Bear Cub help

[BenM]

Here is a pic of an old Bear Cub.  Please help me out with the year.  Thanks guys.
Ben  

[wadde]

Looks like a 1963 dog leg

[BenM]

A few more pics    
   

[BenM]

[/url] [/IMG]

[BenM]

Thanks for your help and sorry for the big pictures.  I can't edit photo bucket on my phone.

[Dan Cressman]

63 from what I can see. Pigskin grip if I remember correctly.

[wadde]

Prior to 63 the cubs were 62 inches long, 63 was 60 inches and after 63 went back to 62 inches.

[BenM]

I have yet to get my hands on it.  But it doesn't appear to be in great shape.  From what I've seen There doesn't seem to be much collector value in the Cubs.  Would you guys have any clue about a value?   Thanks for your help

[Blackhawk]

Collector interest in the Cub does seem to be minimal, however,  I do regret selling a zebrawood version which was from '65.  Value for one in good condition is generally less than $100...more like $50-75.

[BenM]

Thanks again for the info and expertise guys.

[papabear08]

1962 model

[papabear08]

Cub got dropped for a few years and replaced by the Alaskan, '58 thru '61 I believe then reintroduced in 1962. '62 & '63 are both 60" and then they went back to 62".

[Captain*Kirk]

The Jorge Coppen "Bear Archery Traditional Bows" book lists the only 60" Cub as a '63...but with the brass standing bear coin. Yours appears to be pewter which would make it a crossover between a '62 an '63. Both were maple, but the '62 had brown glass and the '63 glass is listed a 'assorted'...which fits your green glass bow.
The coin could be a replacement(doubtful)but I think it's a unique little bow.

[papabear08]

Captain I know Jorge, good guy and with others pointed out some of the errs in first addition. I do not have a copy of the second and the first is on loan but obviously this is another mistake as the 1962 Bear catalog advertises Cub as 60". Also coins don't mean squat.
It tends to be sad when helpful books end up causing more confusion with new collectors.

[Captain*Kirk]

Papabear, mine is the second edition, and Jorge himself points out that the lion's share of the info in his book came from research gleaned by Al Reader over the years. He also mentions that many of the surviving Bear employees can't recall with any certainty the accuracy of some of the details and apparently there were few,if any, records kept. Not to mention the fact that a few of the bows produced were assembled using leftover material from a previous model run and that many times the Bear catalogs and brochures used photos that were not current production...it all adds up to a bowl of confusion soup and I think the second edition does an admirable job of organizing things, even if it's not 100%
Whether a new collector or a grizzled veteran, it's still somewhat of a crap shoot IMHO, but better than nothing.
Personally, I feel much better equipped to buy and advise others with, than without!

[Ardent Archer]

Hi guys. Just ran across this today. Actually my book states: "With its comeback in 1962, the new Cub was redesigned. Still a semi-recurved bow, and retaining its saddle-leather grip, it features a 60” length, newly sculpted sight-window design, and maple limb cores backed and faced with brown BearglasTM". Also, the contents of the book are of "known quantities" but as you may know about Bear bows...there may be other variations out there. This Cub looks like a 1963 to me. It appears to have a Nickel-Silver coin, which were used less prevalently from 1963 to mid-1972.