By Johan Smit

We will probably never end the debate around the traditional bow versus the compound bow. The same goes for bowhunting and rifle hunting. Whatever our arguments are, I believe we often compare apples with pears. I can state with certainty, however, that both of these weapons can be used successfully to hunt. One should not confuse the operator’s insufficient training and experience with the equipment’s shortcomings.

I am privileged to hunt with all three weapons and speak from some experience. That the firearm can be used over longer distances and has more energy is not to be disputed, but this does not mean the bow is less effective. We must be aware of the bow’s limitations, especially that of the traditional bow, but I feel that traditional equipment is sometimes criticised unfairly, whether due to a lack of knowledge, or perhaps because enough time has not been taken to master the weapon. Nevertheless, I would like to place the traditional bow in perspective.

Those who have shot with the compound bow and traditional bow know that there is a significant difference between shooting with a 70-pound compound bow and 70-pound traditional bow. My current compound bow is set on 70 pounds, although I would be happy with a 50-pound recurve. With an 80 per cent reduction, I anchor with only 15 pounds using the compound bow. This is 35 pounds less than the recurve. With a 70-pound traditional bow, the difference is 55 pounds. Thus we find that the traditionalist’s shooting style tends to be somewhat faster because it is not so easy to anchor too long at full draw power.

Most compound bow archers make use of one or the other trigger mechanisms. The modern compound bow is designed for accuracy and it makes sense to shoot with a trigger mechanism. The compound bow is also more effective with light to medium-weight arrows. Think of the difference between AMO (Archery Manufacturers Organisation) and IBO (International Bowhunter Organisation) standards. AMO is measured at 60 pounds against a 30-inch draw length with a nine grain per pound weight arrow (540 grain), while IBO is measured on a 70-pound with a five grain per pound arrow (350 grain) on a draw length of 30 inches. Thus, the use of an IBO standard will not be good for the manufacturers of traditional bows, as there will probably be more guarantee claims against broken equipment. According to my knowledge this standard is not used as a comparative standard in the traditional class.

It is therefore not unusual to find a compound bow with an IBO specification of more than 300 foot per second. This makes sense, as the equipment is designed to shoot lighter arrows. Today’s AMO specifications are less common in compound bows. I’m guessing, but according to information, an AMO specification of 230 foot per second is a good average on a compound bow. Today’s top traditional recurve bows (Fedora and others) test at 218 foot per second with a mechanical trigger. This does not differ much from the average compound bow. While a mechanical trigger could give you up to ten foot per second more on the traditional bow, it is not wise to use it. The chances of damaging your bow are too great.

There are reasons why the traditional bow appears much slower. Shooting heavier arrows with lighter poundage, without any mechanical trigger is a contributing factor. Yet, with the right composition (bow, arrow and broadhead), the traditional bow is deadly. The problem is that archers do not practise enough. Traditional archery is instinctive. It is a combination of concentration (focus) and style. It requires endless dedication and, just when you think you’ve won, you have to start all over again. I know there are archers with a natural aptitude, but most of us must practise ten times more than a compound bow archer to be able to hunt effectively.

I do not want to discourage anyone from shooting with a traditional bow. It remains a challenge and victory is sweet. We traditional archers must not create the idea that the traditional bow is not good enough simply because we haven’t done our homework.

To simply compare one hunting weapon with another doesn’t always make sense. As I stated previously, I have been privileged to hunt with rifle, compound bow and traditional bow. In my opinion, all three weapons have their place in the hunting field. Each of these weapons demands dedication to apply expertly. After all, the aim is to promote hunting, regardless of which weapon we use.