Adding weight to Deep Six shafts?

[Lawnboi]

Luckily with such short arms, 2 d6 inserts puts me right at what I want.

 

[DWhitt]

There are plenty of pros shooting high FOC arrows. I will say its not as important than bareshaft tuning is for me but I believe it helps with how well the arrow reacts to the shot and allows better penetration..

 

[Beendare]

There are plenty of pros shooting high FOC arrows. I will say its not as important than bareshaft tuning is for me but I believe it helps with how well the arrow reacts to the shot and allows better penetration..

Post proof please.....I'm calling horse dung without proof of these "Many pros"....please name the 'many'

I've seen your comment regurgitated on other sites many times without proof by the Ashby clones/backyard internet wonders....no pros I've ever shot with..... talked to....or even heard of...... use arrows outside Eastons recommended medium FOC range. Its time to put an end to bad info.....

 

[DWhitt]

Go listen to bowjunky podcast after the Lancaster tournament. The young kid that got 2nd said he shoots at least 200 grains up front. Sorry if it offends you but they do. There are advantages of doing so.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Beendare]

Go listen to bowjunky podcast after the Lancaster tournament. The young kid that got 2nd said he shoots at least 200 grains up front. Sorry if it offends you but they do. There are advantages of doing so.

So for clarification you said "Many pros".....now its "one kid"? Thats funny right there....sorry if THAT offends you.

You only offend me [and others] when you misrepresent facts.

 

[Capra]

Go listen to bowjunky podcast after the Lancaster tournament. The young kid that got 2nd said he shoots at least 200 grains up front. Sorry if it offends you but they do. There are advantages of doing so.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Jacob Marlow ( Who is an awesome shot).......... Lancaster....

Of course, for at least 20 years everyone shooting indoor has shot large dia arrows and the only way to break down the spine is to add weight up front. Just look at a spine chart and try to figure out how to push a 25XX shaft with a 50-60 lb bow. That is an irrelevant comment to this conversation as I believe we are hunters here.

For the record I like FOC over the years it seems like 12-15 % is the sweet spot where I can get great arrow flight and maintain performance at distance.

To the OP: you may be able to add set screws to the second insert for about 8 grains more. Also, I'm footing my D6 shafts with 1" of 1816 xx75 to compensate for the thin ferrel. For another 8 grains.

 

[BackcountryMT]

Post proof please.....I'm calling horse dung without proof of these "Many pros"....please name the 'many'

I've seen your comment regurgitated on other sites many times without proof by the Ashby clones/backyard internet wonders....no pros I've ever shot with..... talked to....or even heard of...... use arrows outside Eastons recommended medium FOC range. Its time to put an end to bad info.....

For the sake of conversation can you provide any proof that a heavier FOC doesn't improve forgiveness?

I don't shoot a pile of weight up front(62 grains plus the head at about 14%) but I have definitely seen an increase in consistency and forgiveness when shooting broadheads.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Beendare]

For the sake of conversation can you provide any proof that a heavier FOC doesn't improve forgiveness?

I don't shoot a pile of weight up front(62 grains plus the head at about 14%) but I have definitely seen an increase in consistency and forgiveness when shooting broadheads.

Sure, glad to.

First, you and I are within the Easton recommended range of what can be called medium FOC; 8%-16%. I'm at 16%...tunes great. So we aren't in the realm of high FOC.

Really there is only one guy pushing this high FOC- Ashby and his clones. Did you know Ashby did a lot of his testing with a longbow?

Did you know his original claim on his high FOC defied the laws of physics? His claim was trajectory is improved with EFOC arrows. Once the scientific community investigated and it came out how he did the study; Wooden dowels and rubber bands. The whole EFOC thing was proven a sham.

Older longbow vs modern compound; This is a whole different animal than the shoot through risers the vast majority of us use as we don't NEED archers paradox with the arrow bending around the riser to get a clean shot....where some of those longbows do. Also factor in, a longbow has a much different draw force curve than many of the compounds we shoot today which don't apply even force to the arrow on the shot...its much more abrupt....a higher energy output...a faster acceleration if you will.

Especially a high energy compound. Guys always talk about these frnt loaded arrows in flight comparing them to missles but theres no free lunch........what these guys don't factor in is the destabilizing effect of a lot of tip weight and weaker spine on an abrupt launch from your bowstring.

Bottom line; If high FOC was an advantage...don't you think the engineers at Easton would recommend it?

Don't you think the vast majority of pros would be using it?

You know the guys shooting 5 hours a day in FITA, ASA 3D, and all of the other target disciplines spend days/weeks/years just to squeak out a tiny advantage....a couple points in their score.....and 99% of them are all in the Easton rec range for FOC. That should tell you something....

But there are still internet wonders that once a week post on the different archery sites, "OH MY, I just reinvented the wheel with my very high FOC arrow.....its AMAZING" of course they didn't compare it to the same weight arrow with FOC in the Easton range....and of course their testing is completely biased and unscientific....but the claims are there and the uninitiated suck it up.

 

[BackcountryMT]

Sure, glad to.

First, you and I are within the Easton recommended range of what can be called medium FOC; 8%-16%. I'm at 16%...tunes great. So we aren't in the realm of high FOC.

Really there is only one guy pushing this high FOC- Ashby and his clones. Did you know Ashby did a lot of his testing with a longbow?

Did you know his original claim on his high FOC defied the laws of physics? His claim was trajectory is improved with EFOC arrows. Once the scientific community investigated and it came out how he did the study; Wooden dowels and rubber bands. The whole EFOC thing was proven a sham.

Older longbow vs modern compound; This is a whole different animal than the shoot through risers the vast majority of us use as we don't NEED archers paradox with the arrow bending around the riser to get a clean shot....where some of those longbows do. Also factor in, a longbow has a much different draw force curve than many of the compounds we shoot today which don't apply even force to the arrow on the shot...its much more abrupt....a higher energy output...a faster acceleration if you will.

Especially a high energy compound. Guys always talk about these frnt loaded arrows in flight comparing them to missles but theres no free lunch........what these guys don't factor in is the destabilizing effect of a lot of tip weight and weaker spine on an abrupt launch from your bowstring.

Bottom line; If high FOC was an advantage...don't you think the engineers at Easton would recommend it?

Don't you think the vast majority of pros would be using it?

You know the guys shooting 5 hours a day in FITA, ASA 3D, and all of the other target disciplines spend days/weeks/years just to squeak out a tiny advantage....a couple points in their score.....and 99% of them are all in the Easton rec range for FOC. That should tell you something....

But there are still internet wonders that once a week post on the different archery sites, "OH MY, I just reinvented the wheel with my very high FOC arrow.....its AMAZING" of course they didn't compare it to the same weight arrow with FOC in the Easton range....and of course their testing is completely biased and unscientific....but the claims are there and the uninitiated suck it up.

Thanks for the response! I guess I was taking your argument as
"adding any FOC was worthless" where it was more of an EFOC thing. I can agree with that as I've seen minimal, if any, difference from 14-18% in stuff I've played with. I do think focusing some weight to front end of the arrow can benefit most hunters.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[d90rick]

Jacob, just add an extra insert or two, I put three in my injexions and iirc they are 485gr with around 15% foc. good luck and best wishes

 

[Jacob Chapman]

Sure, glad to.

First, you and I are within the Easton recommended range of what can be called medium FOC; 8%-16%. I'm at 16%...tunes great. So we aren't in the realm of high FOC.

Really there is only one guy pushing this high FOC- Ashby and his clones. Did you know Ashby did a lot of his testing with a longbow?

Did you know his original claim on his high FOC defied the laws of physics? His claim was trajectory is improved with EFOC arrows. Once the scientific community investigated and it came out how he did the study; Wooden dowels and rubber bands. The whole EFOC thing was proven a sham.

Older longbow vs modern compound; This is a whole different animal than the shoot through risers the vast majority of us use as we don't NEED archers paradox with the arrow bending around the riser to get a clean shot....where some of those longbows do. Also factor in, a longbow has a much different draw force curve than many of the compounds we shoot today which don't apply even force to the arrow on the shot...its much more abrupt....a higher energy output...a faster acceleration if you will.

Especially a high energy compound. Guys always talk about these frnt loaded arrows in flight comparing them to missles but theres no free lunch........what these guys don't factor in is the destabilizing effect of a lot of tip weight and weaker spine on an abrupt launch from your bowstring.

Bottom line; If high FOC was an advantage...don't you think the engineers at Easton would recommend it?

Don't you think the vast majority of pros would be using it?

You know the guys shooting 5 hours a day in FITA, ASA 3D, and all of the other target disciplines spend days/weeks/years just to squeak out a tiny advantage....a couple points in their score.....and 99% of them are all in the Easton rec range for FOC. That should tell you something....

But there are still internet wonders that once a week post on the different archery sites, "OH MY, I just reinvented the wheel with my very high FOC arrow.....its AMAZING" of course they didn't compare it to the same weight arrow with FOC in the Easton range....and of course their testing is completely biased and unscientific....but the claims are there and the uninitiated suck it up.

I was literally trying to build an arrow in the 12-15% range-yet you jump all over me using condescending language....then say that you shoot arrows with 16% FOC???? Sure are perpetuating that California stereotype there dude.

 

[Beendare]

Thanks for the response! I guess I was taking your argument as
"adding any FOC was worthless" where it was more of an EFOC thing. I can agree with that as I've seen minimal, if any, difference from 14-18% in stuff I've played with. I do think focusing some weight to front end of the arrow can benefit most hunters.

Anytime bro. Sure a reasonable amount of FOC is good......but as you stated....a little FOC either way isn't something you want to plan your arrow build around. [which happens to be the question in this thread]

I hunt with some ASA pro shooters and if you ask them what the FOC is of their arrow they can't even tell you.....its that insignificant.

 

[Jacob Chapman]

Anytime bro. Sure a reasonable amount of FOC is good......but as you stated....a little FOC either way isn't something you want to plan your arrow build around. [which happens to be the question in this thread]

I hunt with some ASA pro shooters and if you ask them what the FOC is of their arrow they can't even tell you.....its that insignificant.

That is incorrect. I am not basing my arrow build off of one particular aspect of the arrow. I'm trying to build the most lethal and efficient setup for my hunting style, preferences and type of game I'm going to be hunting. I simply asked the question about increasing FOC as I had already nailed down what factors are going to play into my plan

FOC is one aspect, as is spine, physical weight of the arrow, etc etc. So-as I said before, no reason to be rude.

 

[Manosteel]

Beendare you come off like an A$$fart, not sure if that was your intention but you do. When Jacob asked a simple question regarding how to increase FOC, I automatically assumed he was talking about the 11-14% range which isn't crazy but IMO has a noticeable difference in arrow flight and penetration down range past 50 yards.

Not sure what your point is regarding smaller diameter arrows, I find they penetrate a lot better than standard arrows. This past season I switched to Easton Deepsix XD's and have been extremely pleased, especially by the fact the I don't have to use an outsert. Like Jacob, I would like to add more FOC but haven't found an easy way to do it, which for my purposes isn't that big of a deal since I have the final arrow weight I want and my FOC is just under 12%. Look me up on instrgram, every year I harvest Trophy class Elk and moose from Alberta and BC, this year with all else being relatively equal, I got better penetration than years before. And before you assume, I have been at the archery bow hunting game since the 80's, (my first compound had steel cables and tear drops) I have been tuning my own bows for almost as long and my garage has all the tools that you would find in any bow shop.