Re: Chronograph + Analysis of Asiatic & Long Bows (natural & synthetic)

geoarcher wrote:
geoarcher wrote:

******Update******

Bow: Elong Outdoor's NIKA ET-4 Meng Yuan Traditional Bow
Bow Rating: 30#@28"
Actual Draw: 36#@32.5"
Arrow Type: Easton Axis 700s @ 32.5"
Arrow weight: 311 grains
GPP: 8.6
FPS: 163

Energy: 18 ft. lbs.
Efficiency: 0.50

Only a slight increase in efficiency but I gotta say I enjoy this one so much more.  I was able to get a speed of 155 fps even with one of my 416 grain Goldtips.  The numbers for energy and efficiency may not be there but the enjoyment is.  I wonder if they'll make a 40lb version next or if they'll stop here?

So just a heads up on this one, this bow actually broke on me.  And after hardly any use.  They have since stood by their product and sent me a new one.

***Update***

The second 30 pound version they sent broke on me as well.  This time they wouldn't stand by the product.  Not recommending Elong or any of their many ebay rebranding accounts anymore.  Shame.

Thumbs up

Re: Chronograph + Analysis of Asiatic & Long Bows (natural & synthetic)

Had a "materials day" in my club last weekend, and speed-tested a few of my Korean bows.
Those were a Kaya KTB with 30lbs, a Nomad with 40lbs and a Windfighter with 50lbs. Draw weight at 31" as usual.
Shooting the same light 240 grain carbon arrow with each bow, I got the following max. speeds:
Kaya KTB      : 195 fps
Nomad         : 215 fps
Windfighter  : 235 fps
The averages were about 5 fps lower.
Worth noting that the draw weights are the nominal one's at 31". With my draw of 29,5", I get about 42 lbs with the Windfighter, for example.

Thumbs up

Re: Chronograph + Analysis of Asiatic & Long Bows (natural & synthetic)

***Update***

Here are the low to high results within range of the gak-gung in fps:

175
181
186

I have no idea what the draw weight is for this bow since the merchant did not know.  I have yet to purchase a luggage scale to determine this myself.  The arrow used was a traditionally made bamboo Korean with a total length of 31.5".  Haven't weighed it yet.  I think I drew to about 30 inches.  That's all I can say for now until I can get more info regarding the bow's draw weight.

Thumbs up

104 (edited by geoarcher 2021-01-10 16:27:30)

Re: Chronograph + Analysis of Asiatic & Long Bows (natural & synthetic)

Just got a luggage scale.  Stats are as follows for the gak-gung:

Bow: Gak-gung by Master Kim Gwan-deok
Bow rating: 45lbs@28" or 51.1lbs@31"
Actual draw: 49lbs@30"
Arrow type: traditional Korean bamboo arrows @ 31.25"
Arrow weights: 418.9885
GPP: 8.55
FPS: 186

Energy: 32.181
Efficiency: 0.65

Thumbs up

105 (edited by geoarcher 2021-01-10 16:27:08)

Re: Chronograph + Analysis of Asiatic & Long Bows (natural & synthetic)

***Update***

Bow: Gak-gung by Mater Kim Seok-Jae.
Bow rating: 60lbs@28"
Actual draw: 68lbs@31"
Arrow type: traditional Korean bamboo arrows @ 31.25"
Arrow weights: 443.98 and 518.37 grains
GPP: 6.5 and 7.6
FPS: 218 and 197

Energy: 46.84 (lighter) and 44.66 (heavier)
Efficiency: 0.68 (lighter) and 0.65 (heavier)

The 5 count of Korean traditional bamboo arrows I own came somewhat mismatched.  So I decided to use the thinnest and one of the fatter arrows in the set.  Amazingly enough, similar efficiency results to my other gak-gung made by Master Kim Gwan-deok.  That's in spite of a 20+ draw weight difference, different ogums, and lengths of the bows.  Two significantly different bows, very similar results.  Although I may redo with my first gak-gung in the future to see if I can tease out something different as I managed to correct the bow more so it draws better.  Also for consideration, the derived speeds within range of each other:

With heavier arrow: 196, 197
With lighter arrow: 214, 216, 218

Thumbs up

106 (edited by geoarcher 2021-01-10 22:42:15)

Re: Chronograph + Analysis of Asiatic & Long Bows (natural & synthetic)

***Update***

Let's do a side by side comparison to the gak-gung vs. the synthetic laminates:

Bow: YMG/Hwarang (jang-gung)
Bow rating: 55bs@31"
Actual draw: 57.2lbs@32" for shorter arrow and 58lbs@32.5" for longer arrow
Arrow type: Goldtip@32" and Korean carbon@33.5"
Arrow weights: 400.93 (Goldtip) and 447.22 (Korean carbon) grains
GPP: 7 (Goldtip) and 7.71 (Korean carbon)
FPS: 231 (Goldtip) and 223 (Korean carbon)

Energy/ft-lbs: 47.49 (Goldtip) and 49.37 (Korean carbon)
Efficiency: 0.82 (Goldtip) and 0.86 (Korean carbon)

Thumbs up

107 (edited by geoarcher 2021-01-10 22:41:50)

Re: Chronograph + Analysis of Asiatic & Long Bows (natural & synthetic)

Bow: HMG
Bow rating: 45@31"
Actual draw: 46.8lbs@32" for Goldtip and 47.6lbs@32.5" for Korean carbon
Arrow type: Goldtip@32" and Korean carbon@33.5"
Arrow weights: 400.93 (Goldtip) and 447.22 (Korean carbon) grains
GPP: 8.55 (Goldtip) and 9.39 (Korean carbon)
FPS: 203 and 199

Energy/ft-lbs: 36.67 (Goldtip) and 39.31 (Korean carbon)
Efficiency:  0.78 (Goldtip) and 0.82 (Korean carbon)

Thumbs up

108 (edited by geoarcher 2021-02-11 12:26:13)

Re: Chronograph + Analysis of Asiatic & Long Bows (natural & synthetic)

Some insights here:  A relationship between longer draws and increased efficiency can be witnessed.  The longer Korean carbon arrows, albeit heavier, yield higher efficiency for both the HMG and Hwarang/YMG.  Higher velocity is maintained with the shorter-lighter Goldtip.  The story is not quite the same for the gak-gung as the bamboo arrows of same length yet varying weights yield results contrary.

While it may be in haste to conclude the synthetics as superior in regards to efficiency, I should note that 31 inches is in fact just about all you're going to get out of my two gak-gungs.  Perhaps if I could find a gak-gung with a longer max draw the story would be different.  Knowing how both gak-gung operate, I can somewhat confidently conclude that 31" is it for them. A heavier arrow may in fact make a difference for the gak-gung made by Mater Kim Seok-Jae.  I may purchase some new Korean bamboo arrows in the future at longer length and heavier weight just to make sure. 

Aside from the comparisons, one has to appreciate the output for the YMG-Hwarang.  In all likelihood, an arrow at 10 gpp with at least a 32" draw would push the YMG-Hwarang to about 0.90 efficiency at ~ 200 fps.  This would make the YMG-Hwarang comparable to the Saluki Damascus/Tatar style bow which currently dominates all performance levels tested and accounted for in this thread.

Thumbs up

109

Re: Chronograph + Analysis of Asiatic & Long Bows (natural & synthetic)

ragnar wrote:

Had a "materials day" in my club last weekend, and speed-tested a few of my Korean bows.
Those were a Kaya KTB with 30lbs, a Nomad with 40lbs and a Windfighter with 50lbs. Draw weight at 31" as usual.
Shooting the same light 240 grain carbon arrow with each bow, I got the following max. speeds:
Kaya KTB      : 195 fps
Nomad         : 215 fps
Windfighter  : 235 fps
The averages were about 5 fps lower.
Worth noting that the draw weights are the nominal one's at 31". With my draw of 29,5", I get about 42 lbs with the Windfighter, for example.

Would be interesting to have data at a draw of 32" and 7gpp...

Thumbs up

Re: Chronograph + Analysis of Asiatic & Long Bows (natural & synthetic)

****Update****

Something new, one of the 53" long HMGs that you can get over at ebay or amazon marketed as 'Monarq':

Bow: HMG 'Monarq'
Bow rating: 50#@31"
Actual draw: 56@34"
Arrow type: Alibow carbon @36"
Arrow weights: 360 grains
GPP: 6.42
FPS: 229

Energy/ft-lbs: 41.91   
Efficiency:  0.75

I consider this bow more of a proper 'jang-gung'.  The 34" max draw is very real and obtainable compared to the YMG-Hwarang which seems to fall a bit short of that.  My shorter HMG also seems to have a good bit of elasticity for a KTB in its class.  I think these results are very promising.  HMG bows are proving consistently based on my chronograph runs + efficiency analysis to be a real diamonds in the ruff among laminate KTA manufacturers.  With the right type of arrow and good technique, you can obtain phenomenal results.  Definitely worth it to check one out if you can.

Also, I've compiled most of the relevant information of this thread in a spread sheet finally after all these years.  Sorting by efficiency a trend can be observed.  Korean and Crim. Tatar laminate bows seem to dominate performance results within the 6-10 GPP range - the typical arrow to bow draw weight recommendations per manufacturer.  While not all of these bows were tested as thoroughly save for the Mariner Han and Mongol, which yielded comparable efficiency results at varying arrow weights within the aforementioned GPP range (and hence not worth compiling subsequent scores), its doubtful based on the arrow weights initially tested at, that they would significantly approach the same level of performance as the Korean and Crim. Tatar laminates.  Except for maybe the Kaiyuan by Alibow although it probably would still be easily out-competed at that GPP range by the Crims and KTBs:

https://i.imgur.com/pd898h6.png

Thumbs up

Re: Chronograph + Analysis of Asiatic & Long Bows (natural & synthetic)

****Update****

So I didn't initially tell, but when I picked up the 50#HMG 'Monarq' I also picked up a 90#one.  I finally have stats:

Bow: HMG 'Monarq'
Bow rating: 90#@31"
Actual draw: 82.94#@29"
Arrow type: carbon
Arrow weights: 502 grains
GPP: 5.57
FPS: 237

Energy/ft-lbs: 62.59
Efficiency:0.75

Naturally, tough bow to shoot.  Especially if your form is not perfect.  I hope to get to 31 inches one day.  In the meantime, I'll add this one to the chart.

Thumbs up

Re: Chronograph + Analysis of Asiatic & Long Bows (natural & synthetic)

And the 90 pounder broke the other day.  Snapped right at the lower limb.  I had gotten the bow to open up to 31 inches and pushed it slightly past it.  When I did, it said no more.  Mind you its a 53" Monarq which is supposed to have 34" max draw per manufacturer's specification.  Its funny because I was noticing what did indeed seem like early stacking in the bow even when just drawing it to 29".  I wasn't too sure if I was just not mustering up enough strength.  I'm pretty sure I have the answer now.

Thumbs up

Re: Chronograph + Analysis of Asiatic & Long Bows (natural & synthetic)

****Update****

Bow: Saluki Turk 'Hybrid'
Bow rating: 42.5#@28"

Actual draw: 51.82#@32"
Arrow type: 32" Alibow carbons
Arrow weights: 342.59 grains
GPP: 6.84
FPS: 207

Energy/ft-lbs: 32.58
Efficiency:0.62

Now with a different arrow:

Actual draw: 51.82#@32"
Arrow type: 32.5" Goldtip carbons
Arrow weights: 479.48 grains
GPP: 9.58
FPS: 189

Energy/ft-lbs: 38.02
Efficiency:0.73

Not exactly getting the best of all worlds here with any one of these arrows I have for this bow according to my criteria which is a speed over 200 FPS garnering an output efficiency in the 80th percentile achieved with an arrow of at least 8 GPP.  But these numbers aren't everything.  I am fairly happy with the way the shorter-lighter Aibow arrow flies which has a less stiffer spine compared to the Goldtip.  Goes to show, you really just have to experiment with different arrows and consider all factors.

****Update****

Some other stats:

Actual draw: 51.82#@32"
Arrow type: 34" Black Eagle Instinct Traditional Carbon Arrows (without tip and insert)
Arrow weights: 306.9496 grains
GPP: 5.92
FPS: 224

Actual draw: 51.82#@32"
Arrow type: 33" Goldtip Devastators
Arrow weights: 405.871 grains
GPP: 7.83
FPS: 201

Thumbs up

Re: Chronograph + Analysis of Asiatic & Long Bows (natural & synthetic)

****Update****

Bow: Paragon 'Khan'
Bow rating: 35#@28"

Actual draw: 43.95#@33.5"
Arrow type: 33.5" Goldtip carbons
Arrow weights: 425.93 grains
GPP: 9.69
FPS: 195

Energy/ft-lbs: 35.95
Efficiency:0.81

So about this one: first off, Rob is an excellent bowyer and what he has achieved here with the Khan is phenomenal.  I am somewhat confused though about the draw weight stats provided with the bow.  This one is supposed to actually reach 48#@32 inches.  It doesn't remotely feel it to me.  Not sure if it has to do with the technology used to build the bow plus the design or not.  I'm also not sure if the draw weight numbers on the card are derived from an actual draw scale or not.  My confusion is partly from the fact that my Alibow Kaiyuan is rated 40#@36" and when I draw to that, the weight of the Kaiyuan at my full draw with that bow seems more comparable to what I'm feeling here with the Khan at full draw.  My Khan's draw weight does not seem to be anything like my Mariner Yuan which is 50#@32".  Of course my challenge is ultimately wrong if draw weights on the card were derived from an actual bow draw scale.  Provided the scale is calibrated correctly of course.  I don't know but even if it is, the bow just doesn't feel 50#@32".  However if I am right, then congratulations to Rob on these phenomenal results!    While mine doesn't quite reach over 200 FPS, 195 with a 9.55 GPP arrow delivering a 0.81 efficiency rating isn't too shabby in my book.

Thumbs up

Re: Chronograph + Analysis of Asiatic & Long Bows (natural & synthetic)

****Update****

Bow: AF 'Crab bow' or Indo-Persian.
Bow rating: 45#@28"

Actual draw: 54.41#@32.5"
Arrow type: 33.5" Goldtip carbons
Arrow weights: 425.93 grains
GPP: 7.8
FPS: 207

Energy/ft-lbs: 40.51
Efficiency:0.74

In some ways, its the one that exceeded expectations.  Especially in overall feel.  The arrows place and fly excruciatingly well out of this one and its just really fun to shoot.  If GPP is increased just a little, its possible that efficiency can be raised to about 80 percent while maintaining an FPS just over 200.  I think this one's optimal output is not yet quite achieved but could very easily be done with just a few tweaks.  Not bad for a so called intermediate level bow.  Just hope it has some longevity to it.

Thumbs up

Re: Chronograph + Analysis of Asiatic & Long Bows (natural & synthetic)

****Update****

This is the replacement HMG sent me after the 90 pounder broke:

Bow: HMG 'Monarq'
Bow rating: 45#@31"
Actual draw: 50.29#@34"
Arrow type: Alibow carbon @36"
Arrow weights: 343.06 grains
GPP: 6.82
FPS: 231

Energy/ft-lbs: 40.63   
Efficiency: 0.80

Pretty darn good results.  Korean synthetics prove time and time again that higher price tag and amazing scores like these have no real correlation.  Often times for the higher end stuff, you pay more for looks and feel.  Not necessarily a bad thing per se and lets consider here the Saluki Turk.  Sure its not casting arrows out as fast or as efficiently as this HMG but it does feel better in the hands.  I prefer the grip with how its shaped on the Turk plus the high quality leather work Lukas provided on that section of the bow.  Its also smoother at full draw and overall a fairly comfortable bow to handle.  Likewise, the amount of let off you get with the Paragon Khan is amazing, so smooth, does not feel like at all like its 50 or 54 pounds.  I'll have to double check things one day if I ever get a decent draw scale. 

I've also noticed that bows over the years that have more of a rigidness to them seem to score higher here in the matter of efficiency.  Bows that are too soft feeling score less.  That's not to say if you go as rigid as you can you will get your best scores.  That was precisely the problem with the Golhan Turk.  Very stiff, very rigid resin material that probably would have produced a near straight draw force curve.  Not smooth at all with poor output efficiency.  The Elong 'Crab bows' were of course the opposite here.  Extremely smooth flexi-resin yet no real power at all with the cast.  This is why laminate synthetic bows are so coveted.  A bowyer can choose a series of top notch material like maple, osage, bamboo, and Bear Paw glass, stack it all together, and produce something amazing by getting the best of both worlds on the pendulum scale of rigid-smooth. 

There's always a sacrifice for whatever you do though.  Tip too rigid on the pendulum scale of bow making and you sacrifice smooth draw, tip too far for smooth draw and you sacrifice efficiency.  The Saluki Damascus seems to hit the balance between these two areas almost perfectly as I reflect back now upon years of data.  That's why that particular bow has been as successful as it has.  The Korean bows in general are not that smooth but I suspect the slight bias towards more rigidness is done to ensure a speedier bow that can easily cast an arrow down a 145 meter range.  Just my guess here.

These particular HMGs are no exception and I can't say my YMGs or SMGs were super smooth either.  However, their inherent power was always realized one way or the other.

Thumbs up