Topic: YT bow reviews ...

Someone having an opinion about this bow reviews ?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hmCo5K7fFCI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nzDKu-2hsj8

Somehow a bit ... too cursory for me.
Didn't see the latter one yet, but going to do it tonight.

Thumbs up

Re: YT bow reviews ...

Well the first one is not a horn bow.  It looks to be the same as the YMG and the Hwarang.  If I'm not mistaken.

Thumbs up

Re: YT bow reviews ...

As I understood it, it's this one:
http://www.koreanbow.com/shop/index.php … ;id_lang=1
The descritpion says:

The Taegeuk horn bow is made by Korean bowyer, Mr. Cho Yeong-seok, with water buffalo horn on its belly.

Which I understand as the "usual" wood-carbon laminate, except with a horn layer on the belly.
Not sure if this is correct, and if this bow is worth the money - compared to a KTB/Nomad, for instance.

Thumbs up

4 (edited by morton509 2018-06-28 17:06:25)

Re: YT bow reviews ...

I see.  It seems around the right price range.  I'm curious if the horn makes a difference compared to the Hwarang?

Thumbs up

Re: YT bow reviews ...

I have the wind fighter which is basically the same as the kaya KTB as far as I know.  And I also have a Hwarang and I would say the Hwarang is definitely superior and worth the money in comparison to the wind fighter.  The KTB is a good starter bow, then if you fall in love with it, you upgrade.

Thumbs up

6 (edited by geoarcher 2018-06-28 19:53:06)

Re: YT bow reviews ...

If you go to page 2 of this subforum series you'll see various reviews for the Taegeuk.  One thread talks about a delamination problem while another about its performance:

http://www.koreanarchery.org/punbb/viewtopic.php?id=704

http://www.koreanarchery.org/punbb/viewtopic.php?id=657

From my experience, I owned YMGs, HMG and an SMG and my feeling is the SMG was really the most boom for buck.  And all I had was the regular carbon laminate.  Koreanbows.com sells those with snake skin finish for less than the Taegeuk.  Matter of fact I was told to purchase a regular SMG carbon laminate by someone at ATARN years ago over the SMG's horn carbon laminate because the guy felt that the addition of horn was more or less superfluous when added to something with a synthetic core.

Some though I believe claim superior results with the horn laminate-carbons but in the second thread I mention, the 'regular' SMG essentially beats the Taegeuk going by chronograph results.  I still today regret selling my old SMG and that's definitely the bow that got away.  Can't say much about the horn-carbon core mesh ups as I've never had one but the second thread I reference may be illuminating.

Thumbs up

7 (edited by geoarcher 2018-06-28 20:32:39)

Re: YT bow reviews ...

Also while that YT bow reviewer makes some pretty nice/cool videos, the guy almost always pushes everything as good/fine/great etc. 'you won't have problems'.  Case in point him with Alibows yet a source noted to me that he has had a 30% problem rate with all the Alibows sold.  Alot of what he gets appears pretty cherry picked by the manufacturer for his video reviews as well.  Just a heads up.

Still I find his videos can be very informative overall and I generally like what he does however given that Taegeuk has been reported as having delamination problems its probably best not to go 100% by what's presented in that video.  As it seems you suspect.

Thumbs up

Re: YT bow reviews ...

From my experience, I owned YMGs, HMG and an SMG and my feeling is the SMG was really the most boom for buck.  And all I had was the regular carbon laminate.

I have several "regular" carbon laminate bows, and actually quite happy with them (Windfighter, KTB and White Feather) ... thus searching for a reason to justify 500 bucks for this bow. I think it's off the table for me at the moment.

Also while that YT bow reviewer makes some pretty nice/cool videos, the guy almost always pushes everything as good/fine/great etc. 'you won't have problems'.
...
Alot of what he gets appears pretty cherry picked by the manufacturer for his video reviews as well.

AFAIK, that's called "advertisement". Not necessary his fault, I could imagine a manufacturers motive to deliver him cherry-picked bows, sometimes for free.
I own one of the bows he judged as "good value for the money", which actually has a pretty mediocre design, quality, and performance. If I had seen and tested it before, I would not have bought it. But it will look pretty cool on the wall ...

Thumbs up

9 (edited by geoarcher 2018-06-29 11:22:08)

Re: YT bow reviews ...

ragnar wrote:

AFAIK, that's called "advertisement". Not necessary his fault, I could imagine a manufacturers motive to deliver him cherry-picked bows, sometimes for free.
I own one of the bows he judged as "good value for the money", which actually has a pretty mediocre design, quality, and performance. If I had seen and tested it before, I would not have bought it. But it will look pretty cool on the wall ...

Well, for one of his early Alibow vids he brings up the typical problems of how the bows arrived to people bent and what not but then goes on to say 'I've never had an problems with that'.  And that's the catch there.  Granted its a business and he's gotta sell bows but it appears he does have knowledge of some of the issues that are typical for others ahead of time.  Naturally since he's a merchant he's going to get 'show-room' stock. 

And that's why its always best to do further research and get other opinions.

Thumbs up

Re: YT bow reviews ...

And that's why its always best to do further research and get other opinions.

Exactly. Or "caveat emptor", as it's called in Latin.

Thumbs up

Re: YT bow reviews ...

If you look here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ahw2fys2hMQ, you can get the impression he reads this forum, too  roll

Thumbs up

Re: YT bow reviews ...

What can I say...we're a small quiet forum but apparently very influential.

Well its nice that some clarification is given as to what 'never had a problem' meant.  Apparently, it meant how easy return or warranty issues were handled with poor manufacturers but also the good ones.  Regardless, I hate to bring up, yet feel I have to and besides you know I'm going to anyway, that Alibow a while back had some serious delamination problems.  The bows were actually showing up to vendors and customers with fissures already in them.  Now how could you miss that? 

Alibow's policy too for situations like that were not necessarily to refund the bow right away but rather extend the warranty to a year and a half and if the bow broke during that time then a refund could be given.  Usually in the form of another bow. 

I'm not going to accuse or point the finger at anyone here but sometimes even 'easy' companies to deal with are not necessarily all that easy and the situation can be complex.  I don't know how Alibow issues were handled with all participating vendors but standing by companies with deep systematic errors is probably not the best policy in the world.  And Alibow's problems don't end at just fissures already in bows when appearing at the door.  Which in and of itself alone is pretty bad.  One vendor I talk to dropped them pretty hard recently due to all the issues.

I don't want to get too much further into this, as I fear I already have, or make anyone here out as the bad guy but people do watch these videos which might I add are done pretty well.  The impression is usually that everything is fine and you'll have a perfectly delightful situation.  All the time.

However, I'll close on a positive by saying I applaud this level of transparency reached by the particular vendor and hope more really nice videos are made about bows.

Thumbs up

Re: YT bow reviews ...

However, I'll close on a positive by saying I applaud this level of transparency reached by the particular vendor and hope more really nice videos are made about bows.

Totally agree with you.

Those are the perils of practising a Far Eastern archery style.
Either accepting the (comprehensible) high costs of a western bowmaker, but being able to test it and have certain guaranteed warranty rights.
Or get a bow from the (supposed) source for far less money, but without a try-before-buy, communication difficulties, often extreme shipping costs, and a warranty depending on the mood of the bowmaker.
The decision has everyone to make for himself.

Thumbs up

Re: YT bow reviews ...

Just a heads up, here is the review for the Hun bow by Jackal:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=poTN3L6c8qc

I have been waiting for a bow like this for a while to come out but decided not to approach the company or anyone else about this yet even after this review.  And sure enough, another vendor who is more conservative on recommendations found that the lower asymmetrical limb would break on 2 of the 4 bows ordered from Jackal unless the lower was reinforced.  Which was why the other two ordered did not break.  So there is a systematic error in the bow design and needs to be reworked and the bow was not recommended to me.  However, and again, we see with this particular review channel that its a really cool bow, blazing fast, may have to take care of it etc etc. 

I also notice the bow looks a little short drawn too in the video.  Apparently it has a 31 (?) inch max draw.  Its even proclaimed that beyond 31 inches you don't want to draw any further and it seems the draw may be to 31 inches but it looks a tad short to me still.  I bring this up because if it is being short drawn a little that probably is why it didn't fail on him during the making of the video.

Thumbs up

15 (edited by CTR 2018-07-16 19:10:31)

Re: YT bow reviews ...

Armin (the gentleman behind that YT channel) is a nice guy and friend of the company. I don't think he means to mislead anyone. I also think he shoots a lot less powerful bows than most of us do, and as we all know less powerful bows tend to have much lower failure rates due to total energy reabsorption relative to percentage energy reabsorption.

Honestly though, I don't envy anyone who makes bows. Bows break. Some of it is random/unavoidable, some of it is time/wear, and some of it is abuse intentional or accidental. Get one person to announce their failure and another will come out of the woodwork. Suddenly a pattern appears to emerge and so does a prophet who announces some particular issue with a run/design/style of bow. *shrug*

Of course he doesn't test bows the same way I'd test them, obviously since we do testing too and ours are focused on the quantitative side more than the qualitative side, but I don't find any fault in his way of looking at bows from a shooter's experience sort of perspective. We try not to get deep into the whole longevity issue because a sample size of one isn't representative of anything, and I wouldn't blame anyone else who takes a similar approach.

Of course he has reviewed our products too, so if you'd like to claim conflict of interest, it would be a fair criticism.

Thumbs up

Re: YT bow reviews ...

There are two things going on here though:

One is a premature release of some bows based on less than sufficient design (the Hun bow in this instance) or ok design but shoddy manufacturing/production (Alibow).  So some of these things could be addressed at the designer/manufacturer level but are being sent up for public dissemination/advertising/whatever you want to call it regardless.

The other, is of course knowing of these issues yet trying to sell the bow regardless as a vendor.  Which appears to be going on with this YT channel.

Armin comes off extremely likeable and charming in these videos.  Charm I've come to realize is perhaps one of the most powerful tools you could have in this world and can get you out of less than desirable situations very easily.  While I don't claim to be a prophet or let alone a crusader out against anyone, I do think its fair game to provide a cautionary tale or two as someone who has dealt with less than desirable manufacturers and knows what its like to come out on the shorter end for let's say less than scrupulous practices.  That being said there are products that Armin does promote that are fine.  But again, there are other vendors I know of out there who would not for some of those 'other' manufacturers.

And so some vendors have different transparency levels than others.  And yes bows break, but if its systematic and that's happening yet still being pushed out to the market then I can't really sit back and say that's right.  But I know people have different ethics and tolerances to those variations in ethics.  Me quite frankly, if I had bows that were failing left and right and breaking I would not even try to push it out to the public.  I'd keep designing and testing enough until reach an appropriate statiscial level of success and then release.  Likewise, if I were a vendor I would not sell anything to anyone that didn't function appropriately.  But hey that's me.  Different strokes for different folks I guess. 

Again though I'm not 'out' for anyone here.  Hate anyone to think that.  I'm just giving my advice from the consumer perspective.

Thumbs up

17

Re: YT bow reviews ...

No, its a valid perspective. I just genuinely think you might have Armin figured wrong. He is a super friendly and nice guy, and I'd honestly suggest you reach out to him and chat with him about your concerns. He also has a disproportionately large voice for actually being a very small shop on a very very very small island. So far as I'm aware, his business is overwhelmingly local and from operating a shooting range, and not as a big retailer of asiatic bows.

As far as any given brand of bows go, I wouldn't claim to be an expert on failure rates of any of it. Overwhelmingly I shoot my YMG, really want to pick up more in different poundages actually. I've broken a couple bows over the years too, but unless a bow breaks during the reviewing process and affects the testing generally I don't mention it because it is an anecdote not data. As a reviewer, unless you had a dataset on hand showing a bow design was faulty or had generated it yourself, I wouldn't be inclined to re-broadcast that information just because I wouldn't consider it reliable.

Given the power of the interwebz though, now that you've got me thinking about it, I might run a facebook poll though for a month or so and try and aggregate data on who bought one of X bows, how many arrows had been put through it, and whether it was still working well or not. That way you'd step away from the reporting bias whereby users who break bows are much more likely to go complain about it, and due to the rarity the event is much more likely to stick in your mind. Maybe that'd be a good way to aggregate data on a potentially faulty bow group? I don't know honestly, you've got me thinking about this now. Just for background, I've spent some time bumming around the cutlery industry which is rife with this sort of thing. Couple reports of bad edge retention or folding edges or a broken blade or two and suddenly there is a panic over heat treat batch faults when in reality it was nothing. Bad sharpening, a dull grinding belt, whatever, but a couple strung together isolated incidents became "data" in people's minds because of the way the human mind likes to see patterns, even when they don't exist.

I hope all that made sense. Again I'm not looking to be rude, stir the pot, or anything of the sort. Experience just has me leery of forum derived accounts of bad batches of products, and I also take a somewhat charitable view of Armin who as best I can tell is just a super nice dude trying to find his way in the world like the rest of us.

Thumbs up

18 (edited by geoarcher 2018-07-16 23:05:08)

Re: YT bow reviews ...

I actually did talk to Armin once before regarding this.  And while I don't have a problem with him on a personal level, standing by some of these company's the way he does is a bit perplexing as he did in the conversation.  But it seems some manufacturers per his agreements with them are better than others at replacing however some will watch the videos and go to the manufacturer directly and just purchase.  What we get may not stand up to our standards as to how the product is delivered or manufactured.  And as I said before, Armin's videos can be very influential.  They're well done overall, he's charming-likeable, but is the whole story really there?

What I speak of is based on my dealings with the manufacturer but also what was shown to me by another vendor who had a problem very similar to mine.  And of course being influenced by one of Armin's videos.  Some of what the other vendor received from the manufacturer was so poor that I just don't know how he could have gotten anyone to buy the bows.  And I can't help to wonder how many others influenced by a YT video bow review ended up treading down the same path.  Maybe they were lucky and got some better?  Did the manufacturer improve any in the meantime?  There were also a lot of criticisms about this manufacturer too over at ATARN FB page.

That being said I am curious myself about the 'problem' rate that a certain manufacturer has.  I am most curious about this manufacturer's packaging, bow failure rate, but also after unboxing seeing if there are any fissures still in the glass layers of their bows.  So if I were conducting a poll, I'd include all those factors too in addition to whether or not the bow actually broke as some of what I mention are factors that could easily lead to breakage yet lead a purchaser to just push for a refund at the start.  Also important would be to mark the time period of purchase to see if there is an improving process vs. steady decline.

Again though, some of what I heard actually had a rate of failure attached to it.  Also, I'm glad to talk about these issues to anyone and if there is a good way to measure these things.

Thumbs up

19 (edited by ragnar 2018-07-17 10:49:09)

Re: YT bow reviews ...

That being said I am curious myself about the 'problem' rate that a certain manufacturer has.  I am most curious about this manufacturer's packaging, bow failure rate, but also after unboxing seeing if there are any fissures still in the glass layers of their bows.  So if I were conducting a poll, I'd include all those factors too in addition to whether or not the bow actually broke as some of what I mention are factors that could easily lead to breakage yet lead a purchaser to just push for a refund at the start.  Also important would be to mark the time period of purchase to see if there is an improving process vs. steady decline.

This is IMHO a problem with startups and very small (in business terms) bowmakers. They can hardly afford much experimentation, testing and statistical data collection. In former time of craftmanship, this knowledge collected over decades and centuries, passed from father to son.
This path seems mostly lost. Combine this with a lean towards sales numbers instead of quality ...

I think, for the time being I stay with my more industrial-style looking, series-produced White Feather bows. I expect a proper pre-production evaluation and development, and rigorous production testing. None of my 3 bows had let my down yet, and I was not always easy on them.

And as I said before, Armin's videos can be very influential.  They're well done overall, he's charming-likeable, but is the whole story really there?

What I find a bit strange: if he really wanted to test more bows, he could sell the tested one's for a discount, and invest that money in the next one.
Instead, he insists on giving it away. Extending the range of tested/presented bows seems not the main focus.

Thumbs up

20 (edited by geoarcher 2018-07-17 18:12:27)

Re: YT bow reviews ...

ragnar wrote:

This is IMHO a problem with startups and very small (in business terms) bowmakers. They can hardly afford much experimentation, testing and statistical data collection. In former time of craftmanship, this knowledge collected over decades and centuries, passed from father to son.
This path seems mostly lost. Combine this with a lean towards sales numbers instead of quality ...

I think, for the time being I stay with my more industrial-style looking, series-produced White Feather bows. I expect a proper pre-production evaluation and development, and rigorous production testing. None of my 3 bows had let my down yet, and I was not always easy on them.

For what its worth, I think most of your Korean makers are fairly reliable.  Though not necessarily every make or model.  I think your YMG, SMG, and HMGs are all pretty good in this matter.  Although bow breaking happens with them, the amount sold and the times you hear of it I doubt produce a significant failure rate.  The Korean bow making tradition after all is essentially unbroken and of great cultural pride still.


ragnar wrote:

What I find a bit strange: if he really wanted to test more bows, he could sell the tested one's for a discount, and invest that money in the next one.
Instead, he insists on giving it away. Extending the range of tested/presented bows seems not the main focus.

Yeah.  I'll say though that in my critique of his recent video,  it sounds more like after talking to my conservative vendor that the Hun bow does not fail in the video likely because Armin's was from a better batch.  Although both vendors note some wobble at the ears and there's still the matter that apparently some batches can have a high failure rate.  Hopefully the feedback given to the manufacturer will be taken into consideration and the bow design and manufacturing improved.

Thumbs up

Re: YT bow reviews ...

The Korean bow making tradition after all is essentially unbroken and of great cultural pride still.

Yes, I think Korea is one of the exceptions here. It began quite early to conserve its archery legacy (on recommendation of the German Emperor, if I remember correctly), including the craftmanship. And Korea was less affected by the great upheavals of the last century, like the "great leap" and the red menace - at least partially... The only other examples I can think of are the English longbow and the Turkish bows, and the culture surrounding them.
Not to mention that laminated bows as Armin presents use very recent technology and materials, which excludes longstanding family tradition. Very few are willing to pay for a "real" horn/sinew bow nowadays.

Hopefully the feedback given to the manufacturer will be taken into consideration and the bow design and manufacturing improved.

I hope so. The thumb archery community, the "target" group of said companies, is quite small in the Western world. Words of mouth spread quicky.

Thumbs up

22 (edited by geoarcher 2018-07-18 10:43:13)

Re: YT bow reviews ...

ragnar wrote:

The only other examples I can think of are the English longbow and the Turkish bows, and the culture surrounding them.

Really the only other truly unbroken Asiatic archery traditions the way I see it are Japanese and Bhutanese.  There's a continuous 'curriculum' and manufacture of bows with them both that continues from older times with authenticity.  And still within the culture.  I'm pretty sure there was a break in Turkish archery.  Usually it was considered with the death of Turkish bower Neçmeddin Okyay in the 1930s.  This of course follows the logic that if the bows are not being produced anymore then likely neither is the archery.  Also, I'm not too sure if Ataturk would have encouraged the tradition or not.  He seemed more into progressing Turkey at the time although the Turk's zeal in resurrecting their traditional archery makes it seem like it never went away. 

I know the Mongols have their tradition of archery quite modified actually.  They're really not using the right bows or shooting as their ancestors did although per a discussion over at the old ATARN forum, they say they are.  But its not the 'ancestors' we think they're alluding too.  Funny story there actually.


ragnar wrote:

Not to mention that laminated bows as Armin presents use very recent technology and materials, which excludes longstanding family tradition. Very few are willing to pay for a "real" horn/sinew bow nowadays.

I think alot of the failure though is due to what you were alluding to earlier: certain manufacturers not enacting enough quality control because they want to rush their product out and make money.  Alibow comes to mind here.  And of course some designs plus material sourcing plus manufacturing were just bad.  Even some Korean bows apparently weren't immune to that.  Just check out some of the older pages here.

Thumbs up

Re: YT bow reviews ...

You are correct, Japan, Buthan and perhaps some other region have a living tradition. At least the Japanese variant is quite present in the West (bows and schools).
When speaking of broken traditions, I had especially the Chinese, Mongolian and Hungarian in mind. Mao's Great Leap ended up in a fiery pit, so to speak, destroying many people along with their traditions. I never heard of any traditional Chinese bowmaker having more than local reach.
I would consider a tradition broken with (at least) one generation lost. Which seems not the case with Turkey, there is a living community with traditional bowmakers. But I have to admit my knowledge in this regard is a bit shallow, not my style, nor my preferred type of bows. But Turkey, like China, is quite large, with rural areas far away from main cities and main events.

I know the Mongols have their tradition of archery quite modified actually.  ...  Funny story there actually.

I agree. Mongolia is Russian sphere of influence for at least two centuries, as I know. They even adopted the Russian alphabet.
Hungary's current tradition rests, AFAIK, solely on two bows, excavated and restored in the last century. Just the bows, nothing about the shooting style.

I think alot of the failure though is due to what you were alluding to earlier: certain manufacturers not enacting enough quality control because they want to rush their product out and make money.  Alibow comes to mind here.  And of course some designs plus material sourcing plus manufacturing were just bad.  Even some Korean bows apparently weren't immune to that.

Sure, the willingness to learn and improve must be stronger then the strive for money. As in many other businesses.
The more I read and here, the less I'm inclined to try new bows ...  roll  wink

Thumbs up

24 (edited by geoarcher 2018-07-19 00:57:57)

Re: YT bow reviews ...

ragnar wrote:

I would consider a tradition broken with (at least) one generation lost. Which seems not the case with Turkey, there is a living community with traditional bowmakers. But I have to admit my knowledge in this regard is a bit shallow, not my style, nor my preferred type of bows. But Turkey, like China, is quite large, with rural areas far away from main cities and main events.

From reading the Karpowicz book, the feeling I get is Ottoman-Turkish Archery today is the result more of a revival.  The book mentions a 'final generation' of bowyer(s) and then claims production ceases in the 1930s with the man I mentioned above.  Although Necmeddin Okyay lives until 1976.  Was he teaching others bow making back then or up to then?  You can google his name and find more about him although he seems more remembered for his calligraphy work on those sites.  Also a traditional Turkish archer from 1939 named Ibrahim Bozok is photographed adjusting a bow in the book as well.  I can't find much else about him at all and if he had a teaching school that passed on these traditions and what not. 

Considering that most of the major manufacturing centers from Ottoman times were in Istanbul, I'm not so sure how likely it is that the bows would have gradually made it to families in the country side.  Although, I've seen over at the old ATARN forum a guy from a rural area of Iran showing drawing techniques which he claimed his grandfather taught him.  They looked like techniques from Sassanian times.  Although for me even this raises questions: was it due to unbroken tradition from Sassanian times vs. something his grandpa researched in his time and then passed down?  He did not suggest to have a traditional horn composite bow though or been taught with one by his grandpa.  I don't know if Ottoman-Turkish archery techniques practiced by the man I mentioned above were taught and learned by anyone much like Kyudo teaching and its fervently maintained curriculum.  Let alone Gungdo's.

Also brings to question the survival of actual composite bows from old times.  I'm more inclined to believe that few if any in the last century survived among families and were eventually passed down the next generation to use unless you could make the argument that the country had a rock solid traditionalist back-bone and an elite willing to preserve it.  Korea fits the bill here better but not necessarily Turkey.  I suspect the the Ottoman horn composite bow was perhaps more strictly viewed as a military object then anything else and coupled with the expertise needed to care, I picture them really being kept in armories when and where they could be kept that way as the preferred storage method and really only given to soldiers.  Kind've a special military issue thing.  With the exception among maybe the Ottoman-Turkish elite that practiced flight archery in old times.  But once a soldier deployed in those times, they likely slept with it to keep it supple.  Or had to establish a heating system at camp in order to make corrections and what not.

Related, alot of times the present day Koreans themselves will keep their horn composite bows at their dojos because they facilitate things necessary for the bow's care more easily then at the home such as a hot box where they are perpetually kept.  However there are some Koreans who do have a hot box setup at their homes.

We should also remember that the practice of Gungdo in Korea during the late 1800s and early 1900s was really among the elite who could afford the horn composite bows as instruments of leisure.  I think in China right before the Communist era it was the same and in England as well during the Victorian era with longbows.  From what I can tell, Turkey did not really have the same thing happen with their traditional archery after progression from Ottoman times even among the elite.  The Karpowicz book could perhaps fill in more gaps here (and maybe something else).  I highly recommend it.

Whoa.  That got long and off topic.

Thumbs up

Re: YT bow reviews ...

Whoa.  That got long and off topic.

Interesting anyway - thanks for the loooong explanation.
As said, I don't know much details about Turkey's last century. Except that the leadership orientated westwards after the WWI defeat, and dropped many traditions. Like China and Japan at that time, yet not as violent as China again half a century later.
I followed some threads on other fora, mentioning several arab/ottoman archery books, supposedly describing equipment and style in great detail. Thus, a revival is not problematic - if it's authentic is another question. In many cases, such revivals are spurred by by a kind of chauvinistic nationalism. No direct link to Turkey or other countries here ...
And thinking, I agree to the other fact you mentioned - in Turkey, Korea and China, archery was mainly an elitary preoccupation. Bowyers needed a proper compensation for months of work. The same applies for armour and damascene blades, for instance. And not to mention horses.
To extend you argument, I think the cavalry of medieval and antique kingdoms were exclusively an upper-class business. Nomadic people were probably an exception here.

Thumbs up