Sounds like you need to shoot compounds or maybe just gun hunt?

i'll shoot an ugly bow all day and not be bothered...but when spending 400-700 dollars for a bow, customers tend to be particular and i dont blame them....

im ok with Martin using the lam wood(its nice that they give their bows a new look every few years)as long as they dont stop using real woodor make a seperateseries for realwood bows and charge premium price for them like Bear does with their "Supreme series"

Bear companymust be sick charging $800 for a "supreme super kodiak"
vs. $449 for the elite version of the same bow

i mean come on $350 price difference just because one bow is"exoticwood" and the other bow is LAMwood...raw materials dont cost that much. the wood they use is nice but it isnt anything spactacular.
i think a $200 difference in the series would be acceptable.but not 350$

if you ask me Bears marketing of their Trad bows is horrible

if their gonna charge 350$ for real wood then they could atleast do it with a whole new model. and not have the exact same bow for $350 less. Or they could be real sneaky and do it under whole different brand name.

its hard to beat the bearhunter seriesor Montana longbow for the price...they deffinately got those bows right....

I'll spend the little more money on a Martin/Howatt anyday tho. Bear Company could learn a few things from them.


this is my rant for the day. Sorry Bear company.

BC, if you'd seen Chris shoot (I have), I think you would change your mind.

I can see his point--I've seen guys that could hardly hit a barn wall from the inside carry around real pretty and/or expensive bows and show them off, as if they way the bow looked or how much it cost made up for their lack of practice. I also know a guy that I have witnessed out-shoot a factory sponsored "pro" compound shooter--he did it with the most butt-ugly bow I've ever seen. It was/is ugly, but it shoots.

You get down to it, pretty ain't what makes a bow shoot, and if I had to choose I'd take an ugly shooter over a pretty "dog" any day. I do like pretty bows though........

Chad

I bet anyday, I could out perform him out to 50 or 60 yards with a compound.I dont' care how good he is.He said performance is his criteria, so just giving a suggestion based off his criteria. A high powered rifle would outperform either, and meet Chris's criteria for hunting which was performance first. I wasnt' trying to be smart, just pointing out that his point of view might have some kinks.

I didn't pick traditional based off of performance alone. I picked it because of simplicity, and speed of shot. I was hog hunting a few years ago with a compound, and thought to myself, how nice it would be to have a longbow when I was trying to aim up close and trying to get to full draw and get a pin on the pig as he was running at me. I then saw the nice woods some are made of and I was hooked. And I like nice wood weather it be a piece of furniture or hardwood floors that are freshly refinished.

All of you guys can try to sell me on the idea that you like performance alone, but clearly, you guys are not telling the full story when I see what bow you shoot. Much faster material out there like the DAS bows are made of or some of the hoyts. And then I see others on hereshoot snake skin on thier longbows.

Guys, this is just my opinion, nobody has to get upset because its not inline with thiers. I mean its a given, we want to shoot a bow well. Thats common knowledge. I was just about ready to get rid of my dreamcatcher, because I couldn't get it fly well even though it is a good looking bow. I am just looking for both.

Guys if you like Martins new bows, go out and buy one. I ain't stopping you. And don't let my opinion stop you.

Actually, I hunt with a rifle, muzzleloader and a bow. I like being a well rounded hunter.Lately, I've been paying more attention tothe mz, but that's just my mood at the moment. Now, the statement I made about performance was relating to recurves as far as this discussion goes. I do have a compound but it hasn't been hunting in over 10 years. I do break it out and shoot a few through it on occassion, just for giggles. During the archery season, I perfer the simplicity of a recurve orlongbow as well. To clarify what I meant by performance, in relaton to recurves and trad bows in general,is the overall feel of the bow, not just raw speed.Thoughspeed isn't a bad thing, when it comes with good feel andoverall forgivness in design. Now, I'll be the first to admit that I appreciate a nice piece of wood, buta bows looks arenota priority whenI'm choosing what to buy. In the many years I've been shootingtraditional equipment, I'vehad a few bows that shot no where near as good as they've looked.They didn't stay in the stable very long.

Oh come on BC, you were too trying to be smart . I know I was in my response to your firstpost. I should have clairfied things more in my statement though.

I'm not going to argue that point. I can out shoot myself at those distances with a compound. I've done it on many occassions.




The first is a camo dipped Martin Hunter. Nice shooting bow, but you cant really call the camo dip pretty.
The second is has become my "go to" bow and it's the one I shoot the most now. I just picked it upa few months ago. It's a mid 1970's Hoyt Pro-medalist with a 16" metal riser. I've got a few other tradbows that'll shoot a little faster through the chronograph, but this littleHoyt as them all beat in overallfeel and shootability. More than likely, it'llmake the rounds with me during IBO 3D this Spring.I think it'sa rather handsome bow,but I know many will disagree. Some might not even call it "traditional" being it has ametal riser . I do shootit off the shelf though. Now, You should see my barebow recurve rig with the elevated rest and stabilizer. It's really ugly.

I won't bebuying a new martin anytime soon. Their selection of riser woods not being the issue, but rather the overall price of their bows.To many other excellent bowyers out there making great products that costs a good bit less. Plus, if I buy a new bow anytime soon, the little lady won't be happy.

I do too. I like my guns and like being able to use them. I like archery more. Point I was making is I want both and thing both beauty and performance is very attainable.

No, your bows are not for me. But thats me. I am sure your very good with them. Your happy, I am happy, thats what matters.

Chris covered it pretty well. Obviously I'm not trying to get you to buy a Martin or Bear, I just see both sides of the coin--and I know Chris knows his stuff.

I've set up as a vendor at a lot of places. I've seen guys look HARD at a bow--I mean check it out from one end to the other. After the inspection, they asked about the price--when I told them, they put the bow down and walked off. I have no doubt if I'd quoted a price several hundred dollars higher than I did, the bow would have sold on the spot. Another vendor I know set out some arrow shafts at a shoot--had them priced cheap, because he got a deal on them. Didn't sell a one all weekend. On Sunday (last day of the shoot), he jacked the price up just to see what would happen--sold out in no time flat. A local "trading post" had an old game box full of old, rusty tools--had them priced something like 50 cents each--no takers. Changed the price to something like $5 each, sold them like crazy.

My point being is people are goofy, for the most part. Most think that if it costs more, looks better, or has afancier package it's supposed toautomatically be a lot better.

I'd bet you could take a plain-jane bow that shot like a rocket, price it at $100, and lay it on a table next to a beautiful bow that shot like crap and price it at $800, and 9 times out of 10 the pretty bow is going to sell first, and the plain bow may not sell at all.

Again, I like pretty woods, but pretty isn't the determining factor. I like a fast bow, but speed isn't the be-all end-all either. I've shot most of the bows that claim to be the absolute fastest on the market today, and I don't own any of them. Not because I can't get one, they just didn't shoot that well for me. Heck, there's at least one or two I could get at a bargain because I have a bussiness connection. They were really nice bows, just not the bows for me.

Chad

I have to agree with Chad. Damon Howatt was one of the premier bowyers during the "heyday" of archery as a sport. When wheels arrived, traditional archery took a huge nosedive in popularity. When Martin took the reins from Damon Howatt, they kept not only the name, but the plant, the bowyers,and a guynamedLarry Hatfield.

Through the late 70s, all of the 80s, and well into the 90s before traditional archery began to regain some of it's former steam, Martin continued to offer a solid line of traditional bows, built in the same plant where Damon Howatt built them himself, which I believe still serves the same purpose today.

Martin has always produced quality archery equipment. Perhaps this is one of the reasons they picked up the Howatt line to begin with. Economics and availability ofhigh-character naturalwoods most certainly play a part.

My guess is in order to maintain the Howatt line on something other than a custom-shop basis orfocussoley on their compound line, the solution to use quality wood laminatesmade sense in order to maintain cost while alsomaintaining Howatt quality,stillmakingthem affordable to the masses.

The first traditional bow I bought was an X-200 recurve for around $170 in the 90s. It probably costsdouble that now, give or take. I still own several Martins, and a few Bears,though my primary bow is a Chek-Mate Hunter II. Got a hard-hitting90s era Gail Martin Nighthawk that I still enjoy, a 90s era Hatfield TD (both of which had plenty of actionwood).

Unless they have changed their policy, I believe you can contact Martin direct and have traditionalbows made to order. If this is still the case, the discerning archer can still have a bow that pleases in both performance and appearance.

It is certainly disappointing, but the good news is that Martin continues to offer the Howatt line of bows to the present and next generation of archers. Ibelieve even Damon himself would approve of that!

... my apologies for rambling, used more than my two-cents worth.

Blessings!