CherokeeWarrior

I have narrowed my bow selection down to three stickbows, and I could really use some help on the final call...
-Martin "Stick" Longbow
-Martin "Rebel" Recurve
-Check-Mate "Atilla"
I am currently learning toward the Atilla, but was still up in the air.
One more question- I draw #40@26", and when I saw only the draw weight listed in the descriptions of the Martins, I was worried that it ment #40@28", Is that so?

-Thank you for listening to my rambling

c903

CherokeeWarrior

You did not say, so I have to ask. Do you have more than a casual experience with a stick bow and the tech aspects?

Regardless that your draw-length (draw-length or arrow length??) is 26", IMO a 56" bow is not a comfortable bow to shoot, especially when in the hands of someone whom has not shot recurves or longbows much.

As for Martin bows, I highly suspect that the draw-weight of all their "shelf" bows are based on a 28" draw. If you prefer a particular bow for price and other features but the DW is @28", there are a few tweaks you can do to get back some of the lost energy/speed.

LBR

C903 brings up a good point--short bows, in general, are not the most forgiving. The 56" Atilla is a good bow, and made for shorter draw lengths, but I do prefer the 60" Falcon, even for someone with a 26" draw. That's all it is, my preferance.

I don't know about the Rebel, but in general Martin recurves are good bows--probably the best production bow available.

I don't care for the Martin Stick. The grip, for me, is not comfortable, they are slow and shocky. Again, it just depends on your preferance and what you are looking for in a bow. The Stick and Twig are my two least favorite Martin bows, even though I prefer longbows in general.

Chad

CherokeeWarrior

I have shot a longbow for the past three years, and a recurve for two years before it. But this will be my first year hunting with a traditional bow, because I finally feel I am drawing enough weight.
Originally I had been looking at the Falcon, but the archers at another site were raving about the Atilla when I asked, so...
-Thank you again

Silent String

Note that if you decide on a Martin you can have Martin built to your bow to your draw of 26". The problem is that not all of the Martin dealers are aware that they can do this or just do not care. Just ask and you might be able to find a dealer that understands. I order all the time for people to their draw. Good luck!

Wahya

Well, if the decision is down to the Chek-Mate and Martin, I'd choose the Chek-Mate without a second thought. We own both makes of bows and the Martin is a nice bow, nothing against them, but the Chek-Mate is a much more stable and smoother shooting bow in my opinion.

arrowsmit

Me too Wahya, between the Martin 'Stick' & ANY of the Chekmates, the CM wins every time. I'd also second the recommendation for the falcon, it's an awesome bow, its modest selling price notwithstanding.

LBR

If you like more of a longbow grip, but want a recurve, the Atilla will work great. The Atilla has a 50's style grip--like a longbow with a locator, a smaller sight window, and is cut to center, not past (the Falcon is cut 1/4" to 5/16" past center). You can get any of the Chek-Mate's made at whatever poundage @your draw length, plus or minus 2#, modifications made to the grip, inscriptions, etc. at no charge. You could probably get a Martin quicker than a custom ordered CM though--right now the expected wait is around 4 months.

Chad

CherokeeWarrior

I went to my local pro shop and shot both the Rebel and Martins X-200, and I found the X-200 to be really smooth and overall, a really nice shooting bow. Does anyone have any opinions on the X-2? It was alot smoother than the Rebel, most likely because it was 60" compared to 52".
Thank you-

Wahya

There are exceptions, but rarely will you find a 52" bow that will shoot as smoothly or more stable as a 60", especially in the same line of bows. Plus, the longer bow will show less stacking for longer draws and will allow for a smoother release.