tapered shaft facts?

[fujimo]

so this is a topic that has been spoken about heaps, but i dont know if there has ever been anything conclusive established, lots of ideas and opinions( of which- i too have lots- well at least according to my wife)

my two questions are
1. if , when one watches slo-mo videos showing archers paradox, of properly spined arrows- the shaft does not touch the strike plate after release, (in fact strike plate skid marks are used to assist with tuning)- so if the arrow is not supposed to contact the strike plate- why would a tapered arrow help with this?

2.penetration- if the head used  is a broadhead ( and not a field point) surely the major cut from the broadhead is way bigger than the diameter of the shaft- there seem to be so many variables with penetration- (many people have shot moose with a #40 bow, and had complete pass thru's) impact area, hide thickness, distance, release etc etc etc. i do hear that in thoeory- that the diminishing shaft size would decrease resistance- and so enhance penetration, but if the wound channel is already pretty big- does it really have an effect?

3.foc- now that i buy completely- it helps improve FOC, so in turn improves recovery from paradox- the arrow flies straighter, sooner- now that will help with penetration, and flight characteristics.

4. tapered shafts have a "dynamic spine"- (a changing spine value as the diameter reduces), and this purportedly improves recovery from paradox- as apposed to a static spine in parallel shafts.

and if the above points valid- why then only taper the last 12 to 9 "- surely a full taper would be better!!??? or no??

what do you guys think or know? any well documented /recorded facts would go a long way.

by the way- i DO taper my shafts- i need all the help i can get   :D

I got my wife some Acmes thatinstead of the nock end being tapered only 8 or 9 inches, the taper fades out about at about 22".   With her 38 @26 NAT two years ago she shot one through a buck.  The buck ran a half circle and stopped about 28 yards away on her other side.  That shot hit both scaplua and did not pass through.  The buck dropped on the spot and broke the arrow.   She was so upset about one of those rare arrows getting broke, that she refused to use them this year.  The tapered Wapiti worked just fine for her as they have in the past.  While I think there may some recovery speed advantages in the tapered shafts, the real reason I went to them is because of the quality of the Rogue River service and shafts.

[Dan Landis]

I've used nothing but Grizzly Stiks for the last 5-6 years, I love the fact that they are so easy to tune.  I can shoot the Sitkas with 175 gr. field tips from my 45# recurves and self bows and from my 60# recurve without changing anything.  I certainly can't explain why, but they work and are very durable.

[michaelschwister]

All I know is they bare shaft much cleaner and getting a perfectly tunes arrow is much easier than parallel shafts.

[BAK]

Well, for one thing all arrows have static spine, that is a certain stiffness that can be measured on a spine tester.

No arrow has dynamic spine until it is shot.  

All arrows that are shot have some dynamic spine factor that may or likely will not correlate to the initial static spine.

[Kopper1013]

My understanding through Ashby is when BONE is brought into play is really when the tapered shafts shine. With scapula's and heavy'er bone after the broad head passes through the bone will most likely come back together (unless it's shattered) and that's when the taperd shaft has an advantage.... That is just MY understand so take it with a grain of salt please

[Orion]

Tapering the back 9 inches or so of the shaft does two things.  It increases the FOC a bit, about 1-2% depending on shaft diameter and amount of reduction in the taper.  The increased FOC aids penetration.

Two, because it is tapered, it recovers more quickly as it passes the bow so the arrow straightens more quickly, which also aids penetration.  

The reduction in shaft diameter due to tapering the final 9 inches of a shaft has a negligible effect on penetration.  Not enough to notice vis-a-vis a parallel shaft.

Tapering may reduce the static spine from 1-3#, but, because it recovers faster as a result, the arrow can dynamically act stiffer than its static spine.  This also has to do with the fact that the tapered shaft is about 20-30 grains lighter on the tail end, again depending on initial shaft diameter and amount of reduction in the taper.

Full tapers work.  They're just very difficult to do with a wood shaft.  There are a few carbon shafts that are tapered almost their entire length-- Grizzly Sticks and Arrow Dynamics for example. And, of course, bamboo shafts are tapered full length.

[fujimo]

i concur with what everyone above says    
 still no thoughts on the "clearance" at the bow upon release. it seems to be a frequently touted point- i however do not see it in the videos though.
thanks thus far!
wayne

[Orion]

If the arrow is tuned to the bow, it clears the riser without hitting it.  The fact that it's a tad thinner at the base has little to do with it clearing the riser. A typical taper is 11/32 down to 5/16.  That's 1/32 of an inch, and since it occurs on the diameter, that means the arrow is 1/64 inch less on either side at the narrow end of the taper.  The difference in feather height is often greater than that. In short, the 1/32-inch smaller arrow diameter at the base has a negligible effect on the arrow clearing the riser.  

Correct spine enables the arrow to clear the riser, and the tapering enables it to recover a tad faster.  And, we're not talking big differences here.  Most folks can't tell the difference between the way tapered and parallel shafts shoot.  In fact, almost all aluminum and carbon arrows are parallel, and they shoot pretty good (if tuned to the bow, of course.)

[fujimo]

roger that  

[Stumpkiller]

I taper my Douglas fir and P.O. cedar shafts for the last 12" from 11/32" down to 5/16".

Seems to help flight.  May help penetration.  I use metal tips and broadheads on my arrows and don't worry much about FOC.

[Bowjunkie]

Wayne, I prefer to breast or barrel taper mine.

1.) It doesn't. Parallel shafts, properly spined, clear the bow just fine. I don't taper my arrows to clear the bow. I taper their ends so they flex more evenly and stabilize sooner. Not always, but sometimes I notice how arrows tapered on both ends stabilize sooner. It happens so fast that it's hard to see. Conditions have to be just right.

Think about bow limbs... why are they tapered in width and thickness? So they flex evenly and don't carry unneeded mass. Outer limbs that don't carry unnecessary mass, don't cause unnecessary amounts or duration of vibration, loss of energy, etc.

2.) I'm not sure. But there is also the theory that tapered shafts flex and stabilize differently than parallel shafts upon impact, for similar reasons as they do upon release. That is, less mass on the nock end would cause less flexing upon impact, and less flex means less drag against the wound channel. Perhaps this, with a tiny bit more clearance due to the smaller diameter, together aid penetration a little???

3.) Sooner than parallels perhaps, but I don't think foc helps the arrow fly straighter or recover sooner than double tapers like breast and barrel tapering.

4.) I think I addressed pretty well above.

Full taper? Not for me. When we shoot any arrow, the whole shaft flexes/oscillates upon release, and I think/assume tapering from both ends stabilizes it sooner than a full length single taper would.

This is all just my opinion though as I have no well documented or recorded facts.

[fujimo]

thanks guys- all very valid input.

really good to hear some feedback from people who have really thought this through
food for thought
many thanks
wayne

[WESTBROOK]

My thought...

A parallel shafts flex is spread equal between the ends.

The tapered rear of the tapered shaft flexes side to side more than a parallel giving it more clearance going past the riser. The taper allows the shafts to recover and straighten out quicker, partially due to the fact that the front of the shaft probably flexes less. the taper moves the apex of the flex toward the rear of the shaft.

A good example...Arrow Dynamics...rear tapered for about 14"...the front (11/32) 2/3 has about a 95# static spine...the rear tapers down to 9/32 and handles all the flex of paradox and allows this shaft to be shot from 45-55# bows.

BUT...until someone sets up a camera to film a parallel V.S. tapered we will never know for sure.

[fujimo]

true, but when i have watched slo-mo video of correctly spined parallel shafts being shot from the appropriate bow- they too do not impact the strike plate.
but i do agree- that  the tapered shaft doesrecover from paradox quicker - due 1.to the dynamic spine and 2.the higher foc

would be good to see some comparitive video and conclusive test results- otherwise it is simply left to what we " feel and think"- just speculation on our part.
jeff does have some very good points above!

[fujimo]

so heres another one- apparently work was done(Oregon university??) on comparing aluminum shafts and wood shafts- and their respective penetration factors.
 now i have not personally seen the papers or the results- and dont shoot ali  but apparently the sound resonance in ali is higher- so it actually absorbs some of the kinetic energy on release- and therefore equates to lower penetration!!??    

just what i have been told- sure there will be a lot of outcry about that- it is NOT a statement from me- and of no real value until i can see the test results

[Orion]

Huh?  To start with, kinetic energy is a worthless measure of penetration.  Re the sound resonance, pretty much hoowie (sp?). If I were to guess, I'd guess that aluminum may recover/stop flexing a bit more quickly at the shot, and thus may penetrate a little better.  If not, the skinnier shaft will penetrate the best, regardless of material, all other things being equal. Can't believe everything you read, and even less of what you hear.  

[fujimo]

so true Jerry, i need to get a hold of old Stan, and ask him to get the papers for me- who knows how the tests were done- were the arrows totally matched, and tuned to their respective bows- and if not conducted by experienced archers( or at least with their direct consultation???)- i would question the validity of the tests

[Don Stokes]

As a former shaft manufacturer, I have spent a lot of time on this subject. I made barreled shafts, for several reasons. For one, I was able to make higher spines this way by using larger diameters, tapered to standard point and tip sizes.

Orion knows his stuff, so I won't repeat what he has said. I will say that the reason barreled shafts shoot harder is that the center section of the shaft stays closer to the bow riser, so it absorbs the energy of the bow more efficiently. Less is lost to flexing, but the shaftmond still clears the riser perfectly.

As far as penetration on ANIMALS, a broadhead makes a hole much larger than any shaft, and the blood is an excellent lubricant, so shaft diameter is insignificant. Differences only show up shooting solid materials, not on animals.

Dan Quillian was my mentor on much of this, and I also worked out a few things on my own.

[Hud]

When you have minute check out     http://elitearrows.com/proper-arrow/    

When shooting with fingers, and a typical bow, and arrows, the string has a tendency to roll off the fingers. The arrow bends inward and pushes off the rest. Watch Byron Ferguson arrow in slow motion in this YouTube video.

       

If you think tapered are best shoot them.  I have shot both for many years and notice little difference. You can build a paper target like pictured in the first link, and test your own arrows and see if their is a difference. Set it in front of your bales or backstop and have a little fun. The method shown here is one of the best ways to test your equipment.