Crossbows

upinsmoke

Member
Anyway who cares, what crossbows some of us have. Thanks to Del for his show and tell, let us all show ours
 
Last edited:

jerryRTD

Well-known member
It's not the crossbows fault but every time the Police turn up at our shop for help, advice and in the hope of identifying the culprit it is crossbow related - that's why we don't sell crossbows - also unless you have your own land it is pointless as there are very few places to shoot them. Finally of the weekly enquiries we get, the majority want to go out and hunt and do not take it kindly when we dash their hopes.

The funniest but could have been a serious accident so far was an archer who shot a crossbow at 20 yards through a foam boss, two Egertec bosses, a solid wood garage door and finished up in the car door. This was a 190lb crossbow (a compound on its side) looked more like an attack rifle that could reliably put bolts in the 10 ring at 90m - some machine.

Dell the biggest safety feature is that many sold online are so powerful that a good majority cannot cock them :) and come into the shop asking us to make them less powerful :)
As the rules are at the moment that compound cross bow could be legal under the rules of shooting. The draw weight is measured at the latch. If the let off is 60 to 70% the peak draw weight could very well be over 200 lbs.
 

4d4m

Active member
Here's mine. EK Archery Cobra RX, next to my KG Osprey.

IMG_1604 - Copy.jpeg

Quite "tactical" but I like it. I'd love a medieval replica too.
 

Kernowlad

Supporter
Supporter
Two guys at our NFAS club use them; incredible arrow/bolt speed but the range is poor.
All of us had a go at a boss up a steep hill about 70 yards away. All recurvers missed. The crossbow couldn’t get to it (three bolts shot) and missed; guess which bow landed an arrow right in the middle? Yep, me and my compound bow.
 
D

Deleted member 7654

Guest
... incredible arrow/bolt speed but the range is poor...
I'd suggest the archers making errors in their judgement of range rather than the laws of physics not applying to crossbow bolts is a more likely cause for missing.
Del
 

geoffretired

Supporter
Supporter
Many crossbow sights are mounted just above the arrow/bolt, rather like a telescopic sight on a rifle. It isn't possible to elevate a crossbow very far before the stock blocks the view of the target, unless it is close.
So the crossbow might shoot a bolt 800yds, but you wouldn't be aiming through a telescopic sight... just pointing uphill enough to get a good distance.
 

4d4m

Active member
I'd suggest the archers making errors in their judgement of range rather than the laws of physics not applying to crossbow bolts is a more likely cause for missing.
Del
Agreed. My crossbow delivers similar kinetic energy to my recurve which very easily reaches 180 yards for clout. And it's not particularly powerful.

Most rifle style sighting systems can't cope with the amount of compensation you need for arrows/bolts at longer range, so you're into aiming way above the target, often out of a scope's field of view. Easier with a bow because you can usually still see the target but the stock of a crossbow or rifle obscures the target.
 

4d4m

Active member
Many crossbow sights are mounted just above the arrow/bolt, rather like a telescopic sight on a rifle. It isn't possible to elevate a crossbow very far before the stock blocks the view of the target, unless it is close.
So the crossbow might shoot a bolt 800yds, but you wouldn't be aiming through a telescopic sight... just pointing uphill enough to get a good distance.
You beat me to it by 2 minutes! :)

For a scope it is possible but you'd need special raised scope mount with built in incline (there are such things for extreme long range rifle shooting), which would render it useless for close ranges. Or a flip up ladder style rearsight like on many old bolt action military rifles.
 
D

Deleted member 7654

Guest
Many crossbow sights are mounted just above the arrow/bolt, rather like a telescopic sight on a rifle. It isn't possible to elevate a crossbow very far before the stock blocks the view of the target, unless it is close.
So the crossbow might shoot a bolt 800yds, but you wouldn't be aiming through a telescopic sight... just pointing uphill enough to get a good distance.
That presupposes the owner has neither the wit, skill or funds to remedy this fault.
Del
 

4d4m

Active member
That presupposes the owner has neither the wit, skill or funds to remedy this fault.
Del
I'd normally expect anyone intending to shoot any projectile device in an unmarked range competition would have taken time to familiarise themselves with their chosen device's trajectory up to the maximum allowed range. :)

Two guys at our NFAS club use them; incredible arrow/bolt speed but the range is poor.
All of us had a go at a boss up a steep hill about 70 yards away. All recurvers missed. The crossbow couldn’t get to it (three bolts shot) and missed; guess which bow landed an arrow right in the middle? Yep, me and my compound bow.
Did the bolts land short or go over the top? Steep angles both up and down require less holdover because gravity is acting at an angle so has less effect on the trajectory, and this is quite hard for some people to grasp.
 

geoffretired

Supporter
Supporter
I remember struggling to get my head round that one. It took ages for the idea to sink in.
Then I considered the steepest uphill shots. The arrow goes straight up and slows down very quickly as gravity is dragging in back. But it doesn't drag the arrow off line causing it to fly in the curve we see when shooting at ordinary targets. It travels in a straight line. If you used your indoor sight mark, you would miss but not by much.
and this is quite hard for some people to grasp.
 

4d4m

Active member
I remember struggling to get my head round that one. It took ages for the idea to sink in.
Then I considered the steepest uphill shots. The arrow goes straight up and slows down very quickly as gravity is dragging in back. But it doesn't drag the arrow off line causing it to fly in the curve we see when shooting at ordinary targets. It travels in a straight line. If you used your indoor sight mark, you would miss but not by much.
It might be slowing it down a little quicker than air resistance on its own would do, but not by much. By a max of 10m/s for a second of travel. (10m/s^2). The major point is it's not moving the arrow as much off line,
 

geoffretired

Supporter
Supporter
Yes, indeed. I mentioned gravity in order to remind us that it is still working on the arrow but more to slow it down rather than pulling it off line which is normally what we see.
Shooting uphill makes us expect the arrow to slow down more than normal and need to aim higher to counter act that.
 

Kernowlad

Supporter
Supporter
Yep the bolts landed short. About five recurvers tried. All shot at least three arrows. All have been at it for a while.

Crossbow bolts leave the weapon at a far faster rate but the simple physics of a shorter, more stout bolt means they don’t fly as far.

Think longbows vs crossbows in several major battles.
 
D

Deleted member 7654

Guest
" Crossbow bolts leave the weapon at a far faster rate but the simple physics of a shorter, more stout bolt means they don’t fly as far."
Sorry, that's just wrong... :(
The shorter bolt is more aerodynamic... several learned papers have been written on this.
The main reason the longbow out-ranged the crossbow is the short draw length of the crossbow, which necessitates very high poundage to get anywhere near the same velocity. The steel crossbow prod helped a bit, but it's high mass meant the lighter battlefield crossbows were still short on range but they could shoot a very heavy bolt. It was only the really heavy seige crossbows that could out-range the longbow.
This post from my blog explains further:-
Grain/gram Scales, Crossbows, Speed and Power
Del
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Kernowlad

Supporter
Supporter
Okay fair enough but on this particular day, the compound bow won.
I love their power and accuracy even if they are considered the devils work by many.
 

AndyW

Well-known member
I remember struggling to get my head round that one. It took ages for the idea to sink in.
Then I considered the steepest uphill shots. The arrow goes straight up and slows down very quickly as gravity is dragging in back. But it doesn't drag the arrow off line causing it to fly in the curve we see when shooting at ordinary targets. It travels in a straight line. If you used your indoor sight mark, you would miss but not by much.
Roughly you just shoot the horizontal distance. It's not quite that simple for extreme angles - there's a good article/paper on it somewhere with the maths. The arrow/bolt doesn't know where it is, it just drops earthward at about 10m/s/s over the time it's in the air relative to line it was shot at. Same as any ballistic arc.
 

AndyW

Well-known member
Okay fair enough but on this particular day, the compound bow won.
I love their power and accuracy even if they are considered the devils work by many.
Amen, but we will always come second to someone who has mastered crossbow. Watch a good one shoot and just keep shaking your head - they don't miss. Others may have done it but XB is the only style I've known max a field course.
 

geoffretired

Supporter
Supporter
Yes, the horizontal distance is the key. I did get my head round it eventually, it is so strange when first told about it, that I had to start thinking from the ground up. all over again. In cases like this it is sometimes easier to know nothing; rather than having to change long established ideas that were wrong.
Shooting uphill must be harder; just as it is riding a bike up a hill. So we need to aim higher to counter act the extra struggle. That is how I felt about it when I first thought it through. Usually we see the distance as further ,too; because the hypotenuse of the triangle is the longest side etc etc.
Logic is fine up to a point so long as we take all the variables into account and not just the ones we are familiar with.
How many beginners automatically raise their sight if the arrows land too low?
 
Top