Definitive arrow study- Easton

[Beendare]

Finally, a scientific study on arrows including FOC by the premier source- Easton

Shooting machine sure, slo mo camera and multiple engineers calibrating and documenting everything ...but then they shoot both FP's and BH's and induce a consistent 2 deg torque on some shot to replicate a shooter.

One of the key difference between this and the other precisioncutarrow study in 2025, they de tuned the bow to a 1.5" paper tear....and they didn't look at FOC. I suppose the de tune was to replicate the avg bowhunter that doesn't tune his equipment? I don't know. Seems like it was done to test max fletching correction.

I've seen so many other garbage backyard arrow studies I'm looking forward to this. Results aren't published yet....but from my experience, I don't think the high FOC guys are going to be happy.

Whats your prediction?

 

[BBob]

16:50 "FOC matters" But what FOC will matter?

I never shot high FOC and shot more of what would be a standard target FOC (Easton recommended) and never had any accuracy or performance complaints when shooting broadheads.

 

[Beendare]

Actually, he goes into more study parameters here and the torque introduced to the bow and why.

I'm bummed. He detuned the bow here in this study too for a 1" tear. I know a bunch of guys that would be appalled with a 1" tear.....heck, I don't get a 1" tear with my recurve.

Look, I'm not trying to be a naysayer here. It's a fantastic study with incredibly accurate calibration and meticulous data collection. Well done.

BUT....He obviously thinks there are a lot of bowhunters that cannot tune or hold consistent form. Maybe he's right, I dunno?

 

[Beendare]

16:50 "FOC matters" But what FOC will matter?

I never shot high FOC and shot more of what would be a standard target FOC (Easton recommended) and never had any accuracy or performance complaints when shooting broadheads.

He leaves us hanging on the results.

 

[BBob]

He obviously thinks there are a lot of guys that cannot tune or hold consistent form. Maybe he's right, I dunno?

I'd say so. Just like on a public rifle range I'd bet 90% can't shoot very well and I'd bet 90% of the masses don't know a thing about how to tune a bow. The shop does it and hands it over.

He leaves us hanging on the results.

Yes he does the little bastid

 

[wildwilderness]

Actually, he goes into more study parameters here and the torque introduced to the bow and why.

I'm bummed. He detuned the bow here in this study too for a 1" tear. I know a bunch of guys that would be appalled with a 1" tear.....heck, I don't get a 1" tear with my recurve.

Look, I'm not trying to be a naysayer here. It's a fantastic study with incredibly accurate calibration and meticulous data collection. Well done.

BUT....He obviously thinks there are a lot of bowhunters that cannot tune or hold consistent form. Maybe he's right, I dunno?

I think the reasoning to put the bow out of tune was to make the results more conclusive for a more forgiving setup.

If everything is perfectly tuned every time then it will be a lot harder to differentiate which vanes, broadhead, FOC is better. When you introduce a slight error then it should become obvious quicker and more conclusively which stand out.

 

[Joe Holden]

Feel like there's going to be a "FOC Node" where things work well at most speeds with a fixed blade. My Scientific Wild A** Guess (SWAG for short), is going to be 13-17% with absolutely no evidence to support this position.

 

[realunlucky]

This was not a Easton project while they did donate a bunch of resources it was a independent study.

Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk

 

[Jpsmith1]

I definitely went deep down the FOC rabbit hole. 692gr with 23% FOC.

I am much happier with my current 480-485 gr build no matter what the FOC is.

 

[fulldraw1972]

This was not a Easton project while they did donate a bunch of resources it was a independent study.

Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk

Yeah I was under the impression this was round 2 of the big joint venture arrow ballistic study performed by James Yates, Precision Cut Archery, Easton and a few others.
Yates in the backcountry has a video out about the upcoming study and mentioned a fair amount of groups and companies donated to fund the study. One name I remember hearing was Kifaru.

 

[Half Nocked]

Actually, he goes into more study parameters here and the torque introduced to the bow and why.

I'm bummed. He detuned the bow here in this study too for a 1" tear. I know a bunch of guys that would be appalled with a 1" tear.....heck, I don't get a 1" tear with my recurve.

Look, I'm not trying to be a naysayer here. It's a fantastic study with incredibly accurate calibration and meticulous data collection. Well done.

BUT....He obviously thinks there are a lot of bowhunters that cannot tune or hold consistent form. Maybe he's right, I dunno?

Yes there are just a ton of people with a crappy tune on their bow...... I was one of them until I decided to learn how to do it correctly

 

[insanelupus]

I was actually wondering about this the other day.

The question was, "I wonder if anyone has ever done a study identifying the ideal FOC for arrow flight/ trajectory as well as the terminal ballistics effects?"

I look forward to their results.