0
Yesterday danny came over to view my workshop, drop off a catch bag, frame and some bands I'd bought and teach me a bit about Chinese slingshooting.
I expected to be beat hands-down in accuracy. That I was. No contest.
I expected to trump him in speed and energy. I'm not convinced it was so, but it's hard to tell without a Chrony.
What struck me most was that he went about his shooting like a martial artist. There was an accepted right way of doing everything. There were variations, but I got the feeling that every aspect of the equipment, its preparation, the position, method of drawing and action had been thought out and decided by a Sifu/ Sensei/ Grandmaster and had become a distinctive 'style' in itself. This isn't my way. I question, test and reconsider everything for myself. However, I won't hesitate to borrow from several disciplines and integrate them in my own way.
For my record and to satisfy your interest, here is a list of some of the things we discussed. I make no representation that such statements are correct or universal. It's up to you to think it through and try things out.
Weight - I was told that Chinese slingshots are generally stainless steel to have more inertia to reduce tremor. There were no stabilisers, though.
Fork attachment method - there are two main styles, ball in tube, which is for lower powered tubes and typically uses a 4.5mm ball, and the stronger 'custom style' which is a loose loop around the fork.
Grip - I was told that hammer grip isn't directionally stable and does not brace against traction well; the Chinese style uses a high forefinger and thumb that does both. I was told that my forks were too narrow and that I should have to stretch my forfinger and thumb so that fork rotation was eliminated. I was also told that 'blade' style (including very thick board cuts) were bad because they allowed play. Incidentally, danny found Perry's PS-1 to be basically a Chinese slingshot with flat bands!
Tubes vs bands - danny maintains that tubes are faster and stronger than bands. I countered that difficulty of pull is not necessarily an indicator of the velocity achieved. Sadly, my Chrony which I paid 80 bucks to be shipped still hasn't arrived so there is no way to tell for sure.
Tube type - These are vey narrow tubes. 1632, 1842, 1745, 1845, 2040, 2047, 2550, 1949, 2050 refers to the inner hole diameter in mm and the outer diameter in mm. The inner hole is tiny, from 0.06" to under 0.08", rendering the tube almost like a round solid. The holes are not perfectly centred.
Pouch materials - they use thick tanned leather, like you'd get from a heavy belt. This top leather used with the nap out so that there is good grip on the outside.
Orientation - I was told that holding the slingshot on its side was best so that when I turn to track a moving target that uneven tension on the bands does not develop. Conventional vertical orientation and 45° orientation was also valid.
Draw length and pouch position - danny shoots 12cm (4.7") bands from the fork to the back of the elastic on the pouch. This is drawn to 68cm with pouch shot from under the eye. The elongation is 400% to the absolute elastic limit. This gives a very snappy shot so the ball is less affected by inaccuracies from a long duration under traction. The drawback is the initial tension is very high - more than Hunter Bands and my for hand was dancing all over the place. danny said there was no alternative but to exercise. The under eye shooting position means you just sight straight down the bands.
Tying - great attention was paid to tying the pouch perfectly symmetrically with no hint of twist. The bands were tied to millimetre precision. Being looped at the front, the pouch was the only part tied. There were various configurations: one end per punched hole in each side, two tubes per hole in each side, and others were seen as being valid too. The tying method was to stretch the bands to the elastic limit at the pouch and to tie elastic over the band, with two loops and an overhand knot.
Balanced sides - the attention to balancing the sides was carried into the way the slingshot was shot. The front edges of the pouch were made precisely level and the draw was to be perfectly central.
Draw - I do a kind of zero-elevation high archery draw. Instead, I was told to half pull the frame away heel first, then flip it upright and push the fork while simultaneously pulling the pouch. Biomechanically, it's more complex, but the benefit is it makes sure the tube loops always go over the top of the forks properly, which is otherwise a problem.
Elevation - If held conventionally, the slingshot was meant to be leveled with reference to the top of the fork according to range.
Stance - no particular emphasis. Either I was perfect (which was unlikely) or it wasn't a big deal, or a low priority because it never came up.
Maintenance - The bands are to be stored in a plastic bag out of direct sunlight. Great care is taken to avoid scratching the fork tips, which should be kept in a polished state.
These pointers were presented as generally accepted practice rather than personal opinion. In this way and considering the large modern Chinese slingshot following, it doesn't surprise me that there is often something of an impasse between occidental and Chinese shooters who both believe their methods to be the best. It was not as rigid as a stylised Japanese martial art or a traditional Chinese Kung-Fu style, but more like an open minded and ecclectic Jeet Kune Do, but still not quite as flexible as a freestyle MMA.
My initial thoughts are that the Chinese system emphasises accuracy. We were shooting at a small coin at 10m. Velocity and kinetic energy are much lower priorities. Considering how firmly rooted the Chinese sport is in hunting, that in itself is an important philosophical pointer.
Secondly, the aiming is very different. A lot of western shooters shoot from the chest, under the chin, by the ear or in a butterfly. The shooter effectively intuitively projects along the line of the bands to the target, whereas the Chinese under eye shooting position is more like sighting a rifle. This allows western shooters to use longer bands with a light draw and forces Chinese shooters to use shorter bands with a very heavy draw. I also see why the Chinese sling pistol and sling rifle came about. The short heavy bands suit that.
Being a mixture of both cultures myself, I will consider both styles and an appropriate mixture of both styles before I settle on something I will train with for the long-term. At the same time, I will look to other cultures, such as Philippino shooting to see what that has to offer as well.
I expected to be beat hands-down in accuracy. That I was. No contest.
I expected to trump him in speed and energy. I'm not convinced it was so, but it's hard to tell without a Chrony.
What struck me most was that he went about his shooting like a martial artist. There was an accepted right way of doing everything. There were variations, but I got the feeling that every aspect of the equipment, its preparation, the position, method of drawing and action had been thought out and decided by a Sifu/ Sensei/ Grandmaster and had become a distinctive 'style' in itself. This isn't my way. I question, test and reconsider everything for myself. However, I won't hesitate to borrow from several disciplines and integrate them in my own way.
For my record and to satisfy your interest, here is a list of some of the things we discussed. I make no representation that such statements are correct or universal. It's up to you to think it through and try things out.
Weight - I was told that Chinese slingshots are generally stainless steel to have more inertia to reduce tremor. There were no stabilisers, though.
Fork attachment method - there are two main styles, ball in tube, which is for lower powered tubes and typically uses a 4.5mm ball, and the stronger 'custom style' which is a loose loop around the fork.
Grip - I was told that hammer grip isn't directionally stable and does not brace against traction well; the Chinese style uses a high forefinger and thumb that does both. I was told that my forks were too narrow and that I should have to stretch my forfinger and thumb so that fork rotation was eliminated. I was also told that 'blade' style (including very thick board cuts) were bad because they allowed play. Incidentally, danny found Perry's PS-1 to be basically a Chinese slingshot with flat bands!
Tubes vs bands - danny maintains that tubes are faster and stronger than bands. I countered that difficulty of pull is not necessarily an indicator of the velocity achieved. Sadly, my Chrony which I paid 80 bucks to be shipped still hasn't arrived so there is no way to tell for sure.
Tube type - These are vey narrow tubes. 1632, 1842, 1745, 1845, 2040, 2047, 2550, 1949, 2050 refers to the inner hole diameter in mm and the outer diameter in mm. The inner hole is tiny, from 0.06" to under 0.08", rendering the tube almost like a round solid. The holes are not perfectly centred.
Pouch materials - they use thick tanned leather, like you'd get from a heavy belt. This top leather used with the nap out so that there is good grip on the outside.
Orientation - I was told that holding the slingshot on its side was best so that when I turn to track a moving target that uneven tension on the bands does not develop. Conventional vertical orientation and 45° orientation was also valid.
Draw length and pouch position - danny shoots 12cm (4.7") bands from the fork to the back of the elastic on the pouch. This is drawn to 68cm with pouch shot from under the eye. The elongation is 400% to the absolute elastic limit. This gives a very snappy shot so the ball is less affected by inaccuracies from a long duration under traction. The drawback is the initial tension is very high - more than Hunter Bands and my for hand was dancing all over the place. danny said there was no alternative but to exercise. The under eye shooting position means you just sight straight down the bands.
Tying - great attention was paid to tying the pouch perfectly symmetrically with no hint of twist. The bands were tied to millimetre precision. Being looped at the front, the pouch was the only part tied. There were various configurations: one end per punched hole in each side, two tubes per hole in each side, and others were seen as being valid too. The tying method was to stretch the bands to the elastic limit at the pouch and to tie elastic over the band, with two loops and an overhand knot.
Balanced sides - the attention to balancing the sides was carried into the way the slingshot was shot. The front edges of the pouch were made precisely level and the draw was to be perfectly central.
Draw - I do a kind of zero-elevation high archery draw. Instead, I was told to half pull the frame away heel first, then flip it upright and push the fork while simultaneously pulling the pouch. Biomechanically, it's more complex, but the benefit is it makes sure the tube loops always go over the top of the forks properly, which is otherwise a problem.
Elevation - If held conventionally, the slingshot was meant to be leveled with reference to the top of the fork according to range.
- Range 5m one set of ears below: about -200 angular mils.
- Range 10m one half set of ears below: about -100 angular mils
- Range 15m level
- Range 20m one half set of ears above: about +100 angular mils
Stance - no particular emphasis. Either I was perfect (which was unlikely) or it wasn't a big deal, or a low priority because it never came up.
Maintenance - The bands are to be stored in a plastic bag out of direct sunlight. Great care is taken to avoid scratching the fork tips, which should be kept in a polished state.
These pointers were presented as generally accepted practice rather than personal opinion. In this way and considering the large modern Chinese slingshot following, it doesn't surprise me that there is often something of an impasse between occidental and Chinese shooters who both believe their methods to be the best. It was not as rigid as a stylised Japanese martial art or a traditional Chinese Kung-Fu style, but more like an open minded and ecclectic Jeet Kune Do, but still not quite as flexible as a freestyle MMA.
My initial thoughts are that the Chinese system emphasises accuracy. We were shooting at a small coin at 10m. Velocity and kinetic energy are much lower priorities. Considering how firmly rooted the Chinese sport is in hunting, that in itself is an important philosophical pointer.
Secondly, the aiming is very different. A lot of western shooters shoot from the chest, under the chin, by the ear or in a butterfly. The shooter effectively intuitively projects along the line of the bands to the target, whereas the Chinese under eye shooting position is more like sighting a rifle. This allows western shooters to use longer bands with a light draw and forces Chinese shooters to use shorter bands with a very heavy draw. I also see why the Chinese sling pistol and sling rifle came about. The short heavy bands suit that.
Being a mixture of both cultures myself, I will consider both styles and an appropriate mixture of both styles before I settle on something I will train with for the long-term. At the same time, I will look to other cultures, such as Philippino shooting to see what that has to offer as well.
