In field use, one of the disadvantages of a crossbow is its string has to be engaged in firing condition in order to be useful. An unbraced crossbow is not at all useful in hunting conditions whereas most any vertical bow can be made "useful" very quickly. Crossbow makers have tried to overcome this limitation with anti dry fire technology and safeties... but all of this technology does not alleviate the fact that for a crossbow to be usable it needs its string to be under tremendous force. It has other disadvantages, like added weight and they are generally more cumbersome than a compound bow. But I think this is their biggest disadvantage. Their advantages are in their simplicity of use, they are easy to learn and their sighting systems are easier to master than that of a compound. You can use braced field positions more like a rifle which allows for greater accuracy potential in people who are not trained archers. They are also generally faster to use if they are in firing condition than a vertical bow that need to be drawn before they can be fired.Without getting too passionate, can anyone list the advantages and disadvantages in regards to crossbow vs compound bow?
From a technical stand point, crossbows are like short draw bows. Crossbows have a draw length half that of conventional bows. They need very high draw weights to overcome their lack of draw length. Fortunately crossbows can store these very high draw weights as they do not require an archer to actually hold the weight on the string. But bracing this weight takes time and effort. You hear of crossbows having 300lbs+ draw weights,and you think, 'holy F**K that is one powerful bow!' But the reality is that it is on par with far lesser draw weight (70 lbs draw weight) compounds simply because draw length is such an important factor in stored energy. From an arrow penetration and effective range stand point crossbows and vertical bows are very similar in performance, which may seem counter intuitive.