|
Post by hjernespiser on Nov 8, 2010 9:03:57 GMT 3
Sure it's vague. You're not providing very many details upon which to have a meaningful discussion. I still have no idea exactly the construction of your horsebow. Also, how are draw weights being measured? The shooting styles are different between the steppes and the English. Typically the draw length is longer (a longbow will stack earlier). That affects draw weight. So I rather doubt your comparison of draw weights between the English longbow and a horsebow. Also, there's no such thing as a Hungarian horsebow that is made the same way it was for 2000 years. The modern Hungarian horsebow is a modern re-creation based upon grave finds. As for the draw weight on the Mary Rose bows, a quick Google search indicated that such a claim is disputed. Those bows certainly can't have the same operating characteristics as they did when new so the draw weights reported are theoretical guesses.
I believe the fine folks over at ATARN could provide much better details regarding comparing the longbow with Asian recurves.
|
|
|
Post by greyknight on Nov 8, 2010 11:00:06 GMT 3
Firstly you are not paying attention to what I wrote. I said I have a horsebow made by a man of Hungarian lineage. Meaning his family has handed down generation after generation of knowledge in making a Horn hide glue sinew and wood composite bow. Not a Hungarian horsebow. The actual style of bow I have is made after a tartar bow made of the above mentioned materials. The mongol bows were similar and the Chinese made numerous descriptions of the bows of nomadic horse cultures going back 2000 years. The bows on the Mary Rose were made of Yew. A material analysis determined this. The researchers then produced a modern bow of the same materials and dimensions and come to find out the longbows when measured by a device which specifically measures weight while the bow is drawn back to 30" came up with numbers ranging from 145- 180lbs. Meaning, that some of those bows required 180 pounds of tension to hold it at a draw of 30"
|
|
|
Post by hjernespiser on Nov 8, 2010 18:50:13 GMT 3
And that's why I said you're not providing very many details. When you say you have a horsebow made by a man of Hungarian lineage (who?) and nothing else, readers have to fill in the blanks or play a guessing game. Everyone knows what an English longbow is. When you say "horsebow", that could mean a wide variety of bows with a wide variety of performance characteristics. I assumed maybe it is a Hungarian horsebow because, what else? The maker is of Hungarian lineage. How is a reader supposed to know it is made after a Tartar bow?
More interesting is who this bowmaker is because someone whose family has handed down such knowledge would be of value to Hungarian scholars. But also, if by chance some native Hungarian traditions of composite bowmaking were preserved by this family, how can a bow made in this way be held up as an example of a historic Tartar horse bow?
|
|
|
Post by greyknight on Nov 8, 2010 19:35:33 GMT 3
I will tell you theyve been making bows in Hungary for a long time my friend. This is no secret to scholars. My friends name is Creshmir. Beacuse I value his privacy this is all I am willing to say without his permission. We are good friends. My argument from the start has been about the resilience of Milanese plate armour to arrows. In modern Terms. If a Barrette 50cal isnt doing much to the target im firing upon, why would I switch it out for a 308 sniper rifle, Plain and simple.
|
|
|
Post by Temüjin on Nov 8, 2010 22:07:35 GMT 3
if you're friend is making millennia old bows, i'd assume he is making them for more people than just you, so how's 'privacy' going to help his sales?
besides, the argument (as of now) isn't as much about penetration or not, but what's the basis for your assumption that, in your words: longbow = machinegun, bodkin arrow = .50cal and "horsebow" (wtf?) = .308?
since you brought up a documentary, i've seen one too where the had a Mughal composite bow against a longbow vs Mughal armour, and the Mughal one indeed somewhat penetrated the armour whereas the longbow/bodkin didn't.
|
|
|
Post by hjernespiser on Nov 8, 2010 22:59:51 GMT 3
I think you misunderstood me. They have been making bows in Hungary for a long time, but I find it difficult to believe your assertion that they have been making the composite Asian-style recurved horsebow for over 2000 years. Bowmaking in Hungary became influenced by European bowmaking over the centuries. Only starting from the 1930s, when remains of ancient Hungarian bows were dug up, was there interest again in the horsebow. If there were an unbroken tradition of making horsebows in Hungary, that would be of interest to scholars. Indeed your point about armor is why such armor became the death of the bow in warfare and a primary driver in why there is no 2000 year old tradition of making horsebows in Hungary. The folks at ATARN are probably better qualified to discuss bow performance characteristics. atarn.net/phpBB2/viewforum.php?f=4&sid=7860638432b48daf90617c6551c6ec3e Here's an article on the Ottoman Turkish bow written by a bowmaker and one of the ATARN contributors: findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb3284/is_313_81/ai_n29381321/"Therefore the realistic range of draw weights, to include the majority of Ottoman bows, would be from around 90lb to 130lb, possibly to 140lb for the shortest bows."
|
|
|
Post by greyknight on Nov 9, 2010 21:30:55 GMT 3
Correct yes European bow making has influenced Hungarian Bowyers and yes not until the 1920s were there actual burial sites being found which revealed deteriorated bows. One of my friends told me that my arrow shafts I used from my horsebow were of a softer wood thus not as reliable to use against heavy targets, from the way they flex leaving the bow to the way they impact the target, I will have to investigate this he could very well have a valid point I dont know. My friend Creshmir's father has been making bows since 1979-80 of that particular style. that being a reflex Asiatic style bow. And Creshmir has only made two of these versions. One of which I own. Hes not as into it as his father. I tried to contact him but hes visiting his inlaws out of country. I checked out the sites you recomended! Thank you! Very interesting. One of the bowyers I know of who has made numerous English warbows is Pip Bickerstaffe. He has in best effort replicated some of the largest examples of bows brought up from the Mary Rose. www.primitivearcher.com From what I know the archeologist who discovered the grave finds in Hungary Laszlo I believe was his name re created a bow using maple horn deer sinew and horn. Not sure what the draw was on it though. Thanks again for the info you sent. I intend to spend more time looking into that 
|
|
|
Post by pohjanpoika on Jan 11, 2011 4:38:42 GMT 3
since you brought up a documentary, i've seen one too where the had a Mughal composite bow against a longbow vs Mughal armour, and the Mughal one indeed somewhat penetrated the armour whereas the longbow/bodkin didn't.[/quote]
That documentry with Novotny dosent say much i think. They say nothing about the draw weight of the bows, was it the same? how far did he draw? did he draw as far with both. And just by looking at him u can see he cant draw no 100+ pounds bows. It takes alot to draw bows over #100. It seems like all documentries/historians seems to forget about the draw weight of the bows. use a 40 pounds bow and u wont penetrate any armour. The draw weight is alot more important than what kind of bow it is.
|
|
|
Post by pohjanpoika on Jan 11, 2011 4:52:15 GMT 3
Hi greyknight, welcome aboard  Why is it laughable to think a asian compisite bow could be made in the same draw weight as a english longbow??? Its laughable to me to read your post. You think the mongols came riding with 45-70 pounds bows? Grozer makes hornbows just over a meter long in 120 pounds today. He probably can make heavier horn bows but there is really not many that can pull them. You think the lenght has anything to do with the power? The only reason the longbow was so long was that it had to be, to get a reasonable drawlenght, It was not as flexible. It lasted very short. It got weaker very fast. It really cant compare to a hornbow at all. You get the same drawlenght from a short compositebow as its flexible and it also gives u a more even drawweight during the pull that adds a little to the power.
|
|
|
Post by Temüjin on Jan 14, 2011 0:06:18 GMT 3
|
|
|
Post by greyknight on Jan 25, 2011 7:50:23 GMT 3
I have seen that before. The longbow hes shooting isnt a very powerful one I can tell by the way hes able to draw it back. Pohjanpoika, you're right yew doesnt last really long periods of time but you get a self wood bow that is pretty resistant to the elements because of the natural sap in yew. The English used bows that had a tillered 150 to 180 lb draw if you are going by modern standards of measurement based upon the thickness of the bowstaves recovered from the Mary Rose. It was a massive bow and it took a very strong man indeed to pull it back, so much so that archers had deformations to their skeletal structure as a result. Horn bows deteriorate with time as well and because of the fish or hide glues used in them they're prone to damage from moisture. In dry aired environments the cultures tend to prefer composite bows. I wet or humid ones self bows. Once again I think I was misunderstood in that I was stating that really neither bow would do too well against a suit of tempered high carbon steel Gothic plate, unless you got lucky enough to hit an area inside an elbow or in a vision slit. The Lombards proved this when they were pelted with Longbow fire and much to the archers' dismay were still sitting "high in the saddle" as the host of weapons at war put it. Remember knights fought one another on horseback with wooden lances tipped with a spear point designed specifically to pierce armor. The weight of the horse and rider both in armor behind this point as well as weapons like spiked war hammers, maces, and pole hammers were what it took to damage them, or as many ww2 tank crews discovered you dont have to pierce the armor you can kill them with overshock with a sound enough hit, same was true for being slammed in the chest with a pole hammer.
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Jan 25, 2011 15:38:23 GMT 3
Horn bows deteriorate with time as well and because of the fish or hide glues used in them they're prone to damage from moisture. In dry aired environments the cultures tend to prefer composite bows. Indeed, there are records in Chinese annals about how the Gokturks were not able to use their horn bows in rainy or snowy weathers.
|
|
|
Post by greyknight on Feb 4, 2011 23:52:58 GMT 3
I wouldnt dream of using mine in damp conditions at all. Even though it has a laquered painted finish to help seal out moisture, as the bow is used over time small splits in that protective finish can cause moisture to deteriorate the bow and in time it will fail. Unfortunately clear sunny days are the only times I will hunt with it. Other than that, I simply use my compound bow or longbow. I will say though I have NEVER missed a shot with my composite due to its direct flat fast trajectory. I would say it even rivals that of my compound bow. My longbow is noisy and lobs arrows, although its penetration is by far the greatest, but even when I put string whiskers on it to silence it, theres still a noise issue. The composite bow makes a bit of a kathwap noise, however at less than 30 yards distance, the arrow has already hit the deer.
|
|
|
Post by greyknight on Feb 6, 2011 10:40:19 GMT 3
Another anti moisture trick to apply to the surface of bows which use animal hide or fish glues, is bee's wax, it works extraordinarily well to seal out moisture.
|
|
|
Post by greyknight on Feb 6, 2011 10:43:07 GMT 3
At least in my experiences , buuuuuuuuuuuut, WhO aM I tO SaY. lol
|
|