I wondered if you guys have found that longer arrows are more forgiving than shorter arrows. Several years ago I bought the book, "Hit the Mark" by Paul Comstock. In it (on page 5), he states that if the center of gravity (balance point) is farther foreward, accuracy comes easier. 2 ways to accomplish this is to add more weight to the front or to shoot longer-than-the-draw arrows, or both. Paul gave an example where he was able to shoot a long arrow made from a shrub branch that had a 75 gr. stone point on it. With each shot more of the point was broken off until he had no point and it still shot well. To me, this suggests that with longer shafts, arrow spine may matter less since he was in affect changing the dynamic spine on his arrows with each shot. Paul stated in his book that it was preferable to have the point of gravity closer to the bow when drawn for a shot. I don't know if this makes the archers paradox less of an issue or what. My son and I are able to shoot the same full length aluminum arrows well with 250 gr. points even though my draw is about 45# @ 29" and my son shoots about 30# @ 26. My other son seems to be able to shoot any arrow (maybe because they are all long for him?) weak or stiff out of his little 15# fiberglass bow. What think you?
Topic: long arrows? (Read 363 times)
