Stick with it. There is nothing better... or should I stick with my blade rest ( Mybo )
Stick with it. There is nothing better... or should I stick with my blade rest ( Mybo )
I am not convinced according to my research a recurve is spitting out arrows at 225fps max The ibo speed for my compound bow is 335 fps That is 110fps extra that has to be gained. give that the poundage ramps up in about a inch the arrow has to gain that extra speed in about 28 inches.I like your swing analogy
Del
That’s depends on the cam. I would say the first inch is dependant on let off then after that a huge acceleration of 60lb. No tickling going on. Check out the arrows supplied for these super compound cross bows you can buy now that shoot full length arrows. Stick a wooden arrow in one of those and you will have a bad dayJerry. The first inch of travel for a compound arrow is being pushed by about 8 lb. the next inch by about 12lb the next by about 16lb..
The recurve in the first inch pushes the arrow with max holding weight, possibly 40lb. It's like hitting a nail with an 8lb hammer compared to 40lb.
It's a similar effect as being tackled in ruby by some one running at you at full speed when you are standing still. Compared to being tackled by someone who is running from behind you and you are running the same direction and just a bit slower. The impact on the players is far less.
Or put another way; you can throw an egg quite a distance; but you can't kick one very far.
If the facts won't convince you, nothing will. What do you think they were shooting out of the original compounds when they were first developed?I am not convinced according to my research a recurve is spitting out arrows at 225fps max The ibo speed for my compound bow is 335 fps That is 110fps extra that has to be gained. give that the poundage ramps up in about a inch the arrow has to gain that extra speed in about 28 inches.
but all that is not important there is another very good reasons why you should not use wooden arrows. most compounds actually do have a a small verticle paradox That means that if a arrow fails there is a a good chance of the arrow being driven into the arm.There is also a good chance that.wooden arrows are going to be damaged by the extra power of a compound.
Okay, apart from the losses from a finger release in the first inch of travel, which are ignored, there are issues way beyond taking abstract data from a graph to show a single point of view; I hate un referenced data I can show a dozen graphs that will, in isolation, show global warming is not happening. The point is is a wood arrow safe to shoot with a compound, not will a wood arrow survive the first one thou of a second at launch? A wood arrow is good at absorbing the initial arrow acceleration, I have no issue with that. Ignoring any impact issues, what I have an issue with is a wood shaft absorbing the increasing and sustained acceleration of the compound over the repeated longer period. A really well made wood shaft will last longer but it will fail way before a carbon or alu arrow.
I'll try and explain further...Okay, apart from the losses from a finger release in the first inch of travel, which are ignored, there are issues way beyond taking abstract data from a graph to show a single point of view; I hate un referenced data I can show a dozen graphs that will, in isolation, show global warming is not happening. The point is is a wood arrow safe to shoot with a compound, not will a wood arrow survive the first one thou of a second at launch? A wood arrow is good at absorbing the initial arrow acceleration, I have no issue with that. Ignoring any impact issues, what I have an issue with is a wood shaft absorbing the increasing and sustained acceleration of the compound over the repeated longer period. A really well made wood shaft will last longer but it will fail way before a carbon or alu arrow.
I guess the real question should be how much sooner will it fail?
And I can't understand how a fast arrow can overtake a slower one?? How did the fast one get left behind if they set off together.For close targets, the arrow released from the "slower" traditional bow will get there first, but in reality the arrow from the faster compound bow will pass the arrow from the traditional bow after only five feet of flight and 19 ms of flight time.
(maybe that's why I just showed the one important graph originally?)I am confused!
The two graphs in the link show compound in red on one graph and blue on the other.
And I can't understand how a fast arrow can overtake a slower one?? How did the fast one get left behind if they set off together.
Recurve and longbow shooters bend their arrows at the start of the power stroke; surely that bending will eventually lead the the breakage. Compounds with release aids tend to be far less off axis witheir power stroke, compressing the shaft back to front, more tan bending it.
Thank you. Where is the soft start acceleration as the string is leaving the fingers? As with many theoretical models difficult bits to model are ignoredYou obviously don't understand the graph the physics or what acceleration is.
Dealing with your points one at a time.
1. I can reference the graph:- https://sites.google.com/site/technicalarchery/technical-discussions-1/arrow
Doug Easton developed aluminium arrows 1939. Holless Wilbur Allen patented the compound bow in 1966, 27 years later. I'm going to go with aluminium on this one.What do you think they shot from the original compounds?
This is why I hate it when people don't reference their sources. So, the draw force curve shows a 6" draw valley. That's an old stinger. I havent shot a compound with a 6" valley for years. As I said many new compounds have a valley about an inch long. The one referenced is a soft cam IMO.A wood arrow is good at absorbing the initial arrow acceleration, I have no issue with that. Ignoring any impact issues, what I have an issue with is a wood shaft absorbing the increasing and sustained acceleration of the compound over the repeated longer period. A really well made wood shaft will last longer but it will fail way before a carbon or alu arrow.
I guess the real question should be how much sooner will it fail?
@KidCurry Maybe read my previous post that responds to Geoff.
To response to your "soft loose" question, it represents a much shorter portion of the loose than the let off from a compound. (Note in the graph I posted. It starts at time=zero, and yes there is small gap before the first measurement, but it is very small compared to the significant portion of the graph and is dwarfed by the slower start of the compound)
Further.. yes I'm sure not all compounds are identical, but if it has some let off the general idea will be the same.
I notice you don't answer some of my questions.
So what do you think the recommended spine for your compound works out as in "old fashioned" spine?
It comes up very much in line with the "old fashion" poundage spine used for wooden arrows, and as the compound is virtually centre shot and generally using a release aid there is less sideways force on the arrow than with a longbow. So compounds don't have much stiffer arrows, as I've seen suggested elsewhere.
Are you really suggesting that a "ladies weight" compound is going to bend an arrow more than a gents 55# longbow?
Anyhow, there's no point be trying to enhance the understanding of someone who has no interest in it, so I won't be contributing further.
I think you have validated my original assertion about compound shooters not understanding!
Del
BTW. Most of the arrow injury pictures you see are carbon arrows stuck in people's hands.
I find it odd that lots of finger shooters always think compounds don't flex arrows because there is no flex left to right. It's the vertical flex on a compound that breaks arrows with an inherent weakness or damage.