I have really never used a caul, probably because I never took time to make one. I just eyeball the rough cut stave and hold it in position after heating & until it cools. None of my bows are as near perfect as other people making selfbows.
I see & hear all the time; .125 positive tiller, 1/8 of center string line, tillered for 3 under, etc. etc.
That stuff has always been a bit too deep for me and I figured the primitives never had the luxury of micrometers, chalk lines, tape measures, etc. etc. Oh sure, they probably had some of their own types of measure,,, tip of pinky to tip of thumb =equals= long enough,,,, stuff like that!
I see primitives slowly warming a shapened bow at a fires side using the soft earth under his foot to provide leverage to manipulate the bow wood to a more suitable profile.
I guess that the primitive bowyer seen things sort of the way I and others may... If a bow is made by one's self, such bow has the speed and authority to gain adaquate penetration, the maker/shooter can find the bow and the man flinging arrows to a confident accuracy,,, well then the process comes full circle.
I am neither a authority on primitive skills nor can I always spell properly.
I hope no one takes this ranting of mine to heart. Everyone has an opinion and at times I wish I was as precise as others making and posting selfbows.
My patience and time run short and I don't always try and improve myself when given the opportunity. I guess the above was my attempt to justify my lack of concern for a better performing selfbow.
Seeing a recent post by Dano mentioning Gary Davis; it reminded me of this caul process. The cual has hounded my temptations since I saw Gary Davis at a trad show a few years back. He had a bunch of rough shapened osage selfbows for sale and they all looked really good as far as the preshape and the reflex in each bow. At the time I did not know who he was and but he explained on my comment to him about each selfbow looking so much the same. Gary proceeded to be informative and showed me his caul forms. He had the the cauls marked and shaped to certain demensions for different lengths, etc.
I have seen cauls here on the Tradgang and some have a simple slope from middle to the tips,,, really very gracefull and simple shapes.
If my memory serves me correclty Mr. Davis's cauls were more flat until about mid-limb, then they had a precribed and measured curve to match the lenght of the bow being formed.
Seems to me, either process or caul shape provides the same performance effect on the end result.
Is there an advantage to either shape of caul? What do you use when preforming your osage or other selfbow woods?