Accuracy of american flatbow vs one piece recurve

A16KSB

Member
Hi All
This is my first post here and need some advice please.
After shooting target archery for 5 years, I've really taken to field archery and bought a 68inch 45lb Black Hawk Buck Trail bow late last year and was pretty good over 20 yards indoors. I then used it out doors a couple of times this year and was sky aiming at 40 / 50 yards. I wanted to "point of aim" at this distance so 2 weeks ago I bought a 60inch 55lb Bear Paw Kodiak one piece recurve bow. This is a very fast powerful bow and aim to shoot is ok at 50 yards, however it doesn't seem as accurate as the flatbow, is this correct, is it my perception or just I need to get used to the new bow.

Thanks in advance

Regards
Keith
 

English Bowman

Well-known member
In a machine they would be just as accurate as each other, however, there are two things that will make the recurve harder to shoot.
1) It's shorter, this will make it more likely that you will pinch the arrow.
2) And this is probably the main reason you're struggling with it. It's 10lbs heavier. In my opinion a jump of 10lbs is a big jump and 55lbs is a lot for a recurve.
I shoot a 70lbs English Longbow, so I can cope with the weight, but when shooting AFB I shoot a 44lbs Blackbrook I bought second hand. If I'd bought a new one I may have gone to 50 or maybe 55lbs but no higher because you don't need more. For a recurve, I'd go for 50lbs max, but with a shorter bow I'd probably go lighter, maybe 45lbs.

I don't understand why you were sky aiming at 40/50 yds. What arrows were you using, and with what size fletchings?
 

A16KSB

Member
Hi there.
Thanks for your quick reply.
When I say sky aiming, I was probably exaggerating, I was aiming above the full size boss and I found that frustrating and couldn't understand why.
The arrows were POC 11/32, spined at 45-50 lbs with 120gn tophat screw on points, fletching were 4 inch straight feathers.
I thought about finger pinch, but it isn't happening and the 55lb isn't a problem, I can hold at full draw for more than 3 seconds.
Cheers
 

Black Sun

Member
I wouldn't say the Kodiak is less accurate as such but, shorter bows are much less forgiving of variances in technique than longer bows. I'd also suggest that for a 55# recurve, your arrows are under spined and the120gr points on them well make them behave even whippier. For example I'm shooting a 50# recurve (carbon limbs) with 11/32 poc arrows spined at 60-65# and 80gr points and for my set up these are spot on. I reckon you'd need at least 55-60# spines with 100gr points.
 

Berny

Active member
I wouldn't say the Kodiak is less accurate as such but, shorter bows are much less forgiving of variances in technique than longer bows. I'd also suggest that for a 55# recurve, your arrows are under spined and the120gr points on them well make them behave even whippier. For example I'm shooting a 50# recurve (carbon limbs) with 11/32 poc arrows spined at 60-65# and 80gr points and for my set up these are spot on. I reckon you'd need at least 55-60# spines with 100gr points.
I wonder if your experience with a Black Swan carbon limbed recurve is comparable to Bearpaw Kodiak?
You also mention mention a Blackbrook too - i'm assuming carbon here too? Not exactly comparable to a Bucktrail Black Hawk either.

Don't think either of the OPs bows have attributes such as: forgiving, torsional stiffness, cast/speed etc.
a may be associated with Black Swan or Blackbrook
or indeed the perhaps something from the more ubiquitous Border Archery product line
but all these bow we're talking about come in at a significantly different pricepoint to the OPs bows.
 

Black Sun

Member
I wonder if your experience with a Black Swan carbon limbed recurve is comparable to Bearpaw Kodiak?
You also mention mention a Blackbrook too - i'm assuming carbon here too? Not exactly comparable to a Bucktrail Black Hawk either.

Don't think either of the OPs bows have attributes such as: forgiving, torsional stiffness, cast/speed etc.
a may be associated with Black Swan or Blackbrook
or indeed the perhaps something from the more ubiquitous Border Archery product line
but all these bow we're talking about come in at a significantly different pricepoint to the OPs bows.
Hi Berny, no of course I'm not comparing the performance of a Kodiak to a BlackSwan or a Blackbrook - that would be silly and that's why I tried to keep my posting a little more general and of course comparing any of those to a Black Hawk AFB is asking for trouble. The Blackbrook is actually a relatively oldish one and does not have any carbon in it by the way. However a BlackSwan or Blackbrook are not my only experiences of bows and whilst the Kodiak may not be comparable in terms of cast, stiffness etc to either of those, it is still a recurve and so has some common factors. I'm also not saying that the Kodiak or Black Hawk are bad bows incidentally, for what they are they are both reasonably good. Bearing that in mind would you say that none of my observations (listed below) have any merit?

1. A shorter bow is less forgiving of technique than a longer bow
2. For a 55# recurve bow, arrows spined at 45-50# are almost certainly underspined - 55-60# spine arrows would be more appropriate
3. 120gr piles will make any arrow behave a bit whippier, so having this weight pile on an already underspined arrow is not going to help and perhaps a 100gr point would be better?

The OP can take what he likes from this - I'm just giving him my thoughts, but if you think any of those 3 points are wrong Berny I'd like to hear why you think they're wrong.
 
Last edited:

A16KSB

Member
Hi All.
Thanks for the information.
I had to read them several times to fully understand that the OP was me :)
I shot both bows over the last couple of days and I agree with what you've said in that the shorter recurve will highlight bad form, e.g. bad release or gripping the bow and the longer flatbow is easier to smoother and not so aggressive.
As for spine, I paid a visit to someone with decades of experience to make use of their arrow matching service, (not sure if I can mention names or advertise on this site, however they are based in Surrey, you probably know who I mean), and they suggested I shoot 11/32, 40-45lb spined arrows with 125gn points from the 55lb Kodiak, this really surprised me, can anyone explain why?

On a last note, If I were to replace / sell the Kodiak, what type of bow would you recommend, that would give me a flatter trajectory than the Buck Trail Black Hawk, but not so aggressive as the Kodiak. The purpose is for me to do NFAs , EFAA rounds without too much sky aiming, i.e. point of aim at 50 yards for example.

Thanks
 

blakey

Active member
As for spine, I paid a visit to someone with decades of experience to make use of their arrow matching service, (not sure if I can mention names or advertise on this site, however they are based in Surrey, you probably know who I mean), and they suggested I shoot 11/32, 40-45lb spined arrows with 125gn points from the 55lb Kodiak, this really surprised me, can anyone explain why?
That doesn't make sense to me either, unless the Kodiak doesn't have a shelf, which I thought it did? I'd have thought the above recommend would shoot really weak?
 

English Bowman

Well-known member
Hi All.
Thanks for the information.
I had to read them several times to fully understand that the OP was me :)
I shot both bows over the last couple of days and I agree with what you've said in that the shorter recurve will highlight bad form, e.g. bad release or gripping the bow and the longer flatbow is easier to smoother and not so aggressive.
As for spine, I paid a visit to someone with decades of experience to make use of their arrow matching service, (not sure if I can mention names or advertise on this site, however they are based in Surrey, you probably know who I mean), and they suggested I shoot 11/32, 40-45lb spined arrows with 125gn points from the 55lb Kodiak, this really surprised me, can anyone explain why?

On a last note, If I were to replace / sell the Kodiak, what type of bow would you recommend, that would give me a flatter trajectory than the Buck Trail Black Hawk, but not so aggressive as the Kodiak. The purpose is for me to do NFAs , EFAA rounds without too much sky aiming, i.e. point of aim at 50 yards for example.

Thanks
I don't know why those arrows that were recommended to you, but I'd need to see how you shoot and how the arrows fly before saying that they are wrong. If it's who I think it is she's usually right.
That said I'd play with the arrows before worrying about changing the string, try a smaller fletching and / or a lighter point, that will give you a much better sight mark and should give you point on at 50yds.
 

Black Sun

Member
Hi All.
Thanks for the information.
I had to read them several times to fully understand that the OP was me :)
I shot both bows over the last couple of days and I agree with what you've said in that the shorter recurve will highlight bad form, e.g. bad release or gripping the bow and the longer flatbow is easier to smoother and not so aggressive.
As for spine, I paid a visit to someone with decades of experience to make use of their arrow matching service, (not sure if I can mention names or advertise on this site, however they are based in Surrey, you probably know who I mean), and they suggested I shoot 11/32, 40-45lb spined arrows with 125gn points from the 55lb Kodiak, this really surprised me, can anyone explain why?

On a last note, If I were to replace / sell the Kodiak, what type of bow would you recommend, that would give me a flatter trajectory than the Buck Trail Black Hawk, but not so aggressive as the Kodiak. The purpose is for me to do NFAs , EFAA rounds without too much sky aiming, i.e. point of aim at 50 yards for example.

Thanks
I'm with Blakey and English Bowman on the subject of the arrows - I can see them working for your Black Hawk but not for the Kodiak.... I'm very surprised with the recommend at that spine. However the proof is in the pudding as it were - only you can say how they shoot out of the Kodiak. I'd agree with EB and suggest playing around with arrows first before looking at changing bows... definitely look at a lighter point

... which leads me nicely into the bow! Assuming you are wanting something around the same price point as the Kodiak.... I don't think you've got a lot of choice to be fair. Most one piece recurves are around 60" although you can find a few around 62" (take a look at KG in Notts) but for your money I'd say the Kodiak is a good choice and at 55# I'd be very surprised if you weren't getting a PoA around 50 yards. As Berny mentions above I do also have a Blackbrook hunter. True it's a different animal than your Kodiak but it is almost 10years old, has no carbon in the limbs and is 52#@28" so, whilst its not directly comparable its the nearest I've got to your Kodiak, even with fairly heavy arrows (around 500gr) I'm still getting a PoA of 52 yrds

As far as the grouping goes... unless you do find a slightly longer one piece recurve I think you're going to have to get used to 60" or less I'm afraid (you could always go with a take down and go longer but if you're anything like me there's something that feels good with a one piece no?). That'll mean more time with a bow practicing your form and release...... which is surely not a bad thing??

Finally I can't comment about EFAA but NFAS I can.... a good many shots are between 20-40 yards, the majority aren't 50-60+yrds (though you do get them) so to be honest I wouldn't be too worried about a PoA of 50+yrds - yes its a nice thing to have but get your form and release down first (I'm not trying to imply you have bad form by the way!). Have fun! :)
 
Last edited:

Berny

Active member
Hi Berny, no of course I'm not comparing the performance of a Kodiak to a BlackSwan or a Blackbrook - that would be silly and that's why I tried to keep my posting a little more general and of course comparing any of those to a Black Hawk AFB is asking for trouble. The Blackbrook is actually a relatively oldish one and does not have any carbon in it by the way. However a BlackSwan or Blackbrook are not my only experiences of bows and whilst the Kodiak may not be comparable in terms of cast, stiffness etc to either of those, it is still a recurve and so has some common factors. I'm also not saying that the Kodiak or Black Hawk are bad bows incidentally, for what they are they are both reasonably good. Bearing that in mind would you say that none of my observations (listed below) have any merit?

1. A shorter bow is less forgiving of technique than a longer bow
2. For a 55# recurve bow, arrows spined at 45-50# are almost certainly underspined - 55-60# spine arrows would be more appropriate
3. 120gr piles will make any arrow behave a bit whippier, so having this weight pile on an already underspined arrow is not going to help and perhaps a 100gr point would be better?

The OP can take what he likes from this - I'm just giving him my thoughts, but if you think any of those 3 points are wrong Berny I'd like to hear why you think they're wrong.
Apart from 2. I don't/didn't disagree with your specific points
& as also commented by others since, think the bow weight+5 or +10 lbs for spining arrows is more appropriate
for any of the modern Border bows but I suspect not for Bucktrail & most prob. for Bearpaw/Bodnik bows too ....
although I personally have not come across or shot any of the newer Bearpaw/Bodnik bows.
 

blakey

Active member
I don't know why those arrows that were recommended to you, but I'd need to see how you shoot and how the arrows fly before saying that they are wrong. If it's who I think it is she's usually right.
That said I'd play with the arrows before worrying about changing the string, try a smaller fletching and / or a lighter point, that will give you a much better sight mark and should give you point on at 50yds.
I'm wondering if this lady, whose reputation I 've heard of even down here, is working off dynamic spine? I confess I don't really understand it, except it is supposed to be exceptionally accurate, and usually recommends a much weaker set up? Did she use a calculator, factoring various variables which are not evident over the net? I'm intrigued. :)
 

ozzy1977

Member
What length are the arrows? I shoot a 45#@25.5" bear grizzly with 45-50# pine shafts cut to 27" with 100 grn points
 

A16KSB

Member
Morning all.
Really impressed with the feedback and comments guys, thank you.

The recommendation was given by me shooting various arrow (of different spine and point weight) into a target 15 -20 yards away, whilst she observed the flight. The final conclusion was that my draw length was 28, (so cut the arrows to 29), use 40-45lb with 125gn.

I was also told that bare shaft tuning wasn't worth doing. This I find odd as I did it with the Black Hawk and found it quite a useful exercise, however as a novice and out of respect I didn't comment. I am currently in the process of making the arrows for the Kodiak, so haven't done any shooting with the new shafts yet. what do you think about bare shaft tuning do you do it?
 

steve Morley

New member
The Blackbrook is actually a relatively oldish one and does not have any carbon in it by the way.
.
If you're talking about the Blackbrook Zeta then the age of the bow has nothing to do with if it had carbon backing or not, I had the first production Zeta and it was carbon backed.

In the NFAS up until 2000 nobody in AFB had out shot H/T winning scores at NFAS Nationals this is when H/T was 95% wood riser bows, I was the first, followed by Andy Soars and then Denis Alston, a few other have done it since Chris Robson comes to mind. On paper the Recurve normally due to the extra riser mass and grip has the advantage especially on longer shots but end of the day it's the person behind the string.
 

Black Sun

Member
Apart from 2. I don't/didn't disagree with your specific points
& as also commented by others since, think the bow weight+5 or +10 lbs for spining arrows is more appropriate
for any of the modern Border bows but I suspect not for Bucktrail & most prob. for Bearpaw/Bodnik bows too ....
although I personally have not come across or shot any of the newer Bearpaw/Bodnik bows.
Fair enough... I'd agree that bow weight +10 is a bit much for most bows but I'd still go with bow weight +5. I do have a Bucktrail one piece recurve and bow weight +5 works well for that.... but you evidently have a different experience and I'm cool with that :)
 

Black Sun

Member
If you're talking about the Blackbrook Zeta then the age of the bow has nothing to do with if it had carbon backing or not, I had the first production Zeta and it was carbon backed.

In the NFAS up until 2000 nobody in AFB had out shot H/T winning scores at NFAS Nationals this is when H/T was 95% wood riser bows, I was the first, followed by Andy Soars and then Denis Alston, a few other have done it since Chris Robson comes to mind. On paper the Recurve normally due to the extra riser mass and grip has the advantage especially on longer shots but end of the day it's the person behind the string.
Hi Steve... No its the hunter recurve model I've got, its second hand (well, third hand really) and definitely no carbon. I'd agree that it's the person behind the string that matters though.... I have issues with that on a personal level if you know what I mean ;-)
 

A16KSB

Member
Latest update.
I had some spare 45-50lb 11/32 shafts and made up some bare shafts today, based on the recommendation I received last week, and as I suspected they took an extreme right path away from the target, (indicating they were too weak), so I am not sure why she recommended them, and will contact her today.
 

blakey

Active member
Latest update.
I had some spare 45-50lb 11/32 shafts and made up some bare shafts today, based on the recommendation I received last week, and as I suspected they took an extreme right path away from the target, (indicating they were too weak), so I am not sure why she recommended them, and will contact her today.
The problem with bare shafting with timber is that you have to have a very good shaft match to make it meaningful. I bare shaft religiously, but only do it with wood when I have made the shafts myself out of one billet with straight grain. Please let us know what her response is. I am fascinated. :)
 

A16KSB

Member
Hi there.
I was basically told that of all the arrows we tested, (5 or 6 different spine combinations) the spine recommended to me flew the best. So to sum it up, it is not what the books, internet or people say it is what works for you.

I shall leave you to draw your own conclusion.
I will however test some bare shafts rated at 55-60 and 60-65, then make a set of arrows based on the set with the best arrow flight.

- - - Updated - - -

Hi there.
I was basically told that of all the arrows we tested, (5 or 6 different spine combinations) the spine recommended to me flew the best. So to sum it up, it is not what the books, internet or people say it is what works for you.

I shall leave you to draw your own conclusion.
I will however test some bare shafts rated at 55-60 and 60-65, then make a set of arrows based on the set with the best arrow flight.
 
Top