rest material versus point on

[the rifleman]

I had read that Rick Welch uses different materials to get the bow shooting to where the archer is looking.  I have my arrows well tuned so when my form is good and my eye is over the arrow left and right is not an issue.  I had a hard leather (beaver tail) shelf plate on the bow and my point on was a bit farther than I wanted so I tried velcro and it seemed to work.  I ordered a martin rug rest and wondered how much of a difference others have found in the shelf material impacting where the arrow hits vertically.

I know and have made adjustments to all aspects of my shooting to achieve my desired point on including, head position, anchor point, arrow length etc.

After shooting this past weekend in open class because of my fixed crawl, I am re calibrating so that i can shoot 3 under and get back into the longbow class so this is the reason I am trying to find other options.  My goal is to shoot the same way and with the same bow whether hunting or 3d to eliminate margin for error on my part.

[McDave]

Rest materials function like a crude plunger button.  They don’t affect tuning much, if at all, but they do affect where the arrow hits, both right/left and up/down.  Using a softer rest material functions the same as reducing the pressure on the plunger button.

I typically use a Martin rug rest on both strike plate and arrow rest, because I seem to need to move my POI to the right, and like you, would like to reduce my point on.  It moves my POI about 3-4” to the right at 45 yards, and I assume it drops my point on about the same amount, although I’ve never measured it.  Not much of a change, but I’m glad for whatever help I can get.

[McDave]

Might have been a little confusing in my post above.  If your old point on was 45 yards, I would expect to hit 3-4” low at 45 yards with a Martin Rug rest.  The change in point on would be however much you would have to move closer to make up that 3-4”.

[the rifleman]

Thanks McDave!  I understood what you meant.  I thought you may have some insight into this---we had talked about using softer materials before on the sideplate and how even though they may be thicker and move the arrow further away from the riser they have the effect of moving the arrow in a weaker direction at the shot.

I have begun canting my head a bit and with my tab a bit below the nock, but finger still touching the nock I'm just a bit high at 20 yards and about 4 inches high at 15---these are my bowhunting ranges.  It will be interesting to see how the martin rest performs.  Is there a direction to the grain of it that I need to take into consideration when mounting it on my bow?

I'm adjusting to this new hold and have the bloody spot on my nose again to prove it.  If I hold my face square to the target with head tilted over the arrow it doesn't happen, but when I forget I get quite a reminder.  I also played with a nocking point just above 1"---my broadheads and field points still grouped well together, but I shoot light poundage and did not want to compromise tune/penetration so moved it back down to 23/32" which is still high, but shoots the bareshafts along with the fletched.

Thanks again!

[McDave]

I believe there is a grain, although not consistent from batch to batch.  You should feel a resistance when you rub it one way but not the other.  Orient it so the arrow is sliding forward in the direction of least resistance.  If you can't feel any difference, then your batch may not have any noticeable grain.

[the rifleman]

Thank you!