Bare shaft tuning a recurve

[Glynn]

Newtosavage, I can't let that statement go unchallenged. Absolutely nothing wrong with going over 15% FOC.

I have shot between 19% and 23% for several years and 27 % this last year with flawless arrow flight.

I shoot arrows with a 100 gr. brass insert (HIT) and 285 grain BH's and arrows with 60 gr. Tophat inserts with 315 gr. BH's. Lots of ways to skin a cat.

Not saying anyone should do it or not do it. But there's nothing squirrely about my arrow flight and I have reasons to do it.

 

[lumis17]

Just IMO. I found bareshaft tuning with higher front-end weight (200gr plus) more difficult when I first tried it awhile back. Usually with just a regular insert (~10gr) and 100-125gr tips I only had to pay attention to where the bareshaft impacts on the target. Left was stiff, right was weak, etc. With higher FOC I noticed I got BS and fletched arrows hitting at, or close to, the same spot even though both my nock and spine were pretty off. This would be our to 30-40 yards. Sometimes they would impact left even though the arrow was weak and vice versa. It seems that a really heavy front weight is just going to guide your arrow straighter and give you false positives. Nowadays, along with point-of-impact, I pay attention to the angle of the arrow in the target and, more importantly, the flight of the bareshaft. If it’s porpoising at all then I know both spine and nock are off.

 

[Newtosavage]

Newtosavage, I can't let that statement go unchallenged. Absolutely nothing wrong with going over 15% FOC.

I have shot between 19% and 23% for several years and 27 % this last year with flawless arrow flight.

I shoot arrows with a 100 gr. brass insert (HIT) and 285 grain BH's and arrows with 60 gr. Tophat inserts with 315 gr. BH's. Lots of ways to skin a cat.

Not saying anyone should do it or not do it. But there's nothing squirrely about my arrow flight and I have reasons to do it.

LOL Okay.

You do you.

Super high FOC is the new creedmoor of trad archery.

 

[Beendare]

Yeah, the way I look at the super high 30% plus FOC thing....its all about who you believe.

There is essentially one guy recommending it..........with sketchy evidence.

On the other hand all of the top pros in every archery discipline; FITA, ASA 3D, Field, Vegas, etc ...NOT A SINGLE ONE shoots very high 30% FOC. Then add Eastons decades long recommendations.....seems like they know a bit about the arrows they invented.






_______

 

[Glynn]

My Field archery arrows are 13% FOC. I shoot them at target butts out to 80 yards. They don't bareshaft tune as well as my hunting arrows but with vanes they fly where I point them. Higher FOC usually means much heavier arrows too, not exactly what longer distance target archers want but I know a lot of indoor NFAA shooters use it to get a point on at 20 yards.

My hunting arrows I shoot out to 38 yards max (mostly half that) at animals that I want to put two holes in, they have broadheads on them. In the tests I have read, carbon arrows set up to shoot 19% and above FOC begin to out penetrate the lower FOC arrows by good margins in tissue. I set up my hunting arrows using every advantage I can to maximize them completely exiting animals no matter what happens.

Anyway, I am just saying that higher FOC does not cause bareshafts to get squirrely, not being tuned does. Nothing wrong with 300+ grains up front either. If you are going to add mass (weight) to your arrow, which is another good thing for penetration, then you certainly want it up front. Try putting it in the back and see what happens.

 

[Glynn]

Beendare, I am aware of your stance on this and seems like your mind is made up but I think information is a good thing so I'm going to post a link so anybody who wants to read it can do so.

It's just that, information. You can read it and decide you don't believe it too.

It's a small excerpt from a study that spanned 27 years and was conducted to help bowhunters make decisions about building effective hunting arrows. It was more than one man, though he put his name on it, and it was done for the sake of bowhunting, they did not market or sell anything to gain from this.

https://www.grizzlystik.com/PR/ashby_2008_update_part_6.pdf

 

[Beendare]

Glynn,
I've seen the Grizz sticks info....and yeah I'm skeptical since those folks are selling those setups. Plus I've seen there crummy fat shafts they were pedaling in the past and have had buddies use them and fail on very expensive dangerous game hunts. One buddy actually endorses them now...and I know of a failure on that hunt- so yeah, I'm skeptical.


My opinion is formed from;
1) Pro archer buddies
2) Hunting with many arrow setups over the years killing hundreds of animals and seeing a pile more killed by friends- while experimenting with very high FOC myself
3) Talking to Easton engineers at the archery show

Re very high FOC; I have no doubt a guy can get this to work and if it works for you- great....just saying, in my experience, it's not "Better"


____

 

[Glynn]

Well, I'm with you on Grizzly sticks using the study to promote their products. The Ashby foundation does not endorse any manufactures products to avoid bias concerns. They shouldn't have allowed them to be seen as a partner in the study in any way, even if unintentional.

Have not really heard of anyone who is a fan of those shafts either. The study should stand on it's own.

Life and experience is the best teacher and you have lots of it, I would never dismiss your opinion when it comes to killing animals. Would be curious what your hunting FOC is, by the way.

Pro archers and Easton engineers are not necessarily hunters (although probably could be) and I can see where they would consider FOC's influence on arrow flight more important than on it's penetration in tissue. Which is Ashby's main focus.

I have personally found it's effect on flight inconsequential at my hunting range but that it made a difference in several kills on big deer. Small case study for sure, and not enough to claim "better" by any means on animals smaller than 400 pounds. In the end it just gives me a boost of confidence with no downside.

Ashby Bowhunting Foundation

The Ashby Bowhunting Foundation’s goal is to provide the bowhunter with the information and ongoing research to achieve highest possible success rate and reduce the wound/non-recovery rate of big game to the lowest level possible.

www.ashbybowhunting.org

Huge apology to OP for the hijack, I am a complete proponent of extensive bareshaft tuning and just wanted to address the higher FOC post.

 

[Beendare]

Glynn,
I couldn't tell you my FOC....probably high teens is my guess. I tune for perfect arrow flight. Then I shoot longer range groups to fine tune. This gives me a setup much more forgiving of form errors.


I said my piece.........shoot what works for you.

>>>>>>

 

[Cs36]

300 grains?

You're chasing your tail with that much point weight. Just asking for bs tuning problems. Just wow.

Tail low is an indication of overspined from a trad bow, not just nock low.

Man. That makes things interesting. So is it best to video tape arrow flight to differentiate for certain ?

 

[Cs36]

Anyone here run into issues with a stiffer arrow giving a weak impact , but a weaker spine shooting straight? I’ve been shooting recurve for a while now, and can’t make sense of this. First time I’ve seen it

 

[oldgoat]

Anyone here run into issues with a stiffer arrow giving a weak impact , but a weaker spine shooting straight? I’ve been shooting recurve for a while now, and can’t make sense of this. First time I’ve seen it

How are you determining that it's weak or stiff?

 

[Cs36]

How are you determining that it's weak or stiff?

Mostly bareshafting through paper. I usually will also video record arrow flight once I get it to less than an inch tear. This new bow has been giving me some mixed results. I’m trying to get some arrows shot through it for a few weeks to ensure it’s not due to bad form on my end .

 

[GLB]

Anyone here run into issues with a stiffer arrow giving a weak impact , but a weaker spine shooting straight? I’ve been shooting recurve for a while now, and can’t make sense of this. First time I’ve seen it

Yes, if it’s so stiff that it strikes the riser causing a false reading. This can cause it to show weak in paper tuning and bareshaft tuning.

 

[Hartland]

Would those that have experienced squirrely flight with high FOC describe what they experienced?

 

[oldgoat]

Would those that have experienced squirrely flight with high FOC describe what they experienced?

If you try to do EFOC , you can't just add a bunch of weight up front to an arrow you are already using and expect it to work, you have to get a stiffer arrow and break down the spine with heavier tips or components till it's tuned, and since higher FOC increases the authority of the fletches, you have to use quite a bit smaller feathers or they will be severely effected by any cross wind. I've had very good luck with the EFOC , but I drank all the Kool aid and went through all the steps, but EFOC in itself I don't believe actually increases penetration, but I think it helps the arrow stabilize quicker and allows you to use much smaller feathers lowering parasitic drag which I think gives the arrow more energy down range. If it's enough to even matter though, I have no idea! It's fun to play with though and I suggest doing it with micro diameter arrows.

 

[Hartland]

Well if someone modifies a well performing arrow system by increasing the tip weight, with the objective of increasing the FOC, without recognizing an increase in shaft spine is possibly needed, poor flight should not be a surprise.

 

[Hartland]

Here is my understanding of why an arrow with very high FOC gets improved penetration over an arrow that is equal in every other way. It's about shaft drag. The way to accomplish high FOC is to have high tip weight relative to shaft weight. Today, to get a light shaft that has sufficient stiffness to achieve good flight with a lot of tip weight, you're likely using carbon fiber. When that heavy tip hits its target, there is rapid deceleration. With a light shaft, that has relatively low moment of inertia, the shaft does not experience much compressive bending and therefore stays closer to an inline penetration path with the tip than when compared to the bending and resultant drag of the heavier shaft of a lower FOC arrow.

 

[Wrench]

Absolutely true....

But this is diminishing returns.

It takes X to push a broadhead through X type/amount of tissue.

It requires X amount of spine to reduce impact spine deflection based upon the velocity change encountered on impact.

Solve for X and tune for flight with a strong cut on contact head and shove into the resistance you figured for.

If you want to shoot for the humerus you're gonna need to shoot a broomstick. If you kill elk with rib/scapula or less.....you'll likely be more limited by technique than arrow spine.

 

[cap4382]

This chart has worked very well for me over the years. IMO, most people shooting trad bows are way overspined with their arrows. ASTM and AMO are 2 different measurements. AMO is what trad shooters should use, IMO. It’s worked too many times for me to be convinced otherwise.