Australian timbers are poorly suited to self bows
1 study
The summary today
A single study supports it, combining an analysis of mechanical properties with builders' accounts. Among 127 samples of 106 Australian species most are dense and stiff but weak in tension relative to their stiffness, and cluster away from the woods known to be used for self bows; the exceptions are a few species, such as Allocasuarina fraseriana, Intsia bijuga and some eucalypts, that fall close to the suitable or secondary woods. The builders who write on an Australian forum are not unanimous, and some rate many eucalypts and wattles as excellent, but the general impression is the same difficulty: the style reported as most suitable is the Andaman-Holmegaard, with wide limbs of rectangular section and thin tips, no native species tried has held up as an English longbow or a narrow flatbow, and many need a backing of sinew, rawhide, silk or plant fibre. The two sources do not agree in the details, though: the species the forum rates as good fall almost entirely outside the zone of suitable woods, and the author leaves the explanation open. Nobody has built and tested bows from the species the analysis favours.
Also phrased as: "eucalyptus for bows"; "bows from australian wood"; "native australian timbers for bows"; "australian self bow woods"
In practice
Among traditional bowyers the idea goes round that a self bow made from eucalyptus or other Australian timbers turns out badly, and that it nearly always needs a backing.
Evidence
-
2024
For Equipment tests Published later
Across 127 samples of 106 Australian species, placed in a principal component analysis with 326 species in all, Australian woods are negatively correlated with both components: generally dense and strong but stiff, with low tensile strength relative to stiffness. Allocasuarina fraseriana and Intsia bijuga fall near the suitable woods, and some eucalypts and acacias near the secondary ones.
Is Australian Flora Unsuitable for the Bow-and-Arrow? · Nicholas George
-
2024
For Equipment tests Published later
From the roughly 7,000 posts on Australian woods published between 2005 and 2023 on a bowyers' forum: some rate many eucalypts and wattles as excellent, but the general impression is that working bows are hard to make from them; the Andaman-Holmegaard style, with wide limbs of rectangular section and thin tips, is reported as the most suitable; no native species tried has worked for an English longbow or a narrow flatbow; many species need a backing of sinew, rawhide, silk or plant fibre, and working them is made difficult by high density and interlocked grain.
Is Australian Flora Unsuitable for the Bow-and-Arrow? · Nicholas George
-
2024
Context Equipment tests Published later
Of the 24 native species the forum reports as suitable (7 without mechanical data) almost none cluster with the suitable woods: the exception the author names is Eucalyptus macrorhyncha, which falls with the secondary ones, and of the Australian species the analysis picks out only Eucalyptus camaldulensis is mentioned on the forum as good. The author discusses the disagreement: the analysis may fail to capture suitability, suitable Australian woods may be missing, the forum's species may be misidentified, or local builders rate as good a wood from which they manage to make a working bow.
Is Australian Flora Unsuitable for the Bow-and-Arrow? · Nicholas George
Status history
- 2024 Reported The first and only analysis, across 127 samples of 106 Australian species, finds them generally dense and stiff but weak in tension relative to their stiffness, far from the woods known to be used, with few exceptions. The builders who write on an Australian forum generally report the same difficulty: the style they point to as most suitable is a long bow with wide limbs and thin tips, no native species has held up as an English longbow or a narrow flatbow, and many need a reinforcing backing. A single study, partly based on accounts and with two sources that do not agree in the details: reported.
Related
Related articles
Research lines
Cite
Campagna, M. (2026). Australian timbers are poorly suited to self bows (Version 1). In Evidence Registry. Retrieved 16 October 2026, from https://matteocampagna.com/en/registry/equipment/australian-timbers-self-bows
@misc{campagna2026_legniaustralianiarchi,
author = {Campagna, Matteo},
title = {Australian timbers are poorly suited to self bows},
year = {2026},
howpublished = {Evidence Registry, matteocampagna.com},
url = {https://matteocampagna.com/en/registry/equipment/australian-timbers-self-bows},
note = {Version 1; accessed 2026-10-16}
}
Follow this claim
RSS is an address you paste into a feed reader: each time this claim changes status, adds a year to its history or is revised, a new item appears there.
Registry updates by email
At most one email a month, sent only when something has changed: claims that change status, new claims, Lab predictions registered or resolved, new studies and new books.
Sign-ups are handled by Systeme.io, the service that runs the newsletter. Every email has a link to unsubscribe with one click.
Other claims in this domain
- CorroboratedAlong its flight the arrow loses an appreciable part of its launch speed12 studiesStatus since 2011
- CorroboratedAs it leaves the bow, the arrow flexes and snakes around the riser instead of leaving straight19 studies · 47 archers measuredStatus since 2012
- ReportedA camera-based scoring system misreads some arrows: the ones barely sticking out and the ones that shift the target face7 studies · 2 archers measuredStatus since 2017
- ReportedA chest band with fibre optic sensors measures breathing and mean heart rate with small errors, and an archer can wear it while shooting2 studiesStatus since 2019
- ReportedA compound bow stores between 70 and 100 joules and sheds about two thirds of the force at full draw4 studiesStatus since 2015