Originally Posted by
Kontact
Maybe I'm just repeating myself, but no one is suggesting extra energy, just the ability to express it more ergonomically. Polaris Obark's reference to a the difference between a long bow and a compound bow is a very good one: Moving where forces are applied allows the same archer to go from a 60 pound draw weight to over 100 pound draw weight with the resulting difference in arrow velocity. It wouldn't be taken seriously for a moment among archers that you should be able to produce compound bow results with a traditional bow, Yet they express energy the same way, are drawn the same way and fire the same arrows.
I have had the experience of using a lot of different kinds of sprung sporting gear and have a titanium bike that feels like it leaps up hills while not feeling stiff at all. I think a lot of adamant critics just have no basis in their experience to even begin to imagine how things like this feel and function. So they dismiss it out of hand.
Funny you should say that, because I just watched a video where an archer who routinely shoots warbows with draw weights in the 130-160# range struggles to draw a compound bow with a peak draw weight of 135#, mostly because the peak is early in the draw when it's predominantly the arms and a bit of shoulder doing the work while with the warbows the peak comes at the end of the draw, by which time you've recruited the whole body. He managed a handful of shots with the compound before exhaustion, whereas he could shoot dozens with the warbow.
BUT it was an arrow from the compound that was finally able to penetrate a replica 15th Century breastplate, which they'd never managed with any arrows from even a 160# warbow.