Where did the idea of spine come from?

[halfseminole]

You all think I've lost my mind.

But, no First Peoples language talks about spine.  They don't pre-bend their arrows to test.  There's no word in Arabic, at least not in Saracen Archery.  There's no word in any of the Asian traditions that I know (and I do speak more than a few languages, or at least enough for research purposes.

What they did do was make absolutely sure they weighed the same.  Same I was taught by the one that taught me.  If I picked up an arrow that weighed what the last did, it would hit where the last one did.  Even if they were different materials.  I don't know if it's just the way I was taught, but spine is something I just can't see why it matters.  To be honest though, the spine on many of my arrows is very, very high.  7595 is my lightest spine.  

I know warbows didn't argue about spine, and that they did not have uniform draw weights, but they did exactly what was asked of them.  And while they were hail of arrows on the battlefield, there are many reports of their accuracy in target practice.  Just grabbing the arrows out of the bag without worrying about was it made for this bow or that.

I understand that spine causes certain bows to perform better, but that seems to me to be a thing that's a negative, not a positive.  My horn bow doesn't care what shafts I put through it, from my wife's 1535s to my 7595s to my 120# spined warbow arrows.  They hit the same.  I just aim a bit higher with the heavier shafts.

My fiberglass bow seems to care more than any other one I own.  My wife's bow is recalcitrant and doesn't like to work with any arrows but her own.  So why is one bow spine tolerant and the other not?  Or is it just that I learned to shoot any arrow that comes to hand, since I learned completely differently than the average here?

[Krex1010]

Alright I'll take a poke at answering this question, and this is just my gut response, I haven't studied the archery of other cultures. I'll take your word that they didn't have words for spine.  I will say that I beleive people are no smarter today than we were at any time in our history.  Maybe they didn't know spine as we do today, but I will guess they knew when an arrow flew well, I would guarantee they knew when one didn't. I would guess they made arrows of different quality and they knew what arrows were the good ones.  I would also guess that the arrows supplied in wartime that were used to rain arrows on enemies were not built of the same quality as the ones used in competitions of the times.  The master archers of the past were just as picky as we are today, I would bet my house on that, just because they didn't have a word for spine doesn't necessarily mean they didn't recognize a good arrow from a bad one.

[McDave]

Howard Hill used to go around the audience and take arrows from the spectators; in other words, whatever they had in their quivers.  Then he would proceed to shoot them all into the bulls eye.  I know a guy who actually saw him do it.  I guess he didn't worry very much about spine OR weight.

Howard Hill I'm not, so I worry about spine and weight.

[**DONOTDELETE**]

My horn bow doesn't care what shafts I put through it, from my wife's 1535s to my 7595s to my 120# spined warbow arrows. They hit the same. I just aim a bit higher with the heavier shafts.

The question is.... What do they hit?  Are we talking a basket ball at 12 yards... or a Dime at 30 yards.....

[Archie]

Whether the archers of bygone days referenced spine or not, the fact is that we know now that it makes a difference.  Anyone can go to You tube and watch slow motion vids of various spines being shot by the same bow.  We can paper-tune or bareshaft tune, and can bring about different arrow-flight results by playing with the factors that affect "spine".  There is no question that this is true.    

Howard Hill is one of my archery heroes, so I don't want to downplay him in any way, but even though he could shoot anyone's arrows at a show, I'd venture to say those aren't the arrows he shot apples off people's heads with.  Howard used to put arrows together and then shoot them, and the ones that didn't hit where he wanted were set aside.  

The reason some people can predictably and consistently hit tiny targets at considerable distances is because their gear is tuned and their technique is consistent and repeatable.   And if the arrows are not flying consistently, that kind of repeatable accuracy is just not going to happen.  In our era, learning to work out a correctly-spined arrow setup should be a part of every responsible bowhunter's knowledge-base.

[BigJim]

Poorly tuned but consistent arrows will have consistent grouping and flight when shot consistently.
In other words from a shooting machine (something humans are not..now or ever) arrows will respond consistently to each other if they share similar specs.
Having the ability we have to "fine" tune our arrows make it easier to at least avoid the issues of bouncing off the bow. This is something that can be difficult to do the same every time.

BIgJim

[Gordon Jabben]

Interesting subject.  I seem to be able to shoot a wide spine range and I don't know if the spine of an arrow just isn't too critical for me or maybe my shooting is so poor that I can't tell the difference. I remember reading this in an old archery book or mag, " a person needs to learn to shoot a rigid arrow shaft".  I'm sure this was before spine testers were used but seems an odd statement and has stuck in my mine.

[ChuckC]

I have thoughts.  The shorter your draw length, the less spine matters.  The bigger (to a point) your fletching, the less spine matters.  The better your release, the less spine matters.  Some bows, usually cut past center, allow more leeway in spine.

That said.  Spine matters.  It has to because of what it is measuring, deflection of a shaft as it passes a bow riser under pressure.  If you don't actually measure it with a machine, you can "measure it" by shooting the arrows in question and choosing those that work well for you.

Remember. . .  if certain arrows shoot left (or right) of the others, and you remember this and aim accordingly, it works !  Same with weight.

ChuckC

[McDave]

Originally posted by Kirkll:
My horn bow doesn't care what shafts I put through it, from my wife's 1535s to my 7595s to my 120# spined warbow arrows. They hit the same. I just aim a bit higher with the heavier shafts.

The question is.... What do they hit?  Are we talking a basket ball at 12 yards... or a Dime at 30 yards.....

I think Kirk's comment probably answers the question, and also resolves my dilemma about Howard Hill.  In the Middle Ages, groups of archers were trained to shoot at advancing mounted soldiers from ranges of 200 yards and in. Any hit on a horse or soldier was good enough, as a dismounted soldier lost 90% of his effectiveness. There were laws passed in the Middle Ages which forbid archers from practicing accuracy at close hunting ranges, since the king didn't want to encourage poaching.  I'm sure there were those who practiced accuracy anyway, and they probably used the method described by Archie of keeping track of which arrows hit the mark and which didn't, which is an indirect way of measuring spine and weight.

As to Howard Hill, I would imagine hitting a 4" bulls eye at 20 yards was no more difficult for him than hitting a basketball at 12 yards for us, so a little wobble or drop wasn't going to keep him out of it. And yes, I doubt that he shot apples off anyone's head with a borrowed arrow.

[Orion]

Doing a little research on the net, it seems that the concept of archer's paradox was first discussed in1913, and spine as a measurable characteristic a couple of decades later, about 1930s.

Regardless, when I started shooting a bow more than 60 years ago, I knew nothing of spine, and neither did the hardware and sporting goods store workers who sold me arrows. Still managed to hit what I aimed at.

Now, of course, I do pay attention to spine. In so doing, I've confirmed what I learned long ago.  That is that most bows will shoot a range of arrows (spines) well.  There is no doubt that there is one "best" spine for a given bow, draw weight and length, arrow weight length and diameter, brace height, string material, etc., but I do think we get to splitting hairs finer than they need to be at times.

[BowDiddle]

I believe that even though they may not have called it spine, and they didn't have all the technological terminologies we have today, they still shot arrows to test them, and they kept in their quivers the ones that shot best.

I'm with Kirk on this one.

About splitting hairs - The only thing that will keep me from splitting hairs is if I can't do it within a reasonable  amount of effort.

[Krex1010]

Just to add a little more, I have arrows that fly poorly, but I can still hit what I'm aiming at to the point where I could put the arrow in a deers vitals at 20 yards BUT the flight is ugly and penetration is not nearly as good as my arrows that fly well. And I'm a beginner, so im sure a great archer could hit what he was aiming at at far greater distances with a poor flying arrow.

[smoke1953]

I would guess stiffness of the arrow was discussed often around a campfire a hundred years ago. Finding a stiff stem and having a diameter and straightness that was desirable had to be more than difficult until larger limbs and trunks could be split effectively. Beyond that I would think that shooting weak shafts was what was done and adjustments made to accommodate this fact. Good discussion.

[Pat B]

I think the idea of "spine" comes from early target shooting back in Victorian times but that is just a guess.

[mike g]

I read somewhere at sometime, That the English bowmen of Oldentimes....Had a pet arrow if you will, And they even named the Arrow, And when it came to A contest of importance, They would pull that Arrow to make a shot....
    Did they know of Spine, Maybe not, But they knew which Arrow to use when the time came to make the critical shot....

[**DONOTDELETE**]

The bottom line is you only get back.. what you put into this sport.....

The term "Close enough" is used when you have put as much effort into tuning your set up as you have patience for, and are willing to except the slight inconsistencies as "user error".

The fact of the matter is that the closer you can come to perfectly matched arrows, the less inconsistency you will have in arrow flight. Another fact is that a perfectly spine matched arrow that flexes around the riser with good clearance every time is going to be more forgiving to a less than perfect release.

We all have our share of imperfect release issues no matter how much we practice. I think taking the time to fine tune your bow, and match the arrows as close as possible pays big dividends in  consistency.

I was following those spine tester threads on carbon arrow spine differences last week, and i honestly admit the thought never occurred to me there would be that much difference..... For years i always built 2 dozen hunting arrows and tuned them with fletching & broadheads, and just culled the fliers....

I just recently upgraded my spine tester using a dial indicator & checked a bunch of different shafts for over all consistency. I was shocked at how much difference there was just rotating the arrow, much less one shaft to the next. I've seen woodies that had less difference from flat grain to vertical grain than some of these carbon shafts.....

i took a couple Identical shafts out and shot them with .020 spine difference and could see the difference with a fletched shaft at 20-30 yards.... it was even more pronounced with bare shafts........

So here's the deal.... I can move up to 12 yards and say "Close enough" or fine tune my arrows to hit that bull at 30 yards...  Needless to say i will be building my carbon arrows just like i do my woodies from here on out.

[Tall Paul]

Originally posted by halfseminole:
[QB] You all think I've lost my mind.

I don't think you've lost your mind; very interesting topic!

[The Whittler]

So what is the answer, where did the idea of spine come from? What's the answer?

[PEARL DRUMS]

It came from necessity. I bet most of us could have out shot most of them, beyond 10 feet. Considering a bulk of their bow harvested game was small and very close, Id guess nothing mattered but the fact they had arrows in hand or a quiver. Id suppose that's why they ran elk, deer and other large game off cliffs and such to kill them.

Ive yet to meet a bow or person who can shoot equally well with a 50-70# arrow spine variance from the same bow.

[Sam McMichael]

I agree with those who feel that earlier archers were aware of arrows that shot well or did not shoot well from their bows. I imagine they kept the accurate ones and traded off the others. Spine as a technical term may be recent, but selecting out the good shooting arrows is as old as archery.