Bow Grips - Yet Again!!!

I know that my brain is getting slower the older I get, but I still have a modicum of intelligence remaining and I am having a lot of trouble getting my mind around the issue of what constitutes the right sort of bow grip (the actual handle) for both recurve and compound.

The starkest contrast I have with my gear is the non-existing grip on my Mathews Prestige compound, which is the riser itself and it is very narrow and rounded, and the grip on my Win & Win recurve which is a nicely shaped wooden grip, which fits my hand quite comfortably.

OK - the current wisdom is that the type of grip I have on the Prestige is ideal for a compound because at full draw you aren't holding the full weight of the bow and when you release you want the bow to swivel freely in your hand. In fact some of the US shooters even put Vaseline on their hands to make them even slicker.

Seems fair enough to me. Yet in a recurve, where you are holding the full weight of the bow at full draw, a shaped, fuller grip seems to be preferred option and many of the top archers even use a non-slip tape on their recurve grip to stop slipping. I have read the logic of this and it sounds OK too.

However, here is my dilemma. My recurve is 45# at full draw for me. With my compound, which is 60# with 65% let off, the normal holding weight is 39# at full draw. However I pull back hard into the rear wall so I'd be holding back at least 45# on the compound. So my question is - why does 45# on a recurve need a fullish shaped grip, sometimes with anti slip tape on it but a compound at the same hold weight doesn't - in fact a compound seems to require the exact opposite according to accepted wisdom.

45# on the hand/fingers is 45# so I would have thought a similar grip for each bow is the more logical thing to have. What am I not understanding here - please???

[buzz lite beer]

I think it just boils down to comfort, Hoyt have considerably thinned there grips down from gold medalist days to today's helix & nexus, but the thinner you can cope with the more "torque" you should eliminate and I believe torquing a compound is very very easy is it not???

buzz lite beer

I take your point but I find it just as easy to torque a recurve as a compound - or not. It's just that what I see top recurvers doing with their grips makes me wonder why compounders who are holding exactly the same weight, for example, are doing the exact opposite.

It simply doesn't make sense to me, I'm afraid.

[buzz lite beer]

you can grip a compound and rock the strings on the cams considerably more than is you tried the same thing with a recurve, by that I mean at full draw if you wiggle the string from left to right the limbs don't follow the sting immediately unlike a recurve were the limbs will follow the string.

Ok, but I must be really dense to day because I don't see why that should affect the type of grip you have on the bow.

Not trying to be difficult - I just don't understand. Sometimes it seems to me to be a subject similar to "a forgiving bow" - half of the archery community supports that idea and the other half thinks it's rubbish and I haven't seen convincing arguments from either side.

[buzz lite beer]

OK, because you can "wiggle" the string around the axles on a compound doesn't mean its desirable a thinner grip reduces the opportunity to induce this wobble while at full draw. I must be finding it harder to explain what I mean is more probable than you not understanding what I an saying??

No - it's me. I must have taken stupid pills today. The only reason I raised the issue was that I am finiding the Prestige grips a bit uncomfortable the more I use them so I was thinking of building them up to something like a recurve grip which I do find comfortable.

Therefore what I was trying to discover was whether there is a logical reason why I shouldn't do this.

I think I'll do it anyway and just make sure that I keep a constant hand position on the bow handle just like I try to do for recurve.

Thanks for trying, mate. I appreciate it.

[geoffretired]

Timujin, I think the bit that's been missing in this thread, is not your understanding. I think it's the averages thing, rather than the individual's bow(s)
Let me explain it like this. Most compounds with 65% let off,peaking at 60# should hold at 21#.
Most recurves, weighing in at45#, hold at 45#. double that of the compound.
Bearing in mind they sell to lots of archers, they go for the average in order to suit most customers. I skinny grip on a recurve could cause comfort problems and lost sales.
As I am nothing like Mr average(not even close to Mrs average either) I have always modified my grips to suit me, not a theory based on Joe Blogs.
I try to get the grip to do three things
Support my hand in the position I believe to be the correct one.
Tell me something is wrong if I don't fit my hand in properly.
Produce as little torque as possible.
(perhaps your bows, on your holding weights, are equally difficult to torque; but that is not the average situation. I can twist my compound in my hand quite easily with its low holding weight. I can't do that with a 45#recurve.)
I hope that helps.

[Jerry Tee]

I am inclined to think that the thicker the grip the more leverage any hand torque has to produce an angular change of the riser. I think we covered the ability of a bow to counter this in 'Thoughts on Stability'. The amount of distance that the string attachment point is to the rear of the grip will make it resist the torque more.

[dino1300]

The thing is that with a #21 compound holding weight, your hand is twice as likeley to infuence the torque as on a #45 recurve, as you have so much more strength available to do it with.

The thin handle with a higher draw weight could be uncomfortable.