New traditional shooter

[bigbuck247]

Just got a new to me recurve that my FIL gave to us for my son and I to use. I've been hunting for over 24 yrs and have been bowhunting for 15+ of that but have never done anything with a recurve. Any tips? It is a darton ranger super flite (58", 45#). I would like to possibly try and get proficient enough with it to try to shoot a deer this season. I have some lighter XT hunter arrows that I used to use before I started shooting heavy fmj's with my Matthews. Total arrow weight would be around 400-450 with them depending how I fletch them and what broadhead. Any certain type of broadhead yall recommend? I have some muzzy 100gr fixed heads and 100gr g5 montecs as well I thought I might try.

 

[grizzly63]

A two blade fixed blade. Like a bear razorhead, Ace, Zwickey. Stay within your range. Choose your hunting setups to provide those opportunities. Good luck and enjoy. Practice.

 

[Mighty Mouse]

Starting off with a 45# recurve could be challenging. Half your compound draw weight is a good rule of thumb for your first single string bow to help avoid injury and/or bad habits caused by being overbowed. Drawing a 45# recurve and holding its full weight long enough to aim and shoot accurately is a much different experience than drawing a 70# compound that breaks over to a 15# holding weight. A Galaxy (formerly Samick) Sage is an inexpensive 3-piece recurve with interchangeable limbs that is commonly used as a starter/trainer bow. You may do just fine starting out at 45#, but lighter would be better for most beginners.

Don't count on being able to use your compound arrows with a recurve. They will likely be too stiff to fly well with broadheads and may be too short to keep the broadhead in front of the riser.

Due to the low energy of a recurve (compared to a compound), I would put the emphasis on maximum penetration potential when choosing a broadhead. A two blade fixed head with a modest cutting diameter and high length-to-width ratio would be my recommendation. 150 gr single bevel Cutthroats are my go-to.

 

[TrumpkinTheDwarf]

Start low poundage (like 35 lbs).
Get coaching (Solid Archery Mechanics Online course is good, and can get you accurate enough to hunt in a MUCH shorter time frame, like a month).
Don't try to fine tune arrows till you are consistently shooting softball sized groups at 15-18 yards (note, they don't have to be where you are aiming, so long as it's consistent and repeatable).

You can learn on a light bow, and shoot a few arrows from the 45lb recurve at the end of a shooting session every few days. If you try to just muscle through it, you will be miserable, your back will hurt, your fingers will hurt, your shoulder will hurt. It won't be fun.

 

[bigbuck247]

New string comes in tomorrow so we will see how it goes. Will see how these arrows line up and fly and go from there for new arrows if needed. Appreciate the broadhead advice. I will probably stick with this bow to start with atleast and work my way up just because I mainly hunt with a compound and shoot it daily most of the year (may have skipped some recently with our 112 degree heat here in OK right now ). Looking forward to trying something new.

 

[Mighty Mouse]

New string comes in tomorrow so we will see how it goes. Will see how these arrows line up and fly and go from there for new arrows if needed. Appreciate the broadhead advice. I will probably stick with this bow to start with atleast and work my way up just because I mainly hunt with a compound and shoot it daily most of the year (may have skipped some recently with our 112 degree heat here in OK right now ). Looking forward to trying something new.

Whereabout in Oklahoma? I live in Piedmont just NW of OKC.

 

[bigbuck247]

Whereabout in Oklahoma? I live in Piedmont just NW of OKC.

SW OKC near Moore.

 

[Mighty Mouse]

SW OKC near Moore.

If you're interested in some in-person recurve coaching, check out Archery Traditions in Yukon.

I picked up a recurve for the first time last year after having shot compounds for 20 years. I bought the Solid Archery Mechanics online course mentioned above and it gave me a good start, but in-person coaching is even better. I'm planning to schedule a lesson at Archery Traditions sometime soon to brush up on my form before hunting McAlester this fall.

 

[bigbuck247]

Update:
Got my string in and took it to a nearby shop that got me setup with a flipper rest and got some aae trad fletching's for the GT Hunter 400 spine I had and got them fletched up last night. This morning I got up and shot 3 shots before I headed to work and I'd say for never shooting a traditional bow of any kind before I was fairly impressed/surprised. First shot was about 10-12 yards at a slightly oversized tennis ball that is between the size of a baseball and softball and thought I wont hit it but gave me a good aiming point and nailed it. Next 2 I setup a 3d bear target I have at about 12-15 yards and shot aiming about mid body so I had some room for error and wasn't chasing flyers and groups those two decent. Going to try some a little further out tomorrow and try to see what I can group at about 20 or a little further since most of my bow shots are 20-30 yards from my main stand.

 

[bigbuck247]

 

[ImBillT]

Starting off with a 45# recurve could be challenging. Half your compound draw weight is a good rule of thumb for your first single string bow to help avoid injury and/or bad habits caused by being overbowed. Drawing a 45# recurve and holding its full weight long enough to aim and shoot accurately is a much different experience than drawing a 70# compound that breaks over to a 15# holding weight. A Galaxy (formerly Samick) Sage is an inexpensive 3-piece recurve with interchangeable limbs that is commonly used as a starter/trainer bow. You may do just fine starting out at 45#, but lighter would be better for most beginners.

Don't count on being able to use your compound arrows with a recurve. They will likely be too stiff to fly well with broadheads and may be too short to keep the broadhead in front of the riser.

Due to the low energy of a recurve (compared to a compound), I would put the emphasis on maximum penetration potential when choosing a broadhead. A two blade fixed head with a modest cutting diameter and high length-to-width ratio would be my recommendation. 150 gr single bevel Cutthroats are my go-to.

I’m not sure the bolded portion is accurate if you stick to the 10gr+ arrow weight per pound of draw weight and compare equal draw weight bows.

From what I gather, a well designed single-string bow will shoot 180-200fps with an arrow weighing 10gr per pound of draw weight. As far as I can tell, compounds do not outperform that by any significant margin. Entering a 10gr per pound of draw weight arrow into a compound arrow speed calculator does not yield velocities significantly over 200fps. As arrow weight decreases, bow efficiency decreases in BOTH compound and single-string bows, BUT the decrease is far less substantial with compounds. In other words, if a guy is shooting a lightweight arrow at 300fps from a compound, and then switches to a same weight single-string bow, and ups his arrow weight to 10gr per pound of draw weight, he will almost certainly be shooting an arrow with more energy than the arrow he shot from his compound.

You did suggest cutting draw weight in half. Obviously if a guy cuts his draw weight in half, he will be cutting energy drastically. That’s not because a single-string bow is inefficient. That’s because he cut his draw weight in half.

 

[Mighty Mouse]

I’m not sure the bolded portion is accurate if you stick to the 10gr+ arrow weight per pound of draw weight and compare equal draw weight bows.

From what I gather, a well designed single-string bow will shoot 180-200fps with an arrow weighing 10gr per pound of draw weight. As far as I can tell, compounds do not outperform that by any significant margin. Entering a 10gr per pound of draw weight arrow into a compound arrow speed calculator does not yield velocities significantly over 200fps. As arrow weight decreases, bow efficiency decreases in BOTH compound and single-string bows, BUT the decrease is far less substantial with compounds. In other words, if a guy is shooting a lightweight arrow at 300fps from a compound, and then switches to a same weight single-string bow, and ups his arrow weight to 10gr per pound of draw weight, he will almost certainly be shooting an arrow with more energy than the arrow he shot from his compound.

You did suggest cutting draw weight in half. Obviously if a guy cuts his draw weight in half, he will be cutting energy drastically. That’s not because a single-string bow is inefficient. That’s because he cut his draw weight in half.

200 fps at 10 gpp seems very optimisitc for a single string bow at an average draw length, but even at that assumed arrow speed/weight, a modern compound at the same draw length and draw weight will generate significantly more kinetic energy. Below are sample speed calculations for a 340 fps IBO compound at 30" DL and 10 gpp from 50# to 70# DW. In each case, arrow speed will be north of 240 fps and KE will be 45+% greater than the hypothetical 200 fps single string bow.


Looking at draw force curves helps illustrate how a compound bow generates more KE than a single string bow. The area under the curve represents the amount of potential energy put into the bow by the archer during the draw cycle. Kinetic energy is proportional to potential energy, and the shape of the compound curve encloses a much larger area than a single string curve at the same draw weight and length. This would be true even if brace heights were equal, but in reality compound bow brace heights are often 2+ inches shorter, which elongates the power stroke and encloses additional area under the draw force curve. The example curves below (not mine) illustrate the point.

 

[ImBillT]

200 fps at 10 gpp seems very optimisitc for a single string bow at an average draw length, but even at that assumed arrow speed/weight, a modern compound at the same draw length and draw weight will generate significantly more kinetic energy. Below are sample speed calculations for a 340 fps IBO compound at 30" DL and 10 gpp from 50# to 70# DW. In each case, arrow speed will be north of 240 fps and KE will be 45+% greater than the hypothetical 200 fps single string bow.
View attachment 231438

Looking at draw force curves helps illustrate how a compound bow generates more KE than a single string bow. The area under the curve represents the amount of potential energy put into the bow by the archer during the draw cycle. Kinetic energy is proportional to potential energy, and the shape of the compound curve encloses a much larger area than a single string curve at the same draw weight and length. This would be true even if brace heights were equal, but in reality compound bow brace heights are often 2+ inches shorter, which elongates the power stroke and encloses additional area under the draw force curve. The example curves below (not mine) illustrate the point.
View attachment 231439

Increasing arrow weight ALWAYS increases energy when talking about bows. Therefore, you’re compound would have to shoot a 700gr arrow substantially faster than 200fps, and would thus yield an even greater energy advantage over a single-string bow at 700gr if the chart was accurate. Unfortunately the chart shows that both the 350gr arrow and 700gr arrow have identical KE. That’s not what happens is real life. I don’t know how they produced that table, but it’s incorrect. I’m sorry, but bows are not equally efficient with differing arrow weights.

The calculator I used could be poor.

Arrow Speed Calculator

Arrow speed calculator finds the real speed of an arrow for a bow with custom parameters.

www.omnicalculator.com

200fps single-string bows are not exactly the norm, but they exist.

The curve in your graph for a single-string bow is at least slightly incorrect. The force draw curve of single-string bows is not perfectly linear. Early draw weight has a very steep slope in lb/in draw, then there is a near linear portion, followed by another sharp increased in lb/in draw. Higher brace heights and more recurve/reflex yield higher early draw weights, which places substantially more area under the curve, and should yield a curve similar to compound curve, except without letoff(similar in shape before the cams engage). Shorter tip to tip lengths combined with longer draws result in a string angle increase that yields a steeper slope at the end of the draw, which actually decreases the area under the curve if compared to a same draw weight bow that does not exhibit such stack at the end of the draw. I can’t say that I’ve personally measured a bow’s force draw curve, but the graph is not correct.

I don’t know how accurate the calculator that I posted is, but the table and graph that you posted are blatantly incorrect. I’m not blaming you. I’m just saying that we can’t use your numbers for comparison when they come from a source with obvious problems.

 

[Mighty Mouse]

Increasing arrow weight ALWAYS increases energy when talking about bows. Therefore, you’re compound would have to shoot a 700gr arrow substantially faster than 200fps, and would thus yield an even greater energy advantage over a single-string bow at 700gr if the chart was accurate. Unfortunately the chart shows that both the 350gr arrow and 700gr arrow have identical KE. That’s not what happens is real life. I don’t know how they produced that table, but it’s incorrect. I’m sorry, but bows are not equally efficient with differing arrow weights.

I agree that KE increases (slightly) with arrow weight. I consciously ignored that fact for simplicity, but including it would only widen the gap in calculated KE between comparable compound and single string bows. I re-did the calculations assuming a KE increase of 1.5% per 100 gr of additional arrow weight, and the point still stands: the compound generates much more KE. In my testing of various compound bows, KE gain of 2-3% per 100 gr is typical at lower arrow weights then declines to ≈1% beyond ≈500 gr. My speed estimation method is fairly simple:

1. Adjust IBO speed (measured at 70#/30"/350 gr) to actual DW/DL using 2.5 fps/lb and 10 fps/in rules of thumb.
2. Calculate KE using adjusted speed from step 1: KE (in ft-lbs) = Arrow Weight (in gr) × Arrow Speed² (in fps) ÷ 450,240
3. Use KE from step 2 to calculate speed at actual arrow weight. Apply KE adjustment factor prior to calculation if so desired.

The calculator I used could be poor.

Arrow Speed Calculator

Arrow speed calculator finds the real speed of an arrow for a bow with custom parameters.

www.omnicalculator.com

Yes, that calculator is very inaccurate. As shown below, it shows KE decreasing with increasing arrow weight, which we have both acknowledged is not accurate. This calculator is better (or the method I described above): https://www.ashbybowhunting.org/arrow-speed-calculator

The curve in your graph for a single-string bow is at least slightly incorrect. The force draw curve of single-string bows is not perfectly linear. Early draw weight has a very steep slope in lb/in draw, then there is a near linear portion, followed by another sharp increased in lb/in draw. Higher brace heights and more recurve/reflex yield higher early draw weights, which places substantially more area under the curve, and should yield a curve similar to compound curve, except without letoff(similar in shape before the cams engage). Shorter tip to tip lengths combined with longer draws result in a string angle increase that yields a steeper slope at the end of the draw, which actually decreases the area under the curve if compared to a same draw weight bow that does not exhibit such stack at the end of the draw.

I can’t say that I’ve personally measured a bow’s force draw curve, but the graph is not correct.

I agree that the example single string draw force curve I posted is oversimplified and would not be perfectly linear in reality. However, a single string bow still isn't going to store as much energy as a compound at the same draw weight/length.

Just to clarify, these are the specific claims I'm disputing:

From what I gather, a well designed single-string bow will shoot 180-200fps with an arrow weighing 10gr per pound of draw weight. As far as I can tell, compounds do not outperform that by any significant margin.

Compounds do outperform that by a significant margin...by 40-50 fps in the examples above.

Entering a 10gr per pound of draw weight arrow into a compound arrow speed calculator does not yield velocities significantly over 200fps.

Either the calculator is flawed (the one you linked to above definitely is) or you're not comparing apples-to-apples on draw weight/length between the compound and single string.

if a guy is shooting a lightweight arrow at 300fps from a compound, and then switches to a same weight single-string bow, and ups his arrow weight to 10gr per pound of draw weight, he will almost certainly be shooting an arrow with more energy than the arrow he shot from his compound.

False. A lightweight arrow at 300 fps out of a compound will have far more KE than a 10 gpp arrow out of a single string (at the same draw weight/length). Exactly how much more depends on several factors, but I would guess it's on the order of 40-50%.

 

[wytex]

First I would get some feather fletched arrows to shoot. A hair rest would also work ok, no need for a flipper.
Try a 125 gr 2 blade broadhead, cut on contact.

Your body will adapt to the recurve pull pretty quick, shot short sessions to get in tune, few arrows a day and the draw will get easier pretty quickly. No need for a lighter bow.

Carbons might fly quite nicely out of that bow, it is known to be slowish but I like wood arrows for trad shooting and hunting. Tapered doug fir arrows would fly nice I bet, maybe spruce. Your aluminum will be fine if spines close enough, hitting right or left will tell on that.

Enjoy the change!

 

[ImBillT]

I agree that KE increases with arrow weight. I consciously ignored that fact for simplicity, but including it would only widen the gap in calculated KE between comparable compound and single string bows. I re-did the calculations assuming a KE increase of 1.5% per 100 gr of additional arrow weight, and the point still stands: the compound generates much more KE. In my testing of various compound bows, 2-3% KE gain per 100 gr is typical at lower arrow weights then declines to ≈1% beyond ≈500 gr. My speed estimation method is fairly simple:

1. Adjust IBO speed (measured at 70#/30"/350 gr) to actual DW/DL using 2.5 fps/lb and 10 fps/in rules of thumb.
2. Calculate KE using adjusted speed from step 1: KE (in ft-lbs) = Arrow Weight (in gr) × Arrow Speed² (in fps) ÷ 450,240
3. Use KE from step 2 to calculate speed at actual arrow weight. Apply KE adjustment factor if so desired.

View attachment 231457


Yes, that calculator is very inaccurate. As shown below, it shows KE decreasing with increasing arrow weight, which we have both acknowledged is not accurate. This calculator is better (or the method I described above): https://www.ashbybowhunting.org/arrow-speed-calculator
View attachment 231458


I agree that the sample single string draw curve I posted is oversimplified and would not be perfectly linear in reality. However, a single string bow still isn't going to store as much energy as a compound at the same draw weight/length.

Just to clarify, these are the specific claims I'm disputing:

Compound do outperform that by a significat margin...by 40-50 fps in the examples above.

Either the calculator is flawed (the one you linked to above definitely is) or you're not comparing apples-to-apples on draw length/weight between the compound and single string .

False. A lightweight arrow at 300 fps out of a compound will have far more KE than a 10 gpp arrow out of a single string (at the same draw weight/length). Exactly how much more depends on several factors, but I would guess it's on the order of 40-50%.

Everything you said is true if the numbers I found are wrong and the numbers you’re using are right. If the calculator I used does what you say I does(I haven’t had time to check) then it is definitely incorrect.

One reason I had so readily accepted the numbers it turned out when I plugged in a heavy arrow weight was that I had failed to realize one particular aspect of compound bow design. I viewed the primary advantage of the pulley to be increasing the ratio of string velocity(at the arrow nock) to limb tip velocity, which is probably correct. I viewd the primary advantage of the pulleys also acting as cams to be “let-off” compared to peak draw weight. I see now that that is only one part of what the cams can do, and the other part is where I missing a substantial advantage in terms of how much energy a compound could store. Just as the cams allow draw weight to drop to a small fraction of the peak, they could be designed to essentially do that on a small scale through the draw, allow you to use limbs which have a very high increase in draw weight per inch, but once peak draw weight is approached, the cams slash that increase, allowing for a flatter force draw curve than is possible/practical without cams. High performing compounds almost certainly do exactly that. I had never considered that and always assumed that the primary function of the cams was to make it easy to hold at full draw, which was actually a disadvantage for the force draw curve. I always assumed that the only real advantage to a compound was the trajectory that was possible with very light arrows. Clearly I was WRONG.

As far as how substantial the difference is, I’d love to see some real numbers from the handful of people who have ever shot a 10gpp arrow from a good compound over a chrono. As you mention, the rate of increase in KE decreases as you increase arrow weight. It has to. You’re approaching the limit of the force draw curve. As such, calculating with rules of thumb aren’t going to be very useful, as they only apply to the more normal situations.

 

[Mighty Mouse]

Everything you said is true if the numbers I found are wrong and the numbers you’re using are right. If the calculator I used does what you say I does(I haven’t had time to check) then it is definitely incorrect.

One reason I had so readily accepted the numbers it turned out when I plugged in a heavy arrow weight was that I had failed to realize one particular aspect of compound bow design. I viewed the primary advantage of the pulley to be increasing the ratio of string velocity(at the arrow nock) to limb tip velocity, which is probably correct. I viewd the primary advantage of the pulleys also acting as cams to be “let-off” compared to peak draw weight. I see now that that is only one part of what the cams can do, and the other part is where I missing a substantial advantage in terms of how much energy a compound could store. Just as the cams allow draw weight to drop to a small fraction of the peak, they could be designed to essentially do that on a small scale through the draw, allow you to use limbs which have a very high increase in draw weight per inch, but once peak draw weight is approached, the cams slash that increase, allowing for a flatter force draw curve than is possible/practical without cams. High performing compounds almost certainly do exactly that. I had never considered that and always assumed that the primary function of the cams was to make it easy to hold at full draw, which was actually a disadvantage for the force draw curve. I always assumed that the only real advantage to a compound was the trajectory that was possible with very light arrows. Clearly I was WRONG.

As far as how substantial the difference is, I’d love to see some real numbers from the handful of people who have ever shot a 10gpp arrow from a good compound over a chrono. As you mention, the rate of increase in KE decreases as you increase arrow weight. It has to. You’re approaching the limit of the force draw curve. As such, calculating with rules of thumb aren’t going to be very useful, as they only apply to the more normal situations.

Yes, the ability of a compound to get to peak draw weight quickly and stay there for a large portion of the draw cycle works wonders for storing energy in the bow.

Regarding real world compound data at 10 gpp, I have one data point from when I was messing around with my Hoyt Helix a few months ago. With the bow at 69.7# measured DW and 80% mods set to 29" DL, I chrono'd a 703 gr arrow at 236, 237, 236 fps on consecutive shots.


The Ashby Bowhunting Foundation also published data a while back that included a 10 gpp arrow flying at 230 fps out of a 60#/28.5" compound.

 

[Redman]

I shoot 200gr Valkyrie Blood Eagles out of my compound, long bow and recurve. They fly excellent and cut through everything.

 

[ImBillT]

Yes, the ability of a compound to get to peak draw weight quickly and stay there for a large portion of the draw cycle works wonders for storing energy in the bow.

Regarding real world compound data at 10 gpp, I have one data point from when I was messing around with my Hoyt Helix a few months ago. With the bow at 69.7# measured DW and 80% mods set to 29" DL, I chrono'd a 703 gr arrow at 236, 237, 236 fps on consecutive shots.
View attachment 231504
View attachment 231506
The Ashby Bowhunting Foundation also published data a while back that included a 10 gpp arrow flying at 230 fps out of a 60#/28.5" compound.

I knew that flattening the force/draw curve would increase stored energy, and that could be done by using a limb with lower stiffness, and bending it a long way during bracing. That’s what asiatic composites do, I assume that some of the higher performing modern recurves do that to a substantial degree. I also assume that it’s a lot easier to do with a compound since it’s limb tips do not actually have to move very far, thus moving them a high percentage of their total deformation wouldn’t actually require all that much movement compared to trying to do it with a single-string bow. Still, I didn’t imagine that would give a compound a huge advantage over a single-string in terms of the force draw curve. The cams though.. . doing that with the cams should give it a substantial advantage over a single string, and apparently it does. Looking at real numbers, it’s not just speed that can be substantially increased with a compound, which is what I had incorrectly assumed.

 

[gouch]

Countless animals have been killed with bows of unknown draw weight, shooting arrows of unknown and variable weight, tipped with variable weight heads made out of materials from stone to steel by people who never heard the words "kinetic energy."

So just go out there and have some fun.