The Duck Hammer wrote:3legged_lab wrote:(MT)Montanafowler wrote:Redbeard wrote:This is a bow
ImageUploadedByTapatalk1383584923.029438.jpg
#tazincali
i agree with Red. realistically, how much better are the ones you spend a million dollars on?
I will gladly lay some money on a bet that I am more accurate with my mathews than you could ever be with a recurve.
Can you do it without a site though?
Fuck no. That's the point of modern equipment - to be better than an antiquated technology, ie killing animals by throwing rocks at them.
(MT)Montanafowler wrote:3legged_lab wrote:(MT)Montanafowler wrote:Redbeard wrote:This is a bow
ImageUploadedByTapatalk1383584923.029438.jpg
#tazincali
i agree with Red. realistically, how much better are the ones you spend a million dollars on?
I will gladly lay some money on a bet that I am more accurate with my mathews than you could ever be with a recurve.
so, people buy these fancy bows strictly for accuracy?
give your definition of accuracy.
you need your reticle for accuracy, i think most recurve shooters do it without one.
I think the definition of accuracy is pretty universal, and I don't think you need my help with understanding.
I don't use a reticle, if you're referring to magnification, but I do use pins for yardage which takes us back to accuracy.