| Who's Online | There are currently, 6 guest(s) and 0 member(s) that are online.
You're an Anonymous visitor with limited access to the site. You can register for free by clicking here | |
| Other Resources |  | |
 | |
|
Sports and Hobbies: The History Of Crossbows Part 2 Contributed by One of our experts on Sunday, October 12 @ 11:42:57 EDT
|
 I couldn't fit everything I had into the previous crossbow article, so this one is simply called "Part 2"...
History:
As mentioned in our first crossbow article, the crossbow's earliest widespread use was probably in China, during the 3rd or 4th century B.C.
In the manner of handbows of the same period, early crossbows featured wood laths and long power strokes The most common latch mechanism was a rotating nut of bone, ivory or antler. To achieve greater power, massive "composite" laths made from sinew, horn, and wood came into use; these were shorter and much stiffer than the earlier wood laths.
As draw weights increased, new methods and devices for cocking the weapon had to be employed, which included the cord and pulley, belt claw, "goat's foot", bending lever, cranequin and windlass. Steel laths later provided even greater power. Spanning devices made reloading a slow process compared to hand bows, and as a result, Crossbows were more useful for hunting than in open battle, where their slow rate of fire was a serious handicap.
Another type of crossbow used by the Chinese since at least 210 B.C. was a repeating design with a gravity-fed box magazine! The magazine was situated above the bolt track. When the lever at the rear of the crossbow was first raised and then lowered, the box moved forward, caught the string in a wooden recess and drew it to full cock, dropped a bolt into the track and released the string. These crossbows were neither powerful nor accurate, but they could launch a bolt every second or two until the magazine emptied. Poison was usually smeared on the points to increase their lethal ability.
Features usually found on military and hunting crossbows of the 14th to 16th centuries include a fairly plain, straight stock, a sinew bridle binding the lath to the stock, a cylindrical latch nut and a long iron trigger. It would have either a simple rest or a grooved track to guide the bolt; The stock could be held in the same manner as a firearm, or rested on top of the shoulder and the trigger manipulated with the thumb. The bolt's point usually served as the front sight when aiming.
Sporting crossbows of the 17th to 19th centuries were used for formal target competitions and hunting. Aperture sights and set triggers were usually present on target crossbows. Bow irons and similar fittings for securing the lath replaced the sinew bridle. Bullet crossbows became popular for small game hunting and informal target shooting, using a double bowstring with a leather pouch to launch a lead ball, or a small round stone. The barreled crossbow or slurbow also shot round balls, using a conventional bowstring and a tubular barrel.
The crossbow was a popular hunting weapon in Southern Asia and parts of Africa. The construction used in both areas is similar in that a relatively weak wood lath is mounted to a straight stock with a bolt track. The latch is simply a notch in the stock; the trigger is a peg that pushes the string out of the notch from below. On some examples, the stock is horizontally split for part of its length, so that pressing the two halves together pushes the trigger peg upward. Since bolts from these crossbows have little kinetic energy, they are invariably poisoned.
Crossbows of medieval and renaissance design were very inefficient devices. Modern tests indicate that armor-piercing bolts, while heavier than war arrows, achieved about the same velocity (130-140 fps) from a 700 lb. draw crossbow as an arrow did from a 80 lb. draw longbow. The initial velocity imparted to a crossbow bolt is governed by the velocity of the bow tips as the bolt and string part company.
Despite their heavy draw weights, medieval laths were too massive to accelerate rapidly. This was made worse by short draw lengths, which reduced the time available for the tips to accelerate. In addition, the massive bowstrings required for such heavy draw weights robbed energy from the bolt. Balanced against these faults is the higher ballistic coefficient of the short, heavy crossbow bolt, as compared with an arrow. This meant that crossbows often shot further and hit harder than hand bows.
Modern hunting crossbows are engineered to launch bolts at initial velocities in excess of 200 fps, with draw weights of up to 180 lbs. This provides ample kinetic energy for big game hunting with a far lower draw weight than would be the case with a medieval crossbow of similar power. A longer power stroke coupled with a less massive fiberglass lath makes all the difference.
Modern target competition with the crossbow falls into two main classes.
In international 10 meter competition, shooters use a crossbow that marries the elaborate stock and sights of a smallbore target rifle with a short-draw steel lath. The draw weight is well over 100 lbs, so cocking is performed using a long steel bending lever. Bolts are about 6" long and made of wood; their metal points are threaded like a coarse woodscrew to facilitate removal from the lead plates used as backstops.
Field crossbow competition takes place at 30, 40 and 50 yards, with bolts similar to those used in hunting. Because lighter-drawing field target crossbows are shot over greater distances than in international 10 meter, their stocks and sights must be suited to a broader range of adjustments. Field target crossbows are usually hand-made, often home-made by their users.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CROSSBOW HUNTING CONTROVERSY:
Today the crossbow often has a complicated legal status due to its similarities with both firearms and archery weapons.
Many dedicated bowhunters feel that crossbows are so much more accurate and easily mastered than handbows that they violate the original rationale for providing extended archery hunting seasons.
Since creating a special crossbow hunting season would mean shortening other seasons, crossbows are viewed by some as a threat.
The question of whether or not to allow the use of crossbows for hunting during the archery hunting season is a long standing debate in the hunting community. Some think it's a great idea (usually the people who use them), while others are strongly against it.
Argument 1: Crossbows Are Too Efficient
Some hunters say the crossbow is just too efficient to be allowed in the woods alongside other handbows.
Some figures, presented by a group calling itself a "National Anti-Crossbow Committee," are obviously designed to frighten hunters into believing that the presence of crossbows in the woods will lead to a drastically increased deer kill, resulting in a reduction in the length of the season, or decimation of the deer population altogether.
Below are some numbers as presented in one piece of anti-crossbow propaganda. They are said to be "statistics from Ohio DNR publication #166."
Yearly Harvest by Weapon Type
Weapon________1982__1985__1988__1991__1993
Hand-Held Bow__3782__3339__5322__7708__10,155
Crossbow_______446__1689__4716__9401__13,055
This certainly shows an increase in the number of deer taken with crossbows as opposed to other bows, but what it doesn't tell us is how many crossbow hunters were in the woods vs. the number of other bow hunters. If more hunters use crossbows, then it stands to reason that there will be more deer taken with crossbows.
The increase in the overall kill is not explained, either. Is it due to increased bag limits, more hunters in the woods, a longer season, bigger deer herd, more people becoming interested in using crossbows? We don't know, and we can't logically assume it's attributed to the crossbow, since the take with other bows increased as well.
The avid bow hunter uses these numbers as evidence that the crossbow is a deer-slaying tool of mass destruction, but a closer look reveals that it's just not true. More current information obtained from the Ohio Department of Wildlife said this:
"Of the 155,000 archery participants, 70,000 used a crossbow, 55,000 use a vertical bow and 30,000 used both. Of seniors who apply for and receive a free license, 4,000 used a crossbow, 1,000 used a vertical bow and 1,000 used both. Success rates for 2001 were identical for crossbow hunters and vertical bow hunters at 14%."
The increased crossbow kill -- which concerns so many -- seems to be simply a side effect of more hunters using them in the woods.
Argument 2: Crossbows Stay Drawn
One of the great advantages to a crossbow, is that you can draw it in advance of getting a shot at game. No longer do you have to wait until a deer's head is down or behind a bush before you draw to shoot. You simply wait for a clear shot, aim, and fire.
A crossbow holding its draw, while undoubtedly convenient, doesn't give it some magical deer-killing power -- it just removes one variable from the equation. The importance of that variable is debatable. Some believe that not having to draw with game nearby is a huge advantage. Others don't see it that way. Sure, it gives an advantage, but how much of an edge does it really give a hunter? They still need to be able to judge the distance for a shot, as well as velocity of the arrow, and wind variables of the environment.
Argument 3: Crossbow Hunters are less Dedicated
Some crossbow opponents claim that crossbow hunters are "less dedicated" than "real" bow hunters.
The owner of a well-known archery Web site had this to say about keeping crossbow hunters out of the woods: "I'd rather see less bowhunters of higher quality than more hunters of questionable ethics and experience." It's obvious that he is referring to crossbow hunters, but we have to wonder why he assumes that those hunters will, as a group, be any less responsible, less ethical, or less "dedicated" than he and his bow-toting buddies.
In the field in Ohio, the very state they hold up as an example of the evils of crossbows, the game managers of that state have indicated that its performance at taking game has been identical (or nearly identical) to that of other bows.
Every "responsible" hunter practices with his chosen tool(s), and the choice of hunting tool doesn't define one's dedication to hunting, as some seem to believe.
Some would label crossbows as a "threat to the integrity of the archery-only hunting seasons." And, anyone who would use a crossbow is called an "opportunistic hunter who lacks the dedication and commitment required to be a bowhunter."
What they don't display are any facts to back up their claims that crossbow hunters are inherently undedicated or uncommitted to the sport.
Personally, I think crossbows are very cool. And as long as the person using it is safety concious, trained in it's use, and dedicated to the sport (like any user of any weapon should be)... Then there shouldn't be any problem letting them share the woods with other hunters.
Steve/NASP
www.naselfdefense.com
www.naselfdefenseproducts.com
|
|
| |
| Login | Not a member yet?
You can register here.
As a registered user you have some advantages like theme manager, posting comments, and access to more areas of this site. | |
| Article Rating | Average Score: 0
Votes: 0
| |
|
| "The History Of Crossbows Part 2" | Login/Create an Account | 0 comments |
|
| | The comments are owned by the poster. We aren't responsible for their content. |
|
|
|
No Comments Allowed for Anonymous, please register |
|
|
