Whats the deal with carbon manufacturers?

[Shaun]

JC, I have set up some 75-95 Gold Tips with high FOC (100 grn adapters & 190 BHs) that shoot like a 55-75 with 145 up front. I have heard mixed rivews of the Grizzly shafts but had a chance to pick up some finished arrows for the price of shafts alone at the UBM auction. Will let you know how they work out- may have to put egg sinkers behind the BH to get them to fly.

[JRY309]

I think it has alot to do with cost of manufacturing also.Like GT's they all take the same inserts and nocks which saves money.If they made carbons in all the different spines they would have to make all the different inserts and carbons would most likely cost well over $100 which alot do now.Look at Easton ACC they come in more spines then other carbons.But they cost $130 a dozen and they are light weight for what I prefer to shoot.Easton now makes the Gamegetter aluminum in 4 different spines likes carbons.I don't worry about the length of my carbons especially on bows not cut to center.I prefer my carbons longer on those bows.I had some 45/60 CX that were 1" past my draw and they would not tune no matter how much weight I added up front.They seemed to get worse with the heavier point I went with.I believe on the bow not cut to center they were bouncing off the riser instead of going through the paradox.I think finding a carbon that would not overhang excessively can be hit or miss and still be heavy enough for safe shooting.Carbons are very versatile but then I don't like to shoot a 400 gr. carbon out of a 70# longbow.So my carbons are longer and stiffer so I can add more weight to weaken the spine to tune good and have enough total weight.

[DesertDude]

Just some food for thought. While Kevin "CupCake" was building his Spine-O-Meter, we tested alot of different Shafts. Just because a carbon arrow has a stated Spine of lets say .400 (Gt55/75) or Axis 400 we found very few that actually spined at .400. Now turn the shaft and test at each feather, you well get a different reading at each point. Some MFG are way better!!

[George D. Stout]

It's amazing to me that someone would suppose that people don't use carbon because they can't tune.   Seems to me to be the opposite.  The front loading has to come because the shafts are inherently stiff.  They are also light, so you need to weight them somehow....usually by front-loading.  Sure you can do that with aluminum, but you don't need to in order to get proper spine and adequate weight.  

Yes Bob, but I would add that I would know that person is a "newer trad shooter" who has been sold a bill of goods....especially the guy shooting 32 inch arrows with 300 grain points.

Carbons have shown me nothing as of yet...maybe tomorrow.

[bowdude]

I'm still trying to figure out how Lewis is insulting me.    

[Kingstaken]

Bowdude I wasn't gonna respond to that, but I never saw any insult myself even before his edit.   :confused:

[JC]

Originally posted by George D. Stout:
Yes Bob, but I would add that I would know that person is a "newer trad shooter" who has been sold a bill of goods....especially the guy shooting 32 inch arrows with 300 grain points.

Carbons have shown me nothing as of yet...maybe tomorrow.

Yep, and what a great buy it is George! What about all those "old trad shooters" that have embraced it? Maybe, you should try looking at it as an option instead of simply something that does not adhere to your conventional way of thinking. Extreme FOC works, whether you are "new" or "old".

If carbon arrows haven't shown you anything, maybe you should try looking at it from a different angle?   :rolleyes:

[M60gunner]

I believe as time goes by there will be carbon arrows made more for the trad shooter. Not on purpose but because the wheely guys will want them. Case in point, I saw an article in a recent magazine by a well know, corporate sponsered bowhunter telling everyone the advantages of heavier arrows for hunting.
Who knows in 5 years we may look back and say what was all the fuss about?

[Missouri Sherpa]

Can someone explain why adding weight inserts and a heavy broadhead to tune a carbon shaft is any kind of an issue?  Once you know what you need to make your arrow fly right its just one more little step along the path to making a good arrow.  I have abundant choices in broadhead weight and insert weight to tune with which makes up for the excessive number of spine selections offered by the aluminum shaft makers.  I have to cut my shafts to 30.5" to get perfect bareshaft flight and so I don't have any of that unsightly overhang.  I have been using Cabela's Carbon Hunters 65-80 for many years, cheap to me at 49.95 a dozen.  I have to remove the plastic vanes before I fletch them up but I have no complaints about those arrows.  They may not be as uniform as more spendy shafts but they are probably as uniform as a wooden shaft and much more durable. What benefit is there to spending 2-3 times as much for shafting if these work so good for me? Is there a down side to extreme  FOC? IF not what difference does it make if thats what tunes your setup?  I figure the carbon shaft makers are offering enough diversity to satisfy the overwhelming majority of their clients.  If you are looking for a reason not to use carbons you can find one, but lack of options doesn't seem like much of an obstacle to me.

[Dr. Ed Ashby]

Thomas, you are spot on! I have several c-bow shooters using/testing above-threshold Extreme FOC arrows with high MA TRADITIONAL (?) broadheads now. What THEY can do to a fresh deer carcass has to be seen to be believed!

Even more encouraging, I talked to Ed Schlief after he returned from the ATA trade show. He was "overwhelmed" (his word) by the questions he received from C-bow shooters asking about heavy BH's and Extreme FOC arrows. He also said that he was impressed by the fact that they ran the gamut from young to old; new shooters to old hands.

I think the 'breeze of change' is beginning to blow. It will probably be a long while before it's a 'wind of change', but it's more than has been there's been before. Regardless, the more good equipment options the bowhunter has available to choose from, the better!

Ed
TGMM Family of the Bow

[snag]

I think you are right M60. The pendulum is starting to swing the other way for the compound guys. Can you imagine what a bow shooting 300fps with heavy arrows could do to an animal!

[Dr. Ed Ashby]

Dave, we must have been posting simultaneously!

Ed
TGMM Family of the Bow

[vermonster13]

snag, they are shooting 300 fps with 5gpp arrows at 30" draw. The speeds will be considerably slower at 9/10 gpp, but you are right on the amount of damage they could do.

[Jeff Strubberg]

There's no need for more sizes.  More sizes simply confuse new shooters and lead to a longer search for a tuned arrow.

Any bow over 30# and under 100# can and will shoot an existing carbon arrow flawlessly.

[WildmanSC]

Originally posted by vermonster13:
Guys I'm just explaining why there aren't a lot of carbon spines, the largest share of the market doesn't need them. There are more spines available than most guys seem aware of though, but a lot of the lower spines used for Olympic style shooting haven't made the crossover yet for lack of awareness of them it seems.

vermonster,

There's also the little problem of expense of the carbon arrows for the Olympic style shooting.  The shafts will set you back $150-$250 a dozen, and higher!  I don't think it's a lack of knowledge as much as it's the high price of the shafts!    :eek:

Bill

[George D. Stout]

JC....you're pretty full of yourself.  It has nothing to do with my conventional way of thinking.  Perhaps you should just appreciate your carbons and not think we are depriving ourselves of some sort of fix-all.  

Frankly...Son...I don't care if you sleep with your carbon arrows.  I don't like them as they are right now.  I may, and probably will, change my mind as they become better arrow material.  There's a way to go yet to suit me.  But then, that's neither your problem nor concern.

[NDTerminator]

Originally posted by Lewis Brookshire III:
Jon, your right I edited my post.

No problem, pard.  Just came off a tad harsh...
 

[vermonster13]

Bill with higher demand for them, prices would come down or lower cost ones would be developed in those spines for hunting use.

You can get Redlines all the way to a 1000 spine for $90 a dozen.

[laddy]

If I could add a turn in this, when i was a kid, the 60s, there were a lot of aluminum shaft sizes that would be very useful for the Hill style longbow shooters of today. 1818, 1820,1918,1920. Thin fairly heavy arrows that could clear the riser of all those 40 and 45 pound bows most of us were using. We got pass throughs quite often with our tan Bears and Zwickey broadheads.  Many of the fat and stiff aluminum shafts do not work so well for us lighter and shorter draw Hill shooters.  there are basically two choices 1916 and 2016.  Leaving most of us shooting woods and it seems harder to get these in the quality of yesteryear as well.  I for one can not stand shooting arrows that are longer than my draw.  now i am sure with the trial and error tuning it is totally possible for most to get good arrow flight at a cost.  It was a lot simpler when the old Easton chart was correct 9 out of ten times.  We got arrows with good weights that flew at a cost that everyone could afford.  It all made for simple adventurous fun.

[JC]

George, no offense was meant...and I re-read it to see if I missed something. Not sure what you saw, but "full of myself" was not there. You show me what was disrespectful and I will gladly edit it. I offered a suggestion and asked a question, at no time was I derogatory as you were in your original posting and subsequent "full of yourself" comments.

Previous thinking (i.e. conventional) has said your arrows won't work well in the high ranges Dr. Ashby has recommended. With carbons especially, it works really well. Many simply refuse to beleive it works without trying it. Not saying your one of them, but I think if you gave it an honest go, you may be pleasantly surprised.

Doc Ashby has been around the block, so has Charlie Lamb, Vance Brewer, Terry Green, Rob Distefano, Ray Hammond and a host of others who I see as mentors....and all are using very high if extreme FOC. You said anyone with a lot of weight on the front and a large overhang was "a new shooter"....I don't think that's a fair sterotype.

You said "bill of goods", I assumed this was a derogatory comment on current findings with high/extreme FOC. Show me enough negatives to the FOC and I'll sign on with you it's a "bill of goods". I've found, as have many others, that there aren't many and the benifits far outweigh those minor issues, imho.

I never said it was a fix all...your first statements were very skeptical and condescending to those who use high FOC. I was simply pointing out that maybe you should look at it from another angle. I certainly wouldn't ever say your choice of bows or arrows was "a bill of goods." I have much more respect for you and the proof of your equipment than that. I would expect the same from you.

I would love to hear your ideas on what it would take "to suit you". Sincerely, without tounge in cheek, I think someone with your experience could add valuable info.

And you can call me "Son" when you treat me with the respect my father does...