why are reflex bows less forgiving?

I think forgiveness of a particular shooting fault is what makes a bow forgiving for that person. I can say for certain that a flimsy tipped recurve can be more affected by an off balance release than a string follow self bow or well tillered Hill style longbow. Also, I have noticed that a hybrid style short bow shows more variation in arrow speeds at varied draws than a Hill style longbow. If one shoots with Hill form one will like Hill style bows. If one shoots with a straighter arm or a more static style one will like a hybid better. If one likes to have a more forgiving release one will like a longer bow, I am not so certain that the final shape of the limb makes as much difference as good tillering and a wider string angle.

[**DONOTDELETE**]

Originally posted by Orion:
Go back and read the link that's cred4d posted.  That's math and science, not opinion.  Analysis is primarily with recurves, but shows geometrically why and how longer bows are more forgiving than shorter bows, and why thinner,stacked lamination limbs on longbows are more forgiving, ie, tolerant of sideways torque on the string than flatter, wider recurve limbs.  Sure design has a lot to do with it, and one can do a lot with design and materials to make the more radical designs more forgiving. And a person's shooting experience and ability play into it as well as to whether it's even perceived or not.  And, as I noted above, the differences are more theoretical, than practical.  Most shooters probably can't tell the difference.  But there is a difference, all other things being equal, as Sixby notes.

I'm not new to this game either.  I've been shooting sticks for nearly 60 years, and built a lot of selfbows and glass laminated bows in the past.  I shoot highly r/d longbows, mild r/d longbows, Hill style longbows, selfbows and recurves. My current preference is the extreme r/d longbow. It's as smooth to draw as a hill style, probably smoother, certainly a lot faster, but not as forgiving of my shooting faults as a Hill.

That article was a pretty decent explanation of limb stability and energy storage, as well as how "Modern Recurves" using a carbon fiber weave matrix helps with torsional stability.... The theory behind changing the geometry and stabilizing a more radical hook in a recurve limb is very real and very necessary...

But.....That was written in 2008 and the advancements made in today's "Modern recurve" and R/D long bows in the last 5 years are pretty amazing....

[Fanto]

We had a huge argument on the australian bowhunting forum about bow names (longbow/recurve/ deflex/ reflex etc) which I wont bore you with but what seems to be universally accepted is that bows like the big jim and the toelke whip etc are "Deflex/reflex" as opposed to "reflex/deflex" the reason being that the description starts from the riser, so the limnb first deflexes toward the archer, then reflexes away from the archer, hence deflex/ reflex.

please feel free to call your bow whatever you like, im not going to debate the point, just thought it was worth a mention.

 

Originally posted by 30coupe:
 

Originally posted by olddogrib:
Okay, somebody straighten me out here.  
What constitutes reflex/deflex in limbs? I've always thought of those terms as they relate to riser design, with a reflexed riser having the limbs butts more forward-mounted, over or even in front of the bow hand and a deflexed riser having the limbs attaching more rearward, behind the bow hand.  If this analogy is "all wet", just tell me, my wife does it all the time, lol.  But with that analogy the reflexed riser limbs would have a power stroke that would be(for lack of a better term)more linearly forward compared to a deflexed that would be comparatively more up and down.  I'm thinking of similarity to the recent "horizontal limb" technology of wheelie bows where the limb movement is now almost entirely up and down, but on a much, much smaller scale. And I know this is a gross oversimplification, but it seems like it would be further corroborated by the limb preload at brace, which I would think would be greater with the reflexed riser design.  Thanks Kirk and Sixby, that's why you guys that build 'em need to enlighten us dummies that shoot 'em!

Here is a r/d longbow...my Kanati.

Unstrung:

   

...and strung:

   

By the way, it is VERY forgiving! And as Kirk said, that is a FACT! [/b]

[olddogrib]

Cyred4d,
Thanks for that link.  Even as a "bow dummy" I could grasp most of that. I wasn't as far "off in the bushes" as I thought, mainly just having trouble expressing my thoughts in "non-techno-weenie" terms, but even a "blind hog can pick up an acorn now and then"!

[Mr.Magoo]

Hummm ...  Not a 'D' bow in sight.

 

[Brianlocal3]

Magoo,
You can't compare those rigs to even barebow ILF rigs.
Two complelty different animals.  

Not can you compare hunting compounds with target compounds, or bench rest rifles to my predator guns.

Doesn't make a point at all

Hummm ... Not a 'D' bow in sight.
Not a bowhunter in sight either. While I do not deny the ability of a target recurves ability to put out a fast arrow. A hunter that is in persuit of a rascally wabbit, a furious pheasant, or a nervous whitetail, has to take a much tougher shot than a target shooter shooting at a dead target. Nor do I deny that there are lots of great hunting recurves and hybrids to pick from, but after reading this thread and the article, I knew that the best bow for what I do is the JD Berry Mornigstar that I have on order. I wonder if James has the torque control stabilizer option for that Morningstar.

[30coupe]

Originally posted by pavan:
Hummm ... Not a 'D' bow in sight.
 

I'm thinking those things would be a pain to use in a ground blind.  

[Mr.Magoo]

Well ... the original question was about reflex and forgiveness in limb design.  What's in the pic .... reflex.  So I think it makes a pretty simple point.

[Cory Mattson]

Dave THAT WAS FUNNY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

To the original question - reflex deflex are NOT less forgiving - as some have said. I shoot all types of longbows all the time and the notion that a straight limb or whatever is more forgiving is complete nonsense.

<><
<------------------<<<<<<<<

[olddogrib]

I have no dog in this fight, merely trying to comprehend.  The following statements are copied verbatim from the link:

Improving Stability
"Caution must be exercised when designing a bow with recurve, because bows with greater recurve can also be less stable unless the proper provisions are made to improve the stability. The stability of a bow is its ability to minimize errors induced by the archer upon release of the string, and still have the arrow assume its desired trajectory. This quality is known in the target archery community as “forgiveness”. Since the string must move around the fingers upon
release, the predominant error is inconsistent side-to-side movement of the string while the arrow is still attached to the string.
The ability to resist the side-to-side motion of the string (and thus the perturbations caused by release errors) is often associated with the torsional stiffness of the bow; however this resistance is also strongly associated with the shape of the bow. In a bow with no recurve, such as a long bow, all parts of the bow are oriented toward the archer when moving along the limbs from the center of the bow to the tip. As the bow is drawn, a top view of a long bow in Figure 12 shows that the draw force tends to return the bow to its original in-line orientation when that orientation is perturbed slightly to one side. Upon release, the bow limbs drag the mass of the arrow (through the string) such that the return force tends to rotate the bow to its in-line orientation when that orientation is deformed slightly to one side, as would be induced by a release error. This behavior makes the long bow inherently stable at all draw length."

If the author's view is correct and I haven't seen anyone dispute it, then it's not inconceivable to me that reflex in a long bow limb would function similarly to the tip radius of a recurve limb, albeit on a much smaller and less exaggerated scale . I didn't take it that the author was implying these features to be unequivocally unstable, merely that the tendency existed if the bowyer didn't account for increased torsional stability if his design.  I merely point this out as it may answer the OP's original question...where did the reputation come from?