Recurve, Longbow, Deflex/ Reflex bow nomenclature.

[Goatchaser]

That would be a Cari-bow wolverine with the Diamond series riser. Manufacturer calls it a longbow and they make awesome bows and really know their stuff.

[scuzz]

I seem to think that if a bow has a reflexed curvature to the limb when braced, it is a little bit closer to being a recurve than a longbow.

I shoot asymmetrical D/R (or R/D) bows, I now make with no cut in shelf. The arrow needs to deflect around a 3/8 offset from centre. They also have a straight limb at brace. This is how i like them. By some peoples views, and possibly some associations i could be shooting a recurve, and others a longbow.

Its a little bizarre that i can be in different divisions depending on the group running a shoot, but I guess it shows a variance in opinion from one group to the next. And from my own thoughts, i think its right in the middle between a longbow and recurve so i pretty much expect it.
I think HYBRID is as good a name as any, for distinguishing this 'middle' area.

As for a bow being called D/R over R/D. I think if you were to tell someone that your shooting a D/R longbow, most would ask what D/R actually is. Because they have most likely only heard of the term R/D. As mentioned this is likely historically incorrect, but does majority rule??

Scuzz

[Chase N. Nocks]

Scuzz,

The D/R bow you speak of might be closer to a Recurve than a Straight bow, but both D/R and Straight bows can be "Longbows".

The question about D/R and R/D is nicely displayed in the diagram supplied by Greybeard.

The majority of archers may be using the term D/R incorrectly and if R/D bows did not exist it might not represent anything more than a semantic problem however incorrect that usage might be.

But since R/D bows do exist then popularity has nothing to do with technically describing something accurately.

Also as can be seen in the diagram there is nothing that says Longbow.

Cheers
Troy

[Fanto]

as Sean said its a caribow wolverine.

caribow is Abe penner, of Manitoba , Canada.

he makes 3 of these aggressive d/r bows.
58" wolverine , 60" slynx, 62" peregrine.

mine Is the slynx, 59#@28, bow mass 675grams. it's quiet, shock free and fast. very very fast. the grip is brilliant and the craftsmanship and finish is the best I've ever
seen on a bow. it would want to be at $1500 landed in Aus incl freight, gst, duty tv

[Chase N. Nocks]

That would be a Cari-bow wolverine with the Diamond series riser. Manufacturer calls it a longbow and they make awesome bows and really know their stuff.

Thanks mate,

very nice looking bows.

Depending on meeting length minimums it might go close to being recognized as a longbow by FITA. But I think it is showing a little too much recurve as opposed to the acceptable flattening to the "D" shape. I am no expert mind as I have been previously unfamiliar with so many differences in archery legislation. Not saying that is of importance - just gives a point of reference to the overall conversation.

Here is the FITA legal BlackBrook Sigma (not to be confused with the IFAA BlackBrook Sigma with a definitive "D" shape when strung)

Minimum length is 64 inch I believe.

[greybeard]

Etymology[edit]

According to the Oxford English Dictionary, the word is derived from Latin hybrida, meaning the "offspring of an tame sow and a wild boar", "child of a freeman and slave", etc.[4] The term entered into popular use in English in the 19th century, though examples of its use have been found from the early 17th century.[5]

Types of hybrids[edit]

Depending on the parents, there are a number of different types of hybrids;[6]
Single cross hybrids — result from the cross between two true breeding organisms and produces an F1 generation called an F1 hybrid (F1 is short for Filial 1, meaning "first offspring"). The cross between two different homozygous lines produces an F1 hybrid that is heterozygous; having two alleles, one contributed by each parent and typically one is dominant and the other recessive. Typically, the F1 generation is also phenotypically homogeneous, producing offspring that are all similar to each other.
Double cross hybrids — result from the cross between two different F1 hybrids.[7]
Three-way cross hybrids — result from the cross between one parent that is an F1 hybrid and the other is from an inbred line.[8]
Triple cross hybrids — result from the crossing of two different three-way cross hybrids.
Population hybrids — result from the crossing of plants or animals in a population with another population. These include crosses between organisms such as interspecific hybrids or crosses between different races.
Hybrid species - results from hybrid populations evolving reproductive barriers against their parent species through hybrid speciation.[9]

[Goatchaser]

Hybrid in archery is not used in it's literal meaning, same as "instinctive" isn't, remember that one. It is used to describe a bow that has both longbow and recurve characteristics within it's design, same as a Hybrid car runs on petrol and electricity. Best of both worlds just like a D/R hybrid bow...

[Fanto]

Hybrid in archery is not used in it's literal meaning, same as "instinctive" isn't, remember that one. It is used to describe a bow that has both longbow and recurve characteristics within it's design, same as a Hybrid car runs on petrol and electricity. Best of both worlds just like a D/R hybrid bow...

uh oh....

someone once said instinctive is where you pick a spot in a forum that you want unleash armageddon, burn a hole in the spot with your eyes and sit back and watch the destruction....

or something like that

[Chase N. Nocks]

Hybrid in archery is not used in it's literal meaning, same as "instinctive" isn't, remember that one. It is used to describe a bow that has both longbow and recurve characteristics within it's design, same as a Hybrid car runs on petrol and electricity. Best of both worlds just like a D/R hybrid bow...

uh oh....

someone once said instinctive is where you pick a spot in a forum that you want unleash armageddon, burn a hole in the spot with your eyes and sit back and watch the destruction....

or something like that

It's not that bad Fanto. Just how much trouble can an imaginary shooting technique really cause anyway?

Cheers
Troy

[GrahameA]

Afternoo,

Hybrid in archery is not used in it's literal meaning .....

Hmmm...... Archery, the world where the accepted definitions of the rest of the world do not apply.

As for Hybrid cars ..........

I would strongly suggest they are advertisers "Pot-of-Gold" as they invent names where no invention of names is required. It is another of those things where manufacturers are trying to differentiate so as to "suck in" the gullible un-thinking public. Perhaps I need to be a tad more harsh on this.....

[greybeard]

As for Hybrid cars ..........
I would strongly suggest they are advertisers "Pot-of-Gold" as they invent names where no invention of names is required. It is another of those things where manufacturers are trying to differentiate so as to "suck in" the gullible un-thinking public. Perhaps I need to be a tad more harsh on this.....

I can remember the 'diesel electric' locomotive and that is exactly what it was called; none of this hybrid advertising garbage.

[Chase N. Nocks]

Hybrid in archery is not used in it's literal meaning, same as "instinctive" isn't, remember that one. It is used to describe a bow that has both longbow and recurve characteristics within it's design, same as a Hybrid car runs on petrol and electricity. Best of both worlds just like a D/R hybrid bow...

Hi Sean?

I do not have the level of issue with the word hybrid as others do. But from a design and technology perspective there may not be the linage that use of the word hybrid implies. I THINK that is the direction that Grahame and Daryl are coming from.

It is a natural thing to see B that is between A and C and see a hybrid. I have done this but I think you will find (guessing here) that a lot of these designs appeared independently so there is no mixed blood so to speak.

Also you say it has longbow characteristics but what are they. I can see what the D/R characteristics are.


Cheers
Troy

[Goatchaser]

longbow characteristics or not???, the strung shape is closer to a strung longbow than a recurve, one could also say what more recurve characteristics does it have, as I said a bit of both = D/R hybrid IMO.

[toby]

I have been watching this thread for a while without commenting. I am trying to work out if the reason for it is simply to work out what to call a d/r longbow, hybrid bow, on Ozbow when the rest of the world already refers to them by these names or is it to work out what category they should be shot in at Trad shoots. In my opinion they don't properly fit in to either longbow or recurve & maybe they should have there own catergory,maybe Modern Longbow? It could also include three piece hybrid longbows. That is if people don't consider them to be longbows.

[Stickbow Hunter]

Since it is a regular occurrence to see posts involving digs at me regarding my views on this subject I thought it appropriate that I do a reply in this thread - even if I am a bit late.

Firstly let me make it very clear that I hold my views because of our traditions that form our Traditional Archery Heritage. Traditional Archery and its equipment became a separate entity the day the compound bow was invented. Tradtional Archery means to carry on the traditions of simple stick and string, use of modern materials notwithstanding, of the pre compound era.

At this point may I suggest , if you haven’t already, go to the front page of the site and click on the ‘Where We Stand link’ and have a read and ‘The Glossary of Traditional Archery Terms’ at http://www.ozbow.net/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=2927 and familiarize yourself with them.

I give no credibility to those who willingly disregard our Traditional Archery Heritage. This includes any, Archery manufacturer, Archery body, Traditional Shoot Committee or individual.

Gday,

the oxford dictionary defines a recurve as :

noun
Archery
a bow that curves forward at the ends, which straighten out under tension when the bow is drawn.

so where is the line in the sand between longbows and recurves?

is any bow with deflex and reflex a recurve?

discuss...

The short answer is NO. Let me explain further. I am going to show you three distinct types of bows, one is a longbow and the other two are recurves.

This is a longbow incorporating the deflex/reflex design.

primal-longbow.jpg (17.49 KiB) Viewed 6870 times

Note that once the bow is strung there is no reflex in the limbs. The bow is said to be straight ended as the limbs continually bend toward the archer.


This next bow is a semi-recurve incorporating the deflex/reflex design.

P1020689.jpg (16.95 KiB) Viewed 6870 times

This type of bow is most commonly and incorrectly referred to as a longbow now-a-days. Clearly it is a recurve and not a longbow as the limb tips STILL HOLD REFLEX (recurve) when strung even though the string only touches the limbs at the string nocks.

Any bow with limbs that reflex (regardless of how little) when strung is a recurve!!!

These bows were very popular back in the 1950’s but their popularity wained in favour of the working recurve. They were manufactured and sold by many of the leading Archery Manufacturers at the time such as Bear, Hoyt,Coe and others. Photos of these bows have been posted on Ozbow by myself and others numerous times to illustrate the difference. The design is at least 60 years old and was sold as a semi-recurve bow in those times and called such to distinguish it from the new full working recurves which came into production in the 1950s.


This next bow is a working recurve incorporating the deflex/reflex design.

Tribal-Styk-Recurve.jpg (29.83 KiB) Viewed 6870 times

The only difference between the full working recurve and the semi-recurve bows is the degree of recurve in the outer limb.


As you can see above, we have three very different bow types but they all have one thing in common and that is they all are of DEFLEX/REFLEX DESIGN.

What differentiates these three types of bows is simply the amount of deflex/reflex used in their design and manufacture!!!

I hope I have also clearly demonstrated that the term deflex/reflex is a part of bow DESIGN terminology and NOT the name of any TYPE of bow.


While I am on the subject of bow design I will very quickly show what a bow using a reflex/deflex design looks like as many people use this term in place of deflex/reflex. Why the former instead of the latter? Because BY TRADITION, limb design in archery IS described by the side profile which the limbs took as they moved AWAY FROM THE HANDLE. The handle is the ONE CONSISTENT LANDMARK to be found on traditional bows.

So, a bow whose limbs first bend toward the archer has deflex in the limb. If it then bends away from the archer, it has reflex in the limb – hence, the correct term deflex-reflex design. This should NOT be difficult for people to comprehend. It maintains a systematic and universal method of describing limb design.

This following picture shows a bow correctly deemed to be of the reflex-deflex design for the obvious reason that in the braced position the limb profile bends away from the archer, then deflexes back toward the archer and finishes with a semi-recurve.

wind-warrior-a.jpg (39.1 KiB) Viewed 6870 times

As you can see this bow clearly fits into the recurve design category any way you want to look at it but I have seen it incorrectly called a longbow.

Gents,

is there a consensus on what the deflex/reflex limbed , 52-64" flat bows with shelves cut to or near centre, shall be called on Ozbow? simply because its too much work to type out that whole sentence every time.

Can i suggest perhaps deflex/reflex (D/R) flatbow is a good option, because

1) it wont cause confusion for beginners who see bows like Zeta, Toelke whip, Big Jim Buffalo constantly and universally referred to as "longbow". if we call these bows recurves it is just too confusing in my opinion.

2) it is factually correct. they have deflexed and reflexed limbs. they are flat. I can see how there are greivances calling these things longbows. a longbow is, by definition, Long. (66" up) these bows in question, are a foot or more shorter.

Damian, I assume you are meaning bows that look similar to the semi-recurve bow I’ve shown above. Let’s call them what they are; a semi-recurve.

Sadly your point number 1 above makes me chuckle - "calling them recurves is just too confusing". I say WHY!!!

The fact is that in more recent times their names have been changed from what they have been known as for decades (semi-recurves) to that of deflex/reflex longbows, reflex/deflex longbows, modern longbows, hybrid longbows and hybrids principally to get them into competition where they could have a performance advantage over existing traditional designs.

I say THAT is the true reason for all the confusion.


Chase N. Nocks first post raised some questions which I will answer briefly.

What exactly IS a Longbow, what is Not a Longbow.

Troy, this is answered above.

On whose authority?

The answer is existing and long established tradition of long usage which can be verified in the writings and manufacturer’s catalogues of the pre-compound era.

Chronological order of those authorized definitions? (not suggesting that oldest is correct or most accurate)

Same for Recurve I guess.

And what are the cut off points between the two?

All answered above.


There is much more I could say but I will leave it there as I have covered all the above and a lot more many times on this site so some searches should find a lot of reading on these type subjects.

May I suggest that if you want to know more about our Traditional Heritage go and read and learn from the many writings of the days before the compound bow.

I will leave you with a post from the thread GrahameA linked to in one of his posts. It is written by Dennis La Varenne and quite relevant to this topic IMO.

Jeff

Troy,

Thanks for the reply. They can take quite a while to get together. Please do not think anyone is accusing you or anyone else here or invidious motives. It is a passionate debate by people including myself who hold opinons passionately.

My being a stickler for correct usage of terms arises because I am pretty much a conservative traditionalist. My archery tradions begin from the day on which the modern compound bow entered the world and extend backwards from there into history and pre-history as far as archaeology can instruct us.

That being the case, I find it a contradition in terms when people get on the traditional bandwagon and want to jettison in favour of modern rebadging, equipment which has a traditional name and form, which has existed for decades, and was given a name in the days of its origins.

Why do people want to jettison a traditional name and description of a bow form just for the sake of latterday upmarketry? Just because 'X' number of people present at shoots with bows which conform to an existing decades old description, name and form then try to call them longbows just means that they know nothing about their own archery history, or couldn't care less about it.

The idea makes as much sense as somebody today deciding that a woomera and spear should have a more upmarket name. Then, just because their use has been recently resurrected, it is OK to call them by the new marketing tag but trying to pretend they are preserving some kind of tradition.

The original names are as important to the preservation of a tradition as the equipment and its usages.

Within tradtionalism, we have a whole vobabulary of handed-down terms pertaining to our equipment which we try to preserve from dying out. The terms 'long bow', Longbow, recurve and semi-recurve are examples. They are old well understood designs from an earlier age. Ozbow has a whole glossary of trad terms. Most of those who post on Ozbow clearly do not know most of them.

If we keep wanting to jettison the old names for bow designs which have existed for decades or even centuries, there will be nothing of our tradition left. To want to change the names of known traditional designs is to want to make traditional archery extinct through not preserving its language.

If you have a form of archery which you believe to be traditional, and you do not want to preserve those traditions or fiddle around with them, what is it exactly you want to preserve??? What is it that comprises your tradition?

Traditionalism is NOT about moving with the times, but preserving one's heritage despite the times.

A traditional long bow is a long bow as understood by the people of the times of their origins and when such bows were in common usage. A recurved bow is the same and so is the semi-recurved bow.

How is it part of an existing tradition to try to move one thoroughly understood bow form into another category in these times.

Traditional archery is about preserving the customs, language and usage of former times into the present - not fiddling around with them for some reasons of modern convenience. If you are not doing that, you are not talking about traditional archery. You are talking about something else.


Dennis La Varenne

[Fanto]

hi Jeff,

in response to your comment on my point about calling modern laminated d/r bows "recurves" , I shall explain why calling them this is going to cause confusion.

1) almost every archery body in the world wrongly calls them longbows and reserves the term recurves for full working and static tip recurves. most of the clubs we shoot at follow this classification

2) 90% of the the bowyers call them longbows

3) if I tell someone "hey lets shoot recurves tomorrow at the 3d shoot," then rock up with my d/r caribow, they will 99% of the time bring a working recurve and we will be shooting different classes. que sad face.


so as per my posts I'm not advocating that we perpetuate calling these bows longbows,
but instead decide on a terminology that's correct, concise and not confusing nor misleading for new archers.

perhaps it's not possible and we will still waste our time arguing about names and frustrating archers and forum members who want to talk about bows and shooting.

at the end of the day it's your site Jeff and Im not going to try to tell you how to run it. I wanted to make a contribution to the quality of discussion, that is all.

kind regards

Damian

Since it is a regular occurrence to see posts involving digs at me regarding my views on this subject I thought it appropriate that I do a reply in this thread - even if I am a bit late.

Firstly let me make it very clear that I hold my views because of our traditions that form our Traditional Archery Heritage. Traditional Archery and its equipment became a separate entity the day the compound bow was invented. Tradtional Archery means to carry on the traditions of simple stick and string, use of modern materials notwithstanding, of the pre compound era.

At this point may I suggest , if you haven’t already, go to the front page of the site and click on the ‘Where We Stand link’ and have a read and ‘The Glossary of Traditional Archery Terms’ at http://www.ozbow.net/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=2927 and familiarize yourself with them.

I give no credibility to those who willingly disregard our Traditional Archery Heritage. This includes any, Archery manufacturer, Archery body, Traditional Shoot Committee or individual.

Gday,

the oxford dictionary defines a recurve as :

noun
Archery
a bow that curves forward at the ends, which straighten out under tension when the bow is drawn.

so where is the line in the sand between longbows and recurves?

is any bow with deflex and reflex a recurve?

discuss...

The short answer is NO. Let me explain further. I am going to show you three distinct types of bows, one is a longbow and the other two are recurves.

This is a longbow incorporating the deflex/reflex design.

primal-longbow.jpg

Note that once the bow is strung there is no reflex in the limbs. The bow is said to be straight ended as the limbs continually bend toward the archer.


This next bow is a semi-recurve incorporating the deflex/reflex design.

P1020689.jpg

This type of bow is most commonly and incorrectly referred to as a longbow now-a-days. Clearly it is a recurve and not a longbow as the limb tips STILL HOLD REFLEX (recurve) when strung even though the string only touches the limbs at the string nocks.

Any bow with limbs that reflex (regardless of how little) when strung is a recurve!!!

These bows were very popular back in the 1950’s but their popularity wained in favour of the working recurve. They were manufactured and sold by many of the leading Archery Manufacturers at the time such as Bear, Hoyt,Coe and others. Photos of these bows have been posted on Ozbow by myself and others numerous times to illustrate the difference. The design is at least 60 years old and was sold as a semi-recurve bow in those times and called such to distinguish it from the new full working recurves which came into production in the 1950s.


This next bow is a working recurve incorporating the deflex/reflex design.

Tribal-Styk-Recurve.jpg

The only difference between the full working recurve and the semi-recurve bows is the degree of recurve in the outer limb.


As you can see above, we have three very different bow types but they all have one thing in common and that is they all are of DEFLEX/REFLEX DESIGN.

What differentiates these three types of bows is simply the amount of deflex/reflex used in their design and manufacture!!!

I hope I have also clearly demonstrated that the term deflex/reflex is a part of bow DESIGN terminology and NOT the name of any TYPE of bow.


While I am on the subject of bow design I will very quickly show what a bow using a reflex/deflex design looks like as many people use this term in place of deflex/reflex. Why the former instead of the latter? Because BY TRADITION, limb design in archery IS described by the side profile which the limbs took as they moved AWAY FROM THE HANDLE. The handle is the ONE CONSISTENT LANDMARK to be found on traditional bows.

So, a bow whose limbs first bend toward the archer has deflex in the limb. If it then bends away from the archer, it has reflex in the limb – hence, the correct term deflex-reflex design. This should NOT be difficult for people to comprehend. It maintains a systematic and universal method of describing limb design.

This following picture shows a bow correctly deemed to be of the reflex-deflex design for the obvious reason that in the braced position the limb profile bends away from the archer, then deflexes back toward the archer and finishes with a semi-recurve.

wind-warrior-a.jpg

As you can see this bow clearly fits into the recurve design category any way you want to look at it but I have seen it incorrectly called a longbow.

Gents,

is there a consensus on what the deflex/reflex limbed , 52-64" flat bows with shelves cut to or near centre, shall be called on Ozbow? simply because its too much work to type out that whole sentence every time.

Can i suggest perhaps deflex/reflex (D/R) flatbow is a good option, because

1) it wont cause confusion for beginners who see bows like Zeta, Toelke whip, Big Jim Buffalo constantly and universally referred to as "longbow". if we call these bows recurves it is just too confusing in my opinion.

2) it is factually correct. they have deflexed and reflexed limbs. they are flat. I can see how there are greivances calling these things longbows. a longbow is, by definition, Long. (66" up) these bows in question, are a foot or more shorter.

Damian, I assume you are meaning bows that look similar to the semi-recurve bow I’ve shown above. Let’s call them what they are; a semi-recurve.

Sadly your point number 1 above makes me chuckle - "calling them recurves is just too confusing". I say WHY!!!

The fact is that in more recent times their names have been changed from what they have been known as for decades (semi-recurves) to that of deflex/reflex longbows, reflex/deflex longbows, modern longbows, hybrid longbows and hybrids principally to get them into competition where they could have a performance advantage over existing traditional designs.

I say THAT is the true reason for all the confusion.


Chase N. Nocks first post raised some questions which I will answer briefly.

What exactly IS a Longbow, what is Not a Longbow.

Troy, this is answered above.

On whose authority?

The answer is existing and long established tradition of long usage which can be verified in the writings and manufacturer’s catalogues of the pre-compound era.

Chronological order of those authorized definitions? (not suggesting that oldest is correct or most accurate)

Same for Recurve I guess.

And what are the cut off points between the two?

All answered above.


There is much more I could say but I will leave it there as I have covered all the above and a lot more many times on this site so some searches should find a lot of reading on these type subjects.

May I suggest that if you want to know more about our Traditional Heritage go and read and learn from the many writings of the days before the compound bow.

I will leave you with a post from the thread GrahameA linked to in one of his posts. It is written by Dennis La Varenne and quite relevant to this topic IMO.

Jeff

Troy,

Thanks for the reply. They can take quite a while to get together. Please do not think anyone is accusing you or anyone else here or invidious motives. It is a passionate debate by people including myself who hold opinons passionately.

My being a stickler for correct usage of terms arises because I am pretty much a conservative traditionalist. My archery tradions begin from the day on which the modern compound bow entered the world and extend backwards from there into history and pre-history as far as archaeology can instruct us.

That being the case, I find it a contradition in terms when people get on the traditional bandwagon and want to jettison in favour of modern rebadging, equipment which has a traditional name and form, which has existed for decades, and was given a name in the days of its origins.

Why do people want to jettison a traditional name and description of a bow form just for the sake of latterday upmarketry? Just because 'X' number of people present at shoots with bows which conform to an existing decades old description, name and form then try to call them longbows just means that they know nothing about their own archery history, or couldn't care less about it.

The idea makes as much sense as somebody today deciding that a woomera and spear should have a more upmarket name. Then, just because their use has been recently resurrected, it is OK to call them by the new marketing tag but trying to pretend they are preserving some kind of tradition.

The original names are as important to the preservation of a tradition as the equipment and its usages.

Within tradtionalism, we have a whole vobabulary of handed-down terms pertaining to our equipment which we try to preserve from dying out. The terms 'long bow', Longbow, recurve and semi-recurve are examples. They are old well understood designs from an earlier age. Ozbow has a whole glossary of trad terms. Most of those who post on Ozbow clearly do not know most of them.

If we keep wanting to jettison the old names for bow designs which have existed for decades or even centuries, there will be nothing of our tradition left. To want to change the names of known traditional designs is to want to make traditional archery extinct through not preserving its language.

If you have a form of archery which you believe to be traditional, and you do not want to preserve those traditions or fiddle around with them, what is it exactly you want to preserve??? What is it that comprises your tradition?

Traditionalism is NOT about moving with the times, but preserving one's heritage despite the times.

A traditional long bow is a long bow as understood by the people of the times of their origins and when such bows were in common usage. A recurved bow is the same and so is the semi-recurved bow.

How is it part of an existing tradition to try to move one thoroughly understood bow form into another category in these times.

Traditional archery is about preserving the customs, language and usage of former times into the present - not fiddling around with them for some reasons of modern convenience. If you are not doing that, you are not talking about traditional archery. You are talking about something else.


Dennis La Varenne

[Gringa Bows]

Very educational ,thanks Jeff

[Nephew]

Since it is a regular occurrence to see posts involving digs at me regarding my views on this subject I thought it appropriate that I do a reply in this thread - even if I am a bit late.

C'mon Jeffy! I can only speak for myself, but I give ya stick 'cause you're me mate, and I relish and am amused by the return fire! You know me well enough by now to know that it's when I'm icily polite to folk that they need to wonder what I think of 'em!

I find all designs interesting and have tried to shoot as wide a variety of bows as I can and all that matters to me is that the bow is stick and string and flings a good arra. I'm not big on metal risers on recurves, carbon limbs etc, and enjoy a Hill style flat bow the most but I don't mind a bit what anyone else enjoys shooting... I think maintaining the correct Trad terms for each bow design is important but at the end of the day the most important issue is, it's all about having fun flingin' arras with your mates, yeah?

[Mick Smith]

Just out of curiosity, I've seen lots of photos and prints of various bows, but they have all been presented in side elevation. Does the size/shape/thickness of the limbs when viewed from the front elevation make any difference to their nomenclature? In my experience, the semi-recurves of old, always had rather wide limbs, like other recurves, whereas most deflex/reflex bows, of more recent manufacture, have very narrow, longbow like limbs in comparison. Does this make any difference? To my way thinking, although similar to the semi-recurves of old in many ways, modern deflex/reflex bows are different in some ways and this should be recognised, IMO. Just for the record, I don't hold any particularly strong views on this subject. I'm happy to simply shoot my bows regardless of their nomenclature and bow division.

[greybeard]

Does the size/shape/thickness of the limbs when viewed from the front elevation make any difference to their nomenclature?

Mick, from what I have been able to find out the rule in pre fibreglass days was that if the widest part of the bow limb was wider than the handle it was regarded as a flat bow regardless of length.

If the widest part of the limb was no wider than the handle it could be regarded as a longbow if it met the length requirements.

Daryl.

[Stickbow Hunter]

hi Jeff,

in response to your comment on my point about calling modern laminated d/r bows "recurves" , I shall explain why calling them this is going to cause confusion.

1) almost every archery body in the world wrongly calls them longbows and reserves the term recurves for full working and static tip recurves. most of the clubs we shoot at follow this classification

That may be so but they use to correctly call them semi-recurves. The changing of names caused, and still is, causing the confusion.

2) 90% of the the bowyers call them longbows

Yes, you are probably correct in saying that and most of those also incorrectly say the bows are of reflex/deflex design BUT that doesn't make them right. As I said in my post above I give no credibility to those who willingly disregard our Traditional Archery Heritage.

3) if I tell someone "hey lets shoot recurves tomorrow at the 3d shoot," then rock up with my d/r caribow, they will 99% of the time bring a working recurve and we will be shooting different classes. que sad face.

Don't agree with you on this one as you would be shooting a recurve just as your mates would be.

o as per my posts I'm not advocating that we perpetuate calling these bows longbows,
but instead decide on a terminology that's correct, concise and not confusing nor misleading for new archers.

You can't have it both ways mate. You either have terminology that's correct and concise or terminology that is wrong.

Here is a couple of other terms that often get bandied around that are also wrong. The spline of an arrow shaft rather than spine. Also used a lot, especially in the USA, is the reference to a person who makes arrows as an Arrowsmith rather than Fletcher. Just because it is in popular use doesn't mean it is right.

In the end I really think this whole incorrect terminology thing has already gone to the point of no return. People either don't know the correct terminology or do know it and couldn't care less and therefore have no interest in our Traditional Archery Heritage.

I am not one of those people and I will continue to try and preserve our rich Heritage.

but I don't mind a bit what anyone else enjoys shooting...

Nor me Craig but that really has little to do with what this thread is about.

Jeff

[Chase N. Nocks]

Hey fellas,

I am trying to draft a reply but not sure when that will happen but I think I will restrict my self to a number of smaller posts rather than one or two large one as I believe some of what I have said has been lost in the crowd.

But here illustrates something I have been trying to get at since my first post and especially so since Daryl posted bow design diagram.

...either have terminology that's correct and concise or terminology that is wrong.

Identifying Characteristics of Different Types of Bows Unstrung

Straight Limb – correct and concise
Deflexed Limb - correct and concise
Reflexed Limb - correct and concise
Semi-Reflexed Limb - correct and concise
Deflex-Reflex Limb - correct and concise
Reflex-Deflex Limb - correct and concise
Non-working or Static Recurves - correct and concise
Semi-working Recurve Limbs - correct and concise
Short-working Recurves - correct and concise
Long-working Recurves - correct and concise

Not displayed

Longbow - an enveloping term? – disputed and varied amongst recognised bodies.

Cheers
Troy

[Fanto]

hi Jeff

regarding the recurve v longbow shoot classes, 3daaa says my bow is in the longbow class so That's where my scores are recorded Not in the recurve division.

Perhaps the club that I shooot at has misinterpreted the 3daaa rules I'm not sure

I won't go on about the other points.

cheers

[Stickbow Hunter]

hi Jeff

regarding the recurve v longbow shoot classes, 3daaa says my bow is in the longbow class so That's where my scores are recorded Not in the recurve division.

Perhaps the club that I shooot at has misinterpreted the 3daaa rules I'm not sure

I won't go on about the other points.

cheers

Damian,

I don't follow the shooting rules of any Association so can't comment on that except to say if they are letting semi-recurves shoot in the longbow division then I don't agree with it. In saying that, you are shooting under their rules so to participate in their events then you must shoot according to their rules mate.

Jeff

[GrahameA]

Hi Troy.

..... having been down this road in the past and having learnt from the futility of such discussions..........

Longbow - an enveloping term? – disputed and varied amongst recognised bodies.

If you take a quick trip back to 1931 and the formation FITA and then look at the next 20 years there is a huge change in bow design, construction, archery events etc.

So pick a date, any date for drawing the line in the sand (Travis would be proud of you, heck even I would be proud of you defying those Mexicans) and say designs/construction prior to this date is Trad / "Real" Longbows / whatever.

And I say again....

.... So tell me, when did this desire to follow in the path of de Cervantes afflict you........ and say, "Hello" to Miguel as you pass.

Meanwhile I am going to have a cup-of-tea.

[Stickbow Hunter]

Hey fellas,

I am trying to draft a reply but not sure when that will happen but I think I will restrict my self to a number of smaller posts rather than one or two large one as I believe some of what I have said has been lost in the crowd.

But here illustrates something I have been trying to get at since my first post and especially so since Daryl posted bow design diagram.

...either have terminology that's correct and concise or terminology that is wrong.

Identifying Characteristics of Different Types of Bows Unstrung

Straight Limb – correct and concise
Deflexed Limb - correct and concise
Reflexed Limb - correct and concise
Semi-Reflexed Limb - correct and concise
Deflex-Reflex Limb - correct and concise
Reflex-Deflex Limb - correct and concise
Non-working or Static Recurves - correct and concise
Semi-working Recurve Limbs - correct and concise
Short-working Recurves - correct and concise
Long-working Recurves - correct and concise

Not displayed

Longbow - an enveloping term? – disputed and varied amongst recognised bodies.

Cheers
Troy

Troy,

That diagram is for the purpose of describing the side profile of bow limbs and does not classify what type of bow they belong to although that can be assumed by looking at the diagrams. I actually have the book from which that diagram comes from. It is a book on making bows.

Jeff

[Fanto]

Hey Jeff

what are the "types" of bow?

Recurve
Longbow
?

[Roadie]

What sort of Stuff are you Guys smoking, why are some of you Trying to reinvent the Siege Engine, I shoot a Stick with a piece of string and Its called a Longbow, I can shoot Targets with it and I Kill the occasional game with it. What more do I need. Where does the Mongol horse bow and the Japanese Yumi bow fit. Cheers Roadie.

[longbowinfected]

not to mention you can even turn your broken bow into a walking stick.
What classification does your walking stick fall into Grant? Semi stick? Semi self?

Kevin

[Fanto]

roadie I've got a simple stick and string too, it's made mostly of wood and shoots arrows.

this thread was to try to put a stop to the flurry of posts which derail constructive threads.

it has sadly failed because the world calls short deflex reflex bows, with flat laminated limbs, either hybrids or longbows or d/r longbows and they should apparently be called recurves so every time someone says different there will be a big silly argument in that thread about how it's really a recurve . I've never heard anyone who owns such a bow call it a recurve and I doubt I will live to see it.