Recurve riser - reflex-deflex

Hi guys - I know these potatoes have been boiled before, but I can't find a definitive analysis of Deflex vs Reflex in recurve risers. This is what i think I know - but there seems to be almost opposing views out there - can someone please confirm or offer a better version?

1 A Reflex riser is one where the throat of the grip is relatively further in front of the top and bottom limb fulcrums - ie like holding more of a 'C' shape with the horns of the 'C' coming back towards you.

this offers (compared to deflex):

  • slightly higher bracing height
  • slightly less draw on the limbs for an equivalent draw length
  • slightly less weight on fingers for same draw length
  • slightly less stacking at full draw
  • slight less speed for same draw length
  • slightly more stability and 'forgiveness'
  • slightly less likelihood of torquing the bow

2. A Deflex riser is a straighter riser with the limbs closer to being more directly above and below the grip throat - so the riser shape is more toward being much shallower 'C' shape - I know that some compounds can be almost a reverse c shape where the limb pivots are in front of the grip throat - but this topics is purely for recurves thanks.

This offers (compared to reflex):

  • slightly lower bracing height
  • slightly more draw on the limbs for an equivalent draw length
  • slightly more weight on the fingers for an equivalent draw length
  • slightly more stacking at full draw
  • slightly higher speed for the same draw length
  • slightly less stability and 'forgiveness'
  • slightly less likelihood of 'torquing' the bow

not sure if this is correct? it is purely what i think I have gleaned after reading lots of blurb -
not sure if I have missed any other major differences?

I assume that an archer with a rock steady technique could shoot both options equally well - and the relative trade-offs will be purely down to personal preference and skills. Maybe a more reflex riser would help to cover the variances for an intermediate archer?

Also wondering if more aggressive (more extremely hooked) limbs like UUKHA xcurves - with their reduced stacking - but lower bracing height - would be more suited to reflex or deflex? perhaps a deflex plus xcurve would be too much towards speed and to far from stability? opinions welcome.

cheers

al
 

JohnK

Well-known member
You have the terms (and the effects) the wrong way around.

Deflex - grip is further from the archer.

Reflex - grip is closer to the archer.
 

EVC

New member
I assume that an archer with a rock steady technique could shoot both options equally well - and the relative trade-offs will be purely down to personal preference and skills. Maybe a more reflex riser would help to cover the variances for an intermediate archer?
For those "traditional" bows based on compound risers (e.g. Hoyt Gamemaster) I could agree.

Regarding modern target recurve risers, nowadays I am very skeptical about it will really making a huge difference, unless someone shows strong scientific evidences otherwise. Archers variability is still the main variable in this context.

Note: I agree with JohnK.
 

Whitehart

Well-known member
For those "traditional" bows based on compound risers (e.g. Hoyt Gamemaster) I could agree.

Regarding modern target recurve risers, nowadays I am very skeptical about it will really making a huge difference, unless someone shows strong scientific evidences otherwise. Archers variability is still the main variable in this context.

Note: I agree with JohnK.
Well Brady has spent 10 years finding the right bow geometry - but not a surprise which way he has now gone along with the S Koreans.
 

Stretch

Active member
Horses for courses - looking specifically at the Hoyt line (as you mentioned Brady) while most longer draw archers seem to prefer the RX geometry, the shorter your draw length the more likely you are going to benefit the HP geometry (at least that is what it looks like to me). Brady isn't a great marker because he won everything (except OG) with his RX, he then won everything (-OG) with HPX and is now back winning everything with RX geometry again. So the statistics would actually say it doesn't matter :)

Of course now Hoyt have deprecated the 27" riser they only really make formula bows for "short" folks. Anybody with a combination of long draw (~32"), draw weight over 42# , fairly long face and shooting x10 (or lighter) will not get an 18m sight mark on a 25" formula riser (let alone field sight marks). I really liked the 25"Prodigy RX but the sight window was so short best I could do at 18m was high blue/black.

But coming back to the point being these are all Deflex risers - they just have variable amounts of Deflex. So the "RX" geometry is close to the old Geometry in use by Hoyt for forever(ish). Most W&w are a tweak less Deflex. The HP Hoyt is a little less Deflex again... and so on. Simply put there isn't a lot of variation across most of the target risers from mainstream manufacturers.

Possibly more important is the mass distribution across the riser but again that is a personal thing - not a one thing is better than the other. So for example I hated the HPX in the long run as a lot of the riser mass was way forward in the geometry, to get it to balance as I liked I ended up with a very heavy setup compared to my norm. Other people love that "mass forward" feel and I seem to recall W&W claiming this has stability benefits - certainly not for me!

2p

Stretch
 

gtek

New member
For those "traditional" bows based on compound risers (e.g. Hoyt Gamemaster) I could agree.

Regarding modern target recurve risers, nowadays I am very skeptical about it will really making a huge difference, unless someone shows strong scientific evidences otherwise. Archers variability is still the main variable in this context.

Note: I agree with JohnK.
The Gamemaster was designed as a recurve from a blank sheet. Nothing to do with compound.
 

assybish

Member
So called hyper recurve limbs perform best on a more deflex riser as they need lower BH in reflexed risers the BH becomes so low as to be impracticable and torsional stability and the effects of the release become more severe . Border produce "deflexed" risers for this reason
 
Top