Stop what you're doing and watch this video, before you make any of the wrong decisions or buy into the hype that is modern archery. Lars Andersen has studied the actual historical texts that warrior archers learned from, and compiled a style created from accurate, practicality driven teachings. Modern archers will want to load you up with all kinds of compounds bows, sights, quivers, carbon fiber arrows, etc. These are all generic consumer products that will not actually help you grow as an archer, rather hinder you by building bad habits and reliance on them.
Seriously, don't fall into the modern myths of archery, the study is changing and Lars is leading the way, following him is following thousands of years of far more effective archers than we can hope to become today.
>>28663764 Lars is his own brand of hype train. He hasn't rediscovered anything, he's using techniques I knew about 20 years ago (even if I was never good at them), that I learned from a historical re-enactment group instructor who had been practicing them for another 20 years himself. Traditional/Instinctive shooting has been a part of modern archery ever since Howard Hill schooled all the other trick shooters on the Robin Hood set in 1938. Instinctive shooting has never been *popular*, but it's been general knowledge for a long time.
Also, don't believe that what Lars does in the videos is historically accurate. His techniques are *informed by* his historical research, they are not historical recreations. He uses very low poundage bows (15 lbs, iirc) against foam targets that are easy to penetrate. He does this for showmanship, not for historical accuracy. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that (showmanship itself is an art form, and Lars has mastered it, a feat he rightly deserves all the credits for), but the hype about him rediscovering long lost techniques that will give you super senpai bow powers is complete BS. They were never lost, and they won't allow you to perform at that level with realistic bow gear (50lbs +draws). He's admitted and explained all this himself in his own videos.
What I will give Lars credit for is that he has practiced and mastered his techniques, and will certainly grant that he is a world class archer.
Trick shooting with realistic bow gear is entirely possible, but it doesn't look like what Lars does. Drawing and holding a bow of a realistic poundage (I shoot a 55 lbs bare backed longbow; my instructor shot a 70) simply doesn't let your upper body manuever with the speed and flexibility Lars does in his tricks. I shoot a longbow, and have performed the "slisting the wand" stunt many times. This is a historical training exercise, where an arrow or stick is jab into the ground vertically, and archers try to split the arrow. It's meant to represent hitting a man on the battlefield, since a enemy soldier is also a vertical target. It's not easy, but back when I was in practice, I did manage to split that arrow a couple times.
That's a really easy trick as archery goes, with things like shooting through a wedding ring and splitting an aspirin tablet mid-air being top notch. In fact, here's some high-speed photography of exactly that trick, with a bow that could actually bring down eg a deer if needed: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8Yp9SjCU5E
>>28663711 either a modern compound cross bow or a take-down re-curve bow
compound crossbows bows are unreasonably powerful, and for a novice the draw length is an advantage heavier and slower loading than a compound bow, but more compact and with more usability in a greater range of situations
take down bow are a little less powerful than fixed arm bows, but in SHTF the weight, space and conceal-ability advantages are considerable
>>28663711 The best bow is the one you are good at shooting. Compounds have both advantages and disadvantages. Personally I don't like them, since they depend on range calibrated sights, while an instinctive shooting technique instantly adapts to changing targets without even having to think about it.
I'll assume by "survival", you mean lost in the wilderness without access to civilization. That means compound is out, because you won't have access to the various tools and spare parts a compound needs. A recurve is better option since it's maintenance needs are very small, but you still can't repair it if damaged.
So I'd recommend a longbow, since it uses the same instictive shooting technique that a real last-ditch survival bow would need. If you need to make your own bow from sticks, the longbow shooting technique is the one you want to be good at.
For example, I have made bows from this pattern roughly 3 times. They turn out to be about 35 lbs draw and capable of hunting small game. http://www.primitiveways.com/bow_and_arrow.html
>>28664040 >admits to autism Disregarded, in the future you'll learn that in order to become a competent archer you should stick to the information rediscovered by Lars, practical, to the point, effective, when archery WAS the thing.
>>28664047 Aside from none of it having be *re* discovered at all. I knew about shooting from both sides of the bow, holding arrows in the draw hand, etc, for decades before he started releasing his research. I'll admit I never practiced them, but they were part of our historical lectures.
Our group focused on military archery, so what we actually practiced was cadence firing and line firing, the kind that would have been used at Agincourt. Thus the historical techniques we practiced and used were not the same as Lars uses, but we knew about them. For heaven's sake, we had printouts of some of the same woodcuts Lars used on our displays. It's not like they were secret or something.
>>28664068 >Aside from none of it having be *re* discovered at all. Please cite your sources.
>Our group focused on military archery, so what we actually practiced was cadence firing and line firing, the kind that would have been used at Agincourt. Lol, I get it, you learned the new hollywood way and got fucked over for it. You'll be alright man, just give up those old habits and move on so you finally progress.
>>28664081 We practiced volley firing from a staggered line (front know kneeling, back row standing) at a 3 second cadence. We used ground quivers (which, historically, would have been constantly restocked by conscripts) and shot according to a beat called out by a master at arms.
This technique is described here, among other places: https://archive.org/stream/historyofbattl00nico/historyofbattl00nico_djvu.txt
>But on the other side, the warlike >bands of archers, with their strong and >numerous volleys, darkened the >air, shedding as a cloud laden with a >shower, an intolerable multitude of >piercing arrows, and inflicting wounds on >the horses, either threw the >French horsemen who were arrayed to >charge them to the ground, or >forced them to retreat, and so defeated >their dreadful purpose.
>>28663711 Compound bows are definitely powerful but I definitely doubt that it can remain functional for too long. Those wheels must be quite difficult to replace once shit hits the fan. In terms of long term functionality, my vote goes for the recurve bow.
>>28664121 >We practiced volley firing from a staggered line (front know kneeling, back row standing) at a 3 second cadence. We used ground quivers (which, historically, would have been constantly restocked by conscripts) and shot according to a beat called out by a master at arms. Uh huh, you keep hanging with the Cali crowds buddy, you enjoy your video sports.
>>28663764 >Lars Andersen has studied the actual historical texts that warrior archers learned from, and compiled a style created from accurate, practicality driven teachings. Please cite your sources. >the study is changing and Lars is leading the way Please cite your sources.
>>28664093 he's a faggot that needs to climb out of Lars' bumhole or he's a leet master troll. Source? disregarding information on a subject where related information is not given. Lars is good at what he does, but it's just trickshooting. Related to SHTF you'd be far better off taking your time aiming and getting the technique right. rather than waiting for your friend to shoot an arrow at you for you to catch then 180 no scope a deer in mid air.
>>28664145 >Believing Myth Busters as "Science Fact"
IRL medieval times arrows were considered single use despite the practice of retrieving arrows and repairing them, the arrow nocks don't always have horn reinforcement those are for fine crafted arrows for noble or aristocratic hunters (rich people) Your average soldiers arrow nocks were bare wood and easy to split even with target heads which I have done many times on accident. Broad heads were attacked by bees wax or other types of low end glue so you can switch out head types and bonus if the broad head detaches while inside the victim if he tries to pull it out.
As a medieval archer, you didn't have a fine crafted leather quiver, you had simple linen bags of arrows which were from supply wagons of arrows.
>>28664121 >>28664068 >>28663987 >>28663764 From what I gather there were different styles of archery from different cultures depending on that cultures style of warfare. Firing a bow from a stationary position is different like an English long bowman would do uses different techniques to what a horse archer would use.
It seems like Lars' techniques are something that horse archers or light skirmishing troops would use where speed is most important while a more stationary style of archery is something for defending positions where range and power are more important.
tl;dr There are different ways you can shoot a stick.
>>28664145 I was actually there when MB did their hokey ren-faire shootoff thing (episode 36) for that myth. We got out our arrows, including ones we had *actually split* earlier that day (cadence firing 300 arrows into a single target in one minute is guaranteed to split a bunch of them, even on accident), showed how historical arrows were built to resist splitting (a 100lb war bow will instantly split an arrow just by shooting it, if it's not made right), and showed how when struck they bent under impact and how the impacting arrow shifted to the side no matter how cleanly it hit. We showed the actual tracks of actual arrows splitting other actual arrows and deflecting sideweays during the strike, leaving a bent track that you could actually see in the actual split. They filmed 3 takes of our group's leader carefully explaining it all, but of course never used any of it in the final episode.
>MB supplied use with a bunch of arrows they had made with broadheads for us to use, thinking that the heads would make a split more likely. >The arrows were 32 inch long fucking 3/8" dowels from Home Dipshit. >We all shot 50+ lbs longbows. >With such comically underspined arrows, we naturally hit fuck all on camera, so they didn't use any footage of shooting cause it wasn't interesting enough.
They came back and revisited the myth in another episode, and proved that even with perfect alignment, being hit by a second arrow makes the first one bend too far to get a clean, robin hood style split. Which is what we had told them in the first place.
Remember they were testing the "Robin Hood Split" aka a prefect straight line split down the center like in the movies.
Fucking TV shows are all about entertainment, not realism, and it showed while they were working with us.
I will attone for my autistic histofaggery by detailing traditional bow types. I won't address compounds because I don't shoot them and thus don't know much about them. I mean, if you want to use a fucking mechanical projectile delivery system, you may as well go the rest of the way and just use a rifle.
This revolutionized warfare in ancient Europe. It's not special because it's long, or because it's a bow. It's special because it could shoot a FUCKING HEAVY arrow with a 4 inch iron spike on it (called a pile point or pilum point) farther than 200 yards. These arrows broke through chainmail like it wasn't there, and single handedly forced all of Europe to adopt full plate mail for their cavalry (no sense buying armor for peasantfag footmen).
It gets this power from the limb design, which compresses nearly all of the torsional force into the just the midlimb. The riser and tips barely bend at all when the bow is drawn. As a result, it's a lot more efficient, and the straight tips have a lot of leverage and work like mini catapults. This allows the longbow to shoot that massive war arrow. As a side note, there are very few wood species that can take this level of stress, so true single-stave wood longbows are stupidly expensive.
Thus the classic English Longbow is a powerful weapon, but not so great at hunting. The projectile velocity is low by modern bow standards. It's a damn sight better then primitive bows, and it'll do the job of course - a 65 lb longbow is powerful enough to kill any normal game animal - but it doesn't compare well to more modern designs. This bow design is best for historical or novelty purposes.
This is a hybrid design, between the classic longbow and the recurve. It bends the mid limb back towards the belly of the bow, and the tip forward toward the back of the bow. This increases the acceleration of the bow tips, and as a result increases the arrow velocity. The downside is that this increase in leverage goes both ways, and means the bow can't shoot a big heavy war arrow any more - the extra weight pushes back against the bow too much, and costs velocity and power. However, since modern archers don't need war arrows, this problem actually isn't a problem that anyone will notice.
These are ideal for hunting using the instinctive shooting style, with high accuracy and arrow speed. They are lightweight, easy to carry through the woods, and don't stack when overdrawn, making for a great shooting experience as well. These are the most popular modern longbow, and with good reason.
As modern bows, they have a bow rest and a sight window, but are still (usually) don't quite align the arrow to be completely centered with the string. As a result proper arrow spine is crucial and carbon fiber arrows just aren't going to work - carbon arrows don't flex enough during flight to work with this setup.
Like the R/D longbow, this bends the limbs back and the tips forward, to gain leverage and acceleration. However, it does it by a massive amount, to the point that the string actually touches the belly of the bow when undrawn. It has the same boost in accuracy and velocity as the R/D bow, and the same penalty regarding arrow weight. It also stacks heavily when overdrawn, meaning you only want to shoot one that's properly measured for your personal shooting form.
It's an ideal target shooting bow, and in fact is the standard for Olympic archery. It can easily be used for hunting, but compared to the R/D longbow, you'll either want it to be 5 or 10 lbs higher draw, or invest in high quality, lightweight hunting broadheads. On the upside, it's available as a takedown bow, which is good for storage and transport. Takedown bows can also swap limbs to change poundage, or replace damaged parts. Recurves in general usually have a fully centered arrow rest, so compensating for archer's paradox isn't needed and carbon arrows are ok to shoot with it.
Overall an excellent bow for nearly any purpose, but less versatile and forgiving of equipment oddities then the R/D longbow.
This bow sucks ass. It's slow, inaccurate, and the arrow rests so far off center that you'll have to tilt the bow to almost 45 degrees to get it to shoot in a straight line. On the upside, you can make it in about an hour out of sticks you pick up off the ground and a bunch of twine.
I have made 3 of these before (pic is not mine, fwiw), they ended up between 30-35 pounds. For the poundage, I'd say they under-perform by about 5 lbs in terms of power. However, they work, and would be perfectly fine for hunting rabbits, etc. They also take a bit of practice to adapt to the far-off-center arrow position. However, if you were dumped in the wild, this bow would get you food. That's a plus.
If you are interested in making one, I highly suggest making it with a cord backing. It increases the speed of the bow and reduces breakage by a *lot*. http://www.primitiveways.com/cordage_backed_bow.html
>>28664102 >I only accept peer reviewed journals or else everyone else is wrong.
You sound awfully invested in Lars' cock. You know nothing about archery if you think trick shots is how warriors shot each other. You do know that Middle Age artists didn't necessarily draw things correctly, right? They were not soldiers familiar with weapons, they were monks who had to recreate images from their ill informed memories. Modern day comic artists make many of the same ridiculous mistakes.
>>28664102 Ohh, look it's that lazy new way to pretend you win internet arguments. Demand scientific research or else everything is wrong. You know that Lars didn't submit scientific research either, right?
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org with the post's information.