So... Let's say an archer has 7PD, for Eu it appears to be the average for an archer build. Now that means a base of 30 (please correct me if I am wrong) hp, plus 21 for the strength needed, that's a total of 51.
Moving onto the armour, you're more than likely going to be running around with somewhere between 25 to 40 body armour on average depending on your looms/personal style/weight to wpf preference, personally I have 27 + 9 making 36.
Putting that against probably not an average for 2 handers, but a build I know a bit better than others, one with 18 strength giving a total of 48 health with medium-ish armour in most cases to keep with the money balance, you're looking at Lamellar basic for example, that's 36 (dead on for what I have with fully heirloomed mail gauntlets and leather jerkin), then you will more than likely have better head armour etc and therefore you're looking at, let's say for arguments sake, 40+ armour.
So;
21 str archer: 51 health, 35 armour. (~40 max without wpf loss)
18 str 2 hander: 48 health, 40+ armour. (Ability to go much higher with a hell of a lot more choice and versatility.)
I'm not sure what you're complaining about. We might have more hp if we're a heavier hitting archer but we're certainly effected more by having heavier armour and therefore it's really not worth it. Most melee builds that would acceptibly keep up with us are able to wear the same, and then on top of that, the investment that archers can't afford into Ironflesh will increase the hp further giving you, more than likely 5 to 15 more hp.
The numbers seem reasonable to me. Ranged ability for less versatility in melee and less defence.