[Bruce Smithhammer]

in reply to: What's in your daypack? #34336

David Petersen wrote: Jim, assuming that’s you in the photo … did you catch a bullet in your teeth?

Some of us eat Cliff bars in the field, Jim just eats a toof know and then.

[Bruce Smithhammer]

in reply to: A club for those of us without any back country #34334

Well said, and welcome to the forum.

[Bruce Smithhammer]

in reply to: String maker suggestions #34333

David Petersen wrote:

I left B50 after getting tired of re-tuning due to endless stretching.

Agreed.

SBD makes a fine string. Check out Rick Barbee as well, and Dan Clum over @ Rocky Mountain Specialty also makes great strings.

[Bruce Smithhammer]

in reply to: The Trad Knife Thread #33112

sinawalli wrote: Working with G10 is awful! Incredibly stinky, to the point of sickening! Dust is nasty too. I wear coveralls, respirator, dust proof goggles and a scarf. Everything stinks when I’m done. In summer, I can open the garage doors, not too bad then, but winter, it stinks for awhile!

Yeah, that’s kind of what I’d heard. Good on ya for sticking with it!

sinawalli wrote:

I really like that knife pictured in your post! Wood is beautiful! Good score!

Thanks! Wait till you see its big brother….:wink:

[Bruce Smithhammer]

in reply to: The Trad Knife Thread #32895

Thanks for reviving this thread, and nice work on both of those knives. That Helle looks like it would be a heckuva skinner! How do you find working with G10?

I recently picked up a knife from Lon Humphrey, a little beauty called a “Whiteteil” in dark curly maple handles. 6″ overall, with a 2.5″ cutting edge, 1084 steel.

Lon makes all of his knives the traditional way – by hand with a hammer and forge, and every one is a little different. Here’s a little video of Lon at work:

[Bruce Smithhammer]

in reply to: What ya got goin? #32106

Felt like spring here today! Had to get out and close the day good n’ proper:

[Bruce Smithhammer]

in reply to: Accuracy and heavy heads #31632

Arrows, whether high FOC or not, aren’t inherently “accurate.” They are only accurate in relation to the mechanism, and the variables (bow, release, shooting technique, etc) that launch them. In other words, a well-tuned low FOC arrow and a well-tuned EFOC arrow, with all other variables being consistent, have an equal potential to be “accurate” within commonly accepted hunting range shots.

However, a high FOC arrow has more inherent stability in flight and will track better when real world factors come into play, such as wind, than a low FOC arrow. Even more so if fletching is reduced as well, which reduces windage. In this way, it helps improve consistent accuracy, assuming everything else is tuned properly and technique is consistent.

Increasing FOC is really about improving penetration, but stability in flight is a beneficial by-product, and stability helps with consistency, which benefits accuracy.

I hope that helps answer the question.

[Bruce Smithhammer]

in reply to: What's in your daypack? #31109

David Petersen wrote: You wouldn’t want to know, because it’s probably illegal in your state. 😆

[Bruce Smithhammer]

in reply to: poll on release #30618

I think that whether one chooses to shoot split or 3-under needs to be placed within the overall context of how that person shoots. Many gap shooters I know prefer 3-under, and I can see how it works well for that shooting style.

I shoot split, for the reasons that Steve mentions.

But I wouldn’t say that one way or the other is inherently more accurate – either way can be very accurate, as many before us have shown.

[Bruce Smithhammer]

in reply to: Chain saw in a can #30615

I played around with one of those a long time ago, but found them awkward to use. I’m sure it could be handy if it was all you had, but like others have said, there are some very good lightweight folding saws that, while they may not be as compact, are a lot more effective. Love my Laplander…

[Bruce Smithhammer]

in reply to: Southwest DIY Javelina Hunts? #30595

Ha – thanks, folks. He’s definitely one of the most entertaining dogs I’ve ever owned. No shortage of personality.

[Bruce Smithhammer]

in reply to: Anything Positive @ This Winter? #29696

Somewhere in western Wyoming yesterday morning…

[Bruce Smithhammer]

in reply to: What's in your daypack? #29693

R2 wrote:

A friend, now a dealer for Vortex, fell in love with their glass. He ordered $32K for his store. That’s a lotta love!:D

Yep – short of dropping a a major investment on Leupolds or Swaros, Vortex have the highest quality optics I’ve found. I used to work for a Vortex dealer – their customer service is excellent as well.

[Bruce Smithhammer]

in reply to: What's in your daypack? #29644

R2 wrote:

I will probably add my recently purchased Vortex 10×32 monocular so the next time the sun comes up and my binocs are way back in the truck…………

I’ll be curious to hear how that monocular works for you after you’ve had it a bit, R2. I’ve been really happy with my Vortex Talon 8x42s. Always been curious about their monoculars, since there are some situations where hauling a sizable pair of binos isn’t really necessary, but I wouldn’t mind having a more compact, lighter-weight option just in case. I believe you can even mount those on a small tripod if you want?

[Bruce Smithhammer]

in reply to: Father and son longbows #29368

Wow – how great is that?!? Hopefully both those bows will be passed down someday, and the tradition continued.

[Author]

Posts