Ozbow

Hunterguy has inspired me................ or made me get off my back side and finish this bow.!!!!! It is a nice piece of Ash backed with hickory.
I have had the stave cut for nearly a year, and started to shape it the other day. Got it to brace today and tillered to 20", where it is it is pulling 60lb.
Now time for horn nocks, then I will finish off the tillering. Hoping to get around 80lb at 30", bow is currently 77" NtN. That may change.

Bow Specs so far, 35mm till(6" either side of centre) at handle then even taper to 6" from tips where it is 22mm wide on the back then down to 1/2" tips. Belly tapers evenly fromm 32mm to 1/2" tips. I have crowned the backs edges evenly to roll round to the belly, this has made this bow a lot smoother than my Tri Laminate Warbow. There was no Reflex glued into this stave. It had 1' set after I unstrung her, and then that was gone after the stave relaxed. Bit of work to go yet.
I better find an arrow that can handle this bow!!!!!!!!!!!!!

some more....

Looking sweet Mick!!

I think she'll definitely make the 80 at 30 inches, maybe more.

I would just watch mid limb on the right hand limb... Looking a little soft to me, might be the start of a hinge but could just be the shadow...

As far as Arrows go, go and grab yourself some half inch poplar dowels and check out this video for tapering them from 1/2 at the point to 3/8 at the nock. I will be making a matched dozen set for a mate like this complete with horn inserts, hand forged bodkins (he does re-enactment) and 7 inch "whipped" feathers.

Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L40qwNE ... D_yrT0bMfw

This guy does some great how to style videos on the warbow stuff!!

Cant wait to see this one all finished up.

Colin

Mick,

I really like this pic of yours. In my opinion that is EXACTLY how your early tillering should look - a bit stiffish in the centre with the ends nicely rounding. Most people who make ELBs try to go for a big rounded bend in the centre of the bow far too early. Yours has exactly the right kind of whip-endedness which Ascham (Toxophilus, pp109) describes. The very last bit of this kind of bow to bend SHOULD be the very middle section which should just show a tiny bit of a flex right at the end of the draw.

I reckon this bow will do it.

The way in which you have rounded off the back is also something which I have been on about for a long time now since I read a description of the making of an MRB replica by Roy King in Robert Hardy's 'LONGBOW - A SOCIAL AND MILITARY HISTORY'. On page 220 you read -

Sides worked down dead square to back, to what should be finished width, leaving just a little extra width at tips . . . Slightly convex taper.

Back generously radiused over full width, dropping a little extra at the edges. Then there appears as if by magic the Mary Rose sharp edge.

Coming to the conclusion that these bows were made almost by numbers. That given the quality of the wood . . . a formula for manufacture could be closely followed . . . a system that isn't used in Victorian bows.

Bold type is my emphasis.

There is a technical reason for this rounding of the back probably observed but not scientifically realised in those times, that when the back and belly surfaces are of similar convexed shape, the neutral layer of the bow moves toward the centre of the stave and NOT toward the belly as with the flat backed D-section Victorian bow. With a neutral layer close to or at the centre of the stave, tension and compression forces equalise and the stave is less likely to take a set than with a wide flat back. Because the convexed back and belly have very narrow surfaces over which to distribute compression and tension forces, the way to minimise breakage is simply to lengthen the surfaces to achieve the same result of lowering the potential for breakage.

Hence the LONGbow.

And yet, despite descriptions such as the above from Hardy's LONGBOW where an almost exact replica of a Mary Rose bow is being made according to type rather than to conform with and English Longbow Society rule, people insist on making D-section bows which are NOT true mediaeval English Longbows and yet call them such.

Your bow is well on the way to being a correct approximation I reckon.

Here is a picture which I have posted previously of a cross section made from an original Mary Rose bow. I believe that to make these bow by the tens of thousands for military contracts put out by the Government, they would have had to have been made to a formula, perhaps based on standardised templates.

Thanks Dennis.
There sure is a diffence in a crowned back bow. What you have explained makes perfect sense.
I love that picture of the cross section of that piece of mary rose yew. The number of growth rings astounds me. A stave of that quality now would cost a small fortune...................... if you could even find one!!!!

Mick

If ever you want one, they are available from Dave Robertson at MEDICINE BOW WOODS in Washington State at http://www.medicinebowwoods.com/. I have about 6 staves of his here and they are mostly very close ringed stuff which is very good looking indeed. Other stuff has much wider growth rings, but if it is dried properly, there doesn't seem to be much difference in performance really despite all the folklore.

Even early commercial bowmakers in the US as far back as L.E. Stemmler way back in the late 1920s and Paul H. Gordon did not consider that closeness of growth rings matter too much so long as the wood was well dried.

His prices are not really dear for what you are getting and he has staves up to 80+ inches from which he removes all the bark and other stuff which would compromise its passage through customs. The only bugger is the shipping cost unfortunately, but I have gotten staves here landed for about $250.00. For the shipping cost it is probably better to buy 2.

His site has pictures of the staves he has on hand. You can mention that I put you onto him if you like because he knows me reasonably well.

Regards,

Thanks for that Dennis,I will keep him in mind. I want to do a full length yew Elb for sure.
I have been dealing a lot with Carson @ Echo Archery In Salem, Oregon. In fact I have a some Yew and osage Billets on the way as we speak!
I am going to do a spliced yew Elb once that arrives, and if that works out, I will be going for a full stave.
Last one I tried, broke in tillering. I used the remnants to make a great board bow. I am determined to get it done tho!!!!!

Sanded and fitted horn tips yesterday. Shaped them today, put the bow back on the tiller. An hour later, We have 88lb @ 30" with an 1" and 1/2 of set.
Dont know if I'm happy with the tiller.

Nice work Mick, horns are looking very nice!!

To me, the bottom limb is bending really nicely, the top limb looks a little stiff right out at the tip and in very close to the handle...

88lbs is a decent effort! Did you use a winch or something to pull it on the tiller!?

Colin

Thanks Colin, sometimes you have to post a pic to see the flat spots!!!!!!!! Tips are nice and even tho........I like to sleep on it sometimes and have a look the next day.........
Yeah 88lb's is more than I can pull. This is my winch set up I use on my big girls...........

Finishing off today, Also resurrected a couple of old staves I put in the "too hard basket". Now I will have a few bows to take to lilydale with me!

TRi LAm Malas Bow on the left had a couple of bad Chyslas on the bottom limb, it was way to powerful for a 72" ELB, so I lowered the poundage and flatened off the belly, changing the profile. Is now 60lb @ 28" nice little bow now, An ELB Hunter!!!!


Bow on the right is Another Malas Tri lam, 78" ntn 75lb @ 30"..........

Busy productive Day!

nice bows as always Mika.