✅ SOLVED Bow identification help plz

[Mintberrycrunch]

I bought this from a coworker that's in his mid 50s. He told me it was his dads from the late 50s early 60s. Long story short he brought it in for me told me to check it out. Got it home laid it next to my $150 takedown. My $150 bow looked like a child's toy compared to this one. So went in the next day offered $60 and now it's mine. Trying to figure out what company made it and when? Thanks

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Minelab PRO-FIND 35 Waterproof Pinpointer Metal Detector for Experts with Tone ID & Adjustable Sensitivity - Grab it through Amazon!

[History Hunter02]

In my opinion it looks like a homemade recurve. It is beautiful.

 

[Charlie P. (NY)]

Has a Root look about it (precursor to Shakespeare). Though it might be a Shakespeare. I'd guess a Root Range Master.

The white glass and 66" AMO mark it as a field bow rather than hunting bow. The tips look very well made - 1964 to 1966 ish.

Likely been refinished and any decals rubbed off.

$60 wa s good investment. I hunt with recurves of the 1959 to 1968 era (for which I have paid $60 to $150) and that looks to be a good one.

 

[DizzyDigger]

MBC, with the deeper riser it does look a bit like one of the earlier Bob Lee or Martin bows,
but if you really want to nail it down you'll need to go to the experts. A site called "Bowsite", and
then go to the "Leatherwall" forum, which is dedicated to traditional archery equipment.

The #45 draw weight was measured at a 28" draw length, and it would
probably make a fine target bow. It could be used for hunting small game
with some camo sleeves over the limbs, but it's just barely enough draw
weight for deer.

Are the limbs straight? If you set one tip on the floor and hold the other
tip up (like a gunsight), do you notice any twisting in the limbs?

 

[Mintberrycrunch]

Has a Root look about it (precursor to Shakespeare). Though it might be a Shakespeare. I'd guess a Root Range Master.

The white glass and 66" AMO mark it as a field bow rather than hunting bow. The tips look very well made - 1964 to 1966 ish.

Likely been refinished and any decals rubbed off.

$60 wa s good investment. I hunt with recurves of the 1959 to 1968 era (for which I have paid $60 to $150) and that looks to be a good one.[/QUOTE I was thinking Shakespeare I found ones almost exact. But everyone has some sort of manufacturer mark. Still could the same time frame late 50s early 60s. This thing is in perfect condition I can't wait to let a few fly

 

[Mintberrycrunch]

MBC, with the deeper riser it does look a bit like one of the earlier Bob Lee or Martin bows,
but if you really want to nail it down you'll need to go to the experts. A site called "Bowsite", and
then go to the "Leatherwall" forum, which is dedicated to traditional archery equipment.

The #45 draw weight was measured at a 28" draw length, and it would
probably make a fine target bow. It could be used for hunting small game
with some camo sleeves over the limbs, but it's just barely enough draw
weight for deer.

Are the limbs straight? If you set one tip on the floor and hold the other
tip up (like a gunsight), do you notice any twisting in the limbs?

Straight as an arrow. It's absolutely perfect.

 

[Mintberrycrunch]

Full pic

 

[Mintberrycrunch]

The case it came in.

 

[DizzyDigger]

If it were mine I'd twist up a new string for it and shoot it...

 

[Mintberrycrunch]

Rear view

 

[Back-of-the-boat]

Very nice, I shoot a compound bow.My Grandfather had a recurve that I had hoped to get but it was lost in a fire.

 

[flyadive]

It is an Indian, Recurve Bow.

 

[flyadive]

The Bow was possibly rejected by QC and was not meant to be sold... notice the minus sign next to the 45#. And BTW 35lb is minimum hunting weight for large game like Deer at 28” draw.

 

[Mintberrycrunch]

I just dropped it off at the local archery shop. He didn't have any info as for as where it was made. He said it's in great shape doesn't have any stress fractures. But we won't be able to see if the limbs are warped until we string it. I hope they have some more info when I pick it up. I bought up the minus after the 45# he said it's probably just between 44#45# idk. They didn't have a 62" string so they have to make one.

 

[Duckshot]

I bet you could have talked him down to $40 or $50. If the limbs are straight, you got a fair deal. If it is warped, you just got screwed out of $60.

I used to shoot a #50 recurve. Still got it, but now I shoot a compound crossbow. Recurves just ain't as popular as they should be. I'd rather my crossbow were a recurve.

 

[Charlie P. (NY)]

Sometimes you can get them back with warm water and counter twisting. Sometimes. His looks pretty square.

When a bow comes off the glue jigs it has to be trimmed up and tillerred. The more material removed the lower the draw weight. The usual way of marking "off" poundages is:

Tillerred at 45# @ 28"

XX45# = 43# @ 28"
X45# = 44# @ 28"
45# on at 45# @ 28"
45X# = 46# @ 28"
45XX# = 47# @ 28"

And then it recycles

XX50# 48#@28"

Some didn't bother (Bear) and a bow marked "45" could be 44 to 46 lbs and they's just label it higher or lower if it was closer to 40 or 50 or reject it if it was way off specs. But they made enough so that they were pretty "on" by design. They put an "X" (I believe) on the arrow shelf for a bow that was not first rate. It would be covered by a shelf plate or arrow rest.

Others, Damon-Howatt, cheated and labeled their bows lower than they ended up actually pulling when tillerred so they got a reputation for a fast bow. At least it appears that way.

Some, Wing, Bob Lee, marked the bow in odd weights. Like 51# or 52# as they actually turned out.

And sometimes they didn't measure at 28" if it was a custom. That's just the standard.

Note that your 66" recurve will take a 62" string (4" less than AMO) if you order actual length. Longbows are about 3" less. Don't get Fast Flight - get B50 or other Dacron. The older bows weren't designed to take the zero stretch modern strings. Some will, some won't. And you kind of hope with a used bow the prior owner knew that and it's not the next pull that will be the last pull.

In 40 years I've only had one used recurve (55#) blow up in my hands on release. You won't like it. Happily the pieces all went places other than into me. I currently have 14 and shoot about every day. All I bowhunt with are one-piece recurves and wood arrow I make up myself. Very rewarding hobby and sport.

 

[Mintberrycrunch]

He doesn't think it is warped he just said you never know until you get a string on it. He said I did well with the $60

 

[maxpower]

Looks like the same bow I had when I was younger I think it was called little bear 30 or 50 lb pull

 

[RTR]

2x on a Bear.I had the same exact(looking) bow back in the 60s.

 

[Mintberrycrunch]

Has a Root look about it (precursor to Shakespeare). Though it might be a Shakespeare. I'd guess a Root Range Master.

The white glass and 66" AMO mark it as a field bow rather than hunting bow. The tips look very well made - 1964 to 1966 ish.

Likely been refinished and any decals rubbed off.

$60 wa s good investment. I hunt with recurves of the 1959 to 1968 era (for which I have paid $60 to $150) and that looks to be a good one.

Looks like Charlie P was right it's a ROOT. Nicely done. Might not be a Bear but still made here in Michigan so I'm very happy. Could be a target master or a different model I'll post it when I nail it down. Thanks for the info