Shakespeare Wambaw Model X5, X12
by Larry Vienneau
There are several Shakespeare hunting bows named after famous hunting regions and national forests. THE WAMBAW is named after Wambaw Creek Wilderness in South Carolina. The word Wambaw may be derived from an extinct Native American dialect combined with an African language.
Wambaw Model X5 (1974?), X12 1975.
- AMO 58”
- Brace Height: 8-9 inch
- Riser pistol grip style- X12 has five-piece wood lamination, X5 one piece of exotic hardwood.
- Tips - X12 wood overlay, X5 no overlays
- Riser window 5 inch
- Limbs: 1 3/4 inch in Black Glass
- Weights: 40lb, 45lb, 50lb, 55lb
- X 12 Stabilizer insert, X5 no insert
- Arrow speed for X12: 12 shots average, 410-grain arrow 45lb bow-173.62
FPS
 |
| My 45# Wambaw X12 |
 |
| Wambaw X5 |
There is very little information online about this bow since Archeryarchives.com closed.
There are two models listed in the 1975 catalog, the X5 and the X12. I have gathered some information from chat rooms, blogs, and auction sites. I own a 1975 catalog and found the X12 listed in the catalog. It is unclear if the X5 was released in 1974. The X5 model was not included in the 1974 catalog. The X5 has a similar shape, but there is no laminate, no stabilizer insert, no tip overlay, and no stabilizer insert. According to the 1975 catalog, the X12 isn't the first design. The X5 has the new Buck logo and Shakespeare Archery Equipment logo and a sticker found on 1970s bows. I believe the X5 was a 1974 bow. From the decals the X-5 shows it was produced in 1974 yet appears in no catalog or advertising. This is around the time Shakespeare Archery was in turmoil. Perhaps this inconsistency reflects this?
 |
| my Left Hand Wambaw X12 with Lewis Kent's Right Hand Wambaw X5 |
 |
| nock comparison between an X5 and X12 |
I had never actually held an X5 until Lewis Kent won his bow. I have only seen two at auctions and one of them my friend Lewis Kent won. I photographed his right-hand bow with his left-hand bow to compare the differences between these two models. The nocks on the models are quite different. The X5 has no tip overlays but X12 does, and X12 has a string grove.
 |
| X5 can't be a mid-1960s bow because the marking is from the 1970s |
I had first thought that the X5 was a mid-1960s model that had been resurrected. But now, looking at Lewie's bow it is obvious that the X5 is from the same period, it is from 1974 and one of the last of the Shakespeare bows.
 |
| Serial number shows this X5 is 1974 and the X12 is 1975 |
The really interesting thing is that these X5 and X12 bows even have different serial numbers. The X5 ends with a "T" which is the letter found on a Sierra X18. The X12 ends with a "C". The only way to date the X5 is by serial number which dates Lewis Kent's bow as a 1974 product. The X5 is an oddball, it is a rare bow, it does not appear in any catalogs and if it is one of the last of the Shakespeare bows, why the heck did they number it X5??? The Purist X4 and Graduate X6 are both 1974-75 bows, perhaps there is sequential significance, but why the different number X12? Why not X8?
Virtually
every reference to this bow is a positive review,
most call it “a greatly underrated bow” I can’t find any advertising
material
on the bow either. It is a bit fancier than another Shakespeare of the
same
period. It has multiple laminate woods in the riser, and it has wood
overlay
tips similar to The Necedah. In auctions, it can go from $50 - $200 for
RH and
even higher for LH but the value depends on the condition of the bow. Like
many recurve bows it may have suffered the same fate as most recurves –
the introduction
of the compound bow. Recurves quickly fell out of fashion, or, in the
case of
Shakespeare Archery, the manufacturers went out of business. Shakespeare
closed
its archery division in 1975. Personally, I was very surprised by this bow. I paid more than I wanted to for my
bow but
the lefty bows are hard to come by so I bit the bullet. Since there
wasn’t much
information on the bow, I thought it might not be worth what I paid….I
was
wrong. I tested it against my #45 Bear Kodiak Magnum. The #45 Wambaw is
just as
smooth and accurate. It is becoming one of my favorite bows.
The moral of the story is. Don’t trust the hype- Bears are
great bows but you can buy an equally fine shooting bow by Shakespeare for half
the price.
It was true in the 1960s-70 and it is still true in the 21st
century.
© Copyright, Larry Vienneau Jr.
All rights reserved.
When Shakespeare closed Owen Jeffery was the bowyer there, he bought the equipment and started his own company Jeffery Archery in Columbia SC, he was also bowyer to Fred Bear for many years also was VP of Bear, so his influence can be seen in many lines of bows.
ReplyDeleteThanks David I appreciate the comment. I have tried twice to contact Jeffery Archery and had no response. I had hoped to be able to talk to a living legend Owen Jeffery, but I haven't given up yet. He is in his mid 80's so time is of the essence. I also have tried several times to contact Shakespeare but most to the customer service folk had no idea that Shakespeare even made archery equipment, REALLY!!
ReplyDeleteI think it may be time for a snail mail approach. I haven't given up on them either.
thanks again David!!
Owen is around 85 now, he can recall some things from long ago, but not many any more, a stroke hurt his memory pretty badly, he is better on the Bear line, he was there longer. His son Tom runs the business and still produces a limited amount of traditional bows.
ReplyDeletethanks David I will try to contact Tom.
ReplyDeleteHi shakespeare archers. I just bought a wambaw x12, and was wonderering if anyone could tell me what would be the best brace hight. I read that it says between 7 1/2 to 8 1/2. Will be grateful if any could help with your advise.
ReplyDeleteHi Hensen
ReplyDeleteI have not been able to get a hold of any written material about the Wambaw. I looked through lots of chat room posts and auctions sites. There isn't much. I have found references to brace height for this bow, so I added 7 ¾ -8 ½ inch because that is the online advice I have found. I'd start with 7 1/2 and work down from there. I shoot mine at 8 1/4
good luck, it is a sweet bow!!!!
Hello blackfeet1954
ReplyDeleteI'm realively new to the traditional archery world. I'm probably a romantic at heart and as a consequence have become somewhat bored with the mechinized nature of today's compound archery. I grew up within an hour of the famous "Neceedah" on Shakespheare model bows. I recollect my father bow hunting with a Bear Kodiak Magnum as a youth. As such, in the past few years have acquired a few Bear Bows of my own. I've just purchased the X5 (the exact bow) listed above in the picture. I was taken by that particular bow's beauty and thus proceeded with the purchase. The seller clued me into your blogspot. I appreciate your information provided above regarding the particular model. I have a feeling that I will be frequenting this blogspot in the future. For me the beauty, history, and simplicity of these bows is what has really fueled my interest in traditional archery and these bows. I also have a feeling that a Neceedah bow will likely become a part of my collection in the future for the above cited reason.
Jeff
ReplyDeleteCongratulations on your bow. Until your bow appeared on eBay I thought the only WamBaw was the X12. When I finally find more on the bow I will post it, love a good mystery!!
Hello, I just bought an X 12 from a friend of mine for 50 bucks, I didn't know much about it but the bow felt so good I decided to buy it. I don't know much about bow technicalities since I'm a novice, but from this article I can tell it was a good decision - now the only problem is figuring out the draw weight, since the only marks are the logo pictured above and an apparently drawn on 58" #45. Is that enough info to tell the draw weight? Also, with a bow like this should I be able to trust my local archery store to choose the string, or should I listen to this site? I hate sounding like a clueless idiot, but with bow technicalities I am - any help would be appreciated.
ReplyDeletenice buy!! the draw length is a standard 28" and the weight of your bow is #45. so if your draw is 28 inch the bow is pulling 45 lbs. add or subtract a couple pounds for every inch above or below 28". So if your draw length is 29 inch you will be drawing 47 lbs.
Deleteask as many questions as you want and enjoy the bow!!!
Nice write up. Great site for checking out the history. Cameron
ReplyDeleteI know of a man who was the shooter for shakespere, they would build prototype bows and give them to him to shoot,many had odd markings and some where just handwritten specs, he would use them for hunting and or competition shooting,,when he told them no ! dont make this bow,they wouldnt put it into production,,they would let him keep the bows,,,he had many 1 of a kind bows,,his grandchildren inherited a few of these bow in Kalamazoo Michigan over the years, this man died in about 2003 I know that around 1999 a small group of these bows were stolen and never recovered, but my buddy may know some info about the existence of unexplainable shakespere models.... I dont check it too often but you can reach me @ farmtruckgreg@live.com but put something meaning full in the subject line so you arent junk mail !
ReplyDeleteI have a full set of the Ernie Root's (my Father) bow design patterns, and the packing slip that was attached to one of the wooden crates holding the patterns, which reflects the "X-" model designations. That slip shows no X-5 or X-12, which indicates that those bows were not made by Root Archery, either before or after the sale to Shakespeare. That said, the Wambaw appears to be a modification of certain Ernie Root designs for our short bows such as the Hunt Master, the Warrior and the Predator. Dad didn't like short bows personally, but the market wanted them so he designed the best he could. Those are considered among the best-shooting bows ever marketed. The Wambaw appears to be a longer version of Dad's short-bow designs, with a few cosmetic variances. I checked with a former Root Archery employee who went to Columbia, SC with the plant and he has no memory of the Wambaw nor the identity of the fellow mentioned above as Shakespeare's "shooter". Since he was our foreman of what we called the "Bow Crafters" part of our operation (it took the output of our "Bow Blanks" phase of operation, the rough bow "kits" right out of the presses, and turned them into finished bows), I feel he would be in a good position to know what was going on. Given his lack of memory, I'd guess that the Wambaw was not made for long, perhaps as noted above as being made at the end of Shakespeare's Archery Division's existence. While Shakespeare's SC archery operation was beset with quality control problems, they could still put out good bows with no QC issues. Owen Jeffery was given management of the archery division in SC after the QC problems became too great, but it appears his skills came too late to save the Shakespeare brand. Yes, the coming of compound bows also hurt Shakespeare (the coming of the compounds was Dad's primary reason for selling Root Archery because he knew his knowledge base in archery was in long bows and recurves, and that Root Archery wouldn't survive the compound-bow craze. He did predict, accurately it seems, that recurves, and even long bows, would enjoy a resurgence in 20-30 years after we sold the business).
ReplyDeleteAs for the fellow in Kalamazoo who had a collection of Shakespeare one-offs, that is likely true. I worked for Shakespeare in a management internship as part of my undergraduate studies in Management. I worked at their Fayetteville, AR plant (fishing reels) and at the Columbia, SC plant (fishing rods, fishing lines and their cheap all-fiberglass bows). In Columbia they had a room full of prototype fishing rods that only had cryptic markings, with no model designations as they were never marketed. I was allowed to select a few rods for my personal use. I still have them. I mention this as it shows that Shakespeare tended to keep prototypes, occasionally letting them out. At Root Archery, if Dad didn't like a bow design he'd cut it in half and move on.
Thanks Larry
DeleteThe Wambaw was at the tail end of Shakespeare and you are probably right about it not being a Ernie Root Design, though it is reminiscent some of the bows you mentioned. I own a Wambaw and it is a good shooting bow, and it is quite too. The weird thing about them is the different numbers (X5 and X12) and riser materials. One might have been 1975 and one could have been one of the last bows in 1976, it is hard to tell. Most likely Owen Jeffery had a hand in the designs. He is an excellent bowyer and the last of this generation!!
I would love to see the prototypes.
i really love this place, you have collected all of update idea, thanks
ReplyDelete