Crossbow Versus Compound and/or Recurve bow.

[Wyldwraith]

Hey all, TWD's "Daryl" got me thinking about this one, so I thought I'd kick it over to you good folks and see what kind of comparison/contrast we come up with, and what the general consensus pans out to be. All right, as the Topic implies, I'm interested in which is perceived to be the better quiet ranged zombie-killing weapon, the Crossbow or the Bow. Further, when it comes to bows, which would you consider the true "counterpart" to the Crossbow in this little competition and why? I'll leave criteria for comparison up to the inventive, and just start things off with an opinion. I'm inclined to believe the crossbow would see more use since it requires a less unforgiving skillset to operate. However, I give maintenance and overall reliability to the properly maintained recurve bow, while considering the compound to fall somewhere between the two. So, thoughts?

[ProfessorChaos]

i think a cross-bow would be the most accurate, portable, and efficient of the three. a recurve bow would be more reliable and durable, i feel, due to the simplicity of its design. this is the weapon i'd chose of the the three options. a compound bow would be a bit too bulky and cumbersome, in my opinion. while it's very lethal and accurate, it just seems a bit more than you'd wanna lug around for very long.

[bassman]

Neither. You need arrows for those things. From my understanding they don't just pop out of skulls and bodies like shown on TV. So eventually you're going to run out and you're fucked. And even if you could re-use the arrows, they'll be covered in zombie blood. Not a good thing to be carrying around - a very sharp object with a deadly virus all over the tip. I'll take the Shaun route and go with a couple sturdy blunt objects. If I absolutely had to choose between the two, I would go with the cross bow. No real reason, it just SEEMS easier to shoot to me.

[Legion2213]

I believe that basic recurve crossbows lose power over time, but they are incredibly simple tools. Compound crossbows are generally more powerfull, but a bit more complicated. Thats how I understand it, but I'm no expert. And I bet there is a world of difference to using any crossbow as opposed to using a real traditional or compound bow and arrow (I have a feeling that a certain level of skill is required for the latter). Personally, if I had to choose one or the other, I'd go with a crossbow (recurve or compound)...less range, but far greater accuracy for the unskilled user like myself. I also believe that zacks should only be engaged at close range if you really want to survive...if one is over 50 yards away, they are none of my business, I don't want to draw attention to myself by popping him when he is no real threat and probably doesn't even know I am there. Edit: Regarding crossbow bolts, you could use the bullet head types as opposed to broadheads, no problem removing them from skulls as they are smooth.

[Skippy911sc]

I think the reload time of a crossbow would be a lot longer than a re-curve or compound bow. And btw, I know the arrow/bolts would go right through the skull and another 30-50 yards. I shoot a compound bow and it does take a bit more skill to shoot successfully. The cross bow would require you to drop it down to the ground and pull (with both hands) the string back into the holder. They even make cranks to assist people with this task. One could obtain a small compound bow/childrens and successfully shoot that with less fatigue.

[Legion2213]

I think the reload time of a crossbow would be a lot longer than a re-curve or compound bow. And btw, I know the arrow/bolts would go right through the skull and another 30-50 yards. I shoot a compound bow and it does take a bit more skill to shoot successfully. The cross bow would require you to drop it down to the ground and pull (with both hands) the string back into the holder. They even make cranks to assist people with this task. One could obtain a small compound bow/childrens and successfully shoot that with less fatigue. Out of interest, as a genuine user/sportsman, what sort of range would you feel comfortable/confident with when taking out a zombie/head sized target with your bow?

[Philly_SWAT]

I myself would go for the crossbow, no doubt. Not only is it easier to use, but I believe it would be more accurate, expecially if you were in severe trouble and using only one hand to fire a weapon could mean the difference between life and death. I am not sure which one would weigh less...that would be a consideration also. Even if only a pound or two, every little pound adds up when you are carrying shit while on the move.

[Publius]

I'd go with what seems to be the consensus: a crossbow based on the lower degree of skill required to effectively use it. However, with the luxury of time to acquire proficiency, I might choose a recurve bow due to shorter reload time, greater ease of maintenance and repair, and better power to weight ratio. To address bassman's point, my hunch is that the bow would be more useful for hunting than for taking out zombies.

[AcesandEights]

Everyone knows there's no contest here. You go with the compound bow with a high STR draw, pump your strength and DEX and try and take point bank shot and many shot, ASAP. I'd go with what seems to be the consensus: a crossbow based on the lower degree of skill required to effectively use it. Or the above! I'd really only be fit to shoot a crossbow, frankly and probably have to take tons of time to get up to speed at that.

[Eyebiter]

The crossbow is a more powerful platform, some Barnett versions have a draw weight of 175lbs with a match grade trigger and optical scope. The only drawback is the crossbow is slower to reload. Also it will be next to impossible for the average user to repair or replace parts once it breaks.