Maximum practical draw weights for horseback archery?

[Alex S.]

I am looking forward to being able to test Qing bow penetration, because the bow's focus is so different from most other composite bows. I wonder how this and the size and weight of their arrows will affect how they do against armor. I expect surprising results, but no speculation can match actual field testing. The problem is, no-one seems to shoot a 100+ pound Manchu bow these days.

I expect you will get quite good results. I remember a thread on this forum talking about the penetration of a Japanese arrow and some other on target.(sorry, dont recall ) Because of the massive size and weight of the Japanese arrow it had more energy even though it shot relatively slower than the other bow. My guess is, you wont have good distance, but within shooting range the effects would be devastating. I notice most Asian warheads have quite long tangs on them, which would add to the over all weight. Does anyone know how heavy Qing arrows were?

For all I know about damage upon close range, Simon Stanley was able to shoot through a breastplate with only the fletching holding it in place. I think the shot was a little off center if not the center of the breast plate.

Alex

[jack farrell]

FYI;Compare point weights: Scythian bronze points, 1000-500 BC; 22, 36 and 55 grains.

Mongol points 10-11 th centuries: armor piercing points 68, 69 qnd 72 grains. Long lance point 170. Most points of this era cannot be described as armor piercing but rather as broad.

Mongol 12th century armor piercing 53. Broad heads 237, 358 and 471 grains!

If one were to take WWI as an instance, horses were one of the military materiel being consumed at an alarming rate.

[Bede]

Peter,
Having read some accounts of the Manchus shooting in contests, I feel that the effect of the arrows at medium to short range would be formidable. the Manchus were operating in the same weight ranges as the English and the Turks. The large feathers stabilised the arrows quickly which enhanced the effectiveness at close range. perhaps the rapid disappearance of armour in the Qing was due to the effectiveness of the arrows and the simultaneous use of firearms. The Qing arrows I have are about 635 grains, but they are only military practice arrows.

I have a report of a Han Dynasty scale an lamellar armour made from steel plates that were of the hardness and consistency of modern spring steel. I have made some experiments with steel and hardened leather lamellar armour and both are effective. However, lucky shots in the gaps between sections of the armour would have always been a danger. song armour is particularly well documented (down to the number of scales in the armours for each class of soldier).

Mark Stretton made a distinction between the effectiveness of brigandine armour (small plates on the inside of a jacket) when it was worn tightly against the body in the European fashion and wen it was worn more loosely in the East Asian manner. In the first case, the bodkins penetrated the brigandine with ease, in the second they did little damage.

I have some arrows and arrow heads from the periods Jack mentioned and can confirm the weights of the Scythian ones. I have some Indo-Persian ones too and will see if I have the weights written down. I mentioned my Qing arrows above.

[Adam Karpowicz]

These are very good points about the type of armour and its quality and the mode of wearing. The results of such tests may indeed surprise us.

I would again like to stress the need to establish a some kind of "common", or "average" bow draw weight, draw length, the arrow weight plus the string type for all tests. I am sure Simon Stanley could shoot a powerful bow to a great effect, but was this actually representative of the equipment used in the past? As I understand, even the draw length for longbows has not been clearly established. The results will not be the same for a 200lb bow @ 28in (a good part of Mary Rose arrow shafts was this length) or 200lb @ 32in. I would expect the heavy Qing or Japanese bows to be absolutely astonishing at their 3 feet+ draw.

I have a question about Mark Stretton's testing for arrow velocity at longer distances (he does not write about this in the Hugh Soar's book I have). Was this based on the Doppler effect? I have not read the Glade articles.

Adam

[Bede]

Adam,
I will find the article and prepare a pr?cis for you. I only remember the graphs and conclusions clearly. It may take me a while to find the article.

[Puzio]

Is seems to me that the longbow men not discusses arrow speed that much just arrow weight and how many yards they can shoot. i have been looking around to try to find out what speed you need to shoot a 1000 grain war arrow to the longbow standard of 240 yards but with no successes. of course in the old days they didn't? have a crono to test the bow for speed but there is other ways to do it maby not quite easy but possible.

[Adam Karpowicz]

If I remember correctly, Bob Kooi calculated Mary Rose bows at 100 to 172lb draw weight. I do not believe he took hysteresis (related to humidity, temperature and the time of use) into account, so these weights would be rather high. Hugh Soar gives a more reasonable range of 90 to 130lb, Somehow, probably through efforts by Hardy, the "average" became 150+lb, some claim even more than that. I have no doubts at all the bows were very powerful and there were certainly bows in excess of 200lb, but such specimens would not be common. And then there is the issua of draw length and the string type used in modern testing. I think 1000 grain shot to 240 yards needs around 180fps (I would have to check the tables to be sure), which suggests a bow 110-130lb. This is assuming it had to be 1000 grains, not less.

I want to stress I am not trying (as a hornbow maker) to degrade longbows in any way. I am very impressed with the immense power of these simple bows made of wood alone and with the prowess of the archers in shooting those monsters. But after all the years of intense interest, there is still no agreement on the (rather basic) features.

Adam

[heavybows]

Adam all wararrows are 32" to 36" long depend who is shooting. 1300 grain to 1800 grains some can be higher. I think the chinese bows were much faster but warbow deliver more knetic energy. All warbow shooters bows weight are rated to 32" There is one person that draws to 36" nigel and shoots 150#, I think simon draws to 33" here is he 153# flatbow.

[heavybows]

heres the picture.

[Adam Karpowicz]

Hi Marlon. I do not have a problem with the bows weights/draw lengths people are shooting now. I have a problem when someone says these bows, drawn to 32-36" and with FF strings represent historical replicas and then goes on and does penetration tests.

All bow styles can be pushed to the max, but one must draw the line somewhere when talking about historical research.

Adam

[Alex S.]

Guys, not to be rude or anything, but I think we have strayed off topic a bit, myself included. Sorry, just noticed about it, silly how this happens so often

Anyways, Im guessing it all depends on who your talking about and what time period. Mongols? Turks? Japanese? Chinese? Once we have a chosen culture, it would be easier to go into further research about their military system and with a set date, we can determine what armour they were up against etc etc...


Btw, Glennan Carney shot a 96 gram (1481 grains) arrow 233 yards with a 125-130 pound bow I think a 1000 grain should go a bit further with same bow....

Alex

[heavybows]

Alex Yes Glennan shoots 133# bow.

[Puzio]

That is interesting to know. i am of the opinion that its the arrow speed that is the important, not the type of bow.

[Bede]

Arrow speed and bow type are related. Bow weight is more closely related to the weight of missile that can be propelled at that speed.

Once you have achieved a certain arrow speed with a given weight of arrow, the main criterion is how often you can do it with that bow. A more efficient bow would give the archer a chance to shoot more arrows.

There might be a connection with the Chinese suggesting a lighter bow on horse back. Perhaps it was thought more practical to be able to shoot a lot of arrows without getting too tired. The horse archer can move in and out of range more easily than the infantry archer.

[jack farrell]

I want to put in a plug about steel quality as pertains to armor.

When making a crossbow spring the company that tempered it showed me how the hardness test was done. A small place on the steel was cleaned and positioned above a track. A steel ball was dropped down the track striking a solid blow to the spring. The depth of the dimple was measured by micrometer. This was important because it is not desirable to make the spring too hard. 45 on the Rockwell D scale equaled a good temper for spring steel. 45 out of 64 points.

Some American woodworking tools have an edge of 58 points, some German and Swedish tools at 60 and some Japanese tools at 62 points. The harder the edge the sharper an edge can be held and the more fragile the metal.

So if someone says that such and such armor was tempered they might have some evidence we can review.

A simple test for arrowhead metal CONTENT can be made by grinding. A simple test for hardness would be making a cutting edge and testing for durability.

I own some old points but am not ready to destroy them for testing. Maybe one. -j-