Compound or recurve?
 

Hey guys! I have a dilemma about what to buy, a compound bow or recurve. The compound would be a Hoyt Vtec and the recurve a Chek-mate Falcon. The thing is the Hoyt would be $900 CDN bare and the Chek-mate only $300 CDN. Since I'm going to get a block target with a bow the compound would probably total $1500[&:], the recurve $500. But I could also use a treestand, binoculars, etc. So what path would you take, modern or traditional?

Thanks for your help,

Matt

RE: Compound or recurve?
 

If you can kill a deer with the recurve, then have it. It is what you feel good with. If you have doubts about your ability to take a deer with a recurve then you need to consider this point. Do I have the time it takes to be come a good shooter with a recurve?, If so then go for it.

RE: Compound or recurve?
 

Tough choice I keep saying I'm going to go to a recurve or a long bow next but haven't built the stones yet to do it. Good luck with your choice. Mike

RE: Compound or recurve?
 

I like my compunds, but I think it would be a real achievement being confident with a recurve. I would like to get one in the next couple of years. I noticed you live in the same town as me. Weird.

RE: Compound or recurve?
 

recurve

RE: Compound or recurve?
 

I remember standing at that crossroad seven years ago. I chose the longbow and never looked back. Follow your heart...

RE: Compound or recurve?
 

That is weird I thought you were the only person in that town.:eek:

RE: Compound or recurve?
 

There is nothing wrong with a c-pound bow, but for me myself and I. I just love my Long Bow and my Recurve. they just fit me better. i hung up my c-pound bow and have not looked back. trad shooting is great It put the love for archery back in my heart there in nothing like the simplicity of a trad bow just a stick and string to make the heart sing. It is amazing watching the flight of the arrow and then all the sudden it actually hits where you were looking the feeling of pride and accomplishment are incredible. so my vote is for the recurve if you have the time to invest in it. It is the greatedt thing. Good luck with any bow just get out shoot and have fun that is what it is all about.

RE: Compound or recurve?
 

If you want the challenge, then go with a recurve. BTW, I have a King Pawn (ChekMate) on order right now, should be here next month.

RE: Compound or recurve?
 

Not sure, but sounds like you are new to archery. NO offense, I just assume that since it appears you are buying different gear as well. If im wrong, im sorry for the assumption. With this assumption, Id go with the compound. Its easier to learn. If you are not new, and looking for a new challange, Id go with the recurve. I shot all bows, and find hunting with a recurve or long bow is much more challenging. The first traditional kill is by far the most exciting. ;)

I love compounds, but have as great of a love for traditionals.

RE: Compound or recurve?
 

Thanks for the help guys, maybe I just might go recurve. I am also kinda researching this for school so do recurve positives outweigh compound positives;).

Burnie-No, I don't shoot a bow yet even though I hunt with an Excalibur crossbow.

ONbuckhunter-I don't live IN Drayton, I live just outside of it on Sideroad 12.

RE: Compound or recurve?
 

I would say a compound out weighs a recurve in every aspect. That would be in consideration towards ease and accuracy. A compound is very easy to learn compared to a recurve. Or from what I witness. I grew up with recurves, and learned on a recurve/long bow and going to compounds took me about a day or two to get to where I had good groups out to 20 yards. I cant say Ive seen that with people going from compounds to recurves. Compounds are very forgiving. You cant over draw or under draw a compound. Well you can, but it will let you know. Its also much easier to hold a compound, especially since some have as much as 85% let off.

RE: Compound or recurve?
 

How about getting a shot off quickly, or shooting at moving targets such as pheasants, ducks, fish, etc.?

RE: Compound or recurve?
 

It does take years of practice and experiance to accomplish those tasks.Im simple saying in the case of someone wanting to get a bow and start shooting at a target.

RE: Compound or recurve?
 

I understand what you mean. And I should have read your initial post a bit better. It does take a while to develope form and then accuracy with traditioanl equipment, but when it happens, it can be even more deadly then a compound in a lot of situations, especially within 30 yards.

RE: Compound or recurve?
 

(generally speaking)

compound is vastly more accurate. pick it up, shoot 10 minutes and you'll be good enough to hunt with.

they're that good

recurve/longbows take a lot of practice. Not as much money into them vs a high dollar compound either. not as accurate, by far



your choice in weapoins, just make sure the arrow goes where you want it to. I choose trad archery for the challenge. Compounds are no challenge to be accurate with for me.

RE: Compound or recurve?
 

hey AKinPA, you dont have to show us pics of robin hood

RE: Compound or recurve?
 

No problem. You are right about traditionals. Once the instinct sticks, you are a deadly weapon.

RE: Compound or recurve?
 

I gave up the compound last fall and picked up a chek-mate falcon and I have never being happier. The falcon is a fantastic recurve for the money and once you get form and learn the bow its alot more fun to hunt and shoot(just my opinion) more challenging but less to worry about on the technical side no sights to fiddle with no arrow rest to worry about.

If you go with the recurve you will never look back. As mentioned above with a compound once its set up and tuned you can be very effective with it in a very short time and hang it up for mths and pick it up before hunting season starts and be just as good, but with a recuve/longbow you have to practice all the time to keep your skills sharp enough to take game effectively. Good luck and have fun with whatever you choose.

RE: Compound or recurve?
 

I'd have to say that's a myth, you can spend $1,000 easy on a custom longbow or recurve. Check out Black Widow as an example, and they are not even completely hand made anymore.

RE: Compound or recurve?
 

Well said. But to show a few examples of what traditional can do, see below. Below is a picture of my son when he was eight (second year shooting) at 10 yards:





Here is him at 9:




And one at 10:



Below is a group of mine at25 yards, below at16 yards, the reason I'm showing these pictures is to show that it can be done with a little work:

RE: Compound or recurve?
 

Go with the one that doesn't have "training wheels" ;)

RE: Compound or recurve?
 

Ive never heard that one. I like it. Lol. I like them all with or without training wheels.

RE: Compound or recurve?
 

might just change my sig to say something to that effect. Dont get me wrong , I still use the compound about 2 times a yr. , but most of my hunting is done with my recurve.

RE: Compound or recurve?
 

BobCo19-65 A good compound setup = $750 or more and resale on it will be 1/2 that

True, new recurves and longbows can eclipse $1,000, and Lord knows I'd bought many bows in the past 3 years and fully know that, however buy a used Widow and you'll not lose hardly any if at all on it.

You won't buy a Mathews compound today and sell it in 6 months or a year without losing a LOT of its value

RE: Compound or recurve?
 

I agree, and my Adcock Longbow has actually appreciated from my buying price, not that I would ever sell. Especially since he has stopped taken orders a few years back and has no plans as of now to start again.

RE: Compound or recurve?
 

I don't want anyone whois new to archery and has been shooting for 10 minutes hunting anywhere near me. I don't have the time to hear them cry about how they can't find their deer. I know you're probably exaggerating but it definitely takes more than 10 minutes.

RE: Compound or recurve?
 

turtleshell no, I'm NOT exaggerating.

I can take any tuned compound and be accurate with it in 10 minute NO PROBLEM. I've seen every novice, never before shot a compound bow hunter go from never held or drawn a compound to shooting killing size groups.

Compounds are, by design, easy to shoot. Why do you think most bowhunters use them ? Very easy, and getting easier eash year.

Theres a reason for the letoff, the sights, the peeps, the drop away rests, the parallel limb technology, the bright fiber pins, the mechanical release, the short ATA and long brace height ........ all designed to be very easy to shoot, very easy to learn.

Its not a point to argue, its simply the truth of the matter.

RE: Compound or recurve?
 

Big Red, I shoot with alot of wheelie boys, and they dont like putting the first arrow into any target under twenty yards, because I will strip vanes of of them with my longbow, so Im going to have to disagree with rercurves and longbows being "Not as accurate, by far...".

Not to be a pain or anything, but Im going to have to go with turtleshell on this one. Yes, Im sure you can take "any tuned compound and be accurate..." but like turtleshell said, I doubt anyone with ten minutes of shooting experience could be ready for the woods.

Just my two cents...

RE: Compound or recurve?
 

Whitehair - if you shoot that good you should be pro because you're in the upper 1% of trad shooters being able to keep arrow diamter accuracy at 20 yards.

You cannot argue that compounds are built, by design, and stacked will all the accessories with 1 goal in mind - easy of shooting. That is a 100% absolute true. Manufacturers KNOW that 1 thing will ALWAYS sell - and that is to take a product and make it easier to use - and thats exactly where modern compounds are right now.

I understand the need for people who shoot compounds to think they're really doing something terribly hard - but its simply not true. Compound accuracy is as easy as an afternoon of practice with one. Hunting the deer is the hard part, not mastering how to shoot the arrows accurately.

RE: Compound or recurve?
 

I never disagreed that compounds werent made for superior accuracy, I know that. Thats why you see seperate classes for longbow/recurve/compounds in tourneys, because9 times out of 10 the compound is more accurate.

With that said, there are people like Howard Hill, Byron Ferguson, Paul Schafer, etc. who were/are amazing with a stickbow. I know ofno archer with a compound that has ever hit an baby asprin in the air, and of very few when the asprinwas still.Ishould probably retract my earlier statement and say"...can strip vanes..."because "will" should be reserved for the guys who do it every time. Sorry about that (A side note- Its easier for me to shoot at arrows, because it offers a small point to focus on, very important for insinctive shooting, thats why I strip vanes and feathers, "Aim Small, Miss Small"...)

We are going to have to agree to disagree on the "afternoon of practice idea".

Again, Im not trying to be a pain, everything above is my opinion, which we all know opinions are like...

RE: Compound or recurve?
 

It's really pretty simple. If youallyouwant isto camo up and play urban ninja, and make meat or hang horns on your wall with as little effort as possible, get the compound. If you want to experience what bowhunting was really meant to be, and actually feel like you accomplished something when you make meat or hang horns on the wall, get the recurve.

RE: Compound or recurve?
 

Whitehair - why do most bowhunters use a compound ?

Arthur P - I wasn't going to go THAT far but you are correct in your post

RE: Compound or recurve?
 

Great point of view Art!!!

I don't have a lot to add but this.

If you want slightly more of a challenge from a:

-gun, go to a crossbow
-crossbow, go to a compound rigged out
-rigged out compound, to shooting fingers and go with no sights
-compound shooting fingers and no sights, go to traditional archery
-traditional archery, maybe spears or something, I don't know

I would also add that my plan with my son was to persuade him to shoot traditional until the summer before he is able to big game hunt (another 3 years. I figured that if his accuracy was not good enough then, we would switch him to compound and I'm sure he would have more then enough time to become accurate. However, his progress has been very good and he is now shooting (age 11) a 40 pound Howard Hill longbow, which is legal poundage for deer in my state. Last night he shot a three inch group at ten yards (we took a picture, but I forgot to bring the camera with me). FWIW, we also switched him to lefty only three months ago. His 40 pound bow is only a month old and is twice as heavy as his self bow. So, I'm really scratching my head and saying why bother with the compound.

BTW, it's kind of nice to hear from some trad guys on this thread!

RE: Compound or recurve?
 

-gun, go to a crossbow
-crossbow, go to a compound rigged out
-rigged out compound, to shooting fingers and go with no sights
-compound shooting fingers and no sights, go to traditional archery
-SELF traditional archery, maybe spears or something, I don't know

Exacltly. Rifle hunters think the hunting is hard - until they go to a decked out compound. THey think that is hard, until they go to a stripped compound. Thats hard until they take up trad archery. They think thats hard until they get into self bows, arrows and knapped heads.

RE: Compound or recurve?
 

-spears to lassos
-lassos to wrestling
-wrestling to diplomacy :D

But seriously, I have taken upto traditional after only one kill with the compound, as have my sons. They are gearheads, so I would have thought they would love the highest tech of bow equipment - but they are fascinated with what a stick and string will do. We are not very good with them, but that is the addicting part. Hope I don't have to start making arrow shafts from twigs and carve flint arrowheads!

RE: Compound or recurve?
 

ok since you are new to archery i would go compund for about 5 years and then by a trad and work it in till yu get good enough to go hunting with it

RE: Compound or recurve?
 

Thanks fer the advice. We are actually into both high tech and traditional now. We will be elk hunting with our compounds this fall. I have yetto shoot a bulland there is no way I will waste an opportunity (if I get one) with a traditional bow until I after have bagged that first bull.

The only reason I took up archery was to hunt early during the elk rut. After that I got interested in the archery itself. Then I met a traditional hunter who scoffs at our compounds and got us started in traditional shooting.

RE: Compound or recurve?
 

In my best Tarzan voice while pounding my chest Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhh eeeeeeeeee ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh Aaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhh eeeeeeeeeeeahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

Some would have you believe the compound is sinful and somehow illegal and makes you less a man if you use it. Well, having started with recurves and having killed a bunch of deer with a recurve and then switching to a compound, I assure you it's not so. It's simply another tool to use to enjoy the hunt. The compound does make for a lot more dead animals that's for sure. But, it's not because it's a slam dunk. You still have to scout, practice and hunt. One thing it does do is probably make for a lot more humane kills and gets a lot more people in the woods than would otherwise be there. It allows kids, women all sorts of people the opportunity to enjoy the hunt with the expectations they truly can kill something. That's why we hunt. Yes the recurve/long bow is more of a challenge. It also gives you lots more room to fail and tire of a sport if you don't have the guts or time to practice and drive on. I started with recurves when there wasn't anyone else in the woods. I suspect if there weren't compounds there wouldn't be many in the woodstoday, well I guarantee there wouldn't be as many as there are. I will also guarantee without the compound bowhunters and companies that make them, the anti's would probably have done away with bowhunting all together. We'd also be overrun with deer in the burbs more than we are. So yes one is more of a challenge. People shouldn't make it as a challenge to have you "CHOOSE SIDES", but they continue to do so. Well, I have a recurve too.I had the urge to go back to it againafter a couple decades of compounds, not as a replacement but another toy to play with. I can shoot it, but not nearly as well as my compound. I really haven't practiced enough since buying it to become that skilled, at least not to the standards I've set for myself as far s accuracy. If they took away my compound tomorrow I'd have no problem with it, other than I'd see it as the beginning of the end for bowhunting. It's not about choosing sides, it's about enjoy the sport as best you can with the limited time and other responsibilities you may have. If you have the time and are not in a hurry to become the great white hunter, I think the recurve or long bow is the best way to get the FEEL of archery. There is nothing much more pure than wrapping a tab with 3 fingers around a string and pulling it back. You have to learn the very basics to be even half good, like follow through, anchor etc. With a compound a lot of That FEEL is lost, but you can still have a heck of a lot of fun. Once you have that FEEL from a recurve you can shoot any bow the same way in a hurry if need be. So the decision is yours. Either will do the trick. You should have fun with either. It's suppose to be fun. If you choose the recurve just put some realistic limitations on yourself. When I started with a recurve I shot every day. I started in Feb and shot a deer in Nov with my self imposed limitations. Mine was 15 yards. The next year it was 20 and so on. Never did I get passed 30 yards with a recurve. Oh I could have probably killed something out there, but not with any degree of certaintee. It would have been luck

P.S. The early years of Davidmil[8D][8D][8D]

RE: Compound or recurve?
 

Exactly. A compound is mechanical and high tech and very accurate. Its a machine - draw it with a mechanical release, feel the 80% letoff, put the pins where you want the arrow to go, hold as long as you'd like and squeeze the trigger.

And thats fine, its not easy getting within 20-30 yard or more from a deer and have good shot opportunities.

Trad hunting is way, way different. Its not only getting within distance of a deer, much closer distance BTW, its also waiting for the shot, no holding back here, concentrating, no pins here, having the full weight of the draw, no mechanical devices at all ......... and that is the beauty of it.

davidmil is correct on many of his points. Compounds are easy to use, easy to attain accuracy with, and therefore they are the bowhunters choice. nothing wrong with that, but different.

Quote:

---

One thing it does do is probably make for a lot more humane kills and gets a lot more people in the woods than would otherwise be there. It allows kids, women all sorts of people the opportunity to enjoy the hunt with the expectations they truly can kill something

---

You know, that is the EXACT argument for crossbows, don't you ?