Introducing the Black Swan Wave FD Charts added

[LBR]

"One more time, the arrow doesn't lose spine over the longer distances....you can just see the differences better the further away you go. At 20 let's say my bareshafts land 1" roughly to the right of my fletched shafts. Now, for some, that may be good enough. But now move to 30 and they might be 4-5". I tune a bit more and get it closer...then move to 40...repeat. Now back at 20 it might still be 1" but it's certainly not 4-5" at 30 anymore...so I have tuned more accurately using the longer distance to magnify the relation between bare and fletched shafts groupings."

I understand and agree.  You missed my point.  To see a 1" difference at 20 yds, you have to be a good shot.  Accuracy like that is not common with traditional shooters.  How many people can shoot well enough to see a consistent 1" variance @20 yds?  Or even a consistent 4" variance at 30 yds?  A very small percentage.  Archers of that caliber are competeing on a world level, or at least should be.

As I said, you have to be a dang good shooter to notice a difference so small that it only starts showing up at 28 yds and beyond.

It comes down to a simple phrase:  Can you shoot the difference?  Most can't, at least not starting at 28 yds.  I wish I was that good.  I'm not a lousy shot, but I'm not nearly good enough to start seeing a 1" variance in my groups at 28 yds.

Anyhow, now we know there was no bare-shafting to begin with.

[Rob DiStefano]

imo, everything about archery is personally subjective, and that huge variability can mean if you shot my *excellent* bow and arrow, it might just be a *dog* to you.  i take bow and arrow marketing rap with a shaker of salt 'cause the rubber meets the road when *I* try it all out.  

if every *great, fast, wonderful, killer, fabulous, superb* bow was truly as advertised, there shouldn't be many used bow ads in the classifieds forum, eh?  :D

there are two arrow spines to consider: static and dynamic.  static is ballpark, dynamic is what counts and what matters for arrow tuning.

arrow spine, static or dynamic, doesn't change of its own volition.  changing arrow spine requires a physical property alteration, such as in mass weight or balance.  shooting an arrow out of a bow doesn't change either its static or dynamic spine.  this is basic wysiwyg stuff.  

static arrow spine is the applied weight deflection reading you see on a spine meter.  multi directional arrow shafting (carbon, aluminum) spine is very close to 360 degrees around the shaft.

dynamic arrow spine begins upon arrow release, and goes through some measure of paradox that's defined by the release type and its efficiency (the trigger), the  bowstring (the transmission) and the first physical obstruction the arrow encounters other than the ambient atmosphere (the rest, the arrow plate, the riser).  there are so many other factors to include, such as arrow shaft and nock straightness, arrow balance, fletching type & size & location, nock point location and type, and many others including what launches the arrow, human or machine.

if you paper tune, the backstop doesn't matter at all since yer punching holes in suspended paper that's a good distance from the butt.

if you target tune, the butt must be made of a  multi directional material, such as ethafoam (polyethylene).  stuffed bag and layered foam butts are unidirectional and will give false tuning indicators.

[vermonster13]

I tune via grouping as JC does. The string is an 8 strand Ultra-Cam endless loop.

LBR when I get it back I'll do some serious bare shafting with it and tuning.

The bow is a fun bow to shoot. If it is something you're interested in than go for it, if not that's fine too. There are a lot of quality bowyers on here and I shoot other stuff myself as some know. lol

This bow won't cure cancer or guarantee a B&C buck for you. It will give you a smooth draw, good performance and effciency. It will do it's part so long as you do your's as will 99% of the bows made today. Different strokes for different folks.

[JC]

Chad, I think there are many traditional shooters who can shoot the difference. Maybe not with every shot, but shooting multiple arrows for averages yes I think they can. The patterns may look like shotgun patterns but the "averages" of those patterns can easily show 4" differences at 30 yards. And I don't think it takes world class archers to do it because I know I'm not a world class archer but I can see those differences on a regular basis. My point is, if you can bareshaft at 20, bareshafting at 30 or more will only get you more precise results because of the very nature of how the distance magnifies the issues...it may take using the averages of the groups of multiple shots but in the end it will work. At least in my experience and in the experience of some other "non-world level" archers I know.

Rob, I wish I had a release good enough to paper tune, that would make things much easier on me.  Curious about your point with stuffed bag butts giving false tuning indicators. Unless you are using nock tuning, and not the aforementioned relational grouping method popularized by OL,  I still can't understand how the type of target would effect tuning indicators.

[Greg Owen]

I think one of the problems is that on OLs site, the diagrams make it appear that the way the arrow is sticking in the target matters. The diagram shows nock high, nock low, etc. But he clearly says (in the text) to ignore that using his method. All that matters is where the bareshafts hit the target in relation to the fletched shafts. The target material doesn't matter. But that is for OL's method.  You can also tune by how the arrow is sticking in the target, then the target material matters greatly. It's personal preference.

[Greg Owen]

"This bow won't cure cancer or guarantee a B&C buck for you"

You mean I need to cancel my order now? I was expecting this bow to solve all my problems.

Oh, I don't have cancer and I don't hunt so I'm still gonna ride the Wave. I use my camera to take the trophy photos.  Its much easier to pack out a photo than an elk!

[Rob DiStefano]

imo, paper tuning is for targeteers and not trad bowhunters.  i don't paper tune.  i will bareshaft into a polyE or sytrofoam (blown foam) butt.  a stuffed bag butt will not allow an arrow shot into it to remain in its flight path, it will distort as the bag stuffing material shifts around on arrow impact.  the same is true for a layered foam butt as an arrow shot into it will be influenced by the compression of the foam layers.

i dunno what all this tuning stuff hasta do with the quality of any trad bow.  there are far more important features to look for, imho.  

and besides, the bow is still not as important as the arrow.

[Jason R. Wesbrock]

Originally posted by Rob DiStefano:
imo, paper tuning is for targeteers and not trad bowhunters.  i don't paper tune.  i will bareshaft into a polyE or sytrofoam (blown foam) butt.  a stuffed bag butt will not allow an arrow shot into it to remain in its flight path, it will distort as the bag stuffing material shifts around on arrow impact.  the same is true for a layered foam butt as an arrow shot into it will be influenced by the compression of the foam layers.

It doesn’t matter if the bare shaft hits the target, turns sideways, and does a River Dance. What matters is where it impacts relative to the fletched shafts, which will be determined by how if flies through the air. FWIW, Adcock didn’t invent the bare shaft planning method. Heck, Easton has had it in their tuning guide for decades, and they likely got it from someone else.

For the record, most good “targeteers” prefer bare shaft tuning to paper tuning; it’s more precise.
 

[JC]

I see what you mean Rob, but to me that would only matter if you were tuning by nock orientation alone. Once the shaft hits the target, it doesn't matter to me if it turns sideways or not...it's where the fletched impacts in relation to bare shafts.

I don't think the tuning has anything to do with the quality of the trad bow itself, but to me it sure has a lot to do with the overall performance you get out of a the bow setup as a whole.

I don't know...without the bow the arrow is useless and vice versa so I don't think one piece of the equation is any more important than any other...none can do the work intended without the other. They work together as a whole, or not at all.

You're view is just skewed because you have one set of arrows that shoot out of any bow you own. Remember, I'm one of those handful of guys on the planet that can't get AD's to fly out of any bow, let alone all of them.   :p

Like I said, didn' mean to hijack the thread, just kind of strayed into that with all the questions/statements that have focused on the tuning portion of this bow.

[vermonster13]

While I never intended this to be a tuning thread, it sure has got this bow a lot of views on here, so thanks guys!    :D

[JC]

Jason, crossed posts. I also agree, I don't think OL invented it, that's why I usually say "popularized by OL" like I did above. I don't remember where I saw it first but it was a looooong time before the internet.

I remember the days when you grabbed up a handful of arrows and numbered them...shot them a bunch and put the numbers that landed right in the quiver and wrote where you needed to aim for the others on the shaft itself and used them for stumpin. Back then, I mostly saw just target archers tuning and then later on compound shooters. I didn't need tuning but I sure do shoot better with it.

[Rob DiStefano]

Originally posted by Jason R. Wesbrock:
 

Originally posted by Rob DiStefano:
imo, paper tuning is for targeteers and not trad bowhunters.  i don't paper tune.  i will bareshaft into a polyE or sytrofoam (blown foam) butt.  a stuffed bag butt will not allow an arrow shot into it to remain in its flight path, it will distort as the bag stuffing material shifts around on arrow impact.  the same is true for a layered foam butt as an arrow shot into it will be influenced by the compression of the foam layers.

It doesn’t matter if the bare shaft hits the target, turns sideways, and does a River Dance. What matters is where it impacts relative to the fletched shafts, which will be determined by how if flies through the air. FWIW, Adcock didn’t invent the bare shaft planning method. Heck, Easton has had it in their tuning guide for decades, and they likely got it from someone else.

For the record, most good “targeteers” prefer bare shaft tuning to paper tuning; it’s more precise.
     [/b]

with bare and fletched arras, it's both the relative points of impact on a butt (distance) and the nock location (angle) that matter to me.  one without the other don't mean much at all.

for what 'record'? i dunno what 'targeteer' you have in mind, and not that it really matters squat - i mean fita fingers freestyle.  we paper tuned first, bare shaft tuned second, coarse tuned to 30 meters, micro tuned out to 90 meters.  it starts with the paper, you want to see that clean, fletched arrow hole to know yer in the ball park before moving on.  

all of this stuff is getting to be techno jibber jabber that i don't see how any of it relates to the the topic's bow in question.  

we need to end this thread ,.,..