Thoughts from a Luddite

[Jpchilton]

#5283

We delight in criticizing the compound bow community for being too modern, too non-traditional, too technical. But now I see exactly the same thing happening in our traditional archery culture. It is especially obvious in the area of arrows, particularly carbon arrows. So many now seem obsessed with arrow technology – heavy vs. light, FOC, EFOC, etc. – that it has almost reached the point of having to redefine “traditional.” And you, Dr. Ashby, appear to be the impetus behind the movement.

Sorry, I have shot stickbows for almost 40 years now and seemed to have gotten along fine with cedar, then aluminum, arrows. We old guys discussed shot placement, hunting tactics, and generally swapped war stories. Never had to get involved with the mathematics and physics of the thing. I am concerned that the technological trend I see will erode the simplicity, the pure fun, of traditional archery and bowhunting.

[james gilmer]

#39178

It helps me be a better archer when I have the facts. I have been shooting traditional bows for 35 years. I am much better archer now then I ever was because of guys like Dr. Ashby. I am not smart enough to figure some of this stuff out. Thankfully others are and are willing to share their knowledge. When I shoot well, I also have more fun. Ignorance is not bliss.

[Mark Turton]

#39861

We are only rediscovering knowledge that evolved with the bow and was lost in technology.

Early arrows were all weight forward naturally tapering wood with stone points, cast bronze, forged steel it’s only since the rediscovery of our tradition and the inclusion of modern materials that these things have become topics for debate.

Once understood and accepted it all becomes common sense and I for one wonder why this was not a corner stone of traditional bowhunting and archery, undoubtedly it now is but only thanks to Doc Ashby and his comrades for all their hard work.

As for compound shooters, they will continue to pursue faster bows, flatter trajectories, limbs of unobtainium. Some, and I’m one of them will one day look at the mechanical abomination they hold and wonder why? all I need is a simple bow, fieldcraft, and to enjoy hunting.

Not sure if that’s a reply to your post or a sermon.

[Homer]

#40295

Mr. Chilton — I defer to the two responses above as being far more reasoned and briefer responses to your logical but perhaps misplaced sentiments expressed here. With all due respect to your feelings and experiences, if all humanithy for all time had stuck with the “it if ain’t broke, don’t fix it,” philosophy, we’d still be in the stone age. And I must admit, I think I’d prefer that overall :D. But really, as Ashby or one of his growing number of follows once put it so perfectly for me, “Sure, the old ways work well. These new ways just work better.” I apologize, with all due politeness, since I DO understand what you are saying, but I just can’t agree with comparing Ashby’s and my own efforts to make us more efficient killers, thereby reducing wounding loss, with the modern high-tech obsession with whatever is newest, easier, lets us shoot farther, etc., and incidentally more expensive (surely the industry can’t have a hand in this? :twisted:). The two–Ashyb studies and modern hi-tech so-called bowhunting), in my mind and experience have no comparison. And even if you, James, have figured out how to kill without loss of game no matter how badly things may go wrong after the arrow is released, I fail to see what would motivate your unease with those of us who have not had such “perfect world” experiences in our hunting and are trying our best to do better. I have no real “argument” with you here and sure aren’t trying to make this personal, but rather just trying to explain “our” point of view. I have hunted through a long life and have always felt deep pain when i screw up and cause an animal to suffer to go to waste (though coyotes may disagree with “waste.”) Yet I’ve had too many broke hearts when things don’t go right, and after giving Dr. Ashby’s 30 study results a fair shake, I absolutely see a positive differnce. I’m just glad we are able to discuss these important and pre-website mostly unspoke issues here in a mutually respectful way. At least I hope I come across that way. Homer

[Ireland]

#40296

jpchilton wrote: We delight in criticizing the compound bow community for being too modern, too non-traditional, too technical. But now I see exactly the same thing happening in our traditional archery culture. It is especially obvious in the area of arrows, particularly carbon arrows. So many now seem obsessed with arrow technology – heavy vs. light, FOC, EFOC, etc. – that it has almost reached the point of having to redefine “traditional.” And you, Dr. Ashby, appear to be the impetus behind the movement.

Sorry, I have shot stickbows for almost 40 years now and seemed to have gotten along fine with cedar, then aluminum, arrows. We old guys discussed shot placement, hunting tactics, and generally swapped war stories. Never had to get involved with the mathematics and physics of the thing. I am concerned that the technological trend I see will erode the simplicity, the pure fun, of traditional archery and bowhunting.

Why did you make the move from cedar to aluminum? That alone would be considered high tech in some traditional circles…

Ireland

[Stumpkiller]

#41062

I take a very Luddite approach to bowhunting myself. I enjoy shooting recurve bows from the 60’s and 70’s and use wood arrows (only recently switching to Douglas fir from cedar for a couple of my heavier bows). “Traditional” is a very vague concept. The beauty of it is – it is your choice, your decision. So long as we are not bound by game laws or regulations we can use whatever appeals to our own interpretation of tradition. For some it is self-wood bows and knapped flint tips with natural fiber string. For others carbon fiber and foam materials and cutting-edge innovation.

I’m happy to have a choice and enjoy setting the challenge at my own level of satisfaction. If I was headed off for Africa I’d be all over Mr. Ashby’s work. I am happy enough that his findings bear out my choice of single-blade cut-on-contact broadheads on a relatively heavy arrow. Ain’t it a gas Douglas fir grows that way? I appreciate simplicity in my bowhunting and don’t want to be bothered with tables, calculators, center-of-balance calculations, etc. I go for smooth flight and good grouping from what I know to be a heavy-enough bow for my quarry from historical evidence. “Tradition”, after all, is what is handed down to you. Not what you discover through experimentation or research.

[Jpchilton]

#41081

Sorry Homer, Ireland, Stumpkiller, but when I see so-called traditional bowhunter agonizing over a percentage point EOC, it strikes me as having gone too far out on the technological limb. There is a point, which I think has been passed, where “more efficient” actually becomes “easier.” I think that easier translates into a trend that harms traditional archery/bowhunting.

Ireland, I moved from cedar to aluminum many years ago, don’t remember exactly when, mostly because they are “easier.” Oops! But at least the move was made without discussion among my local bowhunting community.

Incidentally, I don’t appreciate whoever burned my barn and shot the dogs off my front porch.

[Stumpkiller]

#41405

jpchilton wrote:
Incidentally, I don’t appreciate whoever burned my barn and shot the dogs off my front porch.

If they weren’t pinned with wooden arrows it wasn’t me.

[epenfold]

#41722

While I dont alawys agree that a scientific studie can be considered traditional, or alawys agree that dr ashbys conclusions work best for my equipment or my shooting style. I do have to say that in an ever growing political arena anything that can help a bowhunter have a more efficient kill and less wounded losses the longer we will be able to hunt with a stick and string.

[tom-wisconsin]

#41814

Pothunter wrote: We are only rediscovering knowledge that evolved with the bow and was lost in technology.
Early arrows were all weight forward naturally tapering wood with stone points, cast bronze, forged steel.

Pothunter is right early man figured all this out a long time ago. Dr. Ashby just confirmed the old ways were correct.

[Stumpkiller]

#42351

I would note that what used to be described as “bird points” in the lithic record are now generally agreed to be the heads used on the largest game – bison, moose, etc. It’s easier to get penetration with a small head on a heavy shaft than a large head on a light one if the total weight is the same.

And, as the prehistoric bow evolved, the points got progressively smaller.

[Mark Turton]

#43062

The whole subject of hunting in prehistory is fascinating and for me the experts opinions are just that, opinions, we will never know for sure how the weapons and methods evolved but it’s great to imagine and occasionally attempt.

I’ve seen some reproductions of the arrows as Charlie describes them with flint cutting edges bonded with resin along the shaft behind the head, it is believed that these would have increased trauma causing the animal to bleed out more quickly, I can imagine that it would produce a great blood trail.

Sort of related, June 06 I was shown a fantastic collection of fishing gear reproduced by a guy in Wales whose name I can’t remember so apologize for not being able to attribute these to him but everything in the picture was made with natural material, fibre and sinew.

[Bruce Smithhammer]

#43326

Information is just that – information. One can take it or leave it, integrate it, or choose to ignore it and stick with what they like. But I’m pretty sure that throughout “traditional” history, hunters have always exchanged information about potential improvements, be it shaft material, bow material, point shape/material, dimensions, proportions, etc.

I understand your point about taking it too far, and getting overly-complicated about it for sure, and I lean the same way. I’m not someone who tends to get really wrapped up in the technical details. But who’s to say what is ‘too much’ for someone else?

To me, it’s kind of like fly fishing – you can keep it really simple and just have fun, or you can also really geek out if you want to. And some of that, I think has more to do with the tendencies of your personality type and what you are looking to get out of this whole experience. Some look for an escape and a return to simplicity, some love nothing more than delving deep into technical geekery with everything they do.

Either way, it’s all good. Take the info, or leave it. As long as you’re having fun.

[David Coulter]

#43726

Hi Guys,
I’m pretty new at this archery stuff, but happy to say I’m pretty excited about it. I like to read and I find a lot of this new information from Dr. Ashby and others very interesting. I like to read what works for others so I don’t have to reinvent the wheel on my own path. I also look around and see some very successful hunters using basically the same stuff that have been available for half a century.
The most important thing is that we all choose our own path within the parameters of a safe and ethical hunt. The last thing I want to read in these columns is someone’s opinion about how others are wrong for their choice of weapon and broadhead, especially when they take the attitude of superiority in their choice.
We all have to find what brings us success, in terms of how we define that ourselves, again as long as it’s safe and ethical to the hunt and to the animal.

[Ireland]

#43832

dwcphoto wrote: Hi Guys,
I’m pretty new at this archery stuff, but happy to say I’m pretty excited about it. I like to read and I find a lot of this new information from Dr. Ashby and others very interesting. I like to read what works for others so I don’t have to reinvent the wheel on my own path. I also look around and see some very successful hunters using basically the same stuff that have been available for half a century.
The most important thing is that we all choose our own path within the parameters of a safe and ethical hunt. The last thing I want to read in these columns is someone’s opinion about how others are wrong for their choice of weapon and broadhead, especially when they take the attitude of superiority in their choice.
We all have to find what brings us success, in terms of how we define that ourselves, again as long as it’s safe and ethical to the hunt and to the animal.

You might be new “at this archery stuff” but your post is outstanding. How often is the other guy “wrong” because he doesn’t shoot “my” bow, “my” broadhead, or he simply hasn’t been hunting for half a century like “I” have.

Thanks for reminding all of us…

Ireland

[Homer]

#43856

Yes! Photo and Ireland, let’s not talk about “what the other guy does wrong,” but rather about “what seems to me is the best way and I’m open-minded enough to give something new a try”! Not about “what has always worked for me (uhh, if we don’t get into uncomfy detail)” but rather “what the best evidence says will make me a more lethal, thus more humane and ethical hunter. Goodgoodgood stuff, great positive open attide that befits traditional thinking, thank you.(In fact I may have made a mistake myself, once, long ago, according to some women in my life. But darned if I can remember what it was! :P) Homer

[David Coulter]

#43908

Ireland, Homer,
Thanks for your words. I’m having a blast with it all, learning a lot. That’s what it’s all about.
peace, dwc

[tom-wisconsin]

#44067

Welcom to the site Photo. These are a great bunch of guys and gals.

[Mark Turton]

#44227

(In fact I may have made a mistake myself, once, long ago, according to some women in my life. But darned if I can remember what it was! :P)

Homer if the women in your life think you made a mistake ‘once’ your doing something right.

Mark.

[JasonJelinek]

#44719

If one wants to be a Luddite, where in the evolution of arms should one choose to be a Luddite?

1. Stone points with a wooden/horn/sinew bow made with stone tools?
2. Bronze points with a wooden/horn/sinew bow made with bronze tools?
3. Steel points with a wooden/horn/sinew bow made with steel tools?
4. Steel points on a fiberglass/carbon shaft with a fiberglass/carbon bow?

Is there really any functional difference between 1-4? I say no, but there are material differences and manufacture techniques. You still have to pull the string back to the bow’s full weight and let the string go. The choice is personal and really not very functionally different.

If you look at Sioux arrows made with steel points (around 1850-1860) you’ll find that they match up very well with Ashby’s findings (3:1 length:width ratio), high FOC. Once they got to steel, they changed their head design to take advantage of the material.

[Stumpkiller]

#44751

Well, Brother Ludd was opposed to automated machinery – not hand operated looms, lathes, etc.. So any operation that requires skilled labor is fine so long as it is human labor and not automated processes.

Guess wood/fiberglass bows are OK but likely metal broadheads would be bad ju-ju. I’ll have to find out if my Magnus and Stos are hand stamped & spot welded. 😉

[JasonJelinek]

#44772

Stumpkiller,

Thanks I looked up Luddites and if you are a Luddite, fiberglass/wood bows made in the 60’s and 70’s are a no no. They (Bears and Pearsons) were made in a factory in a large by machines. Basically any component (fiberglass) made in a factory would be a no-no. That’s taking it a bit far I know but something good to keep in perspective.

[Stumpkiller]

#44819

Because we hand craft our bows one at a time . . .

That’s from the current Damon Howatt website (Martin traditional bows). Power-tools can still be hand tools.

I really don’t know if Bear and Ben Pearson were running on an automated “duplication” process or if it was hands on. I worked at a foundry & valve fabricator in 1980 and I can tell you that the pattern shop and casting operation there was still 100% done by human hands. The guys that worked in the wood pattern shop were artists as well as master craftsmen. I bet any one of them could have done up a riser that would be astounding.

Bear was turning out 1,200 recurves at Grayling per day towards the end there. I would have loved a plant tour to see the process.

[Ireland]

#44875

JasonJelinek wrote: Stumpkiller,

Thanks I looked up Luddites and if you are a Luddite, fiberglass/wood bows made in the 60’s and 70’s are a no no. They (Bears and Pearsons) were made in a factory in a large by machines. Basically any component (fiberglass) made in a factory would be a no-no. That’s taking it a bit far I know but something good to keep in perspective.

Jason,
I had to look it up also…”In modern usage, Luddite is a term describing those opposed to industrialization, automation, COMPUTERS, or new technologies in general”. I guess that will be the last of the postings from JP and Stumpkiller. The “Enoch” (ie Luddite term) has come down on their head…

Ireland

[Homer]

#45022

Ah, this is getting fun. I was waiting for someone to comment on the term “Luddite.” My own take on it is based largely on Edward Abbey’s writing, and for Ed, Ned Ludd was a hero. As the story goes, old Nedd tossed a wooden shoe into the machinery, which wrecked it, in protest of all the traditional cobbler jobs the machinery replaced. This was during the early stages of the Industrial Revolution and, as I have always understood it, among the first rumblings of what would within the century become the Labor Movement. So, any arguments about whether the term means “traditionalism” or “loyalty to old ways” aside, to Abbey and thus to me, a Luddite is not one who is against “progress,” but rather, one who is against “industrial efficiency” replacing human dignity. Who would of ever thought this simple trad archery stuff could get so complicated? So much of what is taken today as differences in opinion, in fact is no more than different understandings of the words we use to communicate, aka semantics. But now we have a whole nuther thread … sorry. Holmes

[Stumpkiller]

#45057

IrelandJason wrote: I had to look it up also…”In modern usage, Luddite is a term describing those opposed to industrialization, automation, COMPUTERS, or new technologies in general”. I guess that will be the last of the postings from JP and Stumpkiller. The “Enoch” (ie Luddite term) has come down on their head…

Ireland

Nah. Read it again: I specifically said:

I take a very Luddite approach to bowhunting myself. I enjoy shooting recurve bows from the 60’s and 70’s and use wood arrows (only recently switching to Douglas fir from cedar for a couple of my heavier bows). “Traditional” is a very vague concept. The beauty of it is – it is your choice, your decision. So long as we are not bound by game laws or regulations we can use whatever appeals to our own interpretation of tradition. For some it is self-wood bows and knapped flint tips with natural fiber string. For others carbon fiber and foam materials and cutting-edge innovation.

I didn’t say in every aspect of my life. Do what you like and I will too. 😀

I’m a bowhunter. I don’t pick fights . . .

. . . I kill you silently without alerting you first.

[Ireland]

#45086

Stumpkiller wrote: [quote=IrelandJason]I had to look it up also…”In modern usage, Luddite is a term describing those opposed to industrialization, automation, COMPUTERS, or new technologies in general”. I guess that will be the last of the postings from JP and Stumpkiller. The “Enoch” (ie Luddite term) has come down on their head…

Ireland

Nah. Read it again: I specifically said:

I take a very Luddite approach to bowhunting myself. I enjoy shooting recurve bows from the 60’s and 70’s and use wood arrows (only recently switching to Douglas fir from cedar for a couple of my heavier bows). “Traditional” is a very vague concept. The beauty of it is – it is your choice, your decision. So long as we are not bound by game laws or regulations we can use whatever appeals to our own interpretation of tradition. For some it is self-wood bows and knapped flint tips with natural fiber string. For others carbon fiber and foam materials and cutting-edge innovation.

I didn’t say in every aspect of my life. Do what you like and I will too. 😀

I’m a bowhunter. I don’t pick fights . . .

. . . I kill you silently without alerting you first.

Stumpkiller,

I didn’t read your post as careful as I should have. My fault…May the Enoch fall down on my head!!!

I owe you an Iowa whitetail hunt…

Ireland

[David Coulter]

#45111

Ireland,
Maybe you can find a way to insult me, too. I would love an Iowa whitetail hunt.
Keep writing folks, I’ll keep reading. dwc

[Bruce Smithhammer]

#45151

Homer wrote: So, any arguments about whether the term means “traditionalism” or “loyalty to old ways” aside, to Abbey and thus to me, a Luddite is not one who is against “progress,” but rather, one who is against “industrial efficiency” replacing human dignity.

I always enjoy your posts Homer (and I’m a big fan of ‘ol Ed). But I’d respectfully put forth that no one, and certainly not any inanimate machine – can take one’s dignity away, unless they let it. It’s not like pre-industrial life was full of ‘dignity’ by most accounts, except in the most romantic tellings of it. I own both a couple trad bows and a laptop. Love ’em both, but if it came down to one or the other, rest assured it would be the former (dignity intact..).

And I’m really enjoying this thread…

[JasonJelinek]

#46020

This has been a fun one! It made me look up Luddite, I will be able to use it correctly from now on.

[Ireland]

#46039

JasonJelinek wrote: This has been a fun one! It made me look up Luddite, I will be able to use it correctly from now on.

This has kind of turned into a vocabulary/history lesson hasn’t it? Never too old to increase ones vocabulary…

Ireland

[Stumpkiller]

#46239

The best part of the Internet and forums is it gets us together from all parts of the country.

The worst part is the tone of voice is just what you read into it and you can’t see the devilish grin or twinkle in the eye of the other posters. I hope no one has taken any of my comments as insulting or intolerant. I use what I use and don’t expect anyone else should do the same. The great news is that a lot of folks seem to and Traditional Bowhunter has given us a meeting place and voice.

Anyone here is welcome to join me on a hunt or stump shoot. 😀

[Ireland]

#46869

Stumpkiller wrote: The best part of the Internet and forums is it gets us together from all parts of the country.

The worst part is the tone of voice is just what you read into it and you can’t see the devilish grin or twinkle in the eye of the other posters. I hope no one has taken any of my comments as insulting or intolerant. I use what I use and don’t expect anyone else should do the same. The great news is that a lot of folks seem to and Traditional Bowhunter has given us a meeting place and voice.

Anyone here is welcome to join me on a hunt or stump shoot. 😀

I for one, have always found your posts informative and well written. Never have I taken your comments in a negative way at all. My ATTEMPT at humor some times could be viewed as being a little sarcastic. Never was that my mission…Trad Bow is a wonderful place for all of us to share our experiences, thoughts, and adventures. You are the “real deal” Stumpkiller!!!

Got to go…I’m taking down tree stands today…Best wishes

Ireland

[Author]

Posts