Speed and Penetration Comparison: Longbow vs. different Reflexbows
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 6 พ.ย. 2021
- My little comparison of speed and penetration of a longbow and same poundage reflex bows in different length. Just to see if there is a difference or not.
The bows in the video are:
Varang Lux Longbow
• Varang Lux bamboo/wood...
Jurchen (manchustyle)
• Jurchen - bamboo/Wood ...
Janissary Turkish
• Janissary Turkish II B...
Short Manchu
• Short Manchu Bow by Se...
Saracen
• The Saracen by Lukasz ...
KTB 2 Korean
• Authentic KTB II - Kor...
If you want to see even more in depth bow reviews and/or join my online course, check our Patreon project here:
/ arminhirmer
If you just want to buy me a coffee for no reason :D here we go:
www.buymeacoffee.com/ArminHirmer
And thank you all, who bought me already a coffee, you are the best :)
Subscribe! / arminhirmer
Follow: / arminhirmerarchery
Follow: / armin_hirmer_archery
Email me! info@arminhirmer.com
Please ask for my actual shipping address before you send items!
longbow 28"
15gpp: 124fps
12,5gpp: 133fps
9gpp: 135fps
penetrations @ 13:44
korean 31"
15gpp: 143fps
12,5gpp: 147fps
9gpp: 144fps
penetrations @ 24:46
janissary 27" and a bit
15gpp: 142fps
12,5gpp: 147fps
9gpp: 156fps
penetrations @ 20:40
saracen 28"
15gpp: 141fps
12,5gpp: 146fps
9gpp: 155fps
penetrations @ 22:28
manchu 34"
15gpp: 163fps
12,5gpp: 161fps
9gpp: 171fps
penetrations @ 18:00
jurchen 34"?
15gpp: 146fps
12,5gpp: 142fps
9gpp: 147fps
penetrations @ 15:51
Looks like the longbow heavy arrows might've hit the same soft patch as the jurchen.
To my eyes, penetration and speed wise: longbow worst, manchu best, rest are very similar.
Yep we all watched the same video lol
Up-vote this. Thanks for the timestamps and time put into this!
I'd say the logic is the same as with the gun barrel length - the longer is the bullet's contact with the propulsive power, the more energy it gets.
Having multiple bows, and making bows, I would say, that there is no doubt that a light curly tipped, short limmed bow with long draw is far more efficient than a long, wide heavy limmed longbow.
The amount of mass needed to be moved, and the profile of it, also has a huge impact on the efficiency.
But is the efficiency worth the extra effort to make them?
It's not necessarily true that a reflexed static recurve composite bow is more efficient than a longbow (and by efficient, I mean efficient at transferring stored elastic potential energy to the arrow in the form of translational kinetic energy). In fact, I'd wager to say that a well made longbow will generally be more efficient than a well made composite bow, especially if the composite bow is made out of wood, horn and sinew. Static recurve composite bows have heavier limbs relative to well made longbows and a larger proportion of their limbs' mass tends to be concentrated toward the tips. Broadly speaking, the advantage static recurve composite bows have over longbows is that they tend to store more energy per unit of draw force and per unit of draw length, but their added limb mass makes them less efficient at transferring their extra stored energy to the arrow.
If what you're interested in is comparing historical bow types, modern composite bows aren't great approximations of their historical counterparts because they're made of modern materials that are lighter, stronger and that can store more energy per unit of mass than horn and sinew. Most modern composite bows are of a quality that historical bowyers could only have dreamed of.
@@Marmocet all of that was very interesting information that I didn't know, so thank you for the explanation, but my question was "why would they go to the extra effort of making such a complicated and pretty incredibly engineered weapon instead of a simple straight armed long bow,was it really worth it? "
@@vincentgalvin4098 Composite bows can be made both powerful and short, which is handy when you want to use a bow from horseback. Also, people made bows out of whatever good bowmaking materials were available where they lived. Peoples who used composite bows tended to come from steppe, semi-arid or arid climates where very few if any trees grow, let alone trees whose wood happens to be good for making self-bows.
@@Marmocet by and large, modern materials aren't really superior in terms of pure performance. I've seen hickory, yew and osage self bows shooting 170-180 easily. Fiberglass has more hand shock than any natural material, and that stronger vibration is caused by energy not leaving the bow limbs that would otherwise be transferred to the arrow. What they are superior in is in availability and the extent to which they lend themselves to mass production, hence commercial availability at a reasonable price. It takes a heap of work to cut, cure, and make a bow from self wood staves. Let alone the amount of work that goes into a horn sinew composite.
Nice experiment. As I'm contemplating about that stuff, too.
Some things:
1) energy of an object is force times distance of acceleration. So if two bows have the same "force", on the first glance the one you draw out further provides more energy to the arrow. But ... yeah, there are some buts, so we come to that later
2) you only made one mistake: the faster the arrow, the more energy it has. And hence should penetrate deeper. Energy of an arrow is velocity (speed) squared - times - the mass. (v^2 * m).
The tricky part is to figure how heavy an arrow for a certain bow should be (see below), that you get an optimal _energy_ for that arrow.
3) In school physics, we learn about springs. Basically the base for calculating energy transfer of a bow to an arrow, a spring that gets compressed and then uncoils. Problem: we idealize the spring and assume it is a kind of invisible energy storage, and when its energy is releases all the energy gets into the object, in this case the arrow.
Oki, the "buts".
As you draw the bow, you realize the force/power you need varies over the course. Hence when you release the arrow, the force pushing on the arrow is simply the analogon of the force you used to pull it at every distance.
Bow design most certainly can influence how much force the bow is giving to the arrow at a certain point of draw length.
Regarding the "spring" example above: a huge deal of the energy is used to "accelerate" the spring back into its original position.
So a long bow, with heavy throwing arms, will retain a higher deal of energy in its throwing arms than a more light asian bow. Hence it will transfer less energy into the arrow, hence the arrows are slower.
The next point is: the speed of the "uncoiling" of the spring/bow. It is related to the previous point. The slower the bow can unleash its energy, the slower the arrow will be.
So you have to find a balance between:
draw weight
draw length
speed of the bow to flex back
weight of the arrow
However mathematically/physically the only thing that counts in the end is arrow weight versus arrow speed.
m * v * v. Mass times speed times speed. Or mass times speed squared. That means: if you double the weight of an arrow, and it has the same speed, you doubled the energy.
If you take the light original arrow and double its speed: you quadruppled its energy.
it was your time to shine
Length of the power stroke matters too. Why my 80lb target crossbow (10in) and 40lb recurve (20in) shoot 400grain arrows the same speed. Why a 150lb longbow can shoot farther (235m v 250m) than a 1200lb crossbow with the same 1350grain weight arrow/bolt.
Draw length will have a big impact on the Energy transfer to the arrow. Better test would be same dl and weight
Yes. Most people don't seem to understand that it isn't draw weight that moves arrows, it's stored energy that does. Draw weight just gives you an idea of how much energy a bow stores per unit length of power stroke and how quickly stored energy will be converted to kinetic energy. The other big factor that determines arrow speed, aside from arrow mass, is the mass of the bow's limbs.
That's exactly why ancient civilization pull so far back
Very cool to see you shoot the various bows. Thanks for the video!
Maestro of precision and consistency! Like music. Super nice. Great video, I was having same question with some local archers last week believe it or not.
Great shooting armin even with ur knackered shoulder great stuff brother
Nice! Awesome comparison
Thankyou , happy you have executed this experiment. Very informative and quite interesting.
Good job Mr. Armin!
I haven’t sent your videos for a while, but coming back now and the production quality is A+. Like you made some major improvements to camera equipment and editing.
Thank you
I really liked this comparison. But it really shows the design differences and where there power stoke is for each one. That is where I think the speed and penetration come into play. But it does show that the same poundage at different powerstrokes makes a significant difference. Thanks my friend I do hope Peter watches this!
Ah. Excellent subject from my favorite TH-cam archery instructor!
As a beginner I found this video really helpful in understanding the mass of information out there to sort through.
It wil be so much easier to choose what I'm comfortable with and build my knowledge from there.
Many thanks 👍👍👍
This is tremendously useful information. It’s so difficult to find useful quick reference information. Depending who you talk to, you get different opinions, and many people have a bias. As a novice archer, it was quite a challenge to focus on one style of Bow.
My application is for big game hunting, and recreational shooting. Many options available today, much more than even 10 years ago.
Traditional archery is becoming more popular , who would have imagined that It would take this long to get back to an ancient technology. Great vid..interesting.
This is a great video! Recently I had a discussion with a friend (James) about this exact topic...and you couldn't have better timing with this video. A bow which provide a longer power stroke should generally be able to transfer more of the stored energy from the flexed limb to the arrow. Heavier arrows should have greater kinetic energy, allowing for better penetration. The Manchu bow demonstrates this very well. Efficiently sending heavier arrows with deep penetration by utilizing a long draw. (And of course, as you mentioned, at higher draw weights, the effectiveness of these long leverage producing siyahs would accentuate the results even more.) You can imagine the advantage against foe wearing armor. Very interesting topic! It should generate some healthy discussions. Regardless of how scientific...it was a very cool test. Thank you for the time and effort put into this video. And best of all, thanks for sharing it with our community.
Some interesting results. It's not undisputable evidence, but there is a clear difference in performance between bow designs.
With the added performance increase from
a thumb ring and khatra, you can say 'Asiatic style' has better performance with the same draw weight.
Great work Armin! Nice to watch 😃
Wow, great comparison. Thanks for that. Really useful and helpful. 👍👍👍👏👏👏👏
Yes I make bows so I've always wanted to do this!
thanks for sharing with us
Lol straight called him out. Great job and excellent shooting and awesome test. Love this stuff. I eat this up for breakfast
Well said. Nothing like a good War bow video. The more you know the better off you are.
That was interesting, thanks Armin👍
24:38 😂
Like the new musical intro.
Very interesting video, much appreciated 👍
Wieder was gelernt, danke für das Video👍
What this points out is the importance of matching arrows to the bow and the archer to get the max efficiency. This takes first of all very consistent shooting and then a lot of trial and error, as there are too many variables to come up with a formula that always works. One needs to find an arrow that tunes well and is of a weight that allows the bow to deliver the maximum possible energy, not an easy task, but essential for longer distances where 5fps is the difference between an X and a 6 on the target.
Wow this is interesting. I'm sure Tod from Tod'S workshop would love to know this to further his Bow experiments.
Seems to me the person that practices diligently will shoot well and accomplish the task. It’s only when you specialize and become exceptional that the design differences may make the difference at exceptionally demanding tasks or targets. If you like the long bows and shoot them well enjoy. The same goes for the other designs. I was in an archery club years ago and the casual, good natured disputes were amusing but I tired of the mean little comments between the compound shooters and the stick bows (all types) got old. It went both ways. Me I just tried to enjoy the archery, self improvement, and camaraderie with folks that shared a love of the outdoors and archery. Love your content .
It does come down to velocity and mass. Bias I believe has to do with what one feels comfortable with for what the arrow is used for.
I shoot a #60 long bow and made a #70 pyramid bow shooting same arrows. Signifiant difference in impact with my setup.
Nice group!
What I mean is the longer the push, the more energy but if the arrows leave different bows at a same speed the length of the push doesn't matter, only the speed matter providing the use of same arrows .
Speed, weight and surface area (air drag - materials and everything 'cos the arrow flexes in the air, technique: the arrow can fly diagonaly after a bad release with the same speed (later the feathers will compensate but still lost energy - and impact area if it doesn't hit like a straight line will reduce penetration due to friction and also has to penetrate more material ie: sloped armor on tanks - same principle), but nothing else.
So the length of the push DOES matter 'cos it will compress the arrow and it will flex more increasing airdrag and loosing energy and also on the impact will generate more friction = wasted energy. If it gives it's energy slower (longer draw) that won't compress (bend) the arrow as much. So not just the length matters but how the bow transfers it's energy to the arrow 'cos it's not a rigid object, it's changing shape as it 'vibrates' through the air. What bow u use how u release therefore makes THE difference, even if the arrow moves with the same speed - at the gate - and weight - it's shape will be different.
So I disagree. Sry - not personal - Armin Hirmer is right. There is a difference using different bows and technique: the flypath is not a line (more like a sinus wave), and the arrows are not absolutely rigid. U cannot calculate this with: 1/2m X v².
@@adamcsillag6058 One thing not considered is the contact surface of the arrow with the target's foam . Arrow with largers diameters should produce more friction hence less penetration .About bad flight look at the slow motion flight of arrows. I was amazed that with thumb release arrows fly the first ten meters sideways.
@@jme104 but arrows with larger diameters also tends to be more rigid which means the way of the energy transferred from de bow will be more efficient - the arrow wont bend as much, and less vibration in the air, which means less airdrag even if the diameter is bigger.
@@adamcsillag6058 Tell that to Isaac Newton, LOL.
@@jme104 ??? It's all physics. What part is not understandable?
Thank you for useful proofs
for every arrow u free into the air a thumbs up.
Zwei Punkte, die ich ansprechen möchte:
Erstens macht es in bestimmten Fällen schon einen großen Unterschied, ob ein leichter oder schwerer Pfeil verwendet wird. Wird zum Beispiel ein traditioneller Langbogenpfeil verwendet, der zwischen 45g und 50g wiegt, ist die, ich nenn‘s jetzt einfach mal „Mündungsgeschwindigkeit“ mangels eines besseren Begriffs dafür, kleiner und damit auch die kinetische Energie des Geschosses (mehr oder weniger) deutlich geringer als die eines leichteren Pfeils wie die osmanischen oder mongolischen Pfeiltypen, die einerseits gemäß ihrer Funktion kürzer sind und andererseits einen kleineren Durchmesser aufweisen. Dadurch, dass der Pfeil eines englischen Warbows auch einen größeren Durchmesser hat, ist er auch weniger aerodynamisch, d. h. der Luftwiderstand des Pfeils ist größer und er fällt früher zu Boden.
Was die beiden Pfeile unterscheidet, ist ihr Impuls. Während sich die kinetische Energie durch E(Pfeil) = 1/2 * m * (v^2) berechnet, also proportional zum Quadrat der Momentangeschwindigkeit ist, errechnet sich der Impuls des Pfeils nur durch p = m * v. Auch ein etwas langsamerer, deutlich schwererer Pfeil hat so eine höhere Durchschlagskraft auf relativ nahe Distanz.
Die zweite Sache, auf die ich kurz eingehen will, ist die Aussage, dass „50 Pfund gleich 50 Pfund“ seien. Ich glaube zwar, Du meinst damit, dass es zwischen den verwendeten Bogentypen keinen Unterschied macht, will das aber nicht ganz unkommentiert stehen lassen.
Also offensichtlich kann man Zuggewichte zwischen verschiedenen Waffentypen wie mittelalterlichen Armbrüsten, Compoundbögen und traditionellen Bögen nicht gleichsetzen, aber auch für europäische Langbögen und z. B. asiatische Hornbögen kann das Zuggewicht kein vergleichendes Maß mehr sein, weil sich der Wirkungsgrad der Bogentypen unterscheidet (i.d.R. ist der Wirkungsgrad von Hornbögen ein höherer). Außerdem ist neben dem Zuggewicht auch noch der Auszug des Bogens entscheidend. Ein Bogen, der bei einem Auszug von 27 Zoll 50 Pfund Zuggewicht aufweist, kann meist weniger Energie auf den Pfeil übertragen als ein Bogen desselben Typs, der 50 Pfund bei einem Auszug von 33 Zoll aufweist. Das kommt daher, dass der Pfeil des zweiten Bogens, um beim Beispiel zu bleiben, über eine längere Strecke beschleunigt wird, diese Strecke wird im Englischen „Powerstroke“ genannt. Eine größere solche Strecke resultiert in mehr übertragener Energie, also höherer Geschwindigkeit.
Es gibt also mehrere Faktoren, die die entgültige Leistung des Bogens beeinflussen.
1. Wirkungsgrad der Wurfarme
2. Pfeilmasse
3. Zuggewicht
4. Auszug
Außerdem verändern auch noch andere Faktoren wie der Pfeildurchmesser oder die Masse der Wurfarme und besonders die der Siyahs wegen ihrer peripheren Lage, die Leistung, die der Bogen erbringen kann.
P.S.: Gibt‘s die Daten, die Du im Video erhebst, irgendwo gesammelt? Die würden mich als Physikstudent wirklich interessieren.
LG aus Wien!
Lukas H.
Sehr schön erklärt!!! Ich selber z.B. schieße diverse unterschiedliche Bogentypen...vom Reiterbogen (asiatisch &/oder osmanisch), über Hybrid- & Recurvebögen bis hin zu Compoundbögen. So detailliert, wie Du das hier beschrieben hast könnte ich das nun nicht, aber...ich würde mal (vorsichtig) ebenfalls zustimmen, dass der Stroke sogar um ein vielfaches mehr ins Gewicht fällt, als die "Zugstärke" des Bogentyps XY an sich. M.p.M.n müsste man den Test von Armin, den ich aber trotzdem richtig geil finde, noch einmal machen.
Hier wäre dann darauf zu achten, dass die Auszugslängen der Bogentypen alle gleich wären. Entweder alle X lbs @28" oder eben X lbs @31". Dann gleiche Pfeile (auch im Durchmesser, Gewicht, Material, Spine & FOC). Wenn ich z.B. einen 45 lbs @ 31" korean style Bogen, mit dem Daumen auf 31 Zoll ausziehe & löse, so steckt dieser Pfeil immer tiefer im Ziel drin, als würde ich, im Vergleich dazu, mit einem meiner Recurvebögen (45 lbs bei 28"), schießen.
Auch ist zu erkennen, dass der 31" gezogene Pfeil wesentlich schneller ist und mit weniger Drop durch die Luft fliegt.
Aber unabhängig davon, ich glaube das ganze "Gelaber" bezüglich Speed und Penetrationswirkung der Pfeile ist meist sinnlos. Jeder Bogen & Bogentyp hat seine Daseinsberechtigung & funktioniert in seinem Gebrauchszweck-/Feld eben genau so, wie er soll. Auch denke ich, wäre es nicht interessanter zu Testen, ob z.B Syhas als "Lever" fungieren & solche Bögen (übertrieben ausgedrückt) die Compoundbögen des alten Zeitalters waren :D ..."Lässt sich ein 100# ELB schwerer auf 28" ausziehen & halten als z.B. ein Manchubow, nur weil der ELB eben keine Syhas besitzt??? Das wäre doch mal ein tolles Thema :D
Danke & Grüße an Armin & auch an Dich
Hallo, vielen Dank für deinen interessanten Kommentar.
Ich bin allerdings skeptisch dass man pauschalisieren kann dass ein 33Zoll Pfeil auf 50 lbs mehr Energie bekommt als ein 27Zoll Pfeil auf 50 lbs.
Die Powerstroke-Theorie ist auf einer Ebene richtig, sonst würden Langbögen nicht mit viel weniger lbs als eine Armbrust auskommen.
Ein 50lbs auf 27 Zoll hat jedoch deutlich früher die Endzugkraft und schnellere kürzere Wurfarme als ein langsamerer, längerer Bogen der bei 33lbs auf 50 lbs die Endzugkraft auf 27 lbs noch lange nicht erreicht hat.
@@SUPERSONIC_ARCHERY Die Siyahs beeinflussen den Spannvorgang als Hebel wirklich maßgeblich. Sobald ein gewisser Punkt überschritten wird, wird die Hebelkraft größer, weswegen auch die Draw Experience zwischen den verschiedenen Bogentypen so verschieden ist. Den Compoundvergleich find ich sehr erheiternd :D
LG
@@Uusicfreak Hallo!
Dass der Kraft-Beschleunigungszeit-Vergleich pauschal bei und vor allem zwischen allen Bogentypen möglich ist, will ich gar nicht sagen. Allein schon durch die verschiedenen Bauformen gibt‘s so viele Faktoren, die man miteinbeziehen müsste, um die Wurfleistung vergleichen zu können, dass das keinen Sinn macht. Wird aber der selbe Bogentyp verwendet mit selben Maßstäben für Länge und Breite, sollte sich eine höhere Auszugslänge positiv auf die Beschleunigung des Geschosses auswirken. Der längere Beschleungigungsweg überwiegt dann gegenüber der niedrigeren Vorspannung und mehr Energie wird auf den Pfeil übertragen. So verhält es sich zumindest bei Federn allgemein und soweit mein Verständnis reicht, sollte dieses Gesetz auch für Bögen gelten.
LG
@@luke_sky5580 :D ein wenig Witz muss ja in der "grauen" Materie sein, nicht wahr....vor allem bei der Vielzahl an Keyboard-Warriors um uns herum ;)
Aber eben genau diese "Hebelwirkung" ist doch m.M.n noch interessanter zu erörtern. Armin hat das in diesem Video ja auch kurz angeschnitten.
..."Warum sonst hätte man sich früher all diese Mühen gegeben? (übersetzt)..." Dies zeugt ja auch schon dahingehend, dass eben dieses Thema u.U der wahre Kern all dieser Diskussionen sein könnte. Speed hier, Penetration da,...aber ganz am Ende ist, sofern Pfeile absolut identisch sind, der Bogen das ausschlaggebende Werkzeug!?
Rein theoretisch müsste man sogar dahin gehen, dass man nicht nur die Bögen und Pfeile "synchronisiert", man müsste auch zusehen, dass die Bögen alle die selbe NtN Dimensionen haben, z.B. 58" NtN, 45 lbs. @28" oder eben @31". Der einzige, gewollte Unterschied wäre dann eben das Bogendesign-/ bzw. die Konstruktion an sich.
In diesem Fall könnte man doch sehr wohl ermitteln, welcher Bogentyp schneller wirft und welcher Bogentyp eben etwas langsamer ist. Darüber hinaus könnte man am Target, messtechnisch, feststellen wie tief der Pfeil, geworfen vom Bogentyp XY, im Ziel eingedrungen ist. Aber auf der anderen Seite denke ich, dass wir das dem Armin nicht antun können,...der dreht sonst noch durch, denn ein Ende ist hier nie in Sicht :D ....
Btw. Finde es toll, wie sachlich Du hier kommentierst!
Danke & Grüße
Great demonstration. The use of longbowmen was impactful because longbows were easier and cheaper (lower tech) to make, so more possible to use en masse, and in the case of England, was a matter of a cultural, even legal obligation to practice. It's analogous to the development of small arms munitions, moving from relatively slow, large calibre bullets to (higher tech) lighter and faster. It's about the transference of energy.
I really enjoyed the comparison, I feel like the more complex bows shot faster and hit harder
Thanks for your work here!
The rule of thumb for better selfbows' (longbows') speeds @10 gpp is 100 fps plus the bow's draw weight. And you know that these are progressively faster at 10 gpp: Laminated longbows, reflex-deflex longbows, Asian (static) recurves, modern recurves, possibly AF's Tatar, then Turkish hornbows (and maybe Tatars too): so these fps numbers seem very low.... But maybe Peter had something else in mind that he'd seen, like an efficiency measure, standardized by something.
Because totalled impact force (aka impulse) equals the difference between initial momentum (upon impact) and final momentum (0 here), you could instead chrono the speeds at target's distance (and if you wanted to convert these speeds to totalled impact forces, in lb-sec, multiply by arrow weight (in lbs) and divide by g=32.2 ft/s^2).
Thank you for all your investigative efforts, reviews, and superb instruction!!
Similar to what I get from my bows. With the same arrow and draw weight, and same draw length I get a spread of 125-155fps from self longbows to composite recurves. They can be closer. The difference between Joe Gibbs's 170 yew longbow (205fps) and 170 Tatar horn bow (211fps) was very close, about 20m farther in distance for the horn bow with the same 972grain/63gram arrows. BTW, the world recurve record is 500fps and 1200m if you want to go for that. About three times as far as the longbow record. ;)
Regarding speed record, yes, modern recurves and especially specialized flight recurves have huge advantage over longbow with low gpp.
But if we compare best target modern recurves or best horsebow replicas (28 inches draw length) with self bows (longbows), the first ones will clearly beat longbows "only" with low or normal gpp. If you go say 16-18 gpp they get close (maybe except for the Manchu styles, that even underdrawn (28) would clearly beat longbows (at same 28)?)
It would be a plausible assumption, maybe, that for voley shooting both West and East archers could have used 16-20 gpp for better penetration, even if distances would have been really short and they would not have had time for more than 2 arrows per archer?
That's a flight bow, which is a recurve specialized to shoot ultra light arrows. Not realistic battlefield practicality at all.
Armin back in the day I’d have stood with all respect you
Both styles of bow existed in the same place and time. My opinion is that they served different roles. A Longbow was cheaper, simpler and maybe more reliable for war in a setting were many men had to be givven a bow. They would also be quicker to replace when broken. With a stationary archer it would make sense. In the context they were used the difference would not make much difference. When hunting it would be a different matter. Also on horseback of course. We can see the same thing today in rifles.
Thank you for pulling more than 2500 pounds for us. Good information very instructive.
This seems as I would expect… not only do the different draw lengths mean different power strokes, but the different materials and construction methods will change the performance. Just because a bow requires 45lb to draw does not mean the limbs will be light enough or efficient enough to maximise arrow speed.
I’d expect a light, springy bow to react faster than a heavier rigid bow, and the heavier bow will lose more energy to internal resistance.
Perhaps an odd question, but what brand trousers is it you wear here? I like the design of those pockets!
I made a quite popular video about this topic, once. The pounds had nothing to do with efficiency. Bowtypes and drawlenght is superior. However! the penetration has even more to do with straight arrow flight and arrow mass. Arrow diameter is paramount too, because less surface on thin arrows. Great video sir
I would think that the FOC weight matters more in the long run
@@MiaogisTeas also correct
It's so interesting, this kind of comparisons. I guess that the power is only a factor of weight of the arrow and the speed the bow can launch it, basically the amount of momentum (Mass X speed) it can produce.
But the penetration test really raises a lot of intriguing points to explore and discuss. My Hypothesis is that the difference in penetration power has something to do with how "straight" the bows can shoot the arrows. The more perpendicular path the arrows take in it's travel thorough the air to the target, the less energy it will lose, thus, the more impact they will do to the target. The angle the arrow is, relative to the target, at the moment of impact, also is a factor. The closer to 90º Horizontally and Vertically the arrow strikes the target, the deeper it should penetrate. The problem is, these factors are humanly impossible to test. The fact that the bows that are shot with a thumb release, which is more "forgiving" than the "Mediterranean release" regarding the range of spine and weight of arrows that are proper for the bow to shoot, corroborates this Hypothesis. Probably the longbow lost a lot of energy when shooting the lighter arrows, because the arrows don't have the "perfect" spine to weight ratio, for the longbow. That, would cause the arrows to lose a fair bit of energy due to wiggling and wobbling during release, and to air resistance, since they are launched not perfectly straight. We don't see much of a difference with the Asiatic bows, because the spine to weight ratio of the arrows doesn't make that much of a difference when shooting thumb release.
Thanks for the test, It was beautifully done.
Some arrow oscillation is better than none. In another test arrows shot from an air cannon in a sabot (no oscillation in flight at all) penetrated less, not more, than arrows shot from a live bow at the same speed. Energy and momentum are related. Arrows with more momentum but the same or less energy, can penetrate deeper because they slow down slower as they fly, and slow down slower after impact as they enter the target and penetrate. Generally bows with more limb mass (longer/heavier limbs and/or siyahs) will do better with heavy arrows, and bows with less limb mass with lighter arrows. In broadhead flight archery where the arrow weight is the same for all bow types and draw weights (a relatively light 450 grains/29grams), the record distance for 50 lb self longbows is 219m, for primitive complex composite bows (recurve) it's 268m. In the unlimited draw weight class it's 270m v 289m. With the lightest flight arrows, its about 400m for longbows, about 1200m for recurves.
This is very interesting
Just an arbirary comparison... Each of these arrows, if the same diameter, which would effect friction drag, would have the same potential penetration.
650gr @ 138fps = 27.48ft lbs
550gr @ 150fps = 27.47ft lbs
450gr @ 166fps = 27.52ft lbs
Now comes the question about trajectory/flatness and whether the bow can handle the lighter arrows.
Interesting. Reminds me of another test I've seen done where they used a (I think) 1200lb crossbow and 80lb longbow and got effectively identical results: showing that other factors matter such as draw length, head shape, mass, etc... hrm... food for thought.
As long as the shape of the arrow/bolt head isn't bulbous and flat, its shape has a negligible effect on arrow speed and drag. As long as it's generally pointy, the exact shape of the arrow head only starts to have a noticeable effect on drag when it reaches speeds greater than or equal to around Mach 0.33 (roughly 370 fps or 112 m/s), which arrows pretty much never do. What has a much more significant effect on arrow drag is its diameter, its surface roughness and the size and shape of the fletchings. I found this out when I plugged various arrow designs into software used for predicting drag for rockets.
@@Marmocet this is true. But head shape has a *massive* effect on how it penetrates different materials, or fails to do so. Rather like bullets: AP vs HP bullets of same caliber and charge don't fly appreciably differently, but they absolutely dump their energy differently.
@@kungfuskull Oh yes, for sure head shape matters for penetration of, or transfer of energy to solid materials. It just doesn't make much difference for penetrating air at low Mach values.
@@Marmocet true.
Still; the inefficiency of a crossbow (medieval) is interesting. General consensus is that it is in contact for far shorter time and thus can't actually impart anywhere near as much energy as the hugely stronger string would make you think.
So seeing something similar with these bow tests was quite interesting
@@kungfuskull Funny you should mention 1200 lbf medieval crossbows, because I actually have some data for them (and warbow draw weight longbows of yew and various wood laminates). A 1200 lbf steel prod crossbow with a 6.5" powerstroke stores ~423 joules of elastic potential energy, but based on the sample I have, it has 237 grams of "virtual mass", meaning it would have to shoot a bolt weighing 237 grams to transmit 50% of its stored energy to the bolt. A bolt that heavy would have a launch velocity of ~42 meters/second, which is really too low to be practical as a ranged weapon. To get a launch velocity of 50 meters/second, the bolt would have to weigh ~101 grams. At launch it would have 126.7 joules of energy. For comparison, a typical 160 lbf longbow with a 23" powerstroke stores 199.6 joules of energy, but it has ~33 grams of virtual mass, so it shoots a 101 gram arrow at a launch velocity of 54.6 m/s and a kinetic energy of 150.5 joules.
Hello from Australia.
I love your videos and feel like I have learned so much from watching.
I recently bought a ragim taiga in 40lb after not shooting in 6 years and I would love to see a video of what you think of this bow.
If you could do that I would greatly appreciate it but if not I will just enjoy watching your other videos.
Thankyou
Thank you. If I ever get my hands on one I will do a review
This confirms a suspicion I've had for a long time that longbows like heavier arrows but have a slower speed. I switched from shooting a recurve to a heavy longbow over 30 years ago and hated the longbow from the very beginning. The arrow flight has a tremendous ballistic arch even at relatively short ranges and the arrows were empirically slower. The recurve bow shot arrows that were faster and the trajectory was much flatter. Glad to be back with recurve/eastern bows.
There is a lot of things to do to make a longbow faster. This one in the video is actually ridiculously slow one. I can make 170 fps 10gpp (flat) self longbow any day, and i have even made 180 fps one (bamboo backed jatoba elb). And i know people who have done over 200 fps 10 gpp longbows. Fastest i know of is Eirik Diseruds Norwegian two wood military bow. Elm backed compression pine bow, with 17cm reflex bit over 100 lbs draw weight, shooting 211 fps 10 gpp and 29" draw. That is way faster than 95% of commercial bows of any traditional type, including recurves and asiatics. Long bow just is way more difficult to make as fast than "better" designs, so on average it is much slower, but at its best, it is just as fast as any other type of trad bow. Longbows usually are just self bows and as such it's quality depends on the quality of the wood and skill of the bowyer quite a lot, two bows that seemingly look similar can have speed difference of 60 fps. Modern material bows are way more similar than longbows, cus the fiber density in man made materials change very little, compared to the huge change in the natural materials.
So no, this confirms nothing, cus in seemingly similar bows have just too much variety in performance to be making any kind of accurate comparison between bow types.
@@jkre Wow! How thoughtful of you to tell me how I should confirm my own experiences! And no, it does confirm what I've experienced. Kindly stop trying to be my conscious, moral guide and thought police.
@@jkre too bad military longbows during the 100 years war were never as fast as you can make a "good selfbow" Joe Gibbs 160 ib warbow shot a 80 gram arrow 7.7 gpp 180 fps. The BEST selfbows are comparable to a Turkish bow. Also most if not ALL selfbows I've seen from bowyers who have made a lot of bows shoot 140-150 fps with 10 gpp. 190 is the very best and that's backed with bamboo so not a good reference for a average longbow
@@Daylon91 this is true, but i never claimed that every longbow could shoot as fast, just that it is possible. English longbow isn't even the fastest self bow design, even tough it has the reputation of being the best traditional bow type, just like katana has the reputation of being the best sword, but it isn't.
@@jkre Yew is apparently the best bow wood but then americans say no its osage lmao both are great. Yew has the ability to have a high draw weight without the how being too big and heavy
First thing I did when watching the video: Pause and look where that BEEP comes from, if my fire alarm went off. 🤣
Potential Energy = Force x Distance. A bow with a longer draw stores more potential energy, even if you pull with the same force.
And it pushes the arrow on a longer distance before it leaves the string .
@@jme104 you can push it as far as you want, what ultimately matters is the energy behind the push. And yes, distance is a factor in that, as expressed in the formula.
Stored energy does not equate to energy transferred to the arrow, the bows efficieny is very important.
That would be it (given identical release), but you do not know what force there is along the way of the power stroke. Plus the imperfections of the flight would affect the impact.
@@arturk9464 yes, that is assuming identical force/draw curves. However if you compare stored energy beween a 32 inch draw and a 28 inch draw bow, the 32 inch draw bow can have a much worse f/d curve and still store more energy overall. Assuming a brace height of about 8 inches for both, one has 20 inches, the other has 24 inch power stroke. Thats a 20% increase, basically an unfair comparison.
Thenks 👍🏼
The Bear super magnum bow is the fastest I have seen so far. It is a real short bow with a predrilled design. It has a brace height of 11 inches so it is half drawn when strung. The one I had was a horror because the target strike pop was heard almost simultaneous with the arrow release pop. I got too old to use it. It was a 60 pound.
Force is mass x acceleration. Some bows can propel the same spec arrow much faster even at the same poundage. Get a compound bow of the same draw weight vs a long bow, that should easily show the difference when they propel the same spec arrow
Interesting, Armin...;)
I see some little red nocks on some of those arrows buddy...lol great job Armin
....one question though why is the Saracen the only reflex bow shot Mediterranean 🤔
to make it even more comparable to the longbow
I think WE should consider not only the weight of the arrow but also the weight of the Limbs. Reflexbows are lighter then longbows. so they have light LIMBS.
The result is interesting. Short Manchu However, the actual stop position of the bowstring seems to be the result.
Sorry for writing with a translator due to my short English skills.
The manchu bow string stop position has nothing to do with its performance. It is the length and the angle of the levers (siyahs) that gives the extra performance, because at the early draw, the string is pulling the levers at the direction of the levers, so it is not using the leverage it gives, so at the early draw the draw weight is higher than other design bows. More it is drawn, the more the string uses the levers to assist the draw, and that gives flatter draw curve. Flat draw curve with high early draw weight gives more stored energy than the other bows of same max draw weights. It is also drawn longer, so the arrow has more time to accelerate. Manchu bow is the most powerful traditional bow type, but it is also the most difficult to make and it is pretty weak to side ways twisting forces, thanks to those long levers, that also unfortunately assists the sideways twist as well, hence the difficulty in making it, cus it needs to be absolutely straight to work, tiniest twist and the levers will multiply it.
I saw more consistency between differant arrow weight with the horse bows. Plus same performance smaller bow.
Interesting to see both Manchu design showed a level arrow speed from light to heavy arrow. An advantage if the archer has different arrows with different weight for different purpose.
The heavier the limps the less impact arrow weight has on them. Manchu Bows where designed to throw logs (same as English Longbow).
In my practice (Larp archery) Manchu Bows with huge siyas show best performances (in terms of distance and flight curve) even in small poundages (32-40 pounds) then almost all others, (same draw, same poundages and same arrows), the improvement is marginal, but the extra meter/2 meters really matter. (PS for those who are not familiar with Larp archery, we shoot huge soft pointy arrows that are super heavy comparing to normal ones, with arrows depending on model ranging from 45-65grams (not grains) at 30inches)
The physics works out though, especially considering high FOC weight like those arrows have.
Don't tell anyone though because otherwise the longbow puritans will find a way to ban us. I already fire at nearly 3 times their rate, they get kinda annoyed by that.
@@MiaogisTeas I find that longbows don't do to shabby either, they are inferior to Manchus, but are better then some smaller lighter horse bows, (given equal quality). Me loving a tiny Turkish simsek hybrid am barely able to compete with them at same poundages, but then again mainly due to simseks bows being top of the line, and an average long bow is usually average at best... Those damn longbow puritans. *Clenches fists in righteous rage"
Manchu bows are designed with recurved tips and severely reflexed limbs. This is the most most efficient non-compound design. However its massive tips means it takes more poundage to get the limbs moving, which makes it less efficient at lobbing light arrows. The lighter the arrow, the faster the limbs must accelerate to achieve high kinetic energy.
Would be interesting if you would try an actual yew english longbow. Different types of wood have different efficiencies.
yes of course. I just could do it with bows I have on hands. soon I will get some more longbows
This is why there is a thing called "efficiency", 50# is just input energy, the end result would be different for each bow.
Интересное и информативное видео. Спасибо.
Nice grouping :)
momentum is defined as mass times velocity (p=m*v). In archery mass is defined by the weight of the arrow, speed is dependend on the bow's draw weight AND - more important - on the physical attributes of the bow. Recure bows are empirically faster than long bows. Given the same arrow weight (or mass), they are able to produce more momentum. So, no. Draw weight isn't the only defining factor when it comes to velocity and (therefore) momentum. Otherwise, it's abolutely correct. 50 lbs is 50 lbs ;) The effects are different.
No need for time consuming test series. Just simple physics.
Interesting, i need to do that too compare very short bow to long bow like yumi.. may be interesting..
If you had to pick one bow for hunting/survival which would it be?
Ja sehr gut!
Bei Ihnen ist es aber schoen.
Gut geschossen. Durchaus unterhaltsam
Does anyone know the name of the bow that shot the arrows a bit deeper... I almost thought that it would go that way.. I like that kind of bow... Especially in higher poundage.
But I think u called it the monchu.... Which is a type right. Not the brand or model type.
The next one, I believe u called a Turkish... Type.
At the end of the day, it all comes down to preference. American flat/longbows are my preference . longbows like BigJim and Acadian woods would make even the Turks and other eastern, asian and english bowers switch.
The physics is pretty simple F=MA. Higher mass = higher force. That's most of the reason why bigger bows have more penetration power. Accelration is velocity squared. So you have to square velocity to get the same doubling effect of Mass. Mass has a higher effect on penetration.
And while time on the string (the powerstroke) also matters, the mass is the more important part. It takes energy to move the limbs. So the more mass the limbs have, the slower it moves because it's "stealing" energy from passing into the arrows. That's why tatar bows, being small and having less mass are faster, but that's also conversely why manchu bows, with more mass pushes more energy into the arrow. The bridges and tilting forward is extra energy, and does help, but the primary factor is still the mass.
@@serdarbas5364 penetration and force are not the same thing. Force is a factor by which to calculate penetration. There are other factors involved. A hammer and club can have more energy and force than a sword or arrow, but will likely penetrate less.
As for your other points, first, the primary factor for penetration is not energy. Again I point at hammers and clubs. Second the arrow matching is less important than shooting technique. If your shooting technique is poor, you won't even hit the target. Furthermore khatra helps alleviate arrow matching problems. Sure, it's much better to use a matched arrow, than not, but you will still have functional arrows that can penetrate with good technique and khatra to compensate for weak arrow matches. On the other hand the opposite is not true.
That’s Saracen is gorgeous!!
oh yes, I always have this small moment of wow when I string it
Yes indeed it is sensual & stunning. If you have the time, follow the link in Armins description and re view the Saracen video on full screen, at least 28in screen. If you don't have time, watch it twice, even if you have seen it recently. 😀
as a hunter and you with lots of knowledge, for hunting wild boar what tip would be the best to use in your opinion?
I don’t hunt, sorry :)
Intresting
That longbow is actually a flatbow. Flat limbs reduce strain on the limbs compared to a D-shaped longbow and thus is less likely to break. Also less selective on material choice; longbows have to be made of certain woods. The downside is that flatbows are less efficient because it needs heavier limbs than a longbow to achieve the same draw weight. Try an English longbow with 30'' draw, the efficiency should be similar to the Jurchen bow.
The Manchu's design makes it specialized to shoot heavy arrows. Higher draw weight is ideal, but even lighter ones are highly efficient when shooting high gpp arrows.
Yet it is classified as longbow
I'm your fan in the U S of A!!!!
What are your thoughts on AirBows/Rifle?,
I would like to have an airbow :)
Draw length is the difference, just as a snub nose firearm, is less efficient than a long barrel, more time to propel the projectile. Very interesting. Thanks
That was interesting! So, why does the arrow weight make a big difference on the longbow (in terms of penetration), but not on the others? Why do longbows like heavy arrows, as you mentioned? Thank you :)!
good questions :) there are sure some who have the answers
I think it's because it peak efficiency is reached at a certain point. This is why the arrow speed doesn't increase with lighter arrows. It has no leverage effect, so the limbs accelerate only up to a point. And heavier arrows pack more punch.
On a recurve bow, or a bow with syahs if you will, this efficiency has more potential. And lighter arrows gather more speed, thus more jules of energy.
I don't know, this is how I see it at least 😂
It's a very interesting topic. We need Bamboo archery to make the calculations us non mathematicians can't do 😂
Energy and momentum are related. Arrows with more momentum but the same or less energy, can penetrate deeper because they slow down slower as they fly, and slow down slower after impact as they enter the target and penetrate. Generally bows with more limb mass (longer/heavier limbs and/or siyahs) will do better with heavy arrows, and bows with less limb mass with lighter arrows. In broadhead flight archery where the arrow weight is the same for all bow types and draw weights (a relatively light 450 grains/29grams), the record distance for 50 lb self longbows is 219m, for primitive complex composite bows (recurve) it's 268m. In the unlimited draw weight class it's 270m v 289m.
Oversimplified answer.
1 Longbows have long heavy limbs compared to shorter limbed bows. When you have all that mass in the limbs the bow can only accelerate those limbs so fast, compared to a bow with lighter limbs with the same stored energy.
2. The bow can't throw an arrow faster than the limbs themselves are moving. Heavier limbs will have a lower speed than light limbs with the same energy stored.
3. When the limbs are accelerating the arrow, some energy is lost from transferring the energy in to the mass of the arrow.
4. At a certain point an arrow gets light enough that the potential speed of the arrow is faster than the speed of a bows limb acceleration. At that point the stored energy in the limbs is not being utilized as speed. In that situation you're better off having a heavier arrow to store that energy as momentum in the arrow. Thus a heavier arrow, it's not going to go faster than the bow's limbs anyway so you may as well throw something heavier at the target. Lighter limbs will accelerate faster, and thus can shoot a lighter arrow (with the same stored energy in the limbs) and not hit the point of wasted energy with a lighter arrow.
TLDR a way to visualize this. Think about throwing things with your arm. With your arm you can throw either a small marble, or a baseball. Your arm can throw them both at about the same speed, but which will hit the target harder? The baseball will. The fact that the marble is lighter than the baseball hits a point of diminishing returns where the fact that it's lighter doesn't let you continue to throw it faster. The longbow (and all other bows) are doing the same thing, but with arrows. Each will have their own "sweet spot" where they balance speed and momentum of projectile at an optimum level.
(well that was my novel writing for the day lol)
Bower will give to each sections of the limbs different design and materials to perform the way they aim for. Even if all those are warbows, some are used on foot other on horseback, long or short distance... A bowmaker will design the limbs for those specific uses, so naturally the bows will perform differently as well.
How can I trust you, when you mix up Saracen and Manchu?
?
Penetration into a block of Styrofoam would, I think, have a lot to do with not only the arrow speed, angle of penetration, but also the coefficients of friction between the arrow surface and the block, ie arrow material and surface finish, circumference, ( ie diameter) and (near the end of travel) the arrow weight, ("normal" force). I know that when I pull my arrows out of my Styrofoam backstop there is a lot of friction. Thanks Armin, you will have started something here ! Very enjoyable.
I agree..makes a good medium for comparison..i used the 4"" thick blue stuff which left a little film on my arrows but cleans off ok
Really the penetration test is unnecessary I think. It’s a complex physical system that can create weird result. Just having the projectile weight and speed is enough to calculate the joules or ft lbs of kinetic energy produced. Unsurprisingly the Manchu is producing the most kinetic energy at around 38 ft lbs
This means it should do the most damage to a target. I am no physicist but pulling back 40-44 lbs over 32 inches and getting 38 ft lbs of energy back seems like a good deal to me.
Thanks for mentioning me and my three accounts,, I'm fameious now. :)
Very Interrestig.
I saw the japanese bow,and think nothing compare to .
The strongest bow is not that which you draw with lot of power but that one who selease that power instantaneose!( composite one)
Before I start watching I’m going to make a prediction - different bows will perform differently at same draw weight and arrow weight. How much energy goes into the arrow comes from 3 factors: draw weight (energy to compress the springs), the speed at which the bow limbs return to neutral, and the power stroke or time the string is in contact with the arrow.
Every bow will have an ideal arrow weight aka maximum kinetic energy transfer because that’s what matters. A 100 grain arrow moving at 300 fps confers less kinetic energy than a 300 grain arrow moving at 200 FPS. Although a faster arrow with less kinetic energy might be ideal in certain circumstances like a moving target.
There’s other factors which probably effect the calculation like the string, nocks, and friction off the riser, hand , or body of the bow.
A modern manchu bow with a drop away or minimal contact arrow rest and shoot through riser would be a beast to behold I think with a long power stroke and the shorter limbs made from modern materials giving that snappy return on the bow limbs. Add a Dloop and thumb release aid for maximum efficiency, accuracy, and power!
Dear Mr Hirmer, what kind of speed measuring equipment do you use for this kind of tests?
Many thanks and best regards, Peter
Hi Peter. The Virtue Clock 3
So cool I thought my longbow were slow with 11gpp at 28in draw I'm at 150fps. So apparently there not so slow lol my selfbows keep up well
What kind of glove do u have
interesting... I think the shorter bows may just have less air resistance? cool on you either way
Before watching the video what I know is draw length makes a hell of a difference. Look at the paddle bow. It can have 50 ibs but only at 22 inches. Now compare that to 50 ibs at 28. Or 32. More momentum is generated with a longer draw. The reason why medieval crossbows are so terribly inefficient and had to be of such high draw weight was specifically BECAUSE of the tiny draw length of 5 inches. Also longbowmen shot arrows roughly 7.7-8.5 gpp during the 100 years war. It's the only way they could get their arrows up to a decent speed and velocity
It is called powerstroke. Force × powerstroke = work (energy in the arrow)
yeah but 8gpp for a ~150lb bow is still immense
@@fungus2116indeed it is. The 80 gram arrows are going 180 fps
@@bambooarchery that's what it was called powerstroke. Thank u sir
New Intro music. Me likey
after using the same music for years now, TH-cam comes up with copyright issues in some of my videos... and all showing that the music is free and from the editing software does not change their opinion. So before fighting again and again, I changed it now
Beauty choice....do flu2 fletch work with english longbow?
what is that? excuse my non existing knowledge :)
@@ArminHirmer flu flu arrow kindly similar to spiral arrow & its being used on short distance, I interesting to see if flu2 arrow do suitable shooting with long bow mid poundage at long/short range
Most people use it as sky shooting since its not for targeting just for group attack dont know if it trues ,just need to find out:)
@@electrizofficial6965 flu flu are meant for short distance in general and for aerial targets I guess
@@electrizofficial6965 but of course you can shoot them with a longbow
Yeah, I'd say that's pretty conclusive. The margin is way to big to say that the bow shape doesn't improve speed and penetration. It's simple physics. I think Peter will not admit he is wrong, but we'll see 😂
And it's worth mentioning, that Joerg shot a very lightweight arrow through a steel plate, from a compound bow. So faster arrow flight means more penetration. And a longer power stroke means more speed.
Well done, Armin! 😁
Oh, and there is one more thing though. The steaightness of the arrow flight has a big impact on penetration. It will penetrate A LOT more if it is perfectly straight.
I know that when I shoot that perfect arrow, it can fly through an archery net. If it's just a bit sideways, it will get stuck, or bounce back. Just thought I'd share that.
I have a black locust long bow , 55 pounder it shoots 330 gain Arrow over 270 yards. 31 inch draw . I dont have a crony but it shoots fast . Get a good long bow with 31 inch draw . It will perform much better .
135 фпс при 9 гран на фунт это очень кисло. Очень медленный лонг на видео.
Я замерял через хрон несколько своих луков, цельнодеревянных, акация и вяз. При таком соотношении они выдавали 160 - 165 фпс. И это обычные рабочие луки для целевой стрельбы.
hallo,
ich habe ein test gesehen mit ein longbow serie : 35# gibt 25Nm, 50# gibt 35Nm und 100# gibt nur 52 Nm...
vielleicht ist für die Jäger or für die 3D der Format die gute Frage
was ist körperlich einfacher am 30# ein 68" Langbogen oder ein 30# 60" horsebow ?
das ist noch ein gute Test Frage !
I would theorise that at longer distances the longbow with the heavier arrwows would retain more penertration capability than the other bows
No, Manchu bows are actually designed to shoot very heavy arrows - even heavier than longbows in terms of arrow grain per pound (GPP). It is surprising that the Manchu bow performed well at these lighter draw weights and lighter arrows. At military heavy-draw weight levels (eg. 80-200 lb draw), the Manchu bow should perform the best at shooting heavy arrows if compared to other bows of the same draw weight.
@@Intranetusa hmm thanks, I didn’t know that
If even a thicker string can have an effect on arrow speed ...an extra foot of dense wood each end plus 2ft more string.....
The light arrows appeared to have a narrower diameter, which would aid penetration. Is that the case?
I understand that the force/draw curve is important--in that the area under the curve graphically represents the total stored power available to the arrow. Things that affect the area under the curve are:
(1) the total draw length; (the low brace height longbow starts its draw earlier, lengthening the draw and the English war bow was drawn longer than the hunting longbow. The Manchu and Korean also have the longer draw length, but starting from a higher brace, which shortens the total draw).
(2) the initial starting draw weight , which is higher in recurves, and yet higher in contact recurves,
and at its maximum in Manchu style static recurves.
(3) The convexity of the force/draw curve. The steeper the curve climbs initially and the higher the middle draw draw weight, the more convex the curve and the greater the total energy stored in the bow.
Of course, features that enable a bow to possess a force/draw curve that stores more energy--can also have a negative effect on the ability of that bow to unload all that energy into the arrow. Heavy siyahs and kassans suck up some of that energy, but this is somewhat mitigated by the shortness of those bows for a given draw length. The longbows lighter tips--are, however, longer.
My knowledge could well be out of date, as it has been nearly twenty years since I was heavily into studying archery and building bows--and the pool of knowledge has expanded mightily since then!
I do notice that a lot of the terminology was established back then, though. It is amazing what the Internet has wrought!
all same diameter
For the same power stroke longer draw with longer braceheight will produce more energy, less energy is being stored at the start of the draw it is not as important.
Whoever suggested all bows perform equally at the same weights knows little about bows. Though honestly, this test is scientific, it's just not rigorous enough to get a paper published.
I would never publish a paper about that hahaha
I imagine this is similar to the take that someone who only uses a compound bow would have a harder time with draw weight on a trad bow. With the discussion being the way compound bows work makes the higher draw weights on them not feel as rough, i.e an 80lb compound archer using a trigger would struggle with an 80lb horse bow using their thumb.
I think some of these experiments make for interesting discussion, since the outcome can really be different based on different variables. Might a get compound user replying that they shoot 90 with both, when in that discussion its someone who only does one.
As for the actual topic, recurves and horsebows should often beat out longbows in speed and versatility test. Gotta imagine there's a reason Asiatic nations chose their bows over the long bows of Europe and NA. Some would say easier on horseback, but Comanche used flatbows which are longbows, from horseback. Sure it might be easier to use a recurve/horsebow but doesn't have to be 100% the sole reason Asian nations used smaller bows
They didn't have a lot of yew trees on the steppes or in the desert, either. That being said, yew longbows of war weight perform a lot better than this. Those will be getting close to 180 fps at 10 gpp, and over 200 fps at 7 gpp.