Spine-Spine- Spine and the quick recovery from paradox w/carbons

[steadman]

Thanks Shawn. I will.

[Bowmania]

Shawn, I'd agree that paper tuning is not for tuning trad equipment.  It's for testing.  You tune with Adcocks tuning page and get to the broadhead part and work that out.  Wait for a calm day set up some paper and start close.  if you can shoot bullet holes from 17 feet and beyond you have a well tuned set up.

Bowmania

[xtrema312]

There is a problem with your shooting or tune that needs work if you can't get a decent paper hole shooting a  fletched arrow from 20' and out.  I didn't shoot paper for a while because i was told trad gear  couldn't do it. well  That made no sence to me given the whole idea of a tunes arrow is to get it to fly straight plus paper tunning was around before compounds. It. was used to tune in general plus fine tune rest and plunger settings longer range. I found some videos of people doing it off the shelf with no problems and saw Rod Jinkens do it in a MOTBB DVD, but what does he know.

[chopx2]

There are just too many variables for perfect arrow flight for ANYONE to DEFINITIVELY tell you what will work from anything anyone can post here. Sure given enough information and experience you can make suggestions, but in the end it is trial and error that will tell you DEFINITELY.

Here are the factors that affect arrow flight and have to be considered when tuning:
1. arrow midline in relation to the center of the riser (i.e. center cut, cut to center, cut past center, not cut to center etc.)
2. FOC
3. Arrow Spine
4. Feather drag due to area and twist Big helical feathers can hide a lot of imperfect arrow tuning.
5. Release quality and consistency
6. Archer's ability to shoot groups
7. Bow weight
8. Form, are you consistently getting the same draw length
The list goes on and on.

Sure some are more impactful than other, but no two archers are the same so no two archer's needs are the same either.

I view it as a process of discovery. It is fun getting to know each of my bow's personalities and needs for perfect arrow flight. Yes you can over think it, but under thinking it is a dis-service to the game we hunt too and our fellow hunters who can be labeled by our own failings.

OK I'll get off my soap box now  

[Shawn Leonard]

I was not saying paper tuning at 17-20 ft. wont work, guys do it like compound shooters and it can not be done that way. Chopx, agreed but I said with enough info I get people very close. The post was also about the quick recovery of carbon and how many people notice that with trad bows you can and do get a better tune going a bit lighter than a bit heavy on spine! Shawn

[Guru]

Originally posted by Shawn Leonard:
The post was also about the quick recovery of carbon and how many people notice that with trad bows you can and do get a better tune going a bit lighter than a bit heavy on spine! Shawn

Amen brother!  I bet the vast majority of trad carbon shooters are shooting overspined arrows.

Good thread bud!

[FerretWYO]

Well done Shawn a lot of good info here.

[Jmatt1957]

52#@28 GT 35/55, with a 50 gr brass insert. I can shoot 145,175 and 200 gr points with no noticable fishtail. 200 gr impact a little low at +25 yards. Now if I could only keep the inserts from comming out life would be great.

[xtrema312]

For sure you can't shoot bullet holes in paper from 6' to forever with a trad bow like you can with a center shot compound, but then even some compound shooters can’t do that every shot. I guess if you define paper tuning as perfect holes all the time at all distances then no you can't paper tune a trad bow.  However, I define paper tuning as shooting a hole in the paper to see what the arrow is doing at any give distance and using that info to help me better understand what changes in my grip, release, and other tuning changes makes to the way the arrow flies.  It was the same thing I did with a compound; I just can't get perfect, but I don't need perfect.  That snap shot in time and space made when the arrow hits the paper is very good and valuable info.  It is as good as high tech slow motion or high speed photo’s at basically free and low tech.  

You don’t need a perfect release every shot.  Shoot 10 or more at the same distance and see what the average arrow is doing.  Do that at all different distances and keep track.  You will see the pattern.  And you have a record of it you can look over and make notes on.  Very handy.

I am sure there is a lot more variation in the tear on paper shooting wood or aluminum with the slower recovery so with those shafts you should plan to see some changes in the tear over flight distance, but the subject is carbons and the fast recovery.  Most of my paper shooting has been with carbons. I find it is not hard  at all to get holes from perfect to no more than ¼” out of line with most shots when I am reasonable with my release and the bow is tuned.  I can do that with my cut 1/8-3/16” out from center bows and my 3/16 cut past center bows.  It just takes a few more feet for arrows  shot from the cut out from center bows to straighten out. I am far from a top shot so if I can do it anyone can do it with some work on release.

O.L’s method can be very good in many ways, but I believe that it is best with wood and aluminum arrows with more standard FOC.  HFOC with carbons and the fast recovery of carbons makes my results very different at times.  I have used this method to tune carbons and found they are not tuned as well as they could be tuned.  Many times I think HFOC arrows are a little too stiff while EFOC arrows are too weak, but they put the bare shaft in the right spot because all that up front weight drags the shaft there not because the whole arrow flies right.  Then I shoot them in paper and see they never get straight to well past reasonable hunting distances, or that they make too much of an over correction and wobble back and forth too much.  An arrow that never sets up and flies straight will not maintain best speed, accuracy and penetration.  I also find that bare shaft shooting takes just as good of a release to get consistent results.  I see very obvious changes in the bare shaft behavior with changes to the release.  Just as much as with paper if not more.  One more flaw to this method for fine tuning is that accuracy is critical.  If you are not shooting well and accurate, it is harder to see if the bare shaft is shooting to the right place.  I have had days when my shooting was off and my release was off, and I could get a bare shaft to do just about every possible thing for flight and impact point.

Now here is where paper shines for fine tuning in two areas.  Because you are shooting paper you can shoot a big piece of white paper.  Not only can you see the hole, but I can see what my arrow does in flight against the white background in shaded conditions. That white background shows the arrow shaft very well.  Way better than shooting most darker targets in varied backgrounds.  That alone is priceless.  Many talk about watching to see how well the arrow flies.  Well why not make it so you can see the flight as well as possible?  Even if you don’t look at the tear in the paper you can get great info from better seeing the arrow flight.  
The second thing about paper shooting is that aiming is about totally non critical.  You can shoot like you are blind bale shooting.  That allows you to put all your concentration into the shot consistence and release without any real effort required for aiming.  I use 30”x42” scrap drawings paper.  Guess how much your form and release consistence will clean up for testing when there is no aiming?  

I have been working with a new to me recurve recently.  I had a great shooting combo going.  Bare shaft looked great out to 20 yd.  Flight looked real good.  I took it on vacation and stump shot it a lot.  I thought I had it dialed.  Then I started shooting very long range shots in a mowed farm field. I was shooting 150 yd or so.  I started to notice some wobble in the arrow as it got out a ways in the blue sky.  I came back and today started the paper work.  I found it looked real good for awhile and had good holes at 10 yd., but had an over correction right after that.  Close shots showed about 2” weak tear as it came off the bow.  I adjust the point weight a little, brace height a little, and then some slight nock height adjustment.  I shot paper from 6’ to 25 yd.  I was able to get down to a ½” tear at 8’, bullet holes at about 15’, slight swing past center at 7 yd of about ¼” then bullet holes the rest of the way out. Groups shrank and the bow got a lot more forgiving.  The bare shaft looked too weak to me after that, but I can guarantee if an arrow sets up that fast and flies straight it will shot a broadhead great, and it did.    

I think every available tuning method has value.  If one works for you that if fine go with it.  Just don’t be afraid to try other things.  Even if all you do when shooting paper is work on your release and use the tears to check that, I think paper shooting has value.  Just don’t pass on trying something because someone says it can’t be done.  I didn’t paper tune for a couple years when I got back into trad bows more again.  I missed out.  I was able to get a way better tune with paper than I ever got with other methods.  I will still do them all as part of my process, but paper is definitely my go to fine tuning method before broadheads.

[Shawn Leonard]

I should clarify my post, I don't mean weak, as said weak is weak, but most people can and should try spines that are lighter than people seem to recommend. You would be surprised at what will fly perfectly for you in a carbon shaft. I just tuned some Entrada .600 with 190 up front out of my warf riser that I am drawing 29"s(30") and 42#s, perfect flight and yes even thru paper which I decided to do after some posts here, I got perfect holes at about 15ft. now mind you I have a plunger that I set very light and a champion rest but people were telling me way to light of spine unless I went to a 145 grain head or less. I, like Curt said see a lot of guys overspined. Shawn

[daveycrockett]

ttt I find this interesting as I've been playing around with 500 spine with 100gr inserts and 125gr heads out of my 2 Centaurs.

[Shawn Leonard]

One more time, just to see what people think and are doing. It may help a few who do not have time to play around to much and listen to some guy at a pro-shop who sells one or two trad bows a year and really gives poor advise to some folks new to traditional and get discouraged because they believe the guy and than think they are doing something wrong!! Shawn

[David Bartholomew]

FYI:  For those that think carbons don't flex that much (and yes, honestly I was one)... the photo showing the carbon shaft paradox.

This photo was taken with a Droid cell phone, and shows Jennifer shooting her 27.5" Gold Tip Traditional 1535, with a 100 grain field point w/ 4 - 4" feathers.  The target was at 25 yards (Ft. Lee 3D shoot), and she shot a dead center "10" on this critter.

     


     

[Shawn Leonard]

David they do flex a lot but recover quicker than other material. Cool pic. looks like it is on its way as you said to the ten ring. Shawn

[David Bartholomew]

Sorry.. forgot to say... "I agree with Shawn".

 

[xtrema312]

I also find myself agreeing more with Shawn and where he is with amount of spine and the FOC he has.  I think he is in about the right area of dynamic spine.  

I have found it very interesting that when someone wants a wood arrow or aluminum arrow recommendation for a bow they get a couple posts.  Sometimes an aluminum request will get you 6 or so post, but two shaft sizes and a lot of people recommending one, the other, or both.  Ask the same thing about carbons and you could get an arrow that calculates in Stu’s calculator from 90# to 20# dynamic spine.  There is something going on with carbons and the way we build them that goes beyond what we get with wood and aluminum, and it is not just false weak type issues explaining this vast difference.  

I have tried a lot of stuff all the way from one end of the extreme to the other.  I have found sweet spots where quite different arrow combinations in a bow will show weaker or stiffer with small point weight and length changes to an extent and then change completely with a larger change, and it is not just a false weak type thing.  They look to fly well and bare shaft fine, but sometimes they just don’t have very much forgiveness so some little form change causes the tune to fall apart a lot more than it should.  I have seen this the most with the stiffer set-up like Stu’s calculator recommends for carbons particularly in cut to or past center bows.  That or they never really fly straight and true even though they look great flying and are real forgiving; I see this with the limp noodle arrows some shoot where the EFOC combo allows the point to do the driving and the shaft doesn’t line up for a long way out unless you have a lot of feather to get things straight.  

I have noticed what looks to me like a pattern of the vast majority of people finding Stu’s calculator works great for wood and aluminum where the carbon group is split.  I find that very interesting.

I believe the FOC amount, and overhanging arrow length a lot of people have with carbons cause some kind of change to the way the arrow plains and flexes with different combinations with a carbon arrow that you just don’t see with typical wood and aluminum arrows set-ups.  I think many times you can get the timing of the arrow so it works well with a combination because the arrow flexes and recovers so fast it almost whips that HFOC point back in line or the EFOC point pulls the shaft so much the arrow follows the point more than the point follows the plain of the arrow shaft when it flexes.

I believe a lot of people really do get what looks like or is great arrow flight from some very different combinations, but I think there is a best dynamic spine area, and that can be tricky to find.  That is why I have become such a big fan of paper shooting with carbons.

[Prewar70]

Shawn,

Wondering what set up you would recommend for me.  I shoot a BW 3 piece recurve, 53lbs at 30 inches, 62".  I pull 30 inches but maybe 29.5 if my form isn't up to snuff.  Currently, I'm shooting 31.75" GT 55-75, 5" feathers, and 225 grains up front.  These arrows fly good for me and bareshaft same poi.  I have not done extensive testing and tuning but again they seem to fly good, group well, broadheads shoot same poi, and they're quiet.  I was shooting 170 grains up front and I noticed more fishtailing and a little louder but they still grouped well and straight.

Do my results make sense?  If I hadn't told you what I was shooting what would you have recommended for a Gold Tip arrow?  Thanks.

[Shawn Leonard]

Your results sound very close, what saves you is shooting an arrow almost 32"s. If you cut it back to 30"s I bet you would need 40-50 grains more up front. If you look atsome of the aboriginal tribes they shot emtremely long arrow 36-40+"s. The reason is that with any point weight light or heavy that long shaft wrapped around the bow and straightend out pretty quick compared to a short stiff shaft. I will say I only claim to get people close and this all requires a bit of experimenting and due to the response from people I am now conducting some more experiments, unscientific as they may be it may lead to some more precise answers foir folks. I am starting to look at the skinny carbons as well to see what that smaller diameter will do because it changes center shot ever so slightly and in the long run may be easier to tune. Shawn

[tecum-tha]

Well Shawn, calculate your 0.600 deflection spine in wood arrow spine. That would be:
(26/0.6)x1.21= 53#.
Now you draw a little over 28 inches. But now a lot depends on your bow and your release.
Yes, carbon or better, hollow arrows will recover slightly faster, because they're lighter in mass along the shaft. Your Carbon shaft will probably weigh about 8.6 grains/inch compared to a wood shaft with around 11-13 grains/inch.
That is almost 40% more mass that must be moved during flexing along the shaft. And this takes longer... Try simple distributed mass dynamics on a beam for theorethical comparison.
Resin: Depending on the used resin and wrapping technology (which depends on the brand)some shafts react weaker or stiffer compared to others.
It is a little bit out of the ordinary to shoot this theoretical weaker combination, but it works for you.

[2 edges]

Shawn your right on the money.I'm shooting 53#'s out of my Pronghorn.Arrow is a 33/55 gt 29.5" 225gr up front.