3Rivers Archery



The Trad Gang Digital Market













Contribute to Trad Gang and Access the Classifieds!

Become a Trad Gang Sponsor!

Traditional Archery for Bowhunters






LEFT HAND BOWS CLASSIFIEDS TRAD GANG CLASSIFIEDS ACCESS RIGHT HAND BOWS CLASSIFIEDS


Author Topic: $110 well spent  (Read 1046 times)

Offline Xander

  • Trad Bowhunter
  • **
  • Posts: 120
Re: $110 well spent
« Reply #20 on: June 25, 2013, 11:41:00 AM »
Thank you for the informative post!  I can easily serve the loops with dacron if needed to give more diameter, I will keep an eye on it.  Like I mentioned, the nock tips have two layers of glass for overlays, so it should be fine I think.

The reason I always shot FF strings was the lack of break in and creep.  There is ZERO speed difference between FF, dacron and other materials, so no performance gain.

I do have a flipper rest to put on the bow, just not sure if its the best one.  I took the old rug off because it was ratty.

I realize 400 arrows might be a bit stiff, but I did get them longer than needed to try and counter act it a bit.  We'll see once I start tuning.  

Thanx for th kind words everyone!

Cheers!
-Xander

Offline shirikahn

  • Trad Bowhunter
  • **
  • Posts: 228
Re: $110 well spent
« Reply #21 on: June 25, 2013, 01:27:00 PM »
grats on a fine setup at an amazing price point.

Offline Orion

  • TG HALL OF FAME
  • Trad Bowhunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 8252
  • Contributing Member
Re: $110 well spent
« Reply #22 on: June 25, 2013, 04:34:00 PM »
Xander, don't want to labor the point, but there definitely is a speed/performance difference between FF/low stretch strings and dacron.  A number of studies published in trad archery mags found speed differences of 5-10 fps and more with ultra skinny strings. That equates to 2-5# of draw weight.  A good number of trad gangers have also conducted their own experiments and reported the results here.  A search should turn up a number of threads.

Regsrdless, good find.  Should serve you well.

Offline LittleBen

  • Trad Bowhunter
  • **
  • Posts: 2970
Re: $110 well spent
« Reply #23 on: June 25, 2013, 04:50:00 PM »
Yeah, gotta go with Orion. FF will definately be slightly faster.

If you have glass overlay on the tips you should be fine. I think the only problems are with bows having no overlays, or using that resin impregnated paper that is not very sturdy.

I've heard alkot of pople say not to use FF on an older bow, but very few people with an actual bad experience .... just my .02

With that said I haven;t had the balls to put a FF string on any of my older glass bows yet.

Offline gunfixrjoe

  • Trad Bowhunter
  • **
  • Posts: 8
Re: $110 well spent
« Reply #24 on: June 25, 2013, 06:10:00 PM »
Keep us posted on your progress

Offline Xander

  • Trad Bowhunter
  • **
  • Posts: 120
Re: $110 well spent
« Reply #25 on: June 25, 2013, 07:21:00 PM »
Well, seems as if I have made the natives restless by puttng a FF string on an old bow!  So, if anyone wants to trade a brand new, un nocked fast flight string for a 56"amo bow for what I am being told to use then shoot me a message, I'll get you my address.

I have used only FF strings for the years I did shoot, never once an issue, that's even on bows with no tip overlays, just bare glass.

If a properly broken-in and set flemish string (dacron) is supposed to have no creep or stretch (just like a FF or skinny string), then where does the performance gain come from?  I want numbers, not backyard tests.  From a shooting machine taking all variables out.  Even strings weighing 30gr less won't give you 5-10fps difference.

Now the tip split issue was one I was unaware of even when shooting before, some have told me it actually happened to them, but most seem to be just repeating what they were told without ever dealing with the issue.  (Much like LittleBen mentions...) That is somthing I will take into consideration.

I apologize if this sounds like I'm being obstainant or hard headed, I'm not meaning it that way at all, but I am a metrologist by training and need actual measured numbers removing all variables in the test.

Cheers!
-Xander

Offline LittleBen

  • Trad Bowhunter
  • **
  • Posts: 2970
Re: $110 well spent
« Reply #26 on: June 25, 2013, 07:31:00 PM »
I too would be interested to see some actual chrono niumbers.


but regarding your FF string Zander ... I say if you're comfortable just stick with it man.

Offline Xander

  • Trad Bowhunter
  • **
  • Posts: 120
Re: $110 well spent
« Reply #27 on: June 25, 2013, 07:54:00 PM »
The only test I have seen using a shooting machine, same arrows, same length strings, same draw weight, the only change was the string material, then strand count.  The only performance difference was adding string silencers which slowed the speed down 2-3fps.  ZERO speed difference.  Even strings weighing 20-30gr less shot the same speed.


Cheers!
-Xander

Offline Orion

  • TG HALL OF FAME
  • Trad Bowhunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 8252
  • Contributing Member
Re: $110 well spent
« Reply #28 on: June 25, 2013, 09:02:00 PM »
Xander, where did you get the idea that a broken in dacron string has no creep or stretch?  It definitely has the latter, more stretch than the low stretch fast flite strings. On a hot, muggy day, it will creep a lot.  It also stretches more during the shot. That's why it's slower than fast flite type strings, and the fact that it weighs more.  

I'm not trying to persuade you one way or another.  Believe what you want to believe. I shoot both, and I shoot fast flite on older bows.  Never have had a problem.  

If you want proof of fast flite type strings greater performance, you'll have to do your own research.  Like I said, several studies were published in Trad Bowhunter over the years.  I remember the gist of the results, but can't remember which issues.  Also, Rick Barbree on the other trad site, has conducted some very good research on various string materials and string sizes.  Might search that site.

BTW, I'd be interested in reading about the research you cite.  Where can I find it?

Offline Xander

  • Trad Bowhunter
  • **
  • Posts: 120
Re: $110 well spent
« Reply #29 on: June 25, 2013, 09:31:00 PM »
This is the information posted about comparing strings as done by Ken Beck and originally posted Feb, 2010.

 "TESTING STRINGS In response to a lot of interest in various string materials and “skinny” strings, we have performance tested several materials in both conventional and “skinny” versions to compare to our standard 14 strand DynaFLIGHT 97. Ray Caliendo (our milling machine guru and longtime string maker and expert) made the strings used for testing. The “skinny” strings had about half the strands but were padded in the loops to protect from what I call the “piano wire effect” that can split the limb tips. The center servings were also padded to get the desired arrow nock fit. For our purposes here, no silencers when installed.

Here is our testing protocol: For the recurve test, we selected a 60" PSA X. We chose to do the tests at a 30" draw (rather than 28") to maximize any benefit gained. The bow was braced at 8 1/ 4" and weighed on our electronic digital scale (0.1 increments) and it weighed in at 57.5#. Then we built an arrow that weighed exactly 517.5 grains (9 x 57.5#). (A higher brace would give a slightly higher draw weight and thus require a heavier arrow.) The shooting was done with our shooting machine. For each test, the bow was drawn with the winch to exactly 30" and the mechanical release was then activated. Each test requires only two or three shots through the chronograph. The readout will never vary more than one foot per second. If the first and second shots read the same (which is usually the case), we record this fps number. If not, we shoot a third arrow and record the two-out-of-three number. Since our chronograph does not measure in tenths of fps, our method is only accurate to within plus or minus 1/ 2 fps. A different chronograph might read faster or slower, but our testing protocol would produce the same consistency.

PSA X 60" RECURVE 57.5# @ 30" 517.5 grain arrow

DynaFLIGHT 97 14 strand 196 fps

Ultra Cam 16 strand 195 fps

Ultra Cam 8 strand 195 fps

Excellerent 12 strand 195 fps

Excellerent 8 strand 195 fps

Astro Flight 20 strand 195 fps

Astro Flight 10 strand 195 fps

Trophy 20 strand 196 fps

Trophy 12 strand 196 fps

D 10 18 strand 197 fps

D 10 12 strand 196 fps

We then tested a 60" (so we could use the same strings) PL X longbow of exactly the same draw weight at 30" with basically the same results, only 2 to 3 fps slower than the recurve. A 64" longbow would have been more suitable for a 30" draw and would have reduced the difference between the longbow and the recurve. We also compared speeds with and without the typical four Spider string silencers with a difference of 2-3 fps (2 fps on the DF 97}.

As you can see, it’s a washout. I was not surprised because I had tested an endless “skinny” string some time ago with the same result. Even though these 60" “skinny” strings (with padded loops and center serving) weigh 20 to 30 grains less (depending on which strand material), fewer strands allow more stretch or elasticity and we thus loose what we hoped to gain. The conventional D 10 string was 1 fps faster for both the recurve and longbow.

Well, there may be those who question these numbers and feel that the “Old Man” has gone over-the-hill and senility has set in. I would simply suggest “Grumpy” old man. So here’s the deal: Since I’m “from Missouri”, bring your Black Widow bow to Missouri with your properly padded “skinny” string and “show me”. Using the scientific testing method described above (you may determine the brace height), if you can achieve an additional 3 fps over a standard 14 strand DynaFLIGHT 97 string, we will build you a new Black Widow bow of your choice. BUT.... if you can not achieve an additional 3 fps, you must leave your Black Widow bow with us, OR.... pay for a new Black Widow bow that we will build for you. SUCH A DEAL! If there is a better mouse trap, we want to know about it! (This offer will expire 12-31-2010.)

I have also resurrected a post from the past entitled "TESTING & COMPARING BOW PERFORMANCE” for you to review.

Let me summerize: PHYSICS is PHYSICS is PHYSICS.... and you can’t get around it.

Ken Beck "


Hope this helps.
-Xander

Offline Roger Norris

  • TG HALL OF FAME
  • Trad Bowhunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 3552
Re: $110 well spent
« Reply #30 on: June 25, 2013, 10:08:00 PM »
I wouldn't use fast flight on that old bow, why risk it? They weren't designed for it.
Also, I would put a little more feather on my arrows if I were you.
"Good Lord....well, your new name is Sledge."
Ron LaClair upon seeing the destruction of his new lock on the east gate

"A man that cheats in the woods will cheat anywhere"
G. Fred Asbell

Offline Xander

  • Trad Bowhunter
  • **
  • Posts: 120
Re: $110 well spent
« Reply #31 on: June 25, 2013, 10:25:00 PM »
Fwiw, I appreciate the infomation sharing and real world experiances.  Y'all are a good bunch of fellas and I do value the input I receive on here.

Btw, my offer for trading the FF string is not in jest, I will gladly trade it to someone for an appropriate string.  

Re: arrows, I have yet to shoot them and can't say one way or the other about them yet.  I may very well refletch them if need be, my brother does have a jig for it.


Cheers!
-Xander

Offline Orion

  • TG HALL OF FAME
  • Trad Bowhunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 8252
  • Contributing Member
Re: $110 well spent
« Reply #32 on: June 25, 2013, 10:30:00 PM »
Xander:  The BW study provides good info.  What they found is that there's little difference between skinny and not so skinny HMPE (high modulus polyethylene) strings, generically referred to as fast flite type material.  I agree.

However, they did not compare HMPE strings to dacron. Because the HMPE strings creep and stretch less than dacron, they extract more of the bow's energy, yielding more speed/performance. That comes at a potential cost, as I pointed out earlier.

Most folks who have responded recommend against using the HMPE strings on older bows. Even the string manufacturers like Brownell and BCY offer a caveat about using it on older bows. As I said before, I use it on some of my older bows.  And, you've indicated that you have as well.  It's a personal decision. I entered this discussion to try to point out some of the differences between the materials, not to persuade anyone to use one or the other. Hope I didn't offend.

Offline gunfixrjoe

  • Trad Bowhunter
  • **
  • Posts: 8
Re: $110 well spent
« Reply #33 on: June 25, 2013, 10:31:00 PM »
Personally, and completely biased, I am partial to a bow made for Fast Flight strings, AND shooting feathers off of the shelf. Again, completely biased! I love :-)

Offline gunfixrjoe

  • Trad Bowhunter
  • **
  • Posts: 8
Re: $110 well spent
« Reply #34 on: June 25, 2013, 10:32:00 PM »
I have no idea why there is "I love :-)" on my last post.....

Offline Gen273

  • Trad Bowhunter
  • **
  • Posts: 3510
Re: $110 well spent
« Reply #35 on: June 25, 2013, 10:43:00 PM »
:thumbsup:  congrats on the rewards of your bargin hunting!!!
Jesus Saves (ROM 10:13)

Offline Xander

  • Trad Bowhunter
  • **
  • Posts: 120
Re: $110 well spent
« Reply #36 on: June 25, 2013, 11:27:00 PM »
Orion, yes I do agree that the study was direct comparisons of modern material strings, but it also disproves what you stated "the fact that it's [dacron string] heavier" as a componant of the performance difference between FF an dacron string.

Furthermore, I believe a direct correlation can be made between the skinny FF strings and dacron strings, due to increased stretch of low strand count FF strings being close to a much more substantial dacron strings stretch.

I haven't gathered any data on this yet, or found exact info, but I may eventually build a test rig just fo the sake of finding the information.


Cheers!
-Xander

Offline Xander

  • Trad Bowhunter
  • **
  • Posts: 120
Re: $110 well spent
« Reply #37 on: June 25, 2013, 11:31:00 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by gunfixrjoe:
I have no idea why there is "I love to shoot :-)" on my last post.....
There, I fixed it for ya Joe [thumbsup]
-Xander

Offline Nativestranger

  • Trad Bowhunter
  • **
  • Posts: 486
Re: $110 well spent
« Reply #38 on: June 25, 2013, 11:50:00 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Xander:
Orion, yes I do agree that the study was direct comparisons of modern material strings, but it also disproves what you stated "the fact that it's [dacron string] heavier" as a componant of the performance difference between FF an dacron string.

Furthermore, I believe a direct correlation can be made between the skinny FF strings and dacron strings, due to increased stretch of low strand count FF strings being close to a much more substantial dacron strings stretch.

I haven't gathered any data on this yet, or found exact info, but I may eventually build a test rig just fo the sake of finding the information.


Cheers!
Everything else being the same, the lighter string will be faster. The reason why skinny string did not outperform the normal ones in that test was because skinny strings stretches more. A stretchy string reduces stored energy so any gains in reduced mass was cancelled out. Now comparing stiffer FF string to dacron string, the FF will be faster.
Instinctive gapper.

Offline Xander

  • Trad Bowhunter
  • **
  • Posts: 120
Re: $110 well spent
« Reply #39 on: June 26, 2013, 12:04:00 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Nativestranger:
 
Quote
Originally posted by Xander:
Orion, yes I do agree that the study was direct comparisons of modern material strings, but it also disproves what you stated "the fact that it's [dacron string] heavier" as a componant of the performance difference between FF an dacron string.

Furthermore, I believe a direct correlation can be made between the skinny FF strings and dacron strings, due to increased stretch of low strand count FF strings being close to a much more substantial dacron strings stretch.

I haven't gathered any data on this yet, or found exact info, but I may eventually build a test rig just fo the sake of finding the information.


Cheers!
Everything else being the same, the lighter string will be faster. The reason why skinny string did not outperform the normal ones in that test was because skinny strings stretches more. A stretchy string reduces stored energy so any gains in reduced mass was cancelled out. Now comparing stiffer FF string to dacron string, the FF will be faster. [/b]
Cool, now let's find a ultra lightweight zero stretch material for bow strings and become rich and famous, lol!

I do need to do a little more reading into the applied physics of the processes involved, but I am enjoying this conversation!  Whether the weight of the string is as much of a componant as it is commonly believed is mainly what I am interested in.

So, now, who are the trusted string makers 'round here?


Cheers!
-Xander

Users currently browsing this topic:

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
 

Contact Us | Trad Gang.com © | User Agreement

Copyright 2003 thru 2024 ~ Trad Gang.com ©