Bow Division for Bio Composite Bows.

General discussions. Politics, scuttlebutt, whatever: you're getting married, changing jobs, got a gripe or a compliment, dying to get out with the bow etc.....

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
greybeard
Posts: 2761
Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2006 9:11 am
Location: Logan City QLD

Bow Division for Bio Composite Bows.

#1 Post by greybeard » Fri Jan 04, 2019 3:20 pm

Where do bio composite bows fit in?

It would appear that these bows are placed in various categories most of which are inappropriate for the construction and style of bow. At one particular traditional shoot a bio composite bow was put in the selfbow category. They have also been relegated to the primitive division.

Should there be a division to cover these and other nonconforming bows regardless of limb profile?

From Paleo Planet;

Mark in England,
“This has been a topic for discussion in the UK where archers bought these bows to shoot within the Primitive Class in the UK National Field Archery. Bow breakages and following discussion with Grozer (rather reluctantly) reveals that these bows have a fibreglass layer onto the wooden core, and that the "horn" and "sinew" layers are basically resin impregnated pressed sheets of horn and sinew particles. Sadly, though sold as natural horn/sinew bows they are anything but. The fibreglass and resin is a critical part of the bows construction and performance.”

Assyrian Archer,

“Hi there folks,
I happen to own an Assyrian biocomposite bow from Grózer, and I figured out its exact construction.
The belly of the bow is made of pressed horn. Below that, there is a layer of fibreglass. Underneath the glass two layers of ash wood can be found. Then again, you have a layer of fibreglass. The very back of the bow consists of pressed sinew.
Modern (epoxy) glue is used to keep it together, and a layer of lacquer is applied to finish the bow. (Reason for knowing this is that I have seen the poor thing torn to pieces when he delaminated and broke.)
And always keep in mind; you could ask Csaba Grózer yourself, he will know the exact answer!”


https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/paleopl ... 47257.html

Daryl.
"And you must not stick for a groat or twelvepence more than another man would give, if it be a good bow.
For a good bow twice paid for, is better than an ill bow once broken.
[Ascham]

“If a cluttered desk is a sign of a cluttered mind, of what, then, is an empty desk a sign?” [Einstein]

I am old enough to make my own decisions....Just not young enough to remember what I decided!....

User avatar
Kendaric
Posts: 177
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2012 10:01 pm

Re: Bow Division for Bio Composite Bows.

#2 Post by Kendaric » Mon Jan 07, 2019 2:10 pm

Interesting article.

Under ABA it would just be placed into Historical: "In this division there shall be no distinction between the different configurations of bow design and material used. There shall be no grades or classes. A Historical Bow is a bow recognised as such by the Association and is of known accepted usage during the period preceding the year 1900 and shall be either a self-wood or a composite bow, which is made to a configuration which has established historical precedence."

Under TAA I think it would be put into "Asiatic Style Bows". It wouldn't be put into Primitive as "a primitive bow is any bow of any design that does not have fibreglass or carbon in its construction".

User avatar
temudjin
Posts: 138
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 1:18 pm

Re: Bow Division for Bio Composite Bows.

#3 Post by temudjin » Mon Jan 07, 2019 3:43 pm

Hey Daryl,

I have for many years shot these Grozer bio composite bows and have sometimes been put into self bow as you say and occasionally even recurve divisions. More recently, at most trad shoots, I am in the "Horse Bow/Asiatic Bow" class as per the TAA Guidelines. For me the issue is more about shooting around the handle than materials (just my opinion) as that makes arrows selection and tuning more critical than on a centre cut bow.

I think the TAA Guidelines are a pretty good solution to the question you pose as the vast majority of "horse bows" tend to be laminated with at least some modern materials and glues. Unless of course someone goes slightly crazy and buys a Saluki which is made using all traditional materials and glues but very expensive.

User avatar
Kendaric
Posts: 177
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2012 10:01 pm

Re: Bow Division for Bio Composite Bows.

#4 Post by Kendaric » Mon Jan 07, 2019 4:30 pm

temudjin wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 3:43 pm
I think the TAA Guidelines are a pretty good solution to the question you pose.....
Yes I think TAA equipment guidelines are a really good balance of the ideas of 'traditional'. I particularly like the statement from "Origins of TAA Rules": If we are going to be fairdinkum about Promoting and Protecting what's traditional in Australia we should ensure that instead of changing our rules to suit someone’s equipment we have their equipment changed to suit our rules.

Nicely put Keith.

User avatar
Kendaric
Posts: 177
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2012 10:01 pm

Re: Bow Division for Bio Composite Bows.

#5 Post by Kendaric » Mon Jan 07, 2019 4:37 pm

temudjin wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 3:43 pm
and have sometimes been put into self bow as you say and occasionally even recurve division.....
Yes, I saw at one ABA state or national shoot where a laminated bamboo Howard Hill Style longbow was put into "historical division" instead of the traditional longbow division where it belonged - all because the judges didn't know what to do with it.

User avatar
greybeard
Posts: 2761
Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2006 9:11 am
Location: Logan City QLD

Re: Bow Division for Bio Composite Bows.

#6 Post by greybeard » Sat Jan 12, 2019 4:42 pm

Tom,

I started shooting selfbows and all bamboo Asiatic and static tip bows off the knuckle around 2004. Perhaps I was fortunate in that I found they were no more difficult to shoot than an off the shelf bow.

From Wiki;
“The bow and arrow appears around the transition from the Upper Paleolithic to the Mesolithic. After the end of the last glacial period, use of the bow seems to have spread to every inhabited region, except for Australasia and most of Oceania. “
Kendaric wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 4:30 pm
........Yes I think TAA equipment guidelines are a really good balance of the ideas of 'traditional'. I particularly like the statement from "Origins of TAA Rules": If we are going to be fairdinkum about Promoting and Protecting what's traditional in Australia we should ensure that instead of changing our rules to suit someone’s equipment we have their equipment changed to suit our rules.......
What is a true representation of traditional archery in Australia?

From AA;
“Although archery had been practised in Australia since 1790 (officers of the First and Second Fleet) with clubs operating in all capitol cities and major regional centres throughout the 1800's and early 1900's the Archery Association of Australia (AAA) was not officially formed until the 17th and 18th January 1948.”

It is most likely that the first known bows in common use in Australia had their origins in the European longbow [self bow]. Prior to this some primitive bows may have appeared in Australia via Papua New Guinea.

TAA;
Longbow; the longbow refers to the traditional, straight end style longbow.
The bow must be of wooden or bamboo construction. Materials such as fibreglass, Phenolic or carbon strips are permitted.

Carbon arrow shafts are not permitted as they cannot be seen as traditional.

ABA;
Traditional Longbow; A one piece straight ended bow of any material, whether glued up of one or more laminations of materials.

Arrows shall be wooden shafted.

Reads like double standards.

Daryl.
"And you must not stick for a groat or twelvepence more than another man would give, if it be a good bow.
For a good bow twice paid for, is better than an ill bow once broken.
[Ascham]

“If a cluttered desk is a sign of a cluttered mind, of what, then, is an empty desk a sign?” [Einstein]

I am old enough to make my own decisions....Just not young enough to remember what I decided!....

User avatar
GrahameA
Posts: 4690
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2005 4:28 pm
Location: Welcome to Brisneyland, Oz

Re: Bow Division for Bio Composite Bows.

#7 Post by GrahameA » Fri Jan 18, 2019 4:44 am

Morning All.

The issue regarding Bow Divisions/Rules has been debated for years on this Forum. The problem/stumbling block appears to be a lack of clear definitions and agreeance.

Grahame.
Grahame.
Shoot a Selfbow, embrace Wood Arrows, discover Vintage, be a Trendsetter.

"Unfortunately, the equating of simplicity with truth doesn't often work in real life. It doesn't often work in science, either." Dr Len Fisher.

User avatar
Kendaric
Posts: 177
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2012 10:01 pm

Re: Bow Division for Bio Composite Bows.

#8 Post by Kendaric » Fri Jan 18, 2019 9:27 am

greybeard wrote:
Sat Jan 12, 2019 4:42 pm

TAA;
Longbow; the longbow refers to the traditional, straight end style longbow.
The bow must be of wooden or bamboo construction. Materials such as fibreglass, Phenolic or carbon strips are permitted.

Carbon arrow shafts are not permitted as they cannot be seen as traditional.

ABA;
Traditional Longbow; A one piece straight ended bow of any material, whether glued up of one or more laminations of materials.

Arrows shall be wooden shafted.

Reads like double standards.

Daryl.
I had a look at the latest TAA equipment guidelines and for longbow it says: 'The bow can be of any material or use any modern glue in its construction'

This appears to be similar to ABA. Perhaps they changed the definition some time back.

User avatar
temudjin
Posts: 138
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 1:18 pm

Re: Bow Division for Bio Composite Bows.

#9 Post by temudjin » Wed Jan 23, 2019 3:27 pm

Daryl,

You may already know this but there are actually three styles of longbow outlined in the TAA Equipment Guidelines.

1. Longbow - as you have described it above.

2. Hybrid Longbow - basically a reflex/deflex longbow as long as the string does not touch the belly of the bow when strung.

3. ELB - an English Longbow can be all one wood (self bow style) of laminated but only modern materials allowed are glues. No shelf allowed, must be shot off the hand.

The guidelines can be a little confusing as the three styles of longbow are interspersed with recurve, asiatic and so on. You really need to read the whole thing to get the full picture.

I am with Graeme on this one, whether you like TAA or not at least they have taken the time to think it thru and document a set of guidelines for trad equipment. And that means that members of TAA can have input into making changes if they want to.

User avatar
Kendaric
Posts: 177
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2012 10:01 pm

Re: Bow Division for Bio Composite Bows.

#10 Post by Kendaric » Wed Jan 23, 2019 4:56 pm

temudjin wrote:
Wed Jan 23, 2019 3:27 pm
Daryl,

You may already know this but there are actually three styles of longbow outlined in the TAA Equipment Guidelines......

2. Hybrid Longbow - basically a reflex/deflex longbow as long as the string does not touch the belly of the bow when strung.
To be pedantic (and not to take away from the point you are saying), the TAA guidelines doesn't state Hybrid Longbow, but just Hybrid.

As we all really know, a hybrid is really a semi-recurve with a new marketable incorrect name of modern longbow. :teasing-poke:

TAA took the diplomatic road and called it hybrid.

User avatar
Stickbow Hunter
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 11458
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 8:33 pm
Location: Maryborough Queensland

Re: Bow Division for Bio Composite Bows.

#11 Post by Stickbow Hunter » Wed Jan 23, 2019 5:29 pm

Kendaric wrote:
Wed Jan 23, 2019 4:56 pm
As we all really know, a hybrid is really a semi-recurve with a new marketable incorrect name of modern longbow. :teasing-poke:

TAA took the diplomatic road and called it hybrid.
No, TAA just abandoned the very traditions they claim to be protecting.

User avatar
Kendaric
Posts: 177
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2012 10:01 pm

Re: Bow Division for Bio Composite Bows.

#12 Post by Kendaric » Thu Jan 24, 2019 9:38 am

The joys of a committee.

Baby steps. I can only summarise from what I seem to be seeing at the time, that around the inception of the TAA as corporation there was a lot of resistance against separating out these semi-recurve/quasi modern longbows from tradition longbows from quite a few. Trad shoots events around this time lumped them in all together as and many did not want to change the status quo, and were quite adamant about it. I think it was only the insistence from a dedicated few that made sure that at least traditional longbow had a definition separate from the other - as a guideline. It took some time before some Trad shoots started to adopt the change.

Ideally these 'hybrids' should have been put into the recurve division were they belong, but I think the opposing pressure must have been too great. Physiologically people don't want to shoot a "semi"-recurve in the recurve division as it implies a 'lesser' recurve and reduced competitive advantage (that's not to say that that is actually true), whereas the opposite is true (from a physiological point of view) if they were able to compete in the longbow division. The fact that they had also bought into the marketing spin (at no necessary fault of there own) and invested in a 'modern longbow' probably plays a part in that mindset too, and that other organisations had divisions specific to these bows as well.

Hybrid strikes me as a terrible word, as it has no ring of 'traditional' in it, but then neither does modern longbow, so I suspect it was the lesser of two weevils (Master and Commander pun). So a specific division was born as a diplomatic solution. Semi-recurve may have been a more correct word, but considering the resistance to the notion of a semi-recurve actually being that, it probably was viable at the time. As time and acceptance increases, it may (or may not, more likely) be changed to that.

The most important thing is that traditional longbow now has it own division, separate from the other. That strikes me as a step in the right direction, if nothing else.




And before we get into the debate (again) about what is a longbow (using the sunken Mary Rose longbows having a curve in some of the limbs as an example) - we are talking about what we classify as 'traditional longbow' which is typified by the Howard Hill style longbow of the 50's (time frame only approximate).

Hybrid bows back then were called semi-recurve.

User avatar
Stickbow Hunter
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 11458
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 8:33 pm
Location: Maryborough Queensland

Re: Bow Division for Bio Composite Bows.

#13 Post by Stickbow Hunter » Thu Jan 24, 2019 12:09 pm

Kendaric,

I have been told by a committee member of TAA as to how things came about and it is as you described in your post. I agree 100% with most of what you say.
Kendaric wrote:
Thu Jan 24, 2019 9:38 am
The most important thing is that traditional longbow now has it own division, separate from the other. That strikes me as a step in the right direction, if nothing else.
I can't agree with you about that. TAA's charter or whatever you wish to call it is this, "Promoting and Protecting Traditional Archery in all Forms". Right from the very outset they decided to disregard that, just as most other associations do. The simple question is this; What traditions are TAA promoting or preserving by changing the historical name given to a specific type of bow? They certainly aren't promoting or preserving any Traditional Archery traditions that I know of, in fact, they are showing total disregard for them. I guess I should add IMO.

I'll just leave it there as we have discussed similar previously. :biggrin:

Jeff

Post Reply