HH bug got me ... Part One!

[WESTBROOK]

Brazos, look in the sponsors classifieds. He will have an add, lists all his string options, contact him by email or PM.

Eric

[Overspined]

For strings, search for oliverstacy as a handle, it's josh sowersby (spell?).  

NATE, come on, now is is the time to give your opinion about lam # and hill style bows!  You too Pavan.  Those who have played with it have an opinion.  I wish I could build bows and experiment...

[Rossco7002]

Arrrgh! What's happened to me! Spent the last month or so up at the lake shooting everyday from ranges 20 - 40 yards. I was hitting so sweet when I left I was beginning to see myself as the second coming of ole HH himself.

Now we're back in the city and I gotta shoot in my basement at 13 yards and I'm all over the map and my form is coming unstuck as a result. What went wrong?!!

You trying to start a fight here Matt? I like five lam bows, avoiding the pithy stuff in the bamboo and making the tips stronger. Plus it is possible to get a greater taper with nice shallow individual lams, more tip flip.  Besides, if a glue line is thin it doesn't really change things that much. How's that Matt.

[Overspined]

Opinions and experiences, Pavan. No fights. That's exactly what I was wondering about. I didn't think the glue made a whole lot of difference, it's so thin. I was looking at my different bows, and it looks like 3-5 lams is pretty standard.

I've heard a few say they really like the tembo, and I have enjoyed the Wesley sp.  I don't think I've shot a tembo to compare, maybe a really old one.

Most of the bows we speak of here are excellent, and the differences may be small, but I've shot a few over the years that after 2 shots, I just couldn't continue shooting because they felt like what the Hill bow haters say, they rattle your teeth. So there must be differences and advantages to some designs over others or that would never happen.

[toddster]

K, let me open up the can of worms, lol.  So tonight I was in garage, preping some of my tackle for squirrel season.  I looked at some of the broadheads I had and of course have some Howard Hill's, was wondering why there isn't a different ferrule made for the blade, to make it easier to sharpen?  I love the blade, myself, but not the ferrule.

[Charlie Lamb]

toddster... There have been many manifestations of the Hill head with different ferrule. Not the EXACT blade but following Howard's concept. Mostly the broadhead market is very competitive and somewhat saturated. So much so that it's very difficult to make a meaningful profit with any new design and especially one with as limited a following as the 3 to 1 ratio heads.

Here's John Shulz take on Howard's idea.
   

[Aussie Stickbow Hunter]

Originally posted by Butch Speer:
A few pages back, a fella asked about the differences in the number of lams. Is less better than more? More better than less? Appreciate any info>

Back in the early 1990's a mate and I (we both make our own longbows) did quite a bit of testing including if the number of lams made a difference in the performance of our bows. The bows were all the same except we varied the number of bamboo lams used.

We tested 3,4 and 5 lam bows and found the 3 lam bows to be the fastest and the 5 lam ones the slowest. The 4 lam ones were of course in between. Now I am only talking of approx 3fps difference between the 3 and 5 lam bows.

The feel, or smoothness of draw, isn't really something you can measure but to me the 5 lam bows felt slightly smoother on the draw than the 3 lam ones.

From our findings my mate decided to build three lam bows because he only has a 26" draw and wanted all the performance he could get for hunting. I chose to go with 4 lams and still use four today as the performance loss was minimal, the draw smooth and I like the look of the belly lam running up the belly side of the riser. Having 4 lams allows the belly lam to be thinner and bend nicely in the curve of the riser.

Not part of the above question but from our testing we also both prefer to use the set back (reflex) design over straight laid or string follow designs in our bows because of the substantial increase in performance without the loss of good shooting qualities.

Jeff

[DWilhelm]

Hey Charlie, I didn't know Schulz had his own broadhead!  The blades must be quite thick to prevent bending the tip back when bone is hit with 3 to 1 ratio heads.  I would like to try the Howard Hill broadheads but like others have said I don't like the ferrule.  To me it looks like it sticks up quite a bit where it meets the blade tip and would reduce penetration.

[Overspined]

I've messed with the Hill broadheads, they fly great, but I have a problem with the ferrule too. Ive had them split with a hard impact. Maybe it was a one-off, but I stick with any more solidly constructed head now and there's a bunch to choose from. Another frustration was sharpening that concave blade where it was all shaving sharp. I'm sure they are effective, but that was my take on them.

Jeff, good post on lam #, a lot of this seems to be splitting hairs.

[Ron LaClair]

The head that Schulz had was called the Hunters Head. It was a good head but the ferrule was an oddball size, 21/64. I shot a buck once using a 90# bow and the old Sweetland compressed cedar forgewoods. The arrow went through him like a hot knife through butter. It must have stopped somewhere in the next County...never did find that arrow..    

I heard that 3 Rivers bought the rights to the Hunters Head...maybe we'll see it again someday.

[Ron LaClair]

I just got off the phone with John Lee and ask him about the Hunters Head. John said that he designed the head for Schultz. He confirmed that 3 Rivers bought the rights to the head from the Kurts brothers who were the ones that were making it.

Jerry Hill made a version of the H Hill head some years ago. It was stainless steel and weighed 190gr. Each head came in an individual plastic bag and they came shaving sharp. It was a good head but I think costly to have made.

[Charlie Lamb]

Ron... I always thought Jerry's design of his uncles broadhead was great. I liked it better than Howards. I don't have both in hand at the moment, but if memory serves Jerry's was slightly larger.

The Hunter's Head is one super penetrating broadhead. My experience matches yours exactly.

[Overspined]

Cool history Ron and Charlie.

[Ron LaClair]

I think you're right Charlie about Jerrys head being a little wider...not much but just enough to make it was easier to get by the ferrule to touch up the edge.

I shot a running Caribou with Jerrys head. It was a 35yd running shot quartering away with an 80# bow. It cut the next to last rib and buried in the off shoulder. You could see a growing red spot on his side and he piled up in about 30yd's.

I was hunting with Jerry Brumm of Great Northern who witnessed the shot. My cedars were full dipped white with white fletching. Watching the arch of that white arrow and the running caribou come together was one of the prettiest shots I've ever made...    We had a video camera with us but it was in the pack...      :(

[swampthing]

Were you using white lacquer?

[swampthing]

Padded loop skinny strings. Even on self bows. Archers are raving about them left and right. Padded out to 16 strands has any one seen one cut into the glass on there bows? Some people say they shorten the "life" of the bow. What is that about.

[Ron LaClair]

Back then I was using Sherwin Williams Opex production lacquer, I've still got some gallon cans of it out in the shop..

One point on Hill broadheads, I shoot single bevel Hills that are ground from unhoned blades and when I sharpen them I take what ever part of the ferrule off with a file that gets in the way of my blade angle. It works just the same with the standard double bevel Hill heads.  Don't let ferrule control the sharpening angle, you control the ferrule with your file, it is thick and soft and you will not loose much strength by removing material from that part anyway. I am doing this from my car, how traditional is that? Time to hit the road again.

[Jacquesbonin]

Weighing in on the basic difference between say the "Tembo" model and the Big Five. The Tembo is a laination up the riser, with a total of 3 laminations. The Big Five is ussually 4 laminations laminated to the back of riser. The lamination up the riser allows smoother draw as the lamination compresses a little at full draw, the 4 lamination on back makes the limb come to terms quicker and the feeling of a little stack by comparison. Now I have had 4 lamination Tembo with one lamination up the riser and 3 lamination on back of riser in a Big Five. The four lamination Tembo was still smooth on the draw. The 3 lamination Big Five still had the feeling of a little more build up at or just before full draw. I will say the Tembo has always a smoother cast and cast an arrow further without the parabolic flight characteristic of the Big Five. I believe the difference to be the Tembo makes the riser flex ever so slightly, allowing the bow feel like it has a longer limb and contributes to the overall smoothness in bow performance. The Big Five because the laminations on the back of riser makes the limb shorter in comparison to the Tembo, both bows the same length and same poundage. The Big Five will usually send the same arrow out a little faster. I am talking heavy draw weight bows, there is just sutle differences,hardly percieveable to most. My preference for longer shots would be the Tembo, my preference in close say to 20-25 yards and fast shooting is the Big Five. I find shooting the Tembo, I will take a little more time at full draw, making sure of a clean release and taking advantage of shooting form. The Big Five is quick shooting at close range at odd angles, at moving targets, example while pheasant hunting and chasing down rabbits. It becomes a matter of preference. For me the most critical part is the handle. I like a straight grip that is narrow and deep enough to fill my hand, no sharp knife edge on the belly side of the grip. The grip makes more of a difference in shooting and cast, accuracy for me than the differences between 3,4 or more laminations. Well there is my take on the differences, outside of the fack the thickness of each lamination compared to each other in the bow ill make more or less poundage even at the same core depth. Allow me to elaborate, example no.1 lamination on the back of bowhas a 3/16ths core depth at fadeout, lamination no.2 has a depth of 1/8th, and lamination no.3 has a depth of 1/16th, this is before taper starts. Now example no.2 lamination on back has a core depth of 1/8th as do the other 2 laminations, both bows have the same overall taper to the lim. Bow no.1 will be less draw weight as compared to bow No.2. Bow no. 1 will be a lot softer on release and lacking in performance compare to bow no.2. If you have any doubts, spend the time to locate two similar bows as described(they are out there) and compare the results for yourself. I am sure this will spark some discussion. Later,Jacques