Is there a line in the sand?

[BAK]

If I introduced a new recurve, made of a material that would launch an arrow 300 fps, would you want it?

I ask this question as I just read an article regarding the regulations being modified in the world of golf.  It will limit the technological advances in club and ball design to eliminate "long ball" golf.  They have recognized that if they don't many of the famous golf courses throughout the world just won't be "usable" anymore.

Golf is suffering from the same issues that we in the "sport" hunting world have been seeing for at least 50 years now.  Striving to make technology "improve our game".

We really don't need to worry about "super" curves, newer compounds, crossbows, airguns for arrows etc.  I'm thinking we just need to limit arrow speed to 200 fps and everything will take care of itself.   

[Cory Mattson]

No

[rastaman]

Nope!  I'm fine with my 180fps (or slower) longbow! 

[bowmaster12]

Suffering from the same issues hunting has for the last 50 years. Really?  Hunting has been suffering from a lack of recruitment even with the technology advancments.  We should be less concerned with what people use and more concerned in getting more people in the woods.   Personally  i would not buy the new 300 fps still doesnt out shoot the speed of sound.

[BAK]

"more people in the woods", no thank you, not interested.  Pick any state, and look at what you would have to go through as a non resident to even try hunting there.  If our numbers are so few, why is that?  Irrespective I agree, I'm not interested in going over 200 either.

[Lori]

When we lived in Story City, my husband shot a small antlered big bodied buck clear across the pond in the Green Belt. He used the supposedly most advanced broadhead, the original, I think, 3 blade Wasp. Only one  part of one of those little razor blades remained intact, but his arrow flew completely through the buck anyway. Since those days we have advanced to better broad heads like Eskimos, Hunter's Heads and single bevel Howard Hills. The only advantage in a super fast recurve design would be that it would allow people to drop to lower draw weights to get the same amount of power.

[Bowguy67]

I think we need to limit things or we get too far removed from where we were. In my state you can do all sorts of things I refrain from in the name of “advancement”.
Lori you might need to go to a super light arrow or something to get that speed. In that case “power” would be limited. Even now real fast bows don’t contain more energy than a slower one when a heavy arrow is used. I’m sure you’ve heard the bike going 200 miles into a brick wall theory. All that happens is the bike is a mess. A train at 60 miles an hour blows through the wall. Which would have more “power”? Don’t feel I’m trying to criticize you, only explaining.

[Roy from Pa]

No.
I'm fine with my 175 fps stickbow.

[MSU]

I will stay with my self bows and 1960's Bear recurve. Cedar arrows have worked fine the last 55 years.

[kopfjaeger]

No. I'm fine with my Bear bows and I don't have a clue how fast they shoot. 

[buckeyebowhunter]

I'll go against the grain and say I'd probably buy it or even better I'd be hoping I was the one who designed it.

Years ago when I went strictly to traditional bows, I kinda stuck my nose up at my wheel bow buddies. As I've gotten older and maybe wiser i no longer feel that way. Not everyone is cut out for or enjoys traditional bows in the degree that I do. So the fps thing doesn't so much bother me.

On the other hand bowhunting holds an aesthetic value to me. And most of the "designs" that can yield speeds over 200 fps are inherently ugly in my eyes.  This is included wheel bows and most of the "super" recurves. I would not hunt with a bow that is in my opinion ugly. So my answer is if I could design a bow that looks like my 3 piece recurves and shoot 300fps with a good hunting weight arrow I sure as hell would. But most likely not going to happen.

[Terry Green]

I like my set ups the way they are.... it works.

[M60gunner]

If I could drop 10# in draw weight and not have to make any mental adjustments sign me up. Maybe at “hunting “ ranges it doesn’t make a difference but I have always done more archery than hunting.

[Wudstix]

All my bows push 640 grain Easton, or 700-900 wood arrows.  Mid 180's for lighter arrows and 170+ for the woodies.  That'll do!
 

[JR Williams]

I probably wouldn't but a recurve just because it shot 300 fps. But I certainly wouldn't care if that is what other guys want to get into. But then again, a 35lb recurve that would sling 600 grain arrows at 200 fps that draws smooth...………..well I may wait for a buddy to buy one and try it out.

[bluemelonchitlin]

No.
I personally don't care about golf and it's plights.

[Burly]

Na I'm good with my slow bows.

[howl]

... allow people to drop to lower draw weights to get the same amount of power.

'xactly.

[Friend]

Many of us have drawn our own personal line in the sand. The tide of technology continually washes away the ideals of preservation.

The beloved tradition we both share and solemnly embrace requires a unity of commitment and an unrelenting resounding voice to endure.

Our legitimate concerns are a call to stand straight and tall in the face of buffeting winds.

[GCook]

My compound shoots a 400 grain arrow at 285fps and even with mechanical heads blows through whitetail, big pigs and red deer.  So the false statements about fast and light vs slow and heavy are really a bad argument for anyone who has experience doing both.

That said two things would entice me to try one.  First speed gives you a more manageable trajectory.   Longer shots are less complex for the mind, eye and body to compensate for so perhaps my lethality would extend from 15 to 20 yards.
Second the point brought up earlier about being able to shoot lighter poundage and still be able to hunt effectively. 
The part that I haven't seen addressed is the resulting noise. 

But above all that, the most important point mentioned so far, is life is too short to hunt with an ugly bow.  So how it looked would play a significant role in my decision.