[rsarns]

Howard hill did alright with them.

but more to the point, BHs are relative. we are running about 7"

Howard Hill bows also have very low mass. hardly have any window. which makes them difficult in our eyes.
as well as slow. and not so smooth. again attributes your not wanting in a bow.
tecnologically advanced for thier time. so have thier place

They are fun to shoot at the right place and time, but not for a long period of time. LOL The hand and bow arm shock is sometimes over powering.

So lower BH is not less forgiving? I just have to stay with this thread, as that goes against everything we have learned over the years of technological advances in archery

 

[Shawn Leonard]

There has to be a point of diminishing returns, that is why you do not see any 10" brace heights. Performance is effected by a very high brace height. I myself need a higher brace height with all my bows. I have huge forearms and get string slap no matter what I do once a bow gets down to 7.5"s or so. Shawn

 

[Mo0se]

Compared to your brace limit, or restrictions, Hoyt is higher across the board, and therefore they start more forgiving. Because like Chris mentioned above, the longer the arrow is on the string, the more "perfect" an archers overall form must be. It's a law of physics that no one can work around. I mentioned all the facts Chris has layed out in another post of yours not long ago. Nothing has changed since then. Now I have a question, are you looking to replace the feel of a 70" bow when shot, since your 70" model is 64" at rest, how do you plan to replace that comfortable stable length we all know and love?

That's why we choose those, stability and feel. Are you expecting your limbs unfolding from 64" to 70" to provide that feeling? Using a long bow as an example for your plight, as you are clearly trying to shed favorable light on a low brace height that no target shooter desires in a recurve bow. A long bow moves in one axis not two like SR, so the long bow will always and forever be more forgiving by its design.

 

[Str8 Shooter]

A high brace, outside of the correct range, doesn't necessarily equate to more forgiveness or accuracy. A given design has a working envelope where the limb functions correctly and has its optimum amount of stability. Operating outside this range, on the high side, compresses the limb more and can reduce vertical stability. In a recurve it also opens the curves earlier which can reduce smoothness and speed.

So, comparing a 70" Hill style which is designed for a lower brace vs a 70" Olympic recurve with a much higher brace isn't really valid comparison. You have to compare like for like. If you want to compare longbows compare a Hill to a stealth D bow which normally presents a higher brace.

Now, with the more aggressive recurves things are a little different. The curves sit further forward at brace which means the limb will want to jack knife more (bigger lever). Ever wonder if people shoot out of spec (higher brace) on aggressive curves because it makes it behave more like a conventional recurve? Food for thought...

 

[olddogrib]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Str8 Shooter View Post
Are these questions being posed because you want a serious discussion or are they being asked because you are justifying the direction your company is going? And, I'm not asking that to he rude but because these threads generally seem to have a feel that you are trying to enlighten those of us too ignorant to know better and you aren't really interested in meaningful discourse. At least, that's the perception many people have and why these threads tend to turn negative and go sideways.

In the interest of having a serious discussion you can't quantify forgiveness but if you're bow doesn't have it you know. Forgiveness is a condition of having a good tune and a bow that doesn't punish mistakes. It is generally accepted that short brace heights (relative term) are less forgiving to shoot. There are two schools of thought on this. One is that short brace heights are faster and this means the arrow is off the string quicker which results in less shooter input. The other is a short brace (relative) has a longer power stroke and the shooter's input affects the shot more because the arrow is on the string for a greater length. Which is right?

Look at compounds for a minute. The prevalence of low brace bows was in a large part due to the push for speed over the last decade. Guys want more speed. When 340 fps was fast one year, the next year it wasn't enough. This led manufacturers to continue pushing the envelope in both cam design, reflex risers, and short brace heights. However, in the last few years, consumers have started asking for something different. People are asking for bows that have less aggressive cams, longer brace height, and more in line or deflexed risers. Why? Because the former designs were less fun to shoot, despite being fast, and people are discovering (or perhaps re-discovering) the less aggressive designs are easier to shoot with consistent accuracy.

Now, one other question a person has to ask in deciding if a low brace bow is for them is what their end game goals are. For hunting we want to hold a single shot accurately into a small area and we choose the distance we shoot. A low brace height bow, which may be faster, may work just fine for the person who knows and sticks within their limitations. A 3D or field archer is normally shooting longer distances and doesn't get to choose their shots. They take what is presented and and the goal is hitting a small bullseye at every distance. If you are trying to win you don't get points for extra speed, you get points for delivering pin point accurate shots.

In the target world do you see short brace bows being used at big tournaments often? Generally not. Why is that? It's the same on the traditional side and compound side. Why?

Does vertical stability or lateral stiffness guarantee better accuracy, regardless of brace? If so, how much of each is needed? Is there a point where there is too much and it causes backlash in the shot? Is forgiveness solely dependent on brace or is it a combination of all factors in the system?

In regards to the second paragraph, I've seen it argued that the point made about the arrow being "off the string quicker" associated with higher BH, not lower...i.e. the closer the string is to the riser when it detaches the later the arrow can complete the necessary gyrations required for paradox. Maybe "sooner" would be a better desciptor than "quicker". I'm obviously not a technoweenie, but I do concur with the crowd that claim lower BH will make dynamic spine of a given arrow act slightly stiffer and raising it will make it slightly weaker due to earlier release. I will concede that if you ask this question on most less-technical oriented websites you will always get near 50-50 responses from the "power stroke" adherents vs. the "release point" crowd. I think it's notable that if we were in the 1% of those whose form was good enough that we'd notice these changes the point wouldn't even be debatable, lo!

 

[Sid]

They are fun to shoot at the right place and time, but not for a long period of time. LOL The hand and bow arm shock is sometimes over powering.

So lower BH is not less forgiving? I just have to stay with this thread, as that goes against everything we have learned over the years of technological advances in archery

according all the old rational though, big recurves are also unstable. yet one currently hold gents barebow field GOLD.

so al the years of knowledge is still up for questioning.
heck at one point man thought he wouldn't be able to withstand more than 30mph.
but it was questioned!

 

[Sid]

There has to be a point of diminishing returns, that is why you do not see any 10" brace heights. Performance is effected by a very high brace height. I myself need a higher brace height with all my bows. I have huge forearms and get string slap no matter what I do once a bow gets down to 7.5"s or so. Shawn

have you ever seen the shim in the grip of a hoyt riser?
you can move the grip left or right?

 

[Scyth]

Uukha runs a relatively high BH . . .

"Brace height:

We recommand to respect the value in a +-10mm range.

Lower the brace height if you focus on speed, increase it for stability and comfort.

Curve and Xcurve models are already very fast, moreover you will be able to use brace height in the bottom of the range to get even more speed.

Brace height 2015 range (and Vx1000 2014) previous generation
70" 225 mm 232 mm
68" 218 mm 225 mm
66" 211 mm 218 mm
60" 192 mm 199 mm
Tiller:

Tiller is the difference between the distance top limbs / string and the distance bottom limb string.
For Uukha limbs common settings between 0 and 6 mm are correct too. "

Do they know something we don't . . . . ? ?


🏹

John

 

[Sid]

Compared to your brace limit, or restrictions, Hoyt is higher across the board, and therefore they start more forgiving. Because like Chris mentioned above, the longer the arrow is on the string, the more "perfect" an archers overall form must be. It's a law of physics that no one can work around. I mentioned all the facts Chris has layed out in another post of yours not long ago. Nothing has changed since then. Now I have a question, are you looking to replace the feel of a 70" bow when shot, since your 70" model is 64" at rest, how do you plan to replace that comfortable stable length we all know and love?

That's why we choose those, stability and feel. Are you expecting your limbs unfolding from 64" to 70" to provide that feeling? Using a long bow as an example for your plight, as you are clearly trying to shed favorable light on a low brace height that no target shooter desires in a recurve bow. A long bow moves in one axis not two like SR, so the long bow will always and forever be more forgiving by its design.

If the arrows time on the string is particular to forgiveness, why do 32" draws not get punished?

I never said I planned on replacing a 70" bow with a 64" bow. that's just stupid. string angles allow your fingers to release the string easier.

Why would I try and replace a 70" bow then spend 2-3 years developing a 25" riser...

why do we offer XL limbs. so XL limbs on a 27" riser = 74" bow.

your making some big assumptions. We also make a 25" covert hunter and a 25" ILF Wood riser.
and when you click on the "target" Tile of our web site it delivers 23 and 25" riser. yet click on hunting and it delivers 17 and 19"

 

[rsarns]

according all the old rational though, big recurves are also unstable. yet one currently hold gents barebow field GOLD.

so al the years of knowledge is still up for questioning.
heck at one point man thought he wouldn't be able to withstand more than 30mph.
but it was questioned!

Most likely that person who won the gold could have shot most any limb and won. Please don't get me started on this, questioning limits or conceived notions is why we are as advanced as we are today, but until someone develops a super recurve that is both fast and forgiving, I will stay with my conventional limbs. I feel that I am safe for many years to come on that.

 

[Sid]

A high brace, outside of the correct range, doesn't necessarily equate to more forgiveness or accuracy. A given design has a working envelope where the limb functions correctly and has its optimum amount of stability. Operating outside this range, on the high side, compresses the limb more and can reduce vertical stability. In a recurve it also opens the curves earlier which can reduce smoothness and speed.

So, comparing a 70" Hill style which is designed for a lower brace vs a 70" Olympic recurve with a much higher brace isn't really valid comparison. You have to compare like for like. If you want to compare longbows compare a Hill to a stealth D bow which normally presents a higher brace.

Now, with the more aggressive recurves things are a little different. The curves sit further forward at brace which means the limb will want to jack knife more (bigger lever). Ever wonder if people shoot out of spec (higher brace) on aggressive curves because it makes it behave more like a conventional recurve? Food for thought...

not everyone. there are plenty of target archers that are not part of the online community that shoot lower BH.
http://www.archeryinterchange.com/f127/show-us-your-set-up-target-ilf-12261/index56.html

have a look at these.

but your right about the limb not working well outside of its BH.

that was the reason for this thread.
how come others don't operate conventional limbs outside of the recommendations but seem to think that all limbs work the same.

 

[Sid]

Most likely that person who won the gold could have shot most any limb and won. Please don't get me started on this, questioning limits or conceived notions is why we are as advanced as we are today, but until someone develops a super recurve that is both fast and forgiving, I will stay with my conventional limbs. I feel that I am safe for many years to come on that.

Ren you asked me not to mention you or get started on your posts. Ive remained polite. though I have a different opinion to you on this one.
reply to this particular post and i'll explain my rational. but you might not like it.

I'll respect your wishes. if you want them respected.

 

[Mo0se]

I'm not assuming anything... A friend just ordered a 70" ch what is its length at rest? I suppose it depends on the point you are trying to make on a certain day. All those threads about how the ch is so much shorter for a given length. I have another question... Why is it you come here exclusively to post negative things about Hoyt, and promote your product, but I never see any threads like this on the FITA forum in Archery Talk? Isn't that another audience or opportunity to promote your concepts? I have nothing personal against you Sid, and wish you great success, but I can assure you the people that inhabit this forum Are not naive or rank beginners.

 

[Sid]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Str8 Shooter View Post
Are these questions being posed because you want a serious discussion or are they being asked because you are justifying the direction your company is going? And, I'm not asking that to he rude but because these threads generally seem to have a feel that you are trying to enlighten those of us too ignorant to know better and you aren't really interested in meaningful discourse. At least, that's the perception many people have and why these threads tend to turn negative and go sideways.

In the interest of having a serious discussion you can't quantify forgiveness but if you're bow doesn't have it you know. Forgiveness is a condition of having a good tune and a bow that doesn't punish mistakes. It is generally accepted that short brace heights (relative term) are less forgiving to shoot. There are two schools of thought on this. One is that short brace heights are faster and this means the arrow is off the string quicker which results in less shooter input. The other is a short brace (relative) has a longer power stroke and the shooter's input affects the shot more because the arrow is on the string for a greater length. Which is right?

Look at compounds for a minute. The prevalence of low brace bows was in a large part due to the push for speed over the last decade. Guys want more speed. When 340 fps was fast one year, the next year it wasn't enough. This led manufacturers to continue pushing the envelope in both cam design, reflex risers, and short brace heights. However, in the last few years, consumers have started asking for something different. People are asking for bows that have less aggressive cams, longer brace height, and more in line or deflexed risers. Why? Because the former designs were less fun to shoot, despite being fast, and people are discovering (or perhaps re-discovering) the less aggressive designs are easier to shoot with consistent accuracy.

Now, one other question a person has to ask in deciding if a low brace bow is for them is what their end game goals are. For hunting we want to hold a single shot accurately into a small area and we choose the distance we shoot. A low brace height bow, which may be faster, may work just fine for the person who knows and sticks within their limitations. A 3D or field archer is normally shooting longer distances and doesn't get to choose their shots. They take what is presented and and the goal is hitting a small bullseye at every distance. If you are trying to win you don't get points for extra speed, you get points for delivering pin point accurate shots.

In the target world do you see short brace bows being used at big tournaments often? Generally not. Why is that? It's the same on the traditional side and compound side. Why?

Does vertical stability or lateral stiffness guarantee better accuracy, regardless of brace? If so, how much of each is needed? Is there a point where there is too much and it causes backlash in the shot? Is forgiveness solely dependent on brace or is it a combination of all factors in the system?

In regards to the second paragraph, I've seen it argued that the point made about the arrow being "off the string quicker" associated with higher BH, not lower...i.e. the closer the string is to the riser when it detaches the later the arrow can complete the necessary gyrations required for paradox. Maybe "sooner" would be a better desciptor than "quicker". I'm obviously not a technoweenie, but I do concur with the crowd that claim lower BH will make dynamic spine of a given arrow act slightly stiffer and raising it will make it slightly weaker due to earlier release. I will concede that if you ask this question on most less-technical oriented websites you will always get near 50-50 responses from the "power stroke" adherents vs. the "release point" crowd. I think it's notable that if we were in the 1% of those whose form was good enough that we'd notice these changes the point wouldn't even be debatable, lo!

any occilation will even itself out. Give it long enough.
so the longer the powerstroke the less jerky the process will be.
for example imagine a 27" BH and a 28" draw length. in 1" the string has to get round your fingers and get traveling at a straight enough line to stop nock separation being at a 45 deg angle.
on the other hand. its said that a conventional bow has a 1.25 cycle. so the angle of release is MUCH more shallow. but also more inline with where you want your arrow to go.

So simply don't subscribe to the idea you want rid of the arrow as fast as possible off the string.
but more importantly... 1"-1.5" really isn't going to make a massive difference to nock separation in either case. as its when the arrow is at MAX speed.
1" at 200fps. that's 2400 inches a second.

 

[Sid]

I'm not assuming anything... A friend just ordered a 70" ch what is its length at rest? I suppose it depends on the point you are trying to make on a certain day. All those threads about how the ch is so much shorter for a given length. I have another question... Why is it you come here exclusively to post negative things about Hoyt, and promote your product, but I never see any threads like this on the FITA forum in Archery Talk? Isn't that another audience or opportunity to promote your concepts? I have nothing personal against you Sid, and wish you great success, but I can assure you the people that inhabit this forum Are not naive or rank beginners.

I utterly don't understand your point then. Ive missed it.

a BH is a BH. its not a negative thing.
Its simply what it is.

 

[rsarns]

Ren you asked me not to mention you or get started on your posts. Ive remained polite. though I have a different opinion to you on this one.
reply to this particular post and i'll explain my rational. but you might not like it.

I'll respect your wishes. if you want them respected.

Thank you, as have I remained polite. I should know by now not to even read a thread you start. It just makes my blood pressure rise. I am out.

 

[Sid]

I'm not assuming anything... A friend just ordered a 70" ch what is its length at rest? I suppose it depends on the point you are trying to make on a certain day. All those threads about how the ch is so much shorter for a given length. I have another question... Why is it you come here exclusively to post negative things about Hoyt, and promote your product, but I never see any threads like this on the FITA forum in Archery Talk? Isn't that another audience or opportunity to promote your concepts? I have nothing personal against you Sid, and wish you great success, but I can assure you the people that inhabit this forum Are not naive or rank beginners.

as for your question.
which forum do you think suits our company best?
which forum is the forum that is the most forward thinking?
which forum are you going to get the most "archery" thinking. Not the blinkerd thinking from a archery monoculture?
here on tradtalk, you get flight archers. Barebow, Target, Stumping, Hunting, Short bows, longbows. Primative bows, Historical facts, modern facts.

I have nothing against you either Jeff.

though im not sure I understand what the compactness of the bow at BH has to do with bow length.
for example. if you take a tape measure round the recurves, straight across the bow, to round the recurves. a covert Hunter is longer than a conventionl bow by a very very small amount. so a 62" widow is like a 62" Covert all bar 1/2" and a 70" WIN&WIN is the same measurement tip to tip, round the recurves to a 70" covert.

its just the covert is a more wrapped up at BH. opposed to long and tall. but once you get to full draw. both bows have the same string angles?

does that answer your questions?

 

[Sid]

Thank you, as have I remained polite. .

appreciated.

 

[Mo0se]

I utterly don't understand your point then. Ive missed it.

a BH is a BH. its not a negative thing.
Its simply what it is.

From a shooters perspective a bh isn't just a bh. From a designers perspective such as yourself, you may see it differently. People want what they want for different reasons in archery equipment, when we are discussing Target, vs hunting. There are certain tools that do each job extremely well. These are not necessarily interchangeable, one to the other and so on. If you would like a larger share of the pie regarding the target market, which is comprised of standard profile limbs, with higher more forgiving brace heights designed into the limbs.

You can't come here and tell us, your potential customers that we are wrong, as well as every other Archery company, like Hoyt, since you like to pick on them a lot... Or Win Win, or MK Korea, etc. that we all have it wrong, without being able to prove it. We are the reason any of those companies, including yours is still in business. We are after all the ones who choose a product based on our own experiences. I feel as if you'd like us to ignore everything that we've learned, just because your limbs are faster, they are better than 2# per inch, but at the end of the day 45# resistance on your fingers is equal across the board, that also includes your design. So why does the majority stick with conventional limbs? It's easy, those manufacturers listen to what we want in a limb. Good speed, good feel, stability, dependability, forgiving brace heights for us mere mortals, and a price that puts it in reach for everyone.

How about asking us what we'd like in a Border limb instead of telling us what you think we should have? While I'm being honest here, how do you wish to remain competitive when you've price gouged a lot of people from being able to afford Hex7.5? What's so earth shattering between those and the 6.5? Bigger hooks? A shorter bow...great for hunting but meh for target. There is no justification for expecting the general shooting public to fork over $900 for a set of limbs? That's a bit unrealistic in my opinion. Once again, It's not my intent to bash you, or your product, or be offensive on purpose. This is a discussion forum so you can't expect everyone to subscribe to your ideas when you're not open to ours.

 

[Sid]

From a shooters perspective a bh isn't just a bh. From a designers perspective such as yourself, you may see it differently. People want what they want for different reasons in archery equipment, when we are discussing Target, vs hunting. There are certain tools that do each job extremely well. These are not necessarily interchangeable, one to the other and so on. If you would like a larger share of the pie regarding the target market, which is comprised of standard profile limbs, with higher more forgiving brace heights designed into the limbs.

You can't come here and tell us, your potential customers that we are wrong, as well as every other Archery company, like Hoyt, since you like to pick on them a lot... Or Win Win, or MK Korea, etc. that we all have it wrong, without being able to prove it. We are the reason any of those companies, including yours is still in business. We are after all the ones who choose a product based on our own experiences. I feel as if you'd like us to ignore everything that we've learned, just because your limbs are faster, they are better than 2# per inch, but at the end of the day 45# resistance on your fingers is equal across the board, that also includes your design. So why does the majority stick with conventional limbs? It's easy, those manufacturers listen to what we want in a limb. Good speed, good feel, stability, dependability, forgiving brace heights for us mere mortals, and a price that puts it in reach for everyone.

How about asking us what we'd like in a Border limb instead of telling us what you think we should have? While I'm being honest here, how do you wish to remain competitive when you've price gouged a lot of people from being able to afford Hex7.5? What's so earth shattering between those and the 6.5? Bigger hooks? A shorter bow...great for hunting but meh for target. There is no justification for expecting the general shooting public to fork over $900 for a set of limbs? That's a bit unrealistic in my opinion. Once again, It's not my intent to bash you, or your product, or be offensive on purpose. This is a discussion forum so you can't expect everyone to subscribe to your ideas when you're not open to ours.

Fair play Moose.

If you going to throw assumptions at me then fair play.
You don't know how many limbs we make, and to whom we sell them to.

but yes. your entitled to your opinion.

have you not seen the set of hex 5s that made it shanghai 2010.
did you not see the hex6 BB2s that were shot in the paralympics.
Did you not click on the link to AIUK to see the full target setups with hex6 and hex7 limbs on it.

Anyway. those folks shooting 7" BHs must be wrong, cos you guys say so.

I never said HOYT was WRONG. I just said there were other shades of right, but your not looking for that.
if you were, you would read a different story in what ive already typed in this thread.

Sorry dude. You missed this one by a country mile!