Trad Gang
Main Boards => PowWow => Topic started by: bayhunter on May 11, 2011, 11:49:00 PM
-
Whats the difference between working recurve limbs and static recurve limbs? Whats the advantages and disadvantages of each? Thanks
-
Dan Toelke tells me the limbs on my Montana Bows Lynx recurve are a true working limb and I can say it is extremely smooth shooting and is as quiet shooting of bow as I have ever owned.
Love this bow.
-
Great question, would love to see what everyone has to say. Even though I think I know the difference it would be nice to find out from someone with more knowledge on the subject.
-
When I see the term "static recurve", I immediately think of the old Bear bows from the 30's, 40's, and early 50's. I believe Nels Grumley came up with them in an effort to improve on the longbow, making a smooth drawing and fairly fast bow.
With the static recurve, the tips do not unfold or curl back. Later came the working recurve that had the tips unfolding.
Which is better? :dunno: :dunno:
I know most target bows are working recurves, so that must mean something. :confused:
I think most bows made today are working recurves, but some companies like RER makes static recurves that are smooth and pleasant to shoot.
Maybe it's like the debate over left wing or right wing feathers? Both work fine...just whatever your preference.
-
Thats interesting to hear that they both work fine but im wondering what are the disadvantages to static limbs because it seems like most bowyers dont make them :confused: so theres got to be a reason, right? :dunno:
-
From what I've heard and read, most bowyers do not make the static recurve mainly because fewer archers want them. There are tales (maybe some truth in them) that the static recurves can easily get twisted limbs, but that's probably from stringing. Archers also claim that form has to be really good for every shot or you can expect flyers. (I get that with working recurves.)
The statics are fast due to this design and are usually quieter. The lack of limb uncurling keeps the string on the the limb eliminating limb slap.
Other than RER Bows, another popular static is the Jack Kempf Kwik Styk which is a "hot" bow these days.
-
Check out the Talons, they are statics. You won't find any of them being traded or sold.
God bless you all, Steve
-
I own a Chastain recurve which is a static limb. Blackhawk is correct as far as the uncurling on the limb is concerned. It is a very smooth and silent shooting bow. I don't buy into the statements that people say they are hard to string.
With that said it is not in the same league as a Toelke Lynx. I have both the recurve limbs and the long bow limbs for the lynx. The recurve limbs make a 58" bow and the long bow limbs make a 62" bow. I would go as far to say that the recurve limbs are every bit as quiet and smooth as the long bow limbs. It really is a great bow built by a great person.
-
My understanding of "static tip" is that by increasing the curl of the limb it increases the "cast" of the limb which in turn increases the stored energy and speed.
I own a Belcher Thunderbird and must say...pound for pound prob the fastest bow I've ever owned.
-
This is getting interesting!!
So what is my Black Widow PMA? Static?
-
im pretty sure black widows are working not static
-
Kempf makes a static limb Recurve cant get better than his
-
Anybody out there make a Grumely static reproduction? You now, the one with the "brush buttons" or whatever they called it? I'm thinking about the picture of Fred Bear dragging the deer back to the cabin ...
-
yes tommy there is a fella that makes them and i have his info some where i wull look and send it to you ut he does not have a web site that i know of
-
I own a sovereign ballistik that is a static recurve. It is very fast, smooth, and is on my never sell list.
There is a big difference between the old school static recurves with the thick wedges at the ends and the new static designs.
-
Once owned a quite severe static recurve.
A booger to string, probably even more complicated due to my inept ability.
The bow would launch an arrow with quite evident authority.
-
Now this is not from personal experience, I have never shot a static limb curve, but this is what I have read and it makes sense to me. The static limb, does not unfold, maintains a larger string angle; therefore the draw is smoother and produces less "finger pinch." Also, I assume they would be quieter because string slap is reduced if not eliminated because the limbs do not unfold. However, this is speculation, most of the extra energy provided by a recurve compared to a long bow I would assume comes from the working limb concept. The unfolding during the draw to be flexed back during the shot provides energy, and if well designed more speed.
But when people discuss their fondness for about RER arroyos and Kwyk Styk's they almost always mention the fast speed. So what do I know.
-
I am a great believer in static recurves. I killed my last elk with one. I own two Salukis, they both shoot heavier arrows faster than you would think. With the Ibex when the tips start to load the limbs draw feels lighter than it is. And they look sooo cool.
MAP
-
I have 2 sovereign Ballistiks that are on my never sell list also.
The speed is generated because the limbs don't have to unfold. They work as a lever more than a spring.
Carl
-
I have a RER Arroyo and it is 52#@28" and I never shot a static in my life till I traded for this one...It will flat out shoot an arrow out to 20/25 yards with no drop in my arrow...Now my shooting is very limited and when people mention no finger pinch this really makes me more interested in trying those type of bows....Here's a true observation from someone who has beafited from a static limb bow...I had my right hand severed in a logsplitter back in 1985 and after two hours time I finally got to a hospital in Baltimore to have it reattached....Very blessed to have it saved due to the time frame...It was pinned back together and with lots of therapy I shoot traditional bows still....I pull with that hand and shoot split finger and "Static" limbs on my RER has no finger pinch....It is a smooth shooting recurve but as I grow older I can say 52# is too much for me but I can still handle that weight due to the limb design....I may one day trade this bow but only for the same but lower poundage...The stactic design has it's beneafits so take it from a man it has helped....Keefer's <")))><
-
All of the so called "horse bows" ie Turkish, Magyar etc... were and are static recurves. The advantage of a static recurve is that it increases string angle on full draw and allows the shorter bow to act as a longer bow. It also increases speed and smooths the draw. That is one reason why many of the Asian style recurves feel like you are pulling so much less.
The disadvantage is they are more difficult to make and also can be harder to string.
-
Dryad makes a dandy.
-
Originally posted by TommyBoy:
Anybody out there make a Grumely static reproduction? You now, the one with the "brush buttons" or whatever they called it? I'm thinking about the picture of Fred Bear dragging the deer back to the cabin ...
Stillwater Archery makes a bow called the "Grum" that is based on the old Bear Grumley bows.
-
I like my Java Man Helm's Deep static recurve.
-
How about some pics you guys???
-
Two piece(sleeve)Palouse Static Recurve
(http://i241.photobucket.com/albums/ff14/LoneWolf73_photo/P3180665.jpg)
Brad Merkle Static "Self Bow"
(http://i241.photobucket.com/albums/ff14/LoneWolf73_photo/P3230680.jpg)
(http://i241.photobucket.com/albums/ff14/LoneWolf73_photo/P3230683.jpg)
-
Here is a link to a thread I started a while back. If you want info on a Grumley replica send me a PM. Hope this helps.
http://tradgang.com/noncgi/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=093850;p=1#000000
-
The more forward the tips of a bow are in relation to a riser, the more prone the bow is to twist during an attempt to string it. Meaning, if you compare two bows that are otherwise identical but one with the tips 3" in front of the riser and the other is 1" in front of the riser, the one that is 3" forward is more prone to twist on you because small variations off an in line pull will result in a force that is a greater distance out of alignment. If you have two parallel lines that are so close together that they appear to be the same line...but one then changes angle at a given "X" degree...the further you continue down that line the greater the distance one travels away from other line that remained straight (the initial plane). It is just physics. The further one travels off line (such as by bow torque during stringing at "X" degree), the more the radical limb is pulled out of alignment.
Additionally, the harder/more radical the curve, the more prone it is to twist. Meaning if you have two bows with the same amount of backset (lets say 2"), but one has the reflex is spread out over a full working limb while the other is static (radically recurved at the tip), the one with the greater "hinge" is more prone to twist. Imagine taking a wire and bending it to a V. If you were to rest the V on a string, it would turn upside down and self-center (become stable) by taking a deflexed shape. If you insist that it stay upright (reflexed) and balanced on the point at the bottom of the V, it would remain unstable and be more prone to twist by being hyper sensitive to any out of alignment pull that is out of alignment with the fulcrum. Again, it is just physics.
Now, all that said, one can indeed make a static bow that is sufficiently stable for shooting if the braced position is one with the tips having enough "string follow" to maintain a desire to pull in alignment...but it is certainly a tricky balance. The tips should NOT still be pointing forward when the bow is at full draw. IMO, the tips should go "vertical" around mid-draw in order to maintain stability of a static bow. If I am right (as this is just MY OPINION), this means the tip angle at full draw would be off vertical by about the same amount as they are at brace height, but of course in the opposite direction by pointing rearward instead of forward. Too MUCH string follow at full draw and you loose the benefits of the static design as string angle will be increased and might as well go with a full working recurve. Too LITTLE string follow at full draw (by string follow I am referring to the degree of pointing rearward), and you give up too much stability. Now, that said, the goal of a static is NOT just about string angle at the tip. The goal is to get the limb to work closer to the fadeouts without adding mass to the tips. This increases stored energy. A very short limb after a hard curve doesn't really add much energy to the fadeouts as there isn't enough leverage there (proportion of the limb) to drive the energy into the fadeouts...but it is also MY OPINION that one of the best ways to make a static bow HYPER SENSITIVE is to have too much limb length AFTER the hard curve. A long lever (limb) after a hard sharp curve makes the bow too easy to torque during draw. The harder/more radical the curve, the shorter the limb should be out past the curve...but if you go too short it doesn't provide any leverage (not good). Again, you have to balance curve and limb leverage to balance energy and stability. I like Sixby's design because IMO it appears near optimal for a static design. While he does have enough limb after to the curve to improve the stored energy to his limb's profile, it also appears that when given the choice between stability vs energy, he chose to error on the side of stability by not making the limb too long after the curve...therefore minimizing the instability issues of a static limb design.
Now, that said, I have never seen a static design being used in Olympic competition. Of course, in the Olympics, noise isn't an issue so the static's benefit in the noise department isn't considered an advantage as it would be in bowhunting. But, I do believe a bowyer can get much of the speed/energy the static has to offer in a full working recurve IF the design is good that also has the tips go vertical around mid-draw, as this would minimize string angle at full draw (within reason) while ALSO maintaining stability (that is obtained string follow during the draw). It is all about BALANCING the traits we desire in a way that produces an optimal bow for our needs.
Unbraced profile alters stability during stringing and also influences initial stored energy at brace.
Braced profile alters stability during shooting and also influences stored energy throughout the draw.
Now that said, STABILITY and ENERGY are very much, but not entirely, in opposition with one another when it comes to bow design.
On stability - The most stable design is a straight limb. This of course is also the least efficient, with the exception of an entirely deflexed/string follow bow being even less efficient than the straight limbed bow (although in my opinion the string follow bow is NO MORE stable than a straight bow as a straight bow and a string follow bow with both have the same strung profile...and it is the strung profile that ultimately determines stability for shooting).
On energy - The more ENERGETIC design is reflexed. We can add reflex to a bow, but doing so typically results in a loss of stability unless one also adds deflex. A good bowyer CAN add more reflex than deflex to create backset without causing a significant loss of stability, but only if they know how to balance these attributes well. If it isn't done right, the bow will be sensitive.
Both static and full working can be good and/or bad. This is left up to the skills and knowledge of the bowyer...as a good bowyer knows how to BALANCE these traits in a manner that results in good shootability.
Deflexing the riser, or shortening the riser to get the bow to work closer to the hand will add a degree of string follow closer to the fulcrum (the bow hand). Too much of this though, and you loose efficiency by having too much mass movement (limb movement) that results in an absorption of energy.
These situations all go back to..."Just because a little is good doesn't mean a lot is better." It is all about balance.
-
All I know is that all the static limb bows(3 different bowyers) I've owned where very smooth,very quiet,and shot w/ good speed.The only thing about static limb bows I didn't like,was that they where very difficult to bareshaft tune.A must for me.
-
The origonal Talon I built was a bit unstable verticaly in lower weights 50lbs and under. However in heavier weights it was good. The new Talon 11 is stable in all weights with the shooting attributes of the origonal Talon.
I am in agreement with what Lee said and stand amazed at his ability to articulate the thought process. Right on sir.
It takes a lot of work to make a good static . A lot more than a standard working recurve. I believe that is why so few are produced. Also getting the balance and getting the right reflex and shape in the limb along with the right length is something that takes a lot of understanding and experience and r and d. There is only one way to really get that and that is to build them. Take your lumps and losses and be a quick study.
Tendancys are to over reflex, lose stability. under reflex lose power. I have learned to make full use of power wedges and to work the working limb length so that I can keep the tips at an optimal length for the draw length and bow length. That is a lot of combinations. However to maintain speed and stability and smoothness of draw it is imperative to do so .
God bless you all, Steve
(http://eaglewingarchery.i8.com/images/PaulGustafson/pgtal15.jpg)
-
I believe the main reason for not making the static limb is that they are much harder to make than the static. Frank
-
I have shot three and all were quick and very quiet. I also found them very accurate and consistent shooting. Only one was a bow I had around to play with for a while. It was a very short bow, but easy to shoot and no real finger pinch I recall. The only thing I didn’t like was stringing it. It was a little hairy stringing, but then I mostly shoot long bows.