Originally posted by pavan:
ken that looks more like a hybrid, what bothers me about hybrids like, my wife prefers, is that they feel longer than they are, they shoot faster than one would think, and they fit into tighter quarters.
Question: besides length and limb loaded energy increases as with hybrids and R/D, what are the advantages or disadvantages of these bows compared to recurves and Hill style longbows. For myself, I have two Robertsons one Pearce point and one myrtle riser with book matched myrtle veneers, I like the speed for the draw weight, I cannot tell whether they are more or less forgiving than my own Hill style longbows. What are your observations?
dunno if you question was directed specifically to ken, or open to others replying, so respectfully here are my observations ...
yes, ken's longbow is an aggressive r/d and not a mild r/d "D".
i consider all r/d longbows to be "hybrids" and fit in somewhere between a hill style longbow and a true recurve. some will argue that any aggressive r/d longbow IS a recurve. imo, if only the string loops touch the limb nocks, it's a longbow.
once you add reflex and deflex to a longbow's planform, you increase it's efficiency and speed over most any longbow that has just reflex ("back set"), or is straight limbed, or has follow-through ("belly set"). r/d longbows allow for shorter length bows than hill style longbows, for the same comparable draw length.
for example, as a good guideline, you will probably want a 70" hill longbow for a 29" draw length, 66" for a mild r/d "D" longbow, and 62" for an aggressive r/d longbow. there are exceptions, but the preceding is a good for starters.
to me, the real question is longbow "stability" and "pointability", which is the forte of the hill style longbow. with stability in mind, imo mild r/d "D" longbows have somewhat less than hill style longbows and somewhat more than aggressive r/d longbows.
shorter limbed stick bows can be, might be, usually have the potential for more speed, too.