Hill style longbow performance...in the eye of the beholder?

 The following write-up is something I did a couple of years ago, posted on an archery forum, reprinted here with some changes.  My follow-up comments are at the end:

*************************************************

 I made up some low-stretch strings and did some comparisons against my B50 strings. I've had some bows through my shop, my own builds, reworks, refinishes, etc so I pulled some date of bows that were as similar as I could.

Disclaimer: I shot all these arrows, around 150 shots for the testing. My standard speed range per set was 2 fps. On those I took the speed most common. On the sets that were greater than 2 fps. I took the average. Out of the entire shooting session, my need to average was only about 6 or 7 sets. I shoot a dynamic pull through release, no hold, but I touch anchor consistently as taught by John Schulz. The consistency shows in my speeds. Multiple times during the shooting I shot the same speeds 3 times in a row, but usually the speeds were the same 2 out of 3 with 1 fps spread. I was using the local archery shop chronograph, set up with its own lighting system, not subject to variables. I shot from 2 feet in front of the device. I used a self-made Hill style glove with inserts. I draw a consistent 26 3/4"-27" max, and shot with my normal shot routine just as I would when shooting at an animal in the field. I did not hold at full draw whatsoever to make sure I was at a complete anchor, but relied on my muscle memory and repetition to get these consistent speed results. I wanted real life results, so this test is mine. I realize others' tests of longbow shooting may be vastly different from mine, or maybe not so much. That is, as always, up for debate and discussion, but I welcome anyone reading this to test their own Hill style longbows, bowyers included, and list them publicly as I have done here for the interest of those who'd like to see real life speed tests from guys who use their standard equipment.            

The bows I build are string follow, deep core Hill style longbows. Deep core meaning that on a 50-55# bow, the limb depth is typically 5/8" at the end of the fadeout. Standard tip depths without inserts or overlays are typically 7/16"ish. There is two ways to build resiliency in a limb. Depth of limb core or built-in stress aka reflex. I prefer to build like the old time English longbow makers did, with deep-cored limbs tapered out to get the desired tiller. To add flavor to the test, I tested a couple of other bowyer's models, popular with the masses.

For a brief history lesson, I read back through old Longbow Digest issues. Most of the tests done on straight-end longbows back in those days either followed Hill's formula of 7 gr. per pound, or sometimes 8 gr. per pound. I finally found a couple of tests done by very respected bowyers that were closer to the bow weights I used. Back then most guys shot heavier bows than nowadays lol. Frank San Marco (yew Traditional longbow) and Ted Kramer (Hill Big 5). They used B-50 strings back in the day. The San Marco bow at 64# @ 28" shot a 7 gpp arrow at 179 fps. The Kramer Big 5 at 64# @ 28" shot a 7 gpp arrow at 180 fps. The reflex backsets were 1" and 1 5/8" respectively.

I bring this history up because back in the day, most guys shot cedar arrows out of these kinds of bows and a lot of these hardcore guys shot using Hill's formula of 7 gpp whether they realized it or not. Jake Powell, for example, a phenomenal hunter from CO. used a 65# Pete George longbow and arrows around 400 gr. with arrow speeds approaching 200 fps shot more elk than most guys will ever hunt, along with moose and the rest of CO's big game. His success showed what others knew back then...they didn't need arrows of 10 gpp to shoot most animals or tame down a bow. After the Ashby studies and the interest in African game hunting and other things like the decline of cedar for arrow use, the available arrow materials became heavier and heavier, along with heavier heads to go with it.

I decided for my test to shoot the arrows I like to use. Around 9 gpp more or less is what I use for hunting. It's a nice weight, not too heavy or light, the gpp used by AMO for testing. It's always served me well and gave a consistent basis for this test. I used 4 different string materials, all flemish twist, all brace heights with 1/8" +/- of 6". All bows tested were 66" nock to nock. No silencers were used. A couple of bows were not tested with the low stretch strings because they were customer bows, with very narrow tips between the grooves. In the case of the Schulz Trophy Hunter this was only 1/4" so I stayed with B50 only on that bow and one other.

The physical weight of the strings were: B50 18 strand (191.6 gr.) B50 16 strand (175.4 gr.) BCY 452X 20 strand (127 gr. just because I like the feel better this thick) and Fast Flight Plus 12 strand with padded loops (104.8 gr).

Here we go:

Schulz Trophy Hunter, 1/2" reflex, 57#@27" 484 gr (8.49 gpp) 166 fps with both 16 and 18 strand B50

Howard Hill Cheetah, 1/2" reflex, 55#@27", 484 gr (8.8 gpp) 168 fps B50 18 str. 169 fps B50 16 str. 170 fps 452X 173 fps FF+

Sunset Hill, 3/4" string follow, (stiffer tips) 50#@27", 455 gr. (8.43 gpp) 164 fps. 16 strand B50

Sunset Hill, 5/8" string follow, (softer tips) 52#@27" , 460 gr. (8.84 gpp) 165 fps B50 18 str. 166 fps B50 16 str. 169 fps 452X 170 fps FF+

Sunset Hill, 1" string follow (softer tips), 54#@27", 484 gr (8.96 gpp) 168 fps B50 18 str. 167 fps B50 16 str. 171 fps 452X 173 fps FF+

Sunset Hill, 3/4" string follow (stiffer tips) 56#@27", 504 gr (9gpp) 168 fps B50 18 str. 169 fps. B50 16 str. 170 fps. 452X 175 fps. FF+

Sunset Hill, 5/8" string follow, (stiffer tips) 58#@27", 520 gr (8.97 gpp) 170 fps B50 18 str. 170 fps B50 16 str. 170 fps 452X 175 fps FF+

So...Straight-end Hill style longbowmen...Draw your own conclusions, this post is open for debate and sharing your experiences. I know each person's shooting form, release, bow arm recoil, equipment, etc can play a large part of their bow performance, arrow speed included. Certain bow limb designs work better for certain people. Some are more forgiving of certain things. One guys slow bow shooting 158 fps with a performance string can be shooting 168 fps with B50 in another's hands at a different time and using a different chronograph.  That shows how close actually and how subjective all this testing can be, and how careful we should weigh what goes out there as fact from certain testing sources. Once man's Mustang is another man's Pinto.

One thing I have noticed over the years and these tests confirmed it to me. The string weight of various materials doesn't do a whole lot for a thick limb Hill style bow. Maybe a flatter limb straight longbow, and most definitely a d/r or recurve bow they do help. The FF+ string was almost 1/2 the weight of the B50 18 strand and I only got a max 7 fps out of one bow. They both feel good at the shot, but the 12 strands need silencers. So then you're back to adding string weight and probably reducing the arrow speeds to a negligible difference. I like the lower hum of the B50 and I switched my personal bows to 18 strands when I noticed John Schulz shot 18 strands on his 40# all bamboo string follows. By this testing, not by watching arrows fly or by thinking "those arrows are hitting with authority"...but real testing, my arrow speeds only increased at the furthest range from heavy fat B50 to light FF+ an increase of 7 fps with the average at 5 fps. This tells me either the bows are being very efficient at this thick limb design and the variables of string material, stretch and weight aren't that great, or that the usual testing we see from guys is with the high performance bows where every little ounce of weight and smaller percentage of stretch can make a noticeable difference....I don't know.

Now the info is out there, for you all to debate. This is my findings. Why don't you post yours?

*********************************************

      So after posting this as an open challenge for some of the ASL / Hillstyle longbow buffs to publicly post the arrow speeds of their supremely fast longbows and how they got those speeds and with what kind of materials and shooting condition variables...I received very few replies.  Maybe they were all out fishing, or otherwise busy, but I found the silence to be quite enlightening.

      I realized that the supposed speed performances of certain brands of longbows over the other brands, can all be totally subjective and the results can vary greatly.  To claim one brand or type of straight-end longbow as being superior to others is most likely entirely based on the preferences of the user, and performance data can be skewed a number of ways...and in the end, does it all really matter?

      There are certain cases where maximizing a bow's performance is critical, due to the needs of the hunt. Hunting thick-skinned, large-bodied dangerous game with lighter weight bows for example, or extending the hunting and shooting capabilities of an archer that is somehow physically impaired  and can't use a heavier weight bow.  Those kind of things are usually requirements for a different kind of bow to be used.  If the archer is shooting a Hill style or ASL, he/she probably isn't going for maximum performance of speed.  Instead, the focus is on shootability, accuracy, the feel of the bow in hand upon recoil...things like that, and speed is at the bottom of the list.  

       When Hill was listing the necessary characteristics of a good hunting longbow, he mentioned enough cast to throw a heavy hunting arrow...but back then, "heavy" wasn't 12-14 grains per pound. He elsewhere listed a "heavy" arrow as being around 500 grains.  Taking this into consideration, a longbow of today's modern materials, shooting a 500 gr arrow with decent cast, is aptly enough for any kind of shooting or hunting almost anything on this planet if so desired.  When we discussed arrow weight and balance, a good flying arrow is not necessarily flying fast.  That's ok.  The performance is a sum total of many things, and Schulz wrote that cedar arrows (as the old standard) of a spine appropriate for the bow, would also be the appropriate physical weight for the bow, giving "total overall performance".  Need there be anything else?  I think not.  That sums it up perfectly.

      So when you're shooting your longbow, if the small nuances of trying to eke out every foot per second of speed is important, then by all means go for it. Make yourself happy.  But if you want total performance, then consider how the bow balances in your hand at the shot, how it feels to draw and how accurate it shoots your arrows. Look at the bow and determine if you like its flowing lines, or perhaps its more "machined" look. How does the bow sound, how's the overall performance?    You'll probably be much happier, much more relaxed in your approach to all things Hill style, and with that attitude, you...the beholder...will like what you see and will

       Shoot Straight.