Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 117

Thread: Fred Eichler

  1. #1

    Fred Eichler

    Anybody read his article in Bowhunter magazine? He says traditional gear is better than compounds for hunting. I have been thinking this exact same thing for a few years now and I think I'm going to make the switch this year. I started out traditional like most people and transitioned to compounds.



  2. #2
    Does he say why HE thinks traditional gear is better than compounds? I love my traditional stuff, but compounds are much more accurate and less apt to wound the animal.

  3. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by Dry Feather View Post
    Does he say why HE thinks traditional gear is better than compounds? I love my traditional stuff, but compounds are much more accurate and less apt to wound the animal.
    He has several reasons. Its a pretty long article. speed is one issue he points out, of 3700 P&Y entries average range was 20.5 yards, size of target doesn't require pinpoint accuracy, and less things to go wrong with a stick and string vs. everything you have on a compound are some of the reasons that stick out in my mind.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    4,105
    but compounds are much more accurate and less apt to wound the animal.
    Guaranteed consistency by all shooters only if shot by a "Hooter Shooter" with a built-in auto range finder and radar lock-on.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    193
    FOR ME, 20 yards and under, I'll take my Dalaa over my compound anyday! One things that might not have been in the article is the feeling one gets from taking game with a stick and string. It's absolutely awsome. It's just a different feeling, at least to me.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    St. Paul, MN
    Posts
    601
    I could see arguments go either way, but compounds do give people more excuses when they make a bad shot and a greater sense of false confidence at greater distances. In the right hands, either weapon can and will take down the desired game when an ethical shot is made at a distance consistent with the shooters ability.

  7. #7
    I have been bowhunting for over 25 years and I have only taken 3 shots over 20 yards. I can think of lots of times where a recurve would have been better. I have always been strictly compound but I'm starting to believe what Fred said. It might not be better for everyone but in my situation I think it is. Plus the feeling of using a recurve would have to be great. Shooting any deer would be an accomplishment in my book.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Beaver Falls, PA
    Posts
    8,750
    Quote Originally Posted by Dry Feather View Post
    but compounds are much more accurate and less apt to wound the animal.
    Now that's not right. Compounds are just as likely to fail as tradbows, if anything more so. It's more about the arrows and the archer than the spring. Compound arrows are generally lighter, and some even fitted with expandables. Traditional archers trend towards heavier arrows with cut on contact broadheads. Hitting the shoulder or bone, which would be better? Dr. Ashby posted a thread about this over on tradbow.com.

    Removing the accuracy issue, which isn't the gear but the fool behind the bow, it's a much more even playing field.

    I like all aspects of archery but don't own a compound. Much prefer shooting a longbow barebow. Simple, and the only real hindrance is how far I can accurately shoot. Not really a big deal considering it's still easier than trying to tackle the animal.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Abington Ma
    Posts
    351
    Quote Originally Posted by Dry Feather View Post
    Does he say why HE thinks traditional gear is better than compounds? I love my traditional stuff, but compounds are much more accurate and less apt to wound the animal.
    That is the quote of the day, WOW. I have seen plenty of guys that can shoot a 300 at 20 yards with a compound and not being able to hit a deer standing at 20 yards.

    Besides that I can post a better score than about half the compound shooters at my local club during out summer league.

  10. #10
    "Better" is a dangerous word. I have my reasons for peferring trad to compunds. Or longbows to recurves. Or aluminum to carbon...

    OTOH, if I had to go to war w a bow, or was hunting for my life, not for fun, a compound would probably be "better".

    You can certainly argue the historical trip down the road to "better" ended up at the compound crossbow w a red dot sight...
    Deja vu DVC: In archery we have three goals; to shoot accurately, to shoot powerfully, to shoot rapidly.
    - De Re Strategica of Syrianus Magister @525 AD

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,957
    99.9% of these magazine articles are just page-filler to fill the white space between the ads. It doesn't have to be all that factual or even near fact, just something to hold your eyes on the page. For many readers, the articles just get in the way of the pretty pictures anyway. I wouldn't look for any gospel in there.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    SW Michigan
    Posts
    2,014
    Hands down a modern compound is a much better weapon than a stickbow. They are much more accurate with significantly more kinetic energy. What tool do you want in your hands if the only food that you our your family could eat had to be killed by an arrow? (besides a crossbow)

    In what situation is a longer, slower, less powerful weapon an advantage?

    I hunt and 3D shoot with a stickbow because I enjoy traditional archery and for the challenge it represents.

    Sorry if this is blasphemy to some...
    Jerry S - Bowhunting & 3D Enthusiast
    Hoyt Buffalo Recurve & Vectrix Compound
    USA Archery Level 2 Instructor

  13. #13
    Mr. Eichler also states this in Masters of the Barebow, that it's "the most efficient weapon". It sounds good if you want to puff up trad snobs, but it's utter nonsense.

    I enjoy shooting my Gamemaster more than my Powerhawk, but a simple side-by-side "shoot-out" shows I can shoot the Powerhawk twice as accurately from twice as far away.

  14. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by NHBarcher View Post
    Mr. Eichler also states this in Masters of the Barebow, that it's "the most efficient weapon". It sounds good if you want to puff up trad snobs, but it's utter nonsense.

    I enjoy shooting my Gamemaster more than my Powerhawk, but a simple side-by-side "shoot-out" shows I can shoot the Powerhawk twice as accurately from twice as far away.
    No argument the compound beats trad when shooting at targets and Eichler agrees but in the woods the trad bow has the advantage in his opinion and I'm starting to lean that way myself. How many shots have you taken over 20 yards and how many have been successful? I find that with proper stand placement my shots are hardly ever over 20 yards. True trad takes more practice to be good but so does a compound take more practice than a crossbow. You should read the article he makes a compelling argument.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    New York State
    Posts
    1,159
    What a load of dump, I could care less about what people use, I'm more interested in the skill of the archer whatever they use. Every bow is accurate enough to do the job, I think we can all agree to that. Fred is just trying to build interest in the new Hoyt Buffalo bow in my opinion.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    4,938
    Quote Originally Posted by Sanford View Post
    99.9% of these magazine articles are just page-filler to fill the white space between the ads. It doesn't have to be all that factual or even near fact, just something to hold your eyes on the page. For many readers, the articles just get in the way of the pretty pictures anyway. I wouldn't look for any gospel in there.
    Thank You very much for that post!!....I quit subscribing to, and buying "Bowhunting" magazines some years back..They are either full of biased crap, or re-hashed fluff that most folks know anyway, lastly, some of the magazines that I've looked at the last few years, have too many articles about property management, food plots, blah blah blah...This means nothing to the average bow hunter, that hunts with a permission slip, or hunts public ground....Jim
    Those who separate Politics, and Morality, will never understand either one....John Viscount Morley

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    4,938
    Quote Originally Posted by jcs-bowhunter View Post
    Hands down a modern compound is a much better weapon than a stickbow. They are much more accurate with significantly more kinetic energy. What tool do you want in your hands if the only food that you our your family could eat had to be killed by an arrow? (besides a crossbow)

    In what situation is a longer, slower, less powerful weapon an advantage?

    I hunt and 3D shoot with a stickbow because I enjoy traditional archery and for the challenge it represents.

    Sorry if this is blasphemy to some...
    Excellent post, Jerry!.....it's not a Survival , or Life or Death situation for us...Hunting is about choosing a Weapon that We want to use, and that's that...Just a hobby/pastime......Jim
    Those who separate Politics, and Morality, will never understand either one....John Viscount Morley

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Northern Kentucky
    Posts
    40
    There is no doubt that a compound is a more efficient weapon. However IMO most people that shoot one (I am referring to the masses that drag one out for hunting only) use a compound as a crutch to make up for lack of practice & poor form. If I had a dollar for every time I smoked one of those guys with a banjo bow on the 3D course I'd... well I'd have a bunch of dollars that's for sure!

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Beaver Falls, PA
    Posts
    8,750
    Quote Originally Posted by jcs-bowhunter View Post
    Hands down a modern compound is a much better weapon than a stickbow. They are much more accurate with significantly more kinetic energy. What tool do you want in your hands if the only food that you our your family could eat had to be killed by an arrow? (besides a crossbow)

    In what situation is a longer, slower, less powerful weapon an advantage?

    I hunt and 3D shoot with a stickbow because I enjoy traditional archery and for the challenge it represents.

    Sorry if this is blasphemy to some...
    Honestly it wouldn't even be a choice: I'd go with a longbow. Probably alot lighter than I'm using now, but still. All those little things that can go wrong with a weapon usually will when it comes down to it. You mean you can take the time to take care of every little detail on a compound when it comes down to it? I don't buy that. What about all the money spent in up keep? Sorta backwards thinking there. Likewise, the compound is a result, just like the asiatic composite, of a society that had long since abandoned the need for survival. Oh, and as for KE meaning more power that's garbage. Shooting equal weight arrows at an equal draw length, compounds are only 30-40 fps faster. It's been proven that heavy arrows are what bring game down when things go wrong, not light ones.

    Longer, slower, and less powerful? Perhaps, but simpler, more reliable, more quiet, and much more versatile as well. Longer is a matter of practice in the field, proper design will give you plenty of speed, and most have more than enough power if you know how to set it up right.

    Of course, no one's hunting to feed their familiy and it's all a matter of choice. Whatever you're more practiced with will always be the one you consider "better."

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Home or at the Club
    Posts
    352
    Hands down a modern compound is a much better weapon than a stickbow. They are much more accurate with significantly more kinetic energy. What tool do you want in your hands if the only food that you our your family could eat had to be killed by an arrow? (besides a crossbow)

    In what situation is a longer, slower, less powerful weapon an advantage?

    I hunt and 3D shoot with a stickbow because I enjoy traditional archery and for the challenge it represents.

    Sorry if this is blasphemy to some...

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Baraboo, WI
    Posts
    913
    I am putting my compound down this year to really give my longbow a honest try. I enjoy stump shooting(roving) much more with my trad bow too.

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    SW Michigan
    Posts
    2,014
    Quote Originally Posted by Sanford View Post
    99.9% of these magazine articles are just page-filler to fill the white space between the ads. It doesn't have to be all that factual or even near fact, just something to hold your eyes on the page. For many readers, the articles just get in the way of the pretty pictures anyway. I wouldn't look for any gospel in there.
    Wow…guess I did not realize until I read this post and Harperman’s comments that I have not purchased or subscribed to any hunting magazines in at least 5-7 years. Apparently I have not missed much…
    Jerry S - Bowhunting & 3D Enthusiast
    Hoyt Buffalo Recurve & Vectrix Compound
    USA Archery Level 2 Instructor

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    4,938
    Quote Originally Posted by jcs-bowhunter View Post
    Wow…guess I did not realize until I read this post and Harperman’s comments that I have not purchased or subscribed to any hunting magazines in at least 5-7 years. Apparently I have not missed much…
    Nope!.....I cant even read much of a Traditional Bowhunter magazine anymore....Sad....
    Those who separate Politics, and Morality, will never understand either one....John Viscount Morley

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    southeast Pennsylvania
    Posts
    1,382
    I didn't read the article so maybe I shouldn't comment, but there are lots of different kinds of "efficiency"... economic, mechanical, thermal, energy, etc.
    It seems to me it's hard to beat a stick and string for efficiency in propelling an arrow from most points of view. Simpler is more efficient.

    But pulleys have a mechanical efficiency that stick bows don't. Which costs less? That can vary... it's kind of apples and oranges unless you define exactly what kind of efficiency you're talking about, and even then it might need to be weighed bow vs. bow, for any individual archer.
    Just my $0.02

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Central Va
    Posts
    185
    I find it amazing people get bothered by an article they have never read. There is no mention of a Hoyt Buffalo bow in the entire magazine!

Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •