Talk:Compound bow

The compound and composite bow are not one and the same, not sure if it's worth separating. (No they aren't. The composite bow is, usually, the horn/wood/sinew Asiatic weapon). Richard Keatinge 12:14, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Draw weight - not force

Yes, the correct term in physics would be force, not weight, but the correct term in archery is "draw weight" - not "draw force". N0YKG 14:02, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The pictures.

Why is there a picture of an incredibly outdated browning? It doesn't demonstrate the technology available in bows and the cam system is not good at all. Perhaps a Mathews switchback or bowtech allegiance would be more apropriate? The cam system works just fine. This bow is quite powerful, yet only has 20 pounds of force required when you draw it. Don't insult my bow.

I don't have a problem with the photo that is there now. It seems like a good basic representation of a compound bow.

What I would like to see is a diagram that shows the basic common components and term such as

where do the ends of the strings anchor to the frame?
what are the name and purpose of the bar in the middle that mounts near the grip and points back at the archer?-Crunchy Numbers 17:05, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

wording problem with acceleration

The string continues to accelerate from the release to rest so imparting more power (and hence speed) to the arrow.

I'm going to rework some of these types of statements. Any bow that puts force on the arrow until release is accelerating the arrow the whole time. A traditional bow has maximum acceleration just after release but there is still force and therefore still acceleration until the arrow leaves the string. A decrease in acceleration is not the same as deceleration or negative acceleration.-Crunchy Numbers 05:13, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Schematic & explanation needed

This article needs some kind of schematic of a common type of compound bow, where all the mechanical parts are clearly visible, and an in-depth explanation of the physics behind the operation of the depicted bow. Shinobu 17:23, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What is Let-off?

It's a term that is put in quotes, and apparently means something, but without knowledge of what that term means, the statement that the let-off is 99% is meaningless. Could someone who knows what it means put it in the article? 62.49.94.185 02:15, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Changes 23 Feb 2007

I had to correct some serious misconceptions about how a compound bow works, the main one being the suggestion that energy is stored anywhere other than the limbs. While there might be a tiny amount of energy storage in the riser, string and cables resulting from the elasticity of those parts, it's not worth confuddling people over. Sorry if I've trodden on any toes. Mr Barndoor 16:44, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Noise levels

In my limited experience compounds are usually noisier than traditional bows. I propose to delete the new section that says the opposite, unless anyone can come up with a good reference. Richard Keatinge 12:14, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

+++ Id say they are much quieter, though that that owes to other technological advancements that have also gone hand in hand with compound development, not necessarily due to the inclusion of cams and pulleys itself.

For instance, parallel limbs have perhaps done the most to bring down the volume of bows, these limbs of course being an exclusively available to compound bows. The fact of the matter is that a fully silenced compound bow is much quieter than a fully silenced long or recurve bow, the fact that a barebones compound in circumstances can be louder is a moot point as bows are rarely fired in this manner anyway. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.242.139.185 (talk) 02:24, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're moving goalposts. Compare a stock compound bow to a stock trad bow. The trad bow is quieter. — NRen2k5^(TALK), 10:55, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Origins of the compound bow concept

I've always thought, and many sources suggest, that the compound bow was invented by H. Wilbur Allen. He was certainly the first to patent the concept. However, I recently had a conversation with a compound bow designer (Ben Jones of Merlin) who told me that the concept had been around since at least the 1950s, possibly the late 1940s, and Allen's patent was strongly disputed at the time. Does anyone have references for this earlier work on the concept? Mr Barndoor 11:31, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It seems the concept of a “compound” bow is even older than that. I stumbled upon a webpage a while back showing a “compound” design that a Native American tribe used. It was basically a longbow with a shortbow attached to the back (to a layperson, the front). The string was tied to the limb tips of the shortbow and strung through the limb tips of the longbow. — NRen2k5^(TALK), 00:51, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Confusing Lingo

As someone who does not have much prior knowledge of bows, I found this article difficult to understand. With all of the technical lingo used in it, I think some clarification is needed. Maguxmagu (talk) 02:31, 30 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Draw weight, fps & kinetic energy=

We read "A draw weight can consist of 30 to 100 pounds creating speeds of 150 to 370 feet per second (46 to 113 m/s)"

--> according to http://www.huntersfriend.com/bowselection.htm#10-drawweights, we find that depending on the person's age, someone will only be able to pull around 30-40 lbs (=30x0,45= 13,5kg) The table from the page is useful:

Very Small Child (55-70 lbs.) 10-15 lbs.
Small Child (70-100 lbs.) 15-25 lbs.
Larger Child (100-130 lbs.) 25-35 lbs.
Small Frame Women (100-130 lbs.) 25-35 lbs.
Medium Frame Women (130-160 lbs) 30-40 lbs.
Athletic Older Child (Boys 130-150 lbs.) 40-50 lbs.
Small Frame Men (120-150 lbs.) 45-55 lbs.
Large Frame Women (160+ lbs.) 45-55 lbs.
Medium Frame Men (150-180 lbs.) 55-65 lbs.
Large Frame Men (180+ lbs.) 65-75 lbs.

we find that the speed of the arrow can vary between 280 and 340 fps (feet per second; see http://www.huntersfriend.com/bow-review-400-fps-bow/400-fps-compound-bow.htm ); that is probably using a 350 grain (= ? kg) arrow. It appears that arrows come in various sizes, and weights of 490 to 540 grains isn't unusual (see http://www.bghi.us/index.php?x=bowspeed )

How to determine kinetic energy ? Is this draw weight X draw height ?

Kinetic energy: fatal weight/velocity chart < 25 ft. lbs. Small Game (rabbit, groundhog, etc.) 25-41 ft. lbs. Medium Game (deer, antelope, etc.) 42-65 ft. lbs. Large Game (elk, black bear, wild boar, etc.) > 65 ft. lbs. Toughest Game (cape buffalo, grizzly, musk ox, etc.)

Draw *weight* - not force