shorter bow with a shorter draw

[greenhed]

I have a shorter draw, 27in or so (depending on how cold it is)  :-).  I was wondering n the benefits of a short bow and gaining arrow speed, etc.  Im looking at getting a recurve in the 55" range.  Any suggestions would be great.

[O.L. Adcock]

Greenhed, The notion that shorter bows perform better for those with shorter draws is a theory/myth that's been floated around so long it's accepted as "fact" when the opposite is the truth. On average, the longer bows perform better at any draw length you want to pick. If comparing bow "A" to bow "B" and the only info is at 28 or 30", which ever one performs best at 28" or 30" will also perform best at 24", reguardless of it's length....O.L.

[Mike Mecredy]

The only thing that factors in is the mass of the limbs.  Example there is if a person is drawing 24" and the bow he uses has short limbs that bend to their max potential at 24" and lets use 50#,  those limbs whill snap back faster than a bow made to flex at it's maximum potential at 28" or 30" even if they both draw 50# @ 24".  Simply because the limbs on the longer bow have more mass than those of the shorter bow.  I've experimented with this in my shop to great lengths.  

The down side, if a person draws 24" 0r 22" 0r 23" and he / she wants a bow built to have a max draw of that short length, optimizing the whole limb, he or she is pretty much stuck with that bow and can't let somebody else with a normal lenbgth draw of 28" + "try it out".  However in  all instances of bows I've built short, for those with short draw lengths, the person that got it is so thrilled to have a bow that fits them they don't want to give it up anyway.

[RonD]

Mike I have thought the same thing as you have stated. Another factor for the short draw length person is that they may shoot a lower draw weight and then performance is everything. How would you evaluate bow performance for a short draw length/low draw weight shooter in using a shorter bow and in particular one that fits that person. Add to that the height of the shooter and the question becomes one of manuverability of the bow as well in the hunting situation (heavy cover/tree stands). Just wondering what the opinions on this might be from a variety of people.

[Stick_N_String]

I have a short draw, 27" and I just bought a used Check-mate hunter 1 the bow is 56" 46 lbs @27" I'm shooting cedar arrows 55-60# that are 28" to BOP with 160 grain glue on tips. The arrows fly like darts and penetrate really good into my block target. My son has a 60" PSE Heritage recurve that's 55# @ 28" he draws 28" he's shooting 29" to BOP aluminum arrows with 125 grain tips. I get deeper penetration in my target than he does. Not any real technical information just my observations.  
Daren

[O.L. Adcock]

Mike, It's mass, force, distance, and time...Yes a shorter bow will have slightly less mass but they travel a further distance negating any potential increase in efficiency..Then add a higher string angle, shorter bows for any given draw length will store less energy then longer ones. The highest performing bow Norb Mulaney has ever tested was 66", the best recurve, 60"...In the flight shooting game, the longer bows 64"+ out distance the shorter bows 52"+ with the same arrows. It's a mis-guided theory that doesn't hold water. Choose short bows for blinds and tree stands, longer ones for performance and accuracy.....O.L.

[amar911]

No doubt O.L. is correct about this. The key is his last sentence. Choose the design of the bow for the purposes it will be used.

Allan

[Guru]

Ok..then why did Mike's testing prove other wise?

[vermonster13]

A bow designed like Mike gives example of is the way to go. Get something that hits it's peak at  your draw length and you'll be ahead in the game.

There are a few bowyers out there who do this and seem to have pretty good performance with their bows.

[Dick in Seattle]

Interesting thread... especially to me.   You guys who think you have short draws and then cite 27"... uh, uh.   I have a short draw... 25" or a bit less!  I've tried all the variations of approach above, long and short bows and bows tillered to my draw vs. short drawing bows tillered longer.   No science talking here, but shorter bows tillered for me definitely seem to perform better for me.   Now that i'm faced with strength problems as well, it's gotten really critical.   I've recently begun to try to learn to build bows.  As a challenge I want to learn to build the best performing 30# bow I can. Something to learn in my old age...  Everything you guys have had to say will get put into my notebook and cranked into my experiments.

[O.L. Adcock]

Guru, His testing?? I assume he's making comparisions between a very narrow range of designs. We've tested dozens of many designs. ALL bows function the same. I could put up f/d curves between longbows and recurves mixed from 52" to 70" and you'd be hard pressed to pick out which are which. I can show you examples of 66" longbows out performing 52" recurves at 24" draw...There is no "sweet" spot other then where they start stacking...Below that point, they are the same. Good performing longer bows gain that advantage in the first half of the draw, not the last half.

Dick, If you are dealing with self or wood composites, most can get better performance out of somewhat shorter bows. That's not because they are shorter, it's because it requires more skill and better design for the longer lengths. Those that do it well, Like Tim Baker and Dan Perry can smoke everyone elses 60" bows with 66"+......O.L.

[Lewis Brookshire III]

I think it all depends on how the bow was designed as far as pre-load goes for shorter draws. A bow designed for a short draw would outperform a "Long" bow not designed necessarily for a short draw archer. IMHO

[greenhed]

Wow I didnt expect this much discussion....thanks for the info.  Now if anyone knows of a nice little recurve 55"-60" or so (for treestands and blinds) that will fit a short pudgy guy, let me know!  :-)  

[O.L. Adcock]

Lewis, That's true, "design" trumps length. But if the designs are "equal", the longer length will win. The only ways one bow out performs another is from efficiency or energy storage or both. Going shorter hurts both....O.L.

[foxbo]

Very interesting. I have two bows of the exact same design. Both are Elburg Jaguar Mites. One is a 48"er and the other a 54"er, both are the same weight. So, when I test them for distance with the same arrow, the longer one should shoot further than the shorter one?

[O.L. Adcock]

Foxbo, Those would be a good test subjects. However unless you are willing to put a LOT of effort into the distance part, it won't tell you much as so many other details are involved. Just chrono them at the same gr/lb and be sure to weigh them on the same scale....That would be 1 data point. Individual bows vary a lot even if they are the same length and design. I base my opinion on the testing of many. Looking at those below 60", they store less energy and are less efficient then those over 60"...On average. You can pick out good short ones that will out perform poor long ones, but the best short ones don't come close to the best long ones....O.L.

[Big_Al]

Mr. Adcock, I've tossed this idea around a good bit because I have a short draw myself.  I would like to propose my question in the form of a hypothetical situation.

Let's say we're gonna build two Hill-style longbows, out of the same materials, same riser length, shot with the same weight arrow, etc.  They will both have a draw weight of 45#@28".  

The first bow, Bow A, will be 70".  The second bow, Bow B, in order to REALLY maximize the potential energy stored by longer limbs, will be four times the length of Bow A, 280" (I know this is a totally unrealistic example, please bear with me).

Now both bows will be drawn to 20" and shot (again, a ridiculous example only used for illustrative purposes).  Bow A's limbs are flexed sufficiently and the bow shoots, say 150 FPS.  Now by the "longer limbs are faster" rule, wouldn't Bow B be faster at 20", even though the limbs barely flex due to the extreme length of the bow and the extremely short draw length?

I'm sure you can see with this ridiculous example what I'm getting at here.  I was always of the opinion that a longer bow would perform better for someone with a longer draw, and a shorter bow would perform better for someone with a shorter draw.  Not necessarily because of energy storage purposes, but mainly because someone with a shorter draw would not be able to sufficiently flex the limbs of a much longer bow in order to maximize the longer bow's energy storage potential.

I am in no way intending to disrespect your statements, as I'm quite sure there is plenty of evidence to the contrary of my example - I just don't see the fatal flaw in my line of reasoning.

I just got a new A&H ACS-CX in 58" and I'm really tickled with it.  I have around a 27-27.5" draw and I got it mainly for hunting purposes, but I also thought that it would be best for me as Dan told me the 58" bows are kind of stacky at anything past 28".  So I thought that it would be the best length to maximize the potential energy of my shorter draw compared to, say, a 66" model.  However, I know that with the ACS cross section limbs, conventional rules probably don't apply.

[Chortdraw]

I have a very short draw of 25" on a good day and have read most everything that Mr. Adcock has had to pass on to us as beginners. I have been building bows for friends and myself for 3 years.Being short I experimented with several designs and lengths. Everything I built from 62" down to 54" all shot within 3 feet per. sec. of each other. Most of the difference seemed to in the material and wood used. The best shooter for me is 58-60"

 OL,you have paid you dues and I am grateful to have learned so much through your long time knowledge. My hat is off to you......Chortdraw

[Dave Bulla]

Hmmm, I always like to read these sort of threads and I like to hear your point of view O.L. but a couple things have always kinda nagged at me about some of the common statements made when comparing bows.  There is always the "gotta compare apples to apples" slant and I agree with that.  

O.L. said "Design trumps length but if designs are "equal", the longer length will win."  On the face of it that makes sense but when I think about it I don't honestly see how two bows can be the same design but two different lengths.  No matter how you slice it, changing the length changes the design doesn't it?  I mean, if bow X is 60 inches long and bow Y is 68 inches long, then the designis different.  The handles and limbs are different lengths so design is different.  If you make the handles the same length, the limbs have to be different length or vice versa.  The design is different.  If you compare a 66 inch recurve to a 66 inch longbow, the design is different.  I realize you are talking about say a 60 inch r/d bow compared to a 66" r/d bow but again, to my mind, longer is different.

Then I think force draw curves.  Now, I've NEVER plotted a force draw curve on ANY bow so take this for what it is, an armchair question... You say you can put up force draw curves from different length longbows and recurves from what was it 52 to 70 inches?  And that we would be hard pressed to tell which is which.  Are force draw curves that similar?  If so, what is the point?  Or do you mean that a 52 inch bow and a 70 inch bow tillered to the same draw length and with both bows having efficient designs, both force draw curves would  be similar?  That's kinda a lot of "ifs".

I'm wondering how, if a bow design that was for an efficiently designed 50 inch recurve could be magically enlarged in every dimension exactly the same percentage so that it was say 60 inches long, would perform?  Which would shoot better?  Of course, to keep things equal, the arrow would have to be enlarged, the string would be proportionately larger and heavier but so would the draw weight, brace hight, draw length etc.

Man, my head is starting to hurt.  I think I'l leave this to you guys...

[bigislandmark]

Howzit Greenhed,

Good post---Lots of interesting reads. I shoot a Great Plains SR recurve 56" 44lbs@ 26" draw. It is a short riser bow with longer working limbs. For "ME" it is plenty fast.

I would suggest that you find a bow that "YOU" can shoot accurately first and then work your way up in poundage if you still "feel the need for speed". I always joke with my friends that shoot wheelies, "Brah at 70lbs you sure when miss um fast!"

As someone posted above, try and match the bow to the type of hunting that you will do. Over here all of my hunting is done spot and stalk. I find that 60" plus bows tend to hang up in branches and brush. For "ME" 56" is the perfect length to hunt with---stable and easy to maneuver.

I suggest that you also look at the bows mass weight. I find that "I" shoot "heavier" riser bows better than lighter ones. I find them more stable after the shot.

Jus my 02 cents

Aloha,

       Mark