"Let me know what you think."
A heavy stocked and barreled bench rifle will probably be more stable having greater accuracy on paper than a featherweight high country sheep rifle. I doubt that anyone chasing high scores on paper at bench rest distances would bother going the route of a sheep rifle. Flip side, I doubt those chasing after sheep in the high country would go the route of the more accurate bench rifle. This analogy can apply to many hunting/target type weapons such as rifles, pistols, revolvers, bows and arrows, etc.
A long limb for design bow will generally be more stable than a short limb for design bow. Flip side, the shorter limb will generally be faster. A heavier well designed bow will generally be more stable than a lighter well designed bow. Flip side, the lighter bow will probably be quicker to deploy and easier to handle when afield. The list goes on and on.
An Olympic bow would probably be of greater accuracy on a static target face at target distaces than a trim and light hunting longbow. I doubt those chasing high scores would opt for the lighter and less stable hunting longbow over the target rig. Flip side, Those who opt for the sleek and light longbow when loosing arrows onto flushed pheasants or small game within spitting distances would probably be more accurate on game than those who would opt for the Olympic bow. The same stability designed into the Olympic bow to enhance static target accuracy, would now becomes "The Devil" and would make for a stagnant bow when used in a dynamic hunting environment.
So, when someone considered a target guru proclaims that one would probably find greater ease for finding accuracy in a static target environment by using a recurve or target bow, that person is probably correct. But, when someone considered a hunting guru such as Hill or a trick shooter as well as great hunter such as Ferguson(he's taken over 200 deer)proclaims that one would probably find more forgiveness for finding hunting accuracy in a dynamic hunting environment by using a longbow, they are probably correct as well.
The end game for each point of view are worlds apart as are the opposing means to get there. As example, Byron Ferguson developed his style of shooting by sitting in a totally dark room and shooting out the flames of candles. This technique is hard to master but is easier found when utilizing a bow and style that places the arrow shaft close to the hand while using a longbow style of shooting. This goes counter to most any static target principle and/or technique which is why you'll see so many target gurus make fun of Byron Ferguson's practice of shooting candles in the dark. Again, different end games and different means to get there. Both are probably correct within the context of their individual end game and many debates on this topic are probably out of context and apples-oranges in discussion based on the opposing paths. The answer for you will lie upon your own individual end game and your chosen path, not the end game and path chosen by another.
later,
Daddy Bear
Topic: longbow Vs. recurve (Read 583 times)
