[Warbow] War bow verses Compound?

Wookster

Wookster

New member
I've been having a bit if a ferret about on line looking at different types of bow. ( I'm firmly in the if you like shooting it brilliant camp of archery, so none if this one bow type is better rubbish!!)

looking on line Ive see a video comparing a Japanese now to a war bow including speeds so if we had a modern battle with no gun powder would a compound be the weapon of choice? Faster speeds, let off of the high poundage, compared to the war bow??
 
Berny

Berny

Active member
Never shot a compound myself, although shot alongside compound shooters.
....but have some questions/observations of my own:
- unless I'm mistaken, pound-for-pound the compound would be/is faster (shoots arrows rather than arrows shot)
than a pure muscle bow?
- the let-off should reduce/slow down fatigue?
- the let-off may allow higher actual poundage to be shot?
- but could you shoot a min of 12 arrows a minute with a compound? .....Maybe with finger release?
 
R

Riceburner

Active member
Wookster said:
I've been having a bit if a ferret about on line looking at different types of bow. ( I'm firmly in the if you like shooting it brilliant camp of archery, so none if this one bow type is better rubbish!!)

looking on line Ive see a video comparing a Japanese now to a war bow including speeds so if we had a modern battle with no gun powder would a compound be the weapon of choice? Faster speeds, let off of the high poundage, compared to the war bow??
Click to expand...
In modern* battle I'd say the main necessities will be speed of identifying the target and making the shot. So they're more to do with the skillset of the protaganists than the hardware. Instinctive shooters who can identify the target, judge the distance, nock the arrow and loose accurately within the shortest time would be the victors. So - barebow recurve (or barebow compounds without a rest) who can shoot instinctively (or very fast gap shooters) would have the advantage. :archer2:
(well - that's my distinctly un-military opinion anyway.....)


* ie - guerilla type fighting in woodland / urban zones - hit and fade tactics. As opposed to the 'archery as artillery' tactics of medieaval warfare.
 
Wookster

Wookster

New member
Agreed on the speed of shooting, the "snap shot", over the artillery, or long aim. The exception being a sniper type weapon.

I just wonder if we had no gun powder weapons where the military bow would be now really?
 
Berny

Berny

Active member
It would probably be where it was as gunpowder/guns were introduced:
- crossbows for the masses - easily trained/less skilled
- muscle bows for the few trained/skilled with more use of specialist bows & equipment
e.g. long bows, short bows, recurved bows, etc. depending on material available, budget etc.
tong-ah/majra for snipers, etc.
- blowpipes (stealth), darts, atlatls etc.
- flingers, throwers, launchers, catapults - trebuchets, ballistas, mangonels, etc.

Bows would've evolved to take advantage of any material/science & used on a cost/effectiveness basis
WHOOSH FOR YOUR WONGA!

Perhaps a narrow perspective on this might be found in the S.M.Stirling "Dies the Fire" series - post apocalypse ....
 
Wookster

Wookster

New member
With most hunters choosing to use a compound do you not think that would be the most popular? But I agree that the crossbow may the most likely candidate.
 
D

Deleted member 7654

Guest
The compounders I've seen would still be adjusting sights or holding at full draw when they realised they were dead... :stirthepo:
It's a pointless and daft comparison really.
If you can shoot the warbow, it probably has better reliability which is what you want in battle.
If you can't then obviously you'd want the Compound....
For close quarter work, I'll take my Chinese repeater too :)
Famous quote from the Falklands conflict about the radios they had were NFG and they had to send runners with messages.
"Typical with all this technology, when the excrement hits the fan you can't get a message across the bay"
Del
 
WillS

WillS

New member
Who'd win - shark or bear?

Seriously though, as Del said if you can actually shoot a warbow instinctively then it's more reliable, solid, consistent and punchy than a compound. However, and as a warbow shooter myself it HURTS to say this - I think a compound bow would wipe the floor with a warbow in general. The very nature of a compound bow is to minimise effort while maximising poundage right? If it takes 10 years to learn how to shoot a 150 pound bow just in order to send a half inch arrow at an efficient distance and speed, yet it takes 10 minutes to learn how to do it with a compound - it's a no brainer isn't it.

The most important point of all is - which looks cooler? The guy standing there fiddling with knobs and dials and pulleys and levers and buttons and stabilisers and balancing bits and sights and adjustments with his fancy chest-protector, top-range quiver, needle-arrows with 1mm fletchings etc etc, or the bloke who turns up with a gorgeous stave of European yew, a 1/2" war arrow with a hand forged bodkin and can chuck 12 of them out while the other guy is still unpacking?

Not that I'm biased or anything...
 
D

Deleted member 7654

Guest
@Wills
"While the other guy is unpacking"
LOL.... high five dude!
Del
 
english_archer

english_archer

New member
Ironman
OK as a compound archer and someone who spends way to much time playing Call of duty on the Xbox, For mass artillery bowmen I would have to go with troops armed with a modern materials longbow/recurve lets face it there is no way you are going to beat the speed they can get arrows away. The compound guys would only really be useful as snipers/support archers to get the best out of what a compound can do.
A modern army would /does use all the tools at it's disposal.
 
Wookster

Wookster

New member
Agreed, but with the speed of compound and increased range would the not be used as a distance weapon, with the Long bows more like a machine gun?
 
L

llkinak

New member
I own several of each, with warbows in the 120# and 150# class. I enjoy shooting the warbows much, much more than the compounds, they are a great deal of fun. The compounds are far, far more efficient bows and would serve better for the vast majority of applications.
 
bimble

bimble

Well-known member
Supporter
Fonz Awardee
Ironman
AIUK Saviour
Considering that muskets managed to replace warbows and according to wikipedia (the font of ALL knowledge)
As for the infantry soldier himself, Napoleon primarily equipped his army with the Musket Model 1777 Charleville?a product of perfection from older designs and models. Used during the French Revolution and Napoleonic wars, the Charleville was a .69- caliber, (sometimes .70 or .71) 5-foot-long (1.5 m), muzzle-loading, smoothbore musket. Properly trained French infantry were expected to be able to fire three volleys a minute. A trained soldier could hit a man sized target at 80 yards but anything further required an increasing amount of luck,
Click to expand...
three shots per minute, hitting a man sized target at 80yds... I think most compounders could do something similar, so if we were to remove all firearms I think that if muskets can replace the bow, so would the compound.
 
jerryRTD

jerryRTD

Well-known member
english_archer said:
OK as a compound archer and someone who spends way to much time playing Call of duty on the Xbox, For mass artillery bowmen I would have to go with troops armed with a modern materials longbow/recurve lets face it there is no way you are going to beat the speed they can get arrows away. The compound guys would only really be useful as snipers/support archers to get the best out of what a compound can do.
A modern army would /does use all the tools at it's disposal.
Click to expand...
Spoken like a confirmed release aid archer. Oneida bows can be shot as fast as a recurve or a war bow, may be faster as the let off would make it easier. They have no bus cables or cable guide tp get in the way and are far more powerful the either a recurve or war bow.
 
P

pantherman

New member
Have to agree with Jerry.....
Many years back the european bowhunters had a speed shoot, 3 arrows, 3 different pegs.
Me and a friend practiced for this at 45/40/35 yd pegs shooting BL (fingers/5 pin sight).
We could easily shoot 3 aimed arrows in 15 sec and were rarely out of the inner 4 ring (IFAA Field target).
Being honest of all the styles I've shot (most of them) this is the best set up for combat.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top