue that bows by Kassai and Grozer perform better (that is not to say the others were disappointing) and look better. I can not comment on the Turkish model as I did not try it, only Grozer's.

Mike,
Do you go to the Tewkesbury Mediaeval Fayre? It's a great weekend event with plenty to see. A couple of guys from Hungary always turn up selling bows, they usually have a big selection of Hungarian, Turkish and Mongol models and the prices are very reasonable, even negotiable depending how cheeky you are.

I, too, have only had very positive experiences with Eastern Archery. Reiner has now extended the range of bows he carries, making it harder to choose...

Thanks for that site jonR, looks like I have a nice selection to choose from in the future.
I am actually surprised as to how many successful traditional bow makers there are out there.

Mike

M Hardman.
Heres an interesting offer from Grozer.( I have one) If you get it without the arrow shelf you can shoot it either split finger or with a thumb ring.
one of the more versitle of grozers bows. Well in MHO
Somewhere in the archives I have a post giving its proformance. Don't have them on paper anymore.
I did get a couple of more bows from Reiner but thats another post on bow differences.
http://www.eastern-archery.com/tradhuntrecgrozer.html
jonR

Has anyone tried shooting a bow with an arrow shelf with a thumb ring draw?, It might be interesting to see how that changes the flight of the arrow.

That hunting recurve looks a bit like his new mongol bow, I suppose effective designs are similar.

Mike

Well one benefit of the shelf is consistency and it seems quite feasible that using a left handed bow (shelf on the right) should work fairly well with a thumb release. I made a leather grip similar to the ones that Grozer offers and found that my accuracy was improved because the arrow position is always the same.

Are there any historical arrow shelf examples then? besides the turkish siper, even then I dont know if it was used outside flight archery .

Mike

I think that there were tied on arrow shelves used in some parts of Africa and the Americas. Modern arrow rests are a twentieth century invention.

A form of siper, called a navak-e qabza (the Persian name for siper), was tied onto the side of the bow. It was an overdraw and was used in war. It is described in the Hidayat ar-Rami.

There were at least three forms of rings worn on the bow hand thumb or forefinger to support the arrow used in Turkey, Iran, Mongolia and Korea. The last two have been photographed in use in Mongolia and Korea.

Reiner told me it was basically a Mongol that was all laminated wood. no leather covering on the limbs.
If I ever get back to shooting again I may try the Crim-Tartar. Always had a feeling it may be a fun bow.
jonR

I have find these diagrams on the net.

And this one. I don't know nothing about the Liskany bows.

jonR wrote:

Reiner told me it was basically a Mongol that was all laminated wood. no leather covering on the limbs.
If I ever get back to shooting again I may try the Crim-Tartar. Always had a feeling it may be a fun bow.
jonR

The Grozer Crim-Tatar is, it's what I'm normally using as my strength bow. Very frustrating, I'm still at only 25-26 in. of draw... but after that, boy does my 80-pounder feel a lot easier to pull! For the record, that curve they show with the TRH Magyar matches my experience exactly: there's a spot where it gets real easy to pull, but then if you want the rest of your shaft inside the bow, you're going to work for it.

With a draw force curve like that where is the peak efficency of the bow? I wonder if it actually does any good to pull through the final few inches, as I would have thought the steep curve represented the dreaded 'stacking'.

Mike

I have to leave that to the experts... anybody?

I have my own question: I just derived the KE from the heavier Grozer bow there, the 57-pounder, and got averages of 83.2J, 85.9J, 85.6J, and 83.6J, respectively, with the four arrow weights documented.

EDIT: I'm an idiot. 41.6J, 42.9J, 42.8J, and 41.8J, respectively.

They show 70.8J, which is 1.24J/#, on a line with what Szollosy Gabor in Budapest has found with composites...

Can anybody tell how they derive their number? I'm bothered that mine and theirs would be so far off, but I don't have the calculus any more to derive the total area under the force curve for the second graph. And understanding how to derive this correctly is going to be important when I do some experimental archaeology and chrony my own bows later this year.

tnx...

Russ, your numbers are confusing.

The 42J you list for the KE is too low. I Think you meant 42ftlb. Otherwise the efficiencies, taking the 70.8J for stored energy, would be much too low. 42ftlb is about 57J, so the efficiency of your arrow is 57/70.8=80.5%, about right for a not-too-light arrow.

The stored energy of 70.8J was taken from the force-draw curve. They probably measured the weight every 1-2" and added all segments for the total.

1.24J/lb is possible, but not particularly good for a composite. especially for a longer one.

Is this bow a true composite ot a fiberglass replica?

Adam

My numbers are 1/2mv^2 based on the arrow velocity and mass. (Converted to metric.) Did I mess up the math?

How are those numbers summed under the force curve? I get measuring by inch or half-inch, but what I don't get is the formula, since simple summing gets you (a ton of pounds force)*(28 inches draw).

You need to keep your units the same for calculations.

A ton? try to divide by 12 - there is 12 inches to a foot.

Adam

I was speaking figuratively, Adam. And we can't keep the units the same: one measurement is in Imperial and the other's in Metric: how on earth does one compute kinetic energy in foot-per-second-grams?

EDIT: Okay, actually, I misinterpreted what you meant. Yes, the numbers come into line nicely... but I'm still surprised at the low KE...