![](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgcuXjH9TIy9oTV5N_3O78hSC5nbheT72flC4huT_jhjsEiLk6Do-Q3yMDaZIKYrQYJS8d8_HjZ6sF_xSFEP1JBPt9Ngu1QhGU7W_RhysDpTCdeoU60_T4JAW-hgwS_RrLT3DzJWw/s400/forestgroup.jpg)
If this had been a hunting situation, a pass-through there would be ideal to hasten the bleeding. Of course though, this spot has been rendered squishy and vulnerable to pass-through from repeated abuse from fellow archers, especially the compound shooters. Doing a bit of 3D is a great way to bond with a new bow as long as I remember to bring enough arrows and allocate enough time to search for the inevitable misses. I probably had about a 50% hit rate, typically from stochastic arrow error from incorrect spine. The trajectory is also a tiny bit flatter than my recurve, although at 25 yards and under, the aim is about the same between the longbow and the recurve, which is really good so I don't have to spend as much time re-calibrating if I decide to shoot both bows in the same day.
I'm still calibrating and tuning my T/D longbow (yet to be named but operating under the use-name "Sparrowhawk") but it looks like the 1916s with a 125 grain point are working pretty darned well. The 1913s aren't quite spined right -- looks like I'm going to get the 145 or 160 grain points for them, but in the meanwhile, they've been serving me reasonably well. With a bit of clever calculation, I could probably get both bows to use the same arrows -- a slightly longer 1916 arrow could easily spine correctly for both bows and with a bit of proper tuning and luck, I could probably even use the same points!
No comments:
Post a Comment