[JamesThom.]

I read from multiple people posting on forums that the difference in limb stability between a recurve and longbow is non existent, some were even saying that modern recurves have even more limb stability than a longbow. Well I received a Samick SLB that I bought used a couple of weeks ago and even with grossly overly stiff arrows noticed how much more accurate I was with it.

I finally got some arrows bareshaft tuned to the bow and was simply amazed at how much more accurate I am with the longbow over my recurve. I put a tennis ball out on top of my target and managed to nail a tennis ball twice in a row (about 5th and 6th attempt using a single arrow I had just fletched up) yet with my recurve that would usually take around 20 arrows to hit once.

My left and right misses are more or less non existent anymore and the bow feels very good in the hands. I am also impressed with how much quieter the bow is now that my arrows are not way over spined and are not smacking up against my riser really hard. As for the bow itself it is VERY smooth to draw back. It makes drawing back my recurve feel like a compound (probably due to the longbow's long limbs and lower brace height). The bow will tell you when your form was off and will throw off slightly more handshock than usually if you grip it incorrectly. I have noticed that you get used to the handshock rather quickly and with the proper grip it's non existent as in, I feel no handshock at all.

With that said I don't know if I can ever shoot a recurve again now, my left and right misses were terrible when I was off with the recurve and the longbow is definitely a much more forgiving design and I feel way more accurate with one in my hands. It's much more of a joy to draw back and shoot over my recurve.

With that said I'm surprised the FITA barebow guy's are not using longbow limbs, as I have said they are VERY stable, smooth drawing, and forgiving. Another thing that I love is that the longbow is much more minimalist. It does not require string silencers to get quiet, nor does it require brush buttons, limb pads, and/or limb savers.

I can see why some of the best in the past have chosen the longbow over the recurve and I am NOT trying to talk down on the recurve as bow choice is a personal choice in the end and some people love the extra speed you can get from the recurves (especially at lower draw weights).

As for arrow speed my recurve is actually spitting out a faster arrow than my recurve but also has a lower brace height and no string silencers or limb dapeners. I dropped down from 11gpp with the recurve to 10gpp with the longbow and it shoots plenty fast for me.

Just a little rant here as I did not expect there to be this much of a difference shooting a longbow over a recurve.

For reference again the recurve that I own is a Samick Volcano one piece and the longbow that I'm shooting is a Samick SLB that has very mild R/D and thick narrow limbs.

As always, not trying to offend anyone or start a bow type vs bow type war. I'm just posting my personal experience and opinion in case someone else was questioning whether there is a big difference between shooting a longbow and a recurve as there is mixed advice posted online.

Enjoy the rest of your weekend!

 

[Halfcawkt]

James, I'm not trashing your bow, but...

I shot one a few months ago and as longbows go, that one leaves a lot on the table. I only say that to encourage you to shoot others because there are so many great options out there. I love my black magic ILF recurve, but since acquiring my first longbow, it has mostly hung on my wall for my wife to look at.

My two other recurves, they get a few arrows here and there just to justify their existence. I should probably sell them. Since the first, I have gotten another. I also have one coming from a custom bowyer. I'm so excited I question my maturity.

Give a decent hybrid a shot some time. You will probably get one shortly afterward.

 

[MGF]

I like longbows and recurves. I have a real soft spot for self bows although I guess I'm not very good at making them yet. LOL

 

[C_Money]

looks awesome man

 

[grantmac]

I would say you simply haven't experienced a really good bow of either variety. At the low end there isn't much difference.

 

[Keeshond]

I would say you simply haven't experienced a really good bow of either variety. At the low end there isn't much difference.

Ditto to the above statement. James, I'm glad you like your longbow. But no longbow in that price range or design can stand up to even an entry-level ILF riser and mediocre recurve limbs.

There is a reason nobody shoots longbow limbs for serious shooting. And it's been tried by plenty of folks. Again, longbows are fun and can be shot well. I just don't think you have the background to know the difference. Not yet, anyway.

 

[JamesThom.]

I would say you simply haven't experienced a really good bow of either variety. At the low end there isn't much difference.

Well Grant I'm more than pleased with this longbow. What else could I ask for in a bow? It looks nice, feels great in the hand, light weight, very smooth, plenty fast for me, and more accurate than I will ever be. I'm not changing a damn thing at this point. Nailin that tennis ball twice in a row from 40 yards sealed the deal for me. This bow just tosses those arrows dead straight as long as I hold on target. It's extremely stable.

Ditto to the above statement. James, I'm glad you like your longbow. But no longbow in that price range or design can stand up to even an entry-level ILF riser and mediocre recurve limbs.

There is a reason nobody shoots longbow limbs for serious shooting. And it's been tried by plenty of folks. Again, longbows are fun and can be shot well. I just don't think you have the background to know the difference. Not yet, anyway.

I won't ever shoot an ILF set up. I don't like ILF rig's or sporty looking gear. Not to mention ILF rig's are way over priced in my opinion.

I have a good idea of why nobody uses longbow limbs for serious shooting and it's because they care more about speed than stability. Not to mention when you are allowed to wear a wrist sling you do not need to grip the bow at all.

You don't know me so how could you say I don't have the background to know the difference? Byron and Hill both talked about how a recurve is inferior to the longbow in terms of forgiveness and stability and I have found their assessment to be true.

I miss left/right much more with a recurve due to how unstable a recurve's limbs are. With the longbow it will place an arrow where I'm pointing the left and right misses are much smaller now.

When you are trying to hit a moving tennis ball (among other difficult targets moving and otherwise) from 40, 50, and 60 yards you need all of the precision and stability that you can get.

 

[Keeshond]

James, hitting a tennis ball twice in a row at 40 yards is random luck. Even the best recurve barebow shooters in the world can't do that on demand.

You should shoot that bow for a long time. After a while try other designs too. I like the radical hybrids for fun shooting. But never base your choice of weapon on one day's outcome.

The first time I ever shot trap I hit 24 out of 25 with an old Remington #11 semi-auto shotgun about 70 years old. No rib, just a bead.

Never shot that well with that gun again but for the first try. The gun was awful but I had a lucky day.

It's like that.

 

[JParanee]

James

When hill made those statements about recurves things were not what they are today

You need to stop quoting a promo artist and a trick shooter

Ilf is a limb attachment system that is all they can look the same as any three piece takedown bow

RECURVE limbs are not unstable and today's good RECURVE limbs are in many cases more structurally rigid than longbow limbs

Ilf is not over priced .... in fact to make a high performance bow it is the most economical path

Slow down buddy and take the time to do more research than fairy tale stories

 

[Keeshond]

James, listen to JP, he's nicer than me. I get impatient very quickly when I read stuff on this forum that is so far wrong it's laughable.

Men in competition shoot the best, most forgiving and stable bows they can find. It's always an ILF or Hoyt Formula design.

Howard Hill's writings about bow design was out of date by 1950, maybe earlier. He might have been correct in 1935 but not after recurve bows evolved.

You have fun with your longbow, we'll have fun with your findings on bow accuracy in the modern world.

Jim, you are fun guy to read. Maybe me favorite poster. I mean it.

 

[JamesThom.]

James

When hill made those statements about recurves things were not what they are today

You need to stop quoting a promo artist and a trick shooter

Ilf is a limb attachment system that is all they can look the same as any three piece takedown bow

RECURVE limbs are not unstable and today's good RECURVE limbs are in many cases more structurally rigid than longbow limbs

Ilf is not over priced .... in fact to make a high performance bow it is the most economical path

Slow down buddy and take the time to do more research than fairy tale stories

James, listen to JP, he's nicer than me. I get impatient very quickly when I read stuff on this forum that is so far wrong it's laughable.

Men in competition shoot the best, most forgiving and stable bows they can find. It's always an ILF or Hoyt Formula design.

Howard Hill's writings about bow design was out of date by 1950, maybe earlier. He might have been correct in 1935 but not after recurve bows evolved.

You have fun with your longbow, we'll have fun with your findings on bow accuracy in the modern world.

Jim, you are fun guy to read. Maybe me favorite poster. I mean it.

I don't think hitting a tennis ball twice from 40 yards is random luck. Sure luck is apart of it but it's mostly the skill of the archer.

The most forgiving would be longbow limbs. Recurve limbs are faster than longbow limbs so they use the faster limbs.

JP - I can twist a modern wooden/glass recurve just using two fingers. Recurves are an unstable limb design that are prone to torquing.

I don't see how it is possible that good recurve limbs are more structural stable than good longbow limbs. When you go with a wide and thin limb that bends backward (recurves) it is going to be more unstable than a limb that is very thick and narrow and acts more or less like a lever.

I think ILF is overpriced and I prefer the look of a 1 piece bow. Most risers are around $200+ and the cheap set's of limbs run over $100 a set.

I don't need to do more research I have these two bows here to compare and know for a fact that a longbow is much more stable than a recurve.

I can not twist the limbs of this longbow yet can torque the recurve limbs easily.

Keeshond how good of a shot are you? How about you post a video of you shooting some field round and I do the same and we all compare scores that way we can see who really knows what they are talking about.

 

[joefire38]

Your left/ right misses would be more a tuning or form issue . Not due to limb design! But if you shoot your longbow better , have fun with it,works for "you".

 

[BarneySlayer]

Your left/ right misses would be more a tuning or form issue . Not due to limb design! But if you shoot your longbow better , have fun with it,works for "you".

What he said, on both counts.

Enjoy your bow. It may be possible that particular bow just 'works' for you. Maybe it's the fit of the grip, maybe something about the combination works with your mojo. If that's the case, cool.

It may be, also, that while you may always love that bow, and shoot it well, you may also find something else down the line that you like even better. You don't have to drop what you're doing and seek it out. Enjoy doing what you love. If it's working for you, keep doing it.

First longbow I got, I preferred over the other two recurves I had bought. It did, in fact, seem more forgiving. It was also more comfortable in my hand, and nicer to carry around, and darn it, i just loved the way it looked. I still love the way it looks. It still looks down on me from the ceiling. Maybe I should string it up and shoot it. Hasn't seen an arrow in a few years, and that's a bit of a shame. Nothing wrong with the bow.

But, once I actually figured out what worked for me in a bow, what I eventually favored was a recurve.

For now, just enjoy what you're doing, and what you're doing it with. I would only suggest that perhaps you realize that just because a lot of people say the same thing, and say it confidently, doesn't actually make it true. The most stable bows are crossbows laid down on sandbags. The most stable bows are fully decked out compound freestyle bows. The most stable single string 'traditional' bows are Olympic Style Recurve rigs. They don't get more points for fast (or heavy) arrows. The fact that a limb is less torsionally stable does not make it a more stable bow from a shooting perspective. It's just one variable in a very complex arrangement of a whole mess of things. If you consider that the arrow is riding a suspension of sorts, theoretically, a less rigid structure between the hand on the string might actually make the arrow flight more stable, but that's merely a hypothetical. Actual results are what count, and if you look at what's scoring...

But, longbows certainly can be awesome in their own regard, and don't need to measure up to a darn thing, particularly if they're what you like. I would offer, that if you do get an itch, contact Kegan regarding an Omega. Great prices, great peformance, great service, and once you figure out what you really like in a grip, you can customize that too. If you get an unfinished bow, way down the road, you can spend a long time slowly and carefully shaping it to best fit your hand, and then stain and finish it to suit your aesthetic needs. Just an idea.

Glad the bow is working out well for you.

 

[Stephen Morley]

You have to take what Hill and Ferguson say about Recurves with a pinch of salt, they both had their own Longbow brands to market, they're never going to admit Recurves are better.

I've shot Recurves for 15 years and Longbows for another 15 years, both awesome to shoot, a Longbow against a modern ILF rig is like bringing a penknife to a sword fight lol

 

[Stephen Morley]

Just to add, if the Longbow is superior then why in WA and IFAA competition is Longbow and Recurve two separate divisions, if You put them together they would be an outcry of unfair from Longbows.

When I still lived in the UK we had two shooting divisions, Longbow/Wood arrows and H/T (Hunting Tackle) any Recurve Wood arrows (but most shot traditional wood Recurves) both had to shoot split finger so a good example for any comparison between Longbow and Recurve, at our National champs if you combined and ordered the scores of both Divs then the top 3 Longbows would show in the top 10 scores , then you would get at least 20 H/T before you saw another Longbow score appear (these two divs if combined would total around 500-600 archers). You and others have had a similar opinions over the years based on Hills quote but the tourney scores prove otherwise and the reason we normally see Recurve and Longbows as two separate divs.

 

[DEdestroyer350]

Dude listen to the people with real experience, and please dont be so close-minded.. You like what you like and thats a great thing, but it sounds like youve only shot low end bows, so how on earth can you make blanket statements like that? In reality you have no clue how Mid level and especially High End bows shoot or anything about their limbs. As youve stated you like 1 piece bows, so what do you know about takedowns of any kind? ILFs are the most affordable option for a high quality bow, but you say they they are over priced.. That right there shows that you are not interested or believe that all bows are created equal, which is most definitely not true .. Your putting out uneducated info man, and its going to confuse people looking to learn something.. So please, cut yourself a little piece of humble pie and listen to the experienced archers who actually know what they are talking about (They dont shoot $1000 bows for no reason)...... This doesnt mean you shoot change your setup at all, I think its great your happy with your set up, but as you move out of the lower end bows you WILL notice a difference.. Higher end bows are expensive for a reason.. Oh and athletes who make their living shooting archery tackle for accuracy, are only going to shoot equipment which gives them the best chance of hitting the middle consistently.. Speed is an after thought.. Think about it

 

[kegan]

There is a reason nobody shoots longbow limbs for serious shooting.

...Because they haven't tried an Omega?:wink:

Joking aside, JamesThom., you're misunderstanding bow design. I've built lots of recurves and longbows, and I can tell you that you're not getting a good idea of the designs only comparing those two very low end bows. A budget 58" recurve is a far cry from how accurate a 70" ILF recurve is. It's no comparison; neither of the bows you're shooting could hold a candle to a decent ILF. It's the short length and physically light mass of the recurve that are giving you the left and right misses compared to the longbow, not the limb design. It's just a cheap recurve designed for hunting and I bet you could have found any number of recurves that would have been a great upgrade over it, too. Joe is spot on about recurves today being a far cry from what Hill recommended against, unfortunately your Volcano is not a good representation of what a good recurve is today either.

Now, I'm obviously a huge longbow guy and completely understand that feeling you get shooting as simple a bow as possible. There is a romance to that simplicity that I never got with a recurve, even with my own. As longbow guys, we're just weird. It's like preferring a manual transmission to an automatic. It's just a personal preference. True, there are a lot of reasons why, on the lower end of the budget scale, longbows have a lot more potential than recurves. That's why D/R and hybrid longbows are so popular; all of the stability of a longbow (making warranties simpler) with the performance and manners of a recurve. When you start moving past that to the higher end though, recurves pull ahead, not only in terms of performance but also accuracy and value.

There's nothing wrong with finding a bow that works better for you. It really seems like you and your SLB are clicking, and that's a great thing! But this is just a bow-to-bow comparison, not a design-to-design comparison. I bet if you get a chance to shoot a really nice longbow you'd be amazed at what it can do. You think that SLB is nice? Whoo-boy are you in for some fun if you get your hands on a really nice longbow!

 

[Beendare]

Glad you like your longbow James....but your thread glaringly illustrates the reason for these boards;

You don't know what you don't know.


This is just another example- grin. Don't burn your bridges my friend....as my guess is you will be back later with something else that is; "The One"

 

[Halfcawkt]

James, these guys aren't trying to attack you. They are trying to make you realize there is a lack of experience driving your claims, and trying to make sure that other people of the uninformed crowd don't get a warped sense of the reality from them.

Everyone of these guys is truly glad you are so happy with your choice of bow.

If you get the chance to shoot an omega or a maddog, take advantage. You will be very surprised at the jump in performance over your current tackle. Keep in mind that those are considered budget bows, but thier value is amazing considering what you are getting for your money. (No disrespect, Kegan)

The only reason I don't have an omega yet is because I am trying to reconcile the fact that Kegan doesn't make the model I want in the specs I want.

You will get there, and when you look back on posts like this later, you will probably grin to yourself.

Right now, you should just try to accept that while Hill was undoubtedly a great archer, he had a vested interest in his claims on technology in the archery world of his day. To top it off, we are light years ahead of the bows from his heyday. So even if what he said was true at the time, it no longer applies in the context that he said it.

Enjoy your journey, sir. I have never found it's equal...

 

[Keeshond]

James, about accuracy in general with bows and shooters. I'm very average as shooters go who compete. At 20 yards I can hit a 9" paper plate 58 or 59 times out of 60 shots. I have never tried that, but can extrapolate this from my indoor 300 round shooting. I average about 250-255 on that. High score of 272. Lots of guy shoot that well with no pressure. In competition I drop about 10 points walking up to line. It's pressure.

At your tennis ball distance of 40 yards I can group inside of 18 inches all day long with most shots tighter than that. Not great shooting but try it some time with your longbow. Take 50 shots at 40 yards on a clean piece of paper and learn something. No do-overs, count every shot. Then measure your spread. If you're inside of 4 feet I'll be impressed.

I couldn't hit a tennis ball twice in a row from 40 yards ON DEMAND if I live another 60 years and tried it every day. Neither can you. I'd bet my life on that.

Every person reading what I've just written understands what I mean. But apparently you don't. It only tells me you have very little recurve or longbow shooting experience aside from reading, "Hunting The Hard Way." Howard Hill and his writings have ruined a lot of prospective new archers. He almost ruined me when I was a kid. I believed his nonsense too. But not now.

Some day try a pal's ILF bow of good length if you can. It won't bite you. Shoot a few arrows and learn something. They are so much easier to shoot well than a Hill longbow, or any longbow, it will stun you. Do be afraid to experiment. I started with Hill and Shulz longbows long ago. The first time I shot a decent recurve, I was shocked to find out Hill was very wrong. I never looked back in time again.