Absolutely perfect arrow flight!

[Curtiss Cardinal]

Well I had posted about my ridiculously fronted loaded carbons and getting just slightly stiff results.
Well I had gooten a couple things wrong. First the inserts were only 12 grains not the 40 I thought. Second I was shooting them and I was short drawing more than likely being too preoccupied with watching/seeing the arrow flight than with my form. Well anyway I got an electronic grain scale in the mail yesterday and I made sure all points, inserts and weights were within 3 grains of each other. Got a total of 412 grains in the point end of the PSE Carbon Force Dominator 300s. I fletched them up and left everything to cure. This morning I shot them 6 arrows touching at 10, 20, 27 yards(the farthest I can shoot in my backyard) and just straight in the foam. As far as I could see no wobble in the air very fast recovery from paradox. And from this 63# @ 29" Crooked Stic 3 piece longbow seems to be shooting at least 175 fps. Just from my years of experience I don't have a chrono. a total arrow weight of 675 grains. I have to do a websearch for a KE calculator but I think I'm sitting pretty for anything in North America.

[Dr. Ed Ashby]

Right broadhead, and I'd say your pretty well set too!

Ed

[capt eddie]

The broadhead test will tell it all.

[Curtiss Cardinal]

OK with 160 STOS on a 35 grain adapter which makes the business end 407 grains still flys good. 185 grain Snuffers fly good too. 225 Wensel Woodsman that goosed the business end weight up another 25 grains flys seemingly the best.The difference between the heads is barelky noticable.

[O.L. Adcock]

C2, we too have had great luck with extreme FOC's. Part of the preceived forgivness in point weight once you get up that high is a 50 grain change when talking 150 refference is a 33% change, the same 50 grain change at 400 is only 12%. We've got arrows set up with a 17% FOC without points! They crowd 30% with points and are a dream to shoot...O.L.

[JC]

OL, do you have any sources for shafts suitable for extreme FOC for those of us shooting heavier bows? I've found the Carbon Tech Safari to be the stiffist and still can't hang more than 100gr insert and 250 head off of it.

Also, field tips and or judo/hex head type heads to pair with 350+ grain broadheads?

[O.L. Adcock]

JC, The Alaskan Safari should do it. The trick is to go with an internal footing down 4-6" into the shaft. It also relieves the tendency to break behind the head, more to come from the good Doctor on that. But the internal footing adds a lot of weight forward without significantly changing the spine. The added weight up front "lowers" the spine but running it internal 4-6" "stiffens" that section of the shaft, net is little change either way. Using this you can get high FOC's and still use "normal" BH's and adapters.....O.L.

[JImmyDee]

Originally posted by JC:
I've found the Carbon Tech Safari to be the stiffist and still can't hang more than 100gr insert and 250 head off of it.

I bought a dozen of those but haven't found a set-up that shoots as well as my 2419s.  I've sleeved 'em with aluminium and am using 250gr field points -- but am stuck with those 30-40gr inserts.  What 100gr inserts are you using?

[JImmyDee]

Originally posted by O.L. Adcock:
The trick is to go with an internal footing down 4-6" into the shaft.

I'd certainly like to know more about internal footing...

[Pinecone]

JC,
Call Ed at Alaska Bowhunting Supply and ask about his various offerings in the Grizzly shafts.  His high FOC tapered design is very impressive and you may find that something he has works well for you.  I am currently testing some of his Sitka shafts and have been very impressed with the results.  I have been a fan of high FOC and moderate to heavy weight arrows for a long time and these shafts seem to be the ticket for those with a similar affinity.  

Claudia

[Dr. Ed Ashby]

Jay,

I've been intensively working on these (the Internal Footings; or IF's, for short) for about three years - mostly using O.L.'s brains and my blood, sweat and tears ... and a truck load of cash to pay for the many dozens of carbon shafts I've destroyed working out how long they needed to be, how to get them to progrssively flex the right amount and determine the best methods of attachemnt. Glue attaching them full-length doesn't work. There has to be some slippage between the 'flex portion' of the IF and the inner shaft-wall; and the solidly attached forward portion has to be long enough to spread the force of a hard frontal impact along enough of the shaft's inner surface to prevent compression-fractures.

Some of the IF info is coming up in the new Updates, Parts 2 and 3. Bad news is that they are extremely tedious to make by hand. Good news is, I passed all the design info and testing results to a shaft maker (for free), and it looks like there will be a commercially available version in a few months. They have a design and material engineer working on it to determine which of the prototypes should give the best progressive flex on angular impacts, and what material should work best for an IF.

Early test results, in a nut shell, indicates they will not only help you get Extreme FOC, they make carbon shafts every bit as durable on heavy and angular bone impacts as the very best performing hardwood shafts - perhaps even stronger.

Ed

[Curtiss Cardinal]

I had a 17 year old shooting  70# single cam compound shoot one of these arrows and it flew great AND the point was just pushing through the opposite side of a MacKenzie boar target, a new one. I though I was doing good shooting this with a mid 60s hydrid longbow getting 7" on penetration in a 3D target the compound got even better. It shot 3 inches low for his sight set up. BUT I thnk this extrme FOC is something the wheelie guys should try too. Especially since in all the bowhunting videos I watch I see so few pass throughs. They look to get about 14" of penetration at most out of heavy poundage fast, flat shooting compounds shooting carbon arrows. I've never see I total pass through on video of a mechanical broadhead tipped arrow.

[JC]

I've tried the grizzly sticks and guess I'm in the minority...I didn't like them at all. Widely varied in spine, the idiosynchrasy of having to find that dramatic spine "hump" in each arrow, and I simply just couldn't get them to fly right. As a matter of fact, I've had trouble getting any tapered shaft to fly as perfectly as standard parallel shafts. I think they are way overpriced for durability...it's a crying shame Carbon Express quit making the Terminator Hunter...and didn't make it at least one size heavier/thicker. Guess I am the only guy who's tried em and not liked em, cause I read a lot of good reviews...but not for me again.

Any other suggestions?    :rolleyes:  

Jimmy, just the standard brass inserts available from 3 Rivers on the Carbon Tech Safari (they fit all the "standard" carbon shafts in both 50 and 100 gr). Dang telephone pole shaft...but I'm not sure I could hang another 100gr off them with the heavy 76# limbs I'm playing with (like I'd like to try more extreme foc with them as Dr. A's studies are suggesting). If they weren't so darned expensive, I'd start fiddling with additional weights screwed into the back of the insert and sleeving externally....but the force of impact of these shafts dictates everything be put together with jb weld, so it's not so easy to "fiddle" with. Now, If I happen to mushroom one, I'll have an excuse, but that's yet to happen with these shafts.

So Doc, on these internal sleeves, are you using 2 different adhesives to get the different solid/flexible attachment areas? Sounds awfully labor intensive to me. I hope all these guys you are giving this valuable data to remember where they got it       And your thoughts on the effectiveness of your same procedure for external footings?

[O.L. Adcock]

C2, Yep, the physics are the same from a green willow limb or a compound, the arrow has no clue what it came out of. 90% of their problem is the velocity they are trying to shoot..resistance to penetration goes up by the square of the velocity. Anytime you increase velocity without an increase in horsepower, bad things happen....

JC, I'm surprised you have found that with tapered shafts. Yes, carbons can and do vary in spine but the worst carbons are better then the best wood shafts and most of us think they are wonderful. Many/most consider tapered shafts to be superior flying no natter the material. Woods footed with a heavy wood up front are the cats behind!    I've heard all the theories about the back end flexing and clearing the shelf better..yadayadayad...I feel it's been the higher FOC all along and nobody put two and two together...

Like Dr. Ed said, there is a comercial venture underway for internal footings so I'm reluctant to spell out how to do it with other materials. Like the Doc said too, it's tedious and time consuming to do it right. Think of the arrow as a fishing rod and how you'd like a fishing rod to bend. Putting a piece of pipe over a rod and setting the hook is going to result in a broken rod. An insert, or a piece of parallel tubing inside or outside is the same thing. All it does is move the weak spot to another place. Look at a 2 point footed wood shaft..that is designed correctly. Better yet would be a 4 point with 2 points extending 3-4" past the other 2.....O.L.

[Dr. Ed Ashby]

I think O.L said it all! It took the intentional destruction of well over a gross of carbon shafts against a piece of armor plate for me to work out what it took to get the IF's dimensions and degree of progressive flex right. And I'll guarantee that the IF's are tedious enough to make that not many folks would ever make their own!

Outside-sleeving carbon shafts helps on direct-impacts, but it doesn't provide the progressive flex; which is what it takes to reduce shaft damage on angular impacts. A 'graduated-flex' outside sleeve would do that, but it also increases shaft diameter; reducing the shaft/ferrule diameter ratio. It's desirable to keep shaft diameter small, ergo, the reason for footing them internally.

Among the 'normal' carbon shafts I've tested, the Grizzly Stik ranks as most durable. I've not had any problems getting great flight with them, and I tune them the same way I would a parallel shaft.

JC, one of the benefits of the IF is that it shortens the shaft's 'working section', stiffening the dynamic spine. Most of my bows are not anywhere close to center shot (which would need a bit more spine) but I had 60-75 shafts shooting perfect from bows up to 90 pounds (at my draw) with high front-end loads. On one older HH 85#, it had to drop back to a 45-60 shaft and still leave it a tad long, and that was with 465 grains up front (including the IF). One up-side of this IF shaft-stiffening effect is that it allows use of a lighter static spine shaft, which lowers the mass-weight of the shaft's rear a bit, further boosting FOC.

Ed

[JImmyDee]

Originally posted by O.L. Adcock:
a piece of parallel tubing inside or outside is the same thing. All it does is move the weak spot to another place.

Originally posted by Dr. Ed Ashby:
Outside-sleeving carbon shafts helps on direct-impacts...

Yes and yes.  I've got some Carbon Tech Safaris that broke just behind the sleeve I had fitted.  I  originally started sleeving carbons because of the mushrooming that started just behind the pile; the sleeves stopped that.
 

Originally posted by Dr. Ed Ashby:
On one older HH 85#, it had to drop back to a 45-60 shaft and still leave it a tad long, and that was with 465 grains up front (including the IF). One up-side of this IF shaft-stiffening effect is that it allows use of a lighter static spine shaft, which lowers the mass-weight of the shaft's rear a bit, further boosting FOC.

Now I'm *really* curious.

I've shot a number of different carbon shafts from 70#, 80#, and 85# bows with 300gr to 420gr worth of insert, weights, adaptors, and points.  I found myself thinking, "These shafts really shouldn't have to be this stiff" and bought a couple dozen more limber shafts.  Out of the middle-weight bows -- 75# and 80# -- those limber shafts looked like they were going downrange sideways, nock-end left.

[I wish I hadn't read this 'til next spring -- I don't want to spend time shaft-putzing at this time of year...]

[Curtiss Cardinal]

OK This is weird I shot these same arrows out of my 73# Critter Getter longbow today and they fly even better if that is possible. So I figure the STOS for that bow and I can shoot anything all the way through. The Snuffers are my turkey arrows and I mighjt go after a whitetail with those too. I am chompoing at the bit for some of those heads Bob Morrison mentioned to me.

[JC]

Like I said, I guess I'm one of the only guys who've had issue with tapered carbons...thankfully I'm not the only one and the others I know are very experienced so that helped my ego a bit    

The set I had (and sold the remainder of) was OK for durability, but nothing like the CE's I'd used. I just thought they should have been that much better for how much more they cost.

Anyway, I agree with all that's said about moving the weakpoint. I don't get mushrooming anymore with EF shafts but I have broken a few (very few) just behind the footing. But then, I think those hits would have destroyed any arrow.

That's good news OL about a new arrow design for us trad guys.