Arrow speed

My Sarrels Blueridge takedown longbow chronos at 175fps. It is 50# @ my 29.5" DL and I shoot 530gr arrows.

Bisch

[JamesKerr]

My Tomahawk Diamond series SS 55# @ 28" (I draw 27.5) came in at around 170 fps. My Legacy series tomahawk 60# at 27.5" managed to do around 173 fps with a 652 grain arrow. If you look at the last traditional bowhunter magazine you can see the speed results for the T-hawk legacy series by Blacky Schwartz on the opening spread. If memory served it shot 188 fps with a 9gpp arrow not the fastest bow ever but an extremely good speed in my opinion for a bow made with wooden cores. 3rivers now offers foam and carbon limbs for it and I would be interested to see what they would do. I bet they would be high 190's to 200 fps.

[duncan idaho]

I have never understood why you cannot have a rational discussion about "speed" and traditional bows. The rules of this forum state, "debate is healthy, as one sword sharpens another".

However, in my opinion, you ask a question about "what is the fastest recurve?" or "how fast a design is XYZ bow compared to ZYX bow?" you will be "slammed" by all kinds of non-witty remarks, especially the famous" fast enough to kill" quote.
 
 It seems, IMHO, that other people take that as a personal insult on traditional archery, yet all are pleased when a bowyer creates a more efficient bow that delivers the same speed at a lower poundage.It appears that most people on this forum shoot bows in the 45 to 53 pound range and I would think you would want the most bang for your buck.

There is nothing wrong about wanting a fast performing bow or discussing the various bowyers who make them.

If I am thinking of investing between 800 to 1300 dollars for a bow, which is the average price these days, I would certainly want the lastest in design and speed. Why have a custom bow built to subpar standards? The difference between 170 FPS and 190 FPS is substantial. I am lucky enough to own over a dozen custom recurves. There is a tremendous difference in shooting my 1997 Dale Dye and my 2012 Sasquatch. Both will kill, but, the Sasquatch delivers the arrow over 23 FPS faster, which make for, in my opinion, easier shooting. Shoot what YOU like, but, there is nothing wrong about talking about speed. IMHO.

[Sixby]

Duncan X2

God bless, Steve

[Flying Dutchman]

X3  

[Thumper Dunker]

x4  

[Hoyt]

I can see several reasons why discussing speed when it comes to so called traditional bows might be a turn off for some. But it's not for me and was a big factor back when I shot recurves before compounds were invented and still is now. (Just in case compounds might be one of the reasons).

Back then I just wanted a fast bow, now I just want the most fps I can get with the highest poundage I'm capable of handling at my age...which isn't all that much and why I shoot a Big Foot Recurve with triple carbon foam core limbs.

I've never timed it, but it has a smooth draw and shoots very quick and hits real hard.

[Fanto]

Originally posted by AdAstraAiroh:
My results with long bamboo-cored Dryad ACS-RC limbs on a 25" Best Moon riser are:

46 pounds @ 30" Using 8.2 gpp arrows at 30 inch draw, average 204 fps, and with 7.3 gpp arrows average 211 fps, both finger released.

Mark

acs- so darned quick!

[gringol]

Duncan, I thought this was a rational discussion...  

[duncan idaho]

W

[duncan idaho]

Sorry about that,hit the button with my off hand.

For the most part, you are correct, this is a rational discussion. However,go back to the first couple of pages and you will find the OP apologizing for asking the question. I would start more discussions myself on various recurves and R/D bows but, I would have to endure the comments on "sharp broadheads kill, not speed" type remarks.
 As I stated above, it appears to be delicate subject with a lot of archers and not worth the trouble.Top of the line bows are expensive, so you should be able to ask about their abilities. No big deal, we all have our opinions. Good Shooting to everyone.

The only problem with fps numbers is, I have a hard time knowing if they are accurate. We tested three of my bows years back, two of them were shooting 9 grains per pound and one was shooting over ten grains per pound,(my Black Widow target bow).  the two heavy Schulz longbows were both over 200 fps and so was the BW target bow. At another shoot the same archer that shot my bows years before shot another of my Schulz longbows, about 66 pounds at his draw with 555 grain arrow and once again broke 200 fps.  I am told over and over again that is not possible, so that must mean that no one around here knows what they are doing with chronographs. Regardless, if they are reading at least consistently high or consistently low, I think they can be useful tools for equipment selections.

[Dan Bonner]

Home made 55# recurve shooting 702 grain arrows at my 28" draw shoots 161-165 averaging 163 over ten shots with my fingers and 10 strand D10 string with yarn silencers. Can't vouch for the accuracy of the chrono. And I personally believe speed is very relevant in bow selection. Just behind accuracy and quietness.

Bonner

[Bjorn]

I think speed is important and chronos are a good tool, but we always blame or praise the bow.  There are many more and perhaps better areas than the bow. A lousy release and shot cycle is good for 20 fps and the cost is only time and focus.

[Cryogenic]

My thoughts:

1. If somebody created a traditional bow that shot arrows at compound bow velocities, I am certain that many of us would own one and that eventually such technology would become the norm.

2. 2 to 3 ft/s may not matter, but a 20 ft/s difference might matter.  In my own simple terms from high school physics:

Arrow A: 150 ft/s
Arrow B: 180 ft/s

Both arrows are fired level at a target 30 yards away.  

ARROW A

Time to Target:
t=d/r
t=60ft/150fps
t=0.40s

Drop Distance:
d=vi(t)+0.5(g)(t^2)
d=(32 ft/s^2)(0.40^2)s
d=2.56ft

ARROW B

Time to Target:
t=d/r
t=60ft/180fps
t=0.33s

Drop Distance:
d=vi(t)+0.5(g)(t^2)
d=(32 ft/s^2)(0.33^2)s
d=1.74ft

ARROW A vs B:
2.56ft-1.74ft=0.82ft, which is 9.8in

Arrow A (the faster arrow) impacts the target about 9.8 inches higher than arrow B.  For the archer who has to shoot a projectile with a parabolic trajectory, velocity could matter.  Of course there are many other factors that make a bow a "good shooter," and velocity is only one of them.

We shoot our bows for fun and not for science, but I find this discussion interesting.

[gringol]

I did a little searching on the web for chrono accuracy and a few people have tested them by lining two chronos up back to back and shooting a projectile through both at the same time.  Here are the highlights:

-the 2 chronos typically showed 6-12 fps difference

-some tests showed 20-30 fps difference

-the same set of chronos would show more/less difference when tested on different days.

Those differences in measured fps are pretty significant for trad bows and could account for some of the wildly different numbers reported by different people.  For me the conclusion is that reported absolute fps numbers should be taken with a grain of salt, but relative fps numbers from one person measured on the same day can be useful in choosing bewteen an arrow/string/bow etc.

On the day that Dick shot my 66 pounder through the machine, the wheel guys were swearing that it was reading consistently about 40 fps show.  My bow was shot then a fellow with a screaming fast recurve from a Bingham kit shot, then the talk turned to "why does it read the old bows fast and the new bows slow." One of guys running the chrono said that it was simple, "The arrows out of cam compounds do not get up to full speed until they are 15 or 20 yards out, depending on the bow." Depending on the bow?
  We did do one test that seemed interesting that day.  We found that some bows shoot with much different variances in speed with different draw lengths, while other bows, Hill longbows, shot with much less variance in speed with longer and shorter draws. The thing got critical when the findings were that some of the bows with the higher variance were hardly any faster than the Hills when they were drawn short, but faster when each was drawn long. That is something that I always wish was included in bow tests, I tend not to believe the generalizations about longer bows always shooting faster at all draws. That may be true in some cases, but I have not seen that with the Bear takedown tests we did, nor does it seem to apply to all longbows.  That is one area where a chronograph can do some real work.

[gringol]

Originally posted by pavan:
"The arrows out of cam compounds do not get up to full speed until they are 15 or 20 yards out, depending on the bow."

 that's a dandy.

[Bjorn]

Comparing your chrono numbers to someone else's over the internet is like measuring, and-well you make up the rest.    :D

[Pointer]

I like my old bows. I enjoy replacing the tip overlays with phenolic so they will take fast flite strings.   I've gotten 185fps from a Wing Gull that was 46@30 with a 475 gr gold tip 55/75..It's actually faster that my Trad-Tech Pinnacle II with the same arrow and with the same draw weight...that averaged 181fps