Talk:Yumi

Old Info

A collection of information that can be added to the article. Everything here needs a lot of work, so I will leave the actual incorporation to others.

Bow lengths:

Height of Archer	Arrow Length	Suggested Bow Length
< 150 cm	< 85 cm	Sansun-tsumari (212 cm)
150 - 165 cm	85 - 90 cm	Namisun (221 cm)
165 - 180 cm	90 - 100 cm	Nisun-nobi (227 cm)
180 - 195 cm	100 - 105 cm	Yonsun-nobi (233 cm)
195-205 cm	105 - 110 cm	Rokusun-nobi (239 cm)
> 205 cm	> 110 cm	Hassun-nobi (245 cm)

Three types of yumi in common usage: bamboo (take-yumi), lacquered bamboo (urushi, shigeto), and synthetic (from fiberglass or carbon).

as far as I know there are no all carbon bows. This means that carbon is used to strengthen either a bamboo or a fiberglass bow Simohell 22:30, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Carbon bows are quite common nowadays 202.186.221.131 (talk) 07:59, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

Urushi-yumi are generally only used for ceremonial purposes. Shigeto-yumi (which are urushi-yumi wound with strips of wood) are only used by the highest level of archers (headmasters of the large schools).

Yumi come in different pull-strengths. Beginners usually start with 10-12 kg yumi. Women generally use 16-18 kg yumi; men generally use 18-20 kg. Anything above 20 kg is considered rather strong; anything below 16 kg, weak. Take-yumi lose some pull-strength over time.

the usual weight of the bow can be slightly different for different schools (ryu) Simohell 22:30, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Shigeto-yumi are wound with rattan skin. All woundings found on all Japanese bows are using rattan skin 202.186.221.131 (talk) 07:58, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

Yumi history:

Time Period	Type of Bow	Bow Formation
Prehistoric	Maruki	Single piece of wood
c.800-900 AD	Fusetake	Wood with bamboo front
c.1100 AD	Sanmaeuchi	Wood with bamboo front and back
c.1300-1400	Shihodake	Wood surrounded with bamboo
c.1550	Sanbonhigo	Three-piece bamboo laminate core, wooden sides, bamboo front and back
c.1600	Yohonhigo	Four-piece bamboo laminate core, wooden sides, bamboo front and back
c.1650-Modern times	Gohonhigo	Five-piece bamboo (or bamboo and wood) laminate core, wooden sides, bamboo front and back

There are many, many parts to the bow (indeed every joint in the bamboo has its own name)--shall I (or someone else) construct an image that lists these parts?

Common superstition: A yumi should never be placed against a tree lest its (the yumi's) energy be drained.

Touching another's yumi without permission has been covered, but a small clarification: when you do have permission, you should still never touch the grip of the bow.

As for carrying the bow upright, there are plenty of times when holding it horizontal is okay. When strung, for example, it can be carried long distances by letting the string rest between your fingers and thumb, balancing the yumi on the horizontal plane.

In normal shooting form (taihai) the bow is carried with the tip tilted downwards while walking... not to leave the bow standing upside down appears to be important for bamboo to maintain its shape. Also it appers to a symbol of respect. Simohell 22:30, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

...where are your sources for all this information? --J.B. 14:10, September 8, 2005 (UTC)

The tabulated data comes from "Kyudo" by Onuma Hideharu, and Dan and Jackie DeProspero. The rest is personal experience from being a student of Mr. DeProspero.

Shape

The asymmetry was supposedly present in the Japanese longbow before the horse was ridden in japan. I have no sources to cite except Feliks Hoff "Kyudo -the way of the bow" (chapter 3), reports on the web and my kyudo-instructor's word. (The horse was presumably used for riding from about 6th century, whereas the earliest known depiction of a Japanese asymmetrical yumi is on a bronze plate from the 3rd century...) This information needs to be confirmed before inclusion in the main article, but if correct punctures a hole in the theory that the shape is due to horseback riding. 84.48.188.2 (talk) 11:44, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

The handle's position on a vibration node is unlikely to be the reason for it's asymmetry. This node, at 3/4 the bow's length, would be the third harmonic and is likely have a much smaller contribution to the bow's vibration than the first harmonic, at 1/2 the bow's length. If the aforementioned is true, than the argument is moot and the paragraph should be removed. I would like to see a source for the claim in the article. Acpepper (talk) 19:15, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Picture

Why is the bow upside down in the pic.? It is never placed to rest on the upper tip, only the lower, and I find it weird that it should hang that way... Can anyone confirm that it is correct? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.202.141.26 (talk) 22:50, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Ironic isn't it?Wolfmankurd (talk) 22:10, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

would like some information to be added as to its use in warfare, its approximate range etc.

Language

Some of the language in the article demonstrates poor English, including this example from the 'Shape' section - "It makes bowyer easy to grip yumi after shoot a arrow.". I appreciate that English is not the first langauge for many people, Japanese included, but that is no excuse for language this poor in an English-language Wiki. Noble Korhedron 02:47, 8 March 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Noble Korhedron (talk • contribs)

• • Have a shot at changing the wording yourself, thats what editing is all about.Samuraiantiqueworld (talk) 03:18, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

More data

Can some body provide information about the penetration, the kind of arrows used and so? Thanks a lot. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.39.46.117 (talk) 20:25, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Dead Link Pruning

• The Korekawa bow at Nara National Museum is a dead link as of 22NOV2011. I've pasted it here in case it comes back later, and for reference. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.56.24.58 (talk) 09:49, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Vibration nodes

The article says that 1/3 and 2/3 are the locations of the vibration nodes in an ideal rod, but they are actually at 1/4 and 3/4 for a free rod, or 1/2 for a rod fixed at its ends. The shape and cross-sectional thickness of the bow will change this dramatically, but the basic hypothesis is easy and painless to test if you have a high-speed camera:

Get a yumi, place it on a table, and give it a little bend-and-release. With a high-speed camera, you will be able to see the nodes easily with even a small push. Do this for both an unstringed and a stringed yumi, and post your results either here or in a blog.

I have not been able to find anything on this, surprisingly. The closest thing is a second-hand quote from the author of a book that apparently dropped the discussion entirely, and he (correctly) identified 1/3 and 2/3 as a perfect-fifth ratio, not the location of natural nodes. Now the perfect fifth may have significance in terms of sympathetic vibrations (harmonics) in the bow, but it will not make the grip itself vibrate less.

Before anybody yells WP:OR, understand that this is a basic physics observation that should be double-checked before we cite a myth redigested multiple times from random blog posts. So that leaves the question: who here is a kyudoka with a high-speed camera? SamuelRiv (talk)

"Before anybody yells WP:OR, understand..."

I understand, thank you very much. Rest assured, I will not "yell" WP:OR just because you are proposing a verification of material here by means of a custom physics experiment, accomplished by seeking out another editor with specialized camera equipment. How could anyone think such a thing? Marteau (talk) 00:50, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

The History of Yabusame and Horse Archery in Japan

There is 0 connection between these two things. If you do not wish to accept my in-good-faith editing out of a patently false statement, so be it. Burden of proof is, nonetheless, not mine. You cannot demand I prove my statement (especially after I did, and I'll get back to that), and then claim it's my responsibility to disprove a false unsourced statement. It is not my Burden of Proof to disprove your false claims just because some moron wrote a pile of bs here before anybody else. As to the source I provided, if you don't know wtf "Classified Regulations of the Three Reigns" is to begin with, you probably shouldn't be writing public articles about Japanese History and embarrassing yourself to begin with. Nor am I being paid to make a trip to the library and write up annotations just to disprove some absurdly silly notion (you may as well claim the Japanese Military didn't use firearms until Tom Cruise starred in the Last Samurai). But anyone who has a clue about Japanese Military History will be aware of that source noting mounted Senshi armed with bows and Hesselink's work, who contends the Yamato state adopted mounted archers, in the form of Chinese immigrants forming the Aya clan, shortly after their failed attempt to aid Paekche. That said, it's just as well. It's abundantly clear when students use Wikipedia for information due to the proliferation of sophomoric idiocy such as this, and the community's obstinate refusal to change bad information just because they've had it wrong for a very long time.50.8.115.78 (talk) 07:06, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Notwithstanding your insults and your temper, your edits will not stand without citations. Should you wish to contribute to the encyclopedia, you will be required to use citations. It's that simple. The paramount rule here is "verifiability". It is not what you or I know. It is what can be verified. Please review WP:NOTTRUTH. Marteau (talk) 07:57, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Let me know when the statement equating Yabusame and Mounted Archery is substantiated and cited. Oh wait, two standards. Like I said -- that's why these articles are a sophomoric joke. If some uneducated and ignorant moron writes a load of bs first, it stays. That's not logic; that's just stupid.50.8.115.78 (talk) 19:01, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

The “cartridge” category in the info box

Why is there a “cartridge” category at the bottom of the infobox? It’s a bow, not a firearm. 2600:1700:9DA0:BCC0:1DC9:74BA:AA0:934E (talk) 05:14, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

Wrong translation

重籐弓 is the right word for shigetō yumi, not 重藤弓. As in it is a rattan bound heavy bow and not wisteria (which doesn't make a lick of sense). 91.159.53.226 (talk) 16:09, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the comment, you are correct. I fixed the kanji spelling, and replaced the mistaken English wording using "wisteria" with the correct word "rattan". ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │^{Tala við mig} 22:09, 18 April 2024 (UTC)