Why are all the new hunting and archery bows so strange looking?
by admin on Friday, January 27th, 2012 | 5 Comments
I mean I understand using more modern materials and so forth, but why is it so hard to find a functional bow like the ones used by celts, or romans and so forth, I mean they were deadly enough to be used by some of the greatest armies of their eras, so they must have been reliable designs.
Sites You May Find Helpful
Do you mean the new (and queer in a bad way) design where there is a cut out in the middle of the bow where you put the arrow through? That one has no explanation besides being utterly retarded.
Things like compound and recurve bows work better than stick + deer sinew = –|)->
The new ones work better, that’s why.
Cavemen used pointy sticks, and they were advanced for their time. So it must be an effective design.
They are compound bows, they are easier to draw and hold back, are more compact, and are more accurate.
Simply? Energy efficiency.
Basically, think of it this way:
A bow is a big leaf spring. As you draw back the string you create a triangle. (well actually you create two, one on top and one on bottom divided by your arrow) The further back you draw the bow the narrower the angle is at the nock of the arrow.
When you release the string part of the energy is going in the direction of the arrow accelerating it. However, the other part of energy is being wasted going perpendicular to the arrow in trying to straighten out the string.
So, compare an English long bow and a Mongolian or Turkish recurve bow. Pound for pound and inch for inch of draw length, a Turkish recurve can generate as much as twice the Kinetic Energy of the English long bow because it is more energy efficient.
As you get into compound bows with short wheel basis and aggressive cam systems – again it’s about energy efficiency, you can get more than twice the energy again.
Thus, modern hunters, if they can make the shot, can deliver similar distances with something like 40% or less of the draw weight, with another 70% let off, once required by bows of antiquity.
Thinkingblade
because a bow as it was used by the Celts took a lot of work to make, and then often broke or warped due to weather.
what’s more, an ancient bow once you pull back the arrow holding it back you need to fight the bow’s full strength, modern designs are set up so you actually pull back against the bow’s full power, but once you have the string all the way back the weight lets off and it takes maybe a quarter of strength to hold it like that.
Oh, the bows the celts, romans, and so forth had were CRAP. This is why they actually were much more likely to be throwing spears and javelins than using bow and arrows. Heck, if they needed a truly long range projectile they used a sling.
I think that you are talking about COMPOUND BOWS. Compound bows DO look strange, but they are designed for accuracy and power. But personally, I prefer the Recurve bows and Longbows