Technology
11-18-2003, 10:05 AM
#31
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Eastern PA USA
Posts: 1,398
RE: Technology
Redpath:
I think it is a case of " You will see what you are looking for." There are plenty of mediocre shooters shooting compounds and sticks.
I personally love to shoot trad. I have good days, when I can put groups into about a 3-4" circle at 20-25 yards. The problem is the next day, I can shoot terrible, and not know why.
IMO, shooting well without sights not only takes a lot of practice, it is a gift. Often those who shoot well without sights figure that anyone can do it if they can. This is rarely the case. The ablilty can be improved, but like athletic talent, hand-eye coordination, etc., some have more ability than others. After more than 30 years of trying to shoot instinctive, I know that I will never be able to shoot really well or really consistently that way. I still love to try, but haven' t hunted with a recurve for over 10 years because I am not sure enough of my abilities.[:' (]
I have been shooting a compound for hunting for a while now for exactly the reasons I have stated above. I can' t pre-draw and hold for minutes with 65% letoff, and I doubt I could with 80%. Now if you had 99%, I do think a lot of guys would do just that. I still think 99% letoff would be very hard to shoot consistently. It is harder for me to shoot well with 80% than 65%. I have proven that to myself over and over again with several bows. I can' t see where the single cam is any huge advantage or disadvantage to the hunter. They may be a little quieter, and that may help prevent " string jumping" , but otherwise, no big deal. None of the deer I shot (with 2-cam bows) seemed to react to the shot anyway. Fiber optic pins? I noticed quite a few years ago, that even the old Saunders T-dot pins were still bright enough to shoot with at quitting time, at least here in PA. I really like my 2 (soon to be 3) year old Bowtech, but I know that any deer I shoot with it, I am 99% likely to be able to shoot with my old Darton Viper as well.
Arthur, I have all the respect in the world for you. I wish I could shoot without sights they way you do. I do not really get the part where you extend the draw-hold-shoot thing all the way to a revolver though. I used to shoot a 44 Mag a lot. We could usually hit a 2-liter soda bottle at 100 yards, at least every other shot. If I had one of those in my treestand a few weeks ago, I would not have had to draw (half-way) and let down 3 times before shooting the doe. The revolver would have been infinitely easier, IMO.
IMO, Stealth Cams, trail timers, etc. are more along the lines of technology that may give the hunter a significant edge. If you know when the deer are in a certain spot, I think that would give you more of an edge than shooting a slightly quieter bow that is 20-30 fps faster than your old one. Getting or developing a great spot to hunt, and then putting your time in without ruining the place are still much more important than having the latest gear.
Once the fall comes, and my wife and all 3 sons start getting " ragweed season" allergies and colds, the wife gets overwhelmed with work, etc. I am lucky to get 2 evenings of hunting in per week. At that rate, I could even have the latest super bow that all the Mathews pros are shooting, $200 per dozen arrows, and even some of those $80 per 3 pack knifemaker broadheads, and it would not do me any good.
I think it is a case of " You will see what you are looking for." There are plenty of mediocre shooters shooting compounds and sticks.
I personally love to shoot trad. I have good days, when I can put groups into about a 3-4" circle at 20-25 yards. The problem is the next day, I can shoot terrible, and not know why.
IMO, shooting well without sights not only takes a lot of practice, it is a gift. Often those who shoot well without sights figure that anyone can do it if they can. This is rarely the case. The ablilty can be improved, but like athletic talent, hand-eye coordination, etc., some have more ability than others. After more than 30 years of trying to shoot instinctive, I know that I will never be able to shoot really well or really consistently that way. I still love to try, but haven' t hunted with a recurve for over 10 years because I am not sure enough of my abilities.[:' (]I have been shooting a compound for hunting for a while now for exactly the reasons I have stated above. I can' t pre-draw and hold for minutes with 65% letoff, and I doubt I could with 80%. Now if you had 99%, I do think a lot of guys would do just that. I still think 99% letoff would be very hard to shoot consistently. It is harder for me to shoot well with 80% than 65%. I have proven that to myself over and over again with several bows. I can' t see where the single cam is any huge advantage or disadvantage to the hunter. They may be a little quieter, and that may help prevent " string jumping" , but otherwise, no big deal. None of the deer I shot (with 2-cam bows) seemed to react to the shot anyway. Fiber optic pins? I noticed quite a few years ago, that even the old Saunders T-dot pins were still bright enough to shoot with at quitting time, at least here in PA. I really like my 2 (soon to be 3) year old Bowtech, but I know that any deer I shoot with it, I am 99% likely to be able to shoot with my old Darton Viper as well.
Arthur, I have all the respect in the world for you. I wish I could shoot without sights they way you do. I do not really get the part where you extend the draw-hold-shoot thing all the way to a revolver though. I used to shoot a 44 Mag a lot. We could usually hit a 2-liter soda bottle at 100 yards, at least every other shot. If I had one of those in my treestand a few weeks ago, I would not have had to draw (half-way) and let down 3 times before shooting the doe. The revolver would have been infinitely easier, IMO.
IMO, Stealth Cams, trail timers, etc. are more along the lines of technology that may give the hunter a significant edge. If you know when the deer are in a certain spot, I think that would give you more of an edge than shooting a slightly quieter bow that is 20-30 fps faster than your old one. Getting or developing a great spot to hunt, and then putting your time in without ruining the place are still much more important than having the latest gear.
Once the fall comes, and my wife and all 3 sons start getting " ragweed season" allergies and colds, the wife gets overwhelmed with work, etc. I am lucky to get 2 evenings of hunting in per week. At that rate, I could even have the latest super bow that all the Mathews pros are shooting, $200 per dozen arrows, and even some of those $80 per 3 pack knifemaker broadheads, and it would not do me any good.
11-18-2003, 10:13 AM
#32
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 9,175
RE: Technology
I wish I could shoot without sights they way you do. I do not really get the part where you extend the draw-hold-shoot thing all the way to a revolver though. I used to shoot a 44 Mag a lot. We could usually hit a 2-liter soda bottle at 100 yards, at least every other shot. If I had one of those in my treestand a few weeks ago, I would not have had to draw (half-way) and let down 3 times before shooting the doe. The revolver would have been infinitely easier, IMO.
A few years back I saw comments by one of Pennsylvania' s state legislators saying his son regularly shot deer at 75 yards with his compound. His point was if bows were that easy to shoot, then there wasn' t enough of a handicap to allow them a seperate season any more.
The point is, how far can we allow technology to advance and still be able to fend off these kinds of arguments?
11-18-2003, 10:16 AM
#33
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Kalamazoo Michigan
Posts: 41
RE: Technology
We had alot of the 3-D only guys with the same attitudes as the ones you' ve mentioned. I' ve seen them gripe until they were foaming at the mouth if a shot was set up where they had to kneel, bend at the waist, or otherwise get out of their straight up and down form.
P.S. I know you guys will be peeking to see the new entries in the *modern bow* category. [&:][>:].
11-18-2003, 10:17 AM
#34
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Central PA
Posts: 2,299
RE: Technology
What I' m worried about is " new" technologys' psychological effect on new hunters and people just looking for an easy out in sport. By this I mean people seeing a bow with 99% letoff and thinking that it will easier to kill a deer if you are able to hold a bow back forever. I think this may lead into other problems as well. Pushing things a little too far to get an arrow off at a buck and ultimately wounding it.
I think technology has its place and I love to see what the latest greatest thing on the market is. But sorry, something like a 99% letoff system is not any more different than a crossbow. If you can draw and hold an arrow while the deer is 75 yards away and slowly closing in, what difference would it make?
As I stated before, thats why its called primitave weapons season. I' m not saying my new Hoyt is primitave by any stretch of the imagination, but at least it does have the principle values that make our sport challenging and what it is today.
I think technology has its place and I love to see what the latest greatest thing on the market is. But sorry, something like a 99% letoff system is not any more different than a crossbow. If you can draw and hold an arrow while the deer is 75 yards away and slowly closing in, what difference would it make?
As I stated before, thats why its called primitave weapons season. I' m not saying my new Hoyt is primitave by any stretch of the imagination, but at least it does have the principle values that make our sport challenging and what it is today.
11-18-2003, 10:28 AM
#35
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Tulsa, Oklahoma
Posts: 1,051
RE: Technology
Well, maybe it should be them that all you (primitive bow) hunters should be mad at, and leave us (modern bow) hunters alone
I take my hat off to those that can shoot sticks, I' m not one of them.And I don' t really think this post was meant to divide traditional archers from modern archers. It originally was meant to show whether or not advancing technology actually benefits the average archer.
11-18-2003, 10:28 AM
#36
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Illinois
Posts: 1,862
RE: Technology
I am not opposed to all technological advances in the bowhunting arena. I am only opposed to advances (gear) that enable the wrong types to easily enter the sport, or gear that actually hinders accuracy unless being used by a person that is highly skilled in shooting and tuning.
I have no doubt that many of the shooters that are of the " yesterday" category are in conflict with many those of the " today" category because of differences in individual attitudes about what bowhunting is actually about.
It used to be that very little discussion occurred regarding gear; mostly about what was considered the best broadhead. The bow was considered the tool that you learned to use as skillfully as possible. The emphasis was on hunting skills. A hunt was an evaluation of what you knew or believed you knew about hunting deer. A kill was the verification of your skills.
Today, with too many, the emphasis is on flashy and rad gear, and the hunt is nothing more than a testing ground for the person' s tackle, and a kill is to validate the person' s outfit, not the person' s hunting skills.
You can verify the differing attitudes and trends by reading the forums on sites such as this one. With some people, they jump from bow to bow and/or from accessory so often and so posthaste you have a hard time keeping up with what bow and accessories he or she is presently using. The minute there is a new hype on the market, or someone claims to have made a kill only because of the bowstring he or she was using, the " I gotta have that new gear" person believes that Fed Express is not fast enough with delivery. In time, you no longer hear from many of these people.
I have no doubt that many of the shooters that are of the " yesterday" category are in conflict with many those of the " today" category because of differences in individual attitudes about what bowhunting is actually about.
It used to be that very little discussion occurred regarding gear; mostly about what was considered the best broadhead. The bow was considered the tool that you learned to use as skillfully as possible. The emphasis was on hunting skills. A hunt was an evaluation of what you knew or believed you knew about hunting deer. A kill was the verification of your skills.
Today, with too many, the emphasis is on flashy and rad gear, and the hunt is nothing more than a testing ground for the person' s tackle, and a kill is to validate the person' s outfit, not the person' s hunting skills.
You can verify the differing attitudes and trends by reading the forums on sites such as this one. With some people, they jump from bow to bow and/or from accessory so often and so posthaste you have a hard time keeping up with what bow and accessories he or she is presently using. The minute there is a new hype on the market, or someone claims to have made a kill only because of the bowstring he or she was using, the " I gotta have that new gear" person believes that Fed Express is not fast enough with delivery. In time, you no longer hear from many of these people.
11-18-2003, 11:04 AM
#37
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 9,175
RE: Technology
I' m not opposed to ' all' advances in technology either. One thing that my shoulders really appreciate is being able to get close to the same arrow speed out of my new compound at 60 pounds that I used to get with the same arrow from an 80 pounder.
11-18-2003, 11:22 AM
#38
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Kalamazoo Michigan
Posts: 41
RE: Technology
My point exactly Pa. Of course P&Y wouldn' t recognize that animal because of the bow anyhow
Looks like after 12-31-03, the 99% let off bow will be eligible, with an " *" by the entry...
And so it is with technology, whats unacceptable today is not necessarily what will be unacceptable tomorrow.
11-18-2003, 11:43 AM
#39
Boone & Crockett
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Lehigh County PA USA
Posts: 12,157
RE: Technology
I am not opposed to all technological advances in the bowhunting arena. I am only opposed to advances (gear) that enable the wrong types to easily enter the sport, or gear that actually hinders accuracy unless being used by a person that is highly skilled in shooting and tuning.
I am in total agreement with the first part of the statement I quoted above but find the second part to again be somewhat of a matter of perception. What would you classify as a piece of equipment that hinders accuracy unless used by a person skilled in tuning/shooting? A short axle to axle length bow? A short brace height bow? Sight pins of unusually small diameter? Harsh drawing cams? As you can see my point, what one person considers a hinderance another person may just take for granted.
With some people, they jump from bow to bow and/or from accessory so often and so posthaste you have a hard time keeping up with what bow and accessories he or she is presently using.
To all,
I think we can see by just the responses on this thread so far that my point earlier is well proven. Each individual has a different perspective on the gear they use. It may not be the same as what others are using but, in my opinion, that does not necessarily make it any less bowhunting.
11-18-2003, 12:08 PM
#40
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 9,175
RE: Technology
Each individual has a different perspective on the gear they use. It may not be the same as what others are using but, in my opinion, that does not necessarily make it any less bowhunting.