Does anyone have info on the difference between using fewer laminates in a recurve, each being a little thicker, than using more laminates, each being thinner? Assuming that the final thickness was the same, which gives you better performance?
I think one would be hard pressed to tell the difference especially from shooting characteristics. More lams may give a bit more stability due to increased number of glue lines (also more places to have a glue failure). IT would add a bit of mass to the limb due to more glue in the limb. Most recurves have been built with two lams for years probably for very good reasons.
I think that it depends a lot of the design of the bow. For a short hunting recurve I would not go over two or three lams at max. But for a long ( 64" or even 66" ), kind of old school design recurve I think it should be no problem to use two core lams and two thin veneers. IMHO there is no big difference in performance between two, three or four lams, if even noticeable.
----------
Andy
Agree with the guys, also I built a rather radical hybrid when I was chasin speed with 2 lams and 2 glass, surprised to find my later d/r was only 1 fps slower with 4 lams and 2 glass.
The rad bow held up just fine tho , cept for a savage mule wreck in CO once! LOL