Trad Talk Forums banner
1 - 20 of 60 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,799 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
In reading the last few threads concerning Border's newest offering, the Covert Hunter, and other threads about the subject matter of arrow speed, brings a few questions to my mind...Why are bows tested for arrow speed, with string silencers on them??..Why aren't bows tested at the middle range of the Manf. recommended brace height range?...Why not test the bows in the over-all length range that fits the draw length??..And for crying out loud, why are folks testing bows shooting with Finger release???...Finger size and release technique variance from archer to archer make too much difference to make testing a bow not being shot with a mechanical trigger kinda silly, to me... .A solid shooting machine is not that complicated, or expensive to build, and relying on someone to watch how far an arrow is drawn to judge draw length is kinda silly...Limb mounted Clickers are $15.00....String material, construction method, strand count, and serving length all make differences , so why not standardize this as well??...Many different attributes add up to make a good limb, but draw force curve graphs, and arrow speed testing done on an "apples to apples", scientific basis is the real deal, and should settle debates, and answer questions with facts.....Take care........Jim
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,505 Posts
Jim,

Wish it were so..

You only have to look at the so-called velocity specs advertised by compound manufatures.

With buyers' penchant for speed, they respond by pulling every trick in the book.

Never, in real life, will you match the advertised speed on compounds, even those these compounds are fired from "machines" .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,581 Posts
In reading the last few threads concerning Border's newest offering, the Covert Hunter, and other threads about the subject matter of arrow speed, brings a few questions to my mind...Why are bows tested for arrow speed, with string silencers on them??..Why aren't bows tested at the middle range of the Manf. recommended brace height range?...Why not test the bows in the over-all length range that fits the draw length??..And for crying out loud, why are folks testing bows shooting with Finger release???...Finger size and release technique variance from archer to archer make too much difference to make testing a bow not being shot with a mechanical trigger kinda silly, to me... .A solid shooting machine is not that complicated, or expensive to build, and relying on someone to watch how far an arrow is drawn to judge draw length is kinda silly...Limb mounted Clickers are $15.00....String material, construction method, strand count, and serving length all make differences , so why not standardize this as well??...Many different attributes add up to make a good limb, but draw force curve graphs, and arrow speed testing done on an "apples to apples", scientific basis is the real deal, and should settle debates, and answer questions with facts.....Take care........Jim
Yes all very valid questions in my mind.
but the draw back is. some bows dont mind being underdrawn as much as others.
so depending on your techneque, you might get whats listed, but you might not. this is going to create a world of debate anyhow. which is why we dont state numbers. we only recite what others are getting. If you can get 10 reviews that put you in the same ballpark, then thats what the next guy is going to get.

We kinda work on what reviews on mass say and not a single review.

that way you also average out a dodgy chrono in the midst.
or an over excided user who is over pulling just to make thier new bow look good.
 

·
Victim of Geography
Joined
·
1,160 Posts
I think this testing is for the owner of the bow (for me anyway).

I would not expect anyone to choose a limb or configuration based on what numbers I posted.

It just interests me to see the different graphs, whether they are 100% accurate or not.

If a person has a hunting bow he has silenced it would be of no interest to him to see what the bow would do with a 6gpp arrow and no silencers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
434 Posts
In reading the last few threads concerning Border's newest offering, the Covert Hunter, and other threads about the subject matter of arrow speed, brings a few questions to my mind...Why are bows tested for arrow speed, with string silencers on them??..Why aren't bows tested at the middle range of the Manf. recommended brace height range?...Why not test the bows in the over-all length range that fits the draw length??..And for crying out loud, why are folks testing bows shooting with Finger release???...Finger size and release technique variance from archer to archer make too much difference to make testing a bow not being shot with a mechanical trigger kinda silly, to me... .A solid shooting machine is not that complicated, or expensive to build, and relying on someone to watch how far an arrow is drawn to judge draw length is kinda silly...Limb mounted Clickers are $15.00....String material, construction method, strand count, and serving length all make differences , so why not standardize this as well??...Many different attributes add up to make a good limb, but draw force curve graphs, and arrow speed testing done on an "apples to apples", scientific basis is the real deal, and should settle debates, and answer questions with facts.....Take care........Jim
For me it is how I choose to do things. My interest is in how the bow shoots set up to hunt, , not how fast I can make it shoot. I will always take quiet less vibrations and shock over faster speeds.. This seems to be the way my readers want things done too. I never make a comparison of 1 bow to another , I like to evaluate each on it's own merits. I choose to chrono at 26/27/and 28" draw so readers are able to see how it might perform at their draw length's in a hunting set up. It is my real world setup for the way I like things.
Everyone is different, and anyone can do their own testing the way they want. My priority is how the bow will be in a hunting setup, I could care less if it can shoot faster and sound like a 22, shake the watch on my wrist into the next time zone. And the bottom line is I don't make comparisons, or pick favorites. If the information I post is useful, great , if not there are lots of other sources. I will not do a review until I have shot a bow a lot, and developed a feeling for how it is to shoot and listen to the feedback I get from other shooters that try the bow out too. The very last thing I do is chrono it , on the day I write the first draft. The numbers are what they are the way I like to have that bow set up. They are repeatable and that is good enough for me and for the majority of the readers I have. If the review is useful to a reader that's great . The way I choose to do things is not going to change though . For my interests and my readers interests this works and provides the information we find useful.

If you are interested , a web site costs just over $100 , a year, {facebook is free},a chrono is similarly priced, a shooting machine is easy to build for practicaly nothing if you already have a release. It is easy to make any bow shoot fast , file the arrow nocks, juice up the string, drop the brace heights as low as possible and ignore how terrible it sounds and feels. A bit of time on the release can add a few FPS too. Heck you can review a bow in an hour this way but I won't.
Pete
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,581 Posts
Pete. My own personal detractors seem to wish to be spoonfed so that they, from thier arm chairs can scoff and mock.
But they miss my point.
My point is to show people how to do thier own testing.
how to assess one bow from the next.
Id LOVE to see the end of these dull posts of "which bow is best"
It becomes a teen fest of my bow is best even though ive never tried any others. And the answers that really make me giggle are the ones who answer about a bow they havent even owned.
But with more testing than just a chrono. It might be possible for the population at large to test thier own bows and assess whats right and whats wrong. And from there proove or disproove the snake oil salesman. And know what they have in thier hands IS the best for them.
Its not for me to tell you my limb is best. Its for you guys to tell each other based on your own testing. That principal means no sponsership. No staff shooter talking waffle onbehalf of thier master
It also gives everyone the power to see into the reviews better and work out whos being paid to review and who is not. Because i know for a fact that there are some well known bows dont perform as well as others even though some good reviewers have them very close.

So in all honesty. I dont agree with pro reviews.
I agree with people knowing how to test bows for themselves.
Id love to name and shame a bowyer for duff information.
There is some complete miss information out there. But its up to you guys to find it. Not me to show you.
i can show you how to make jigs. Show you how to interpret the readings. But its up to you to work out whats better and whats worse.

thats one of the reasons we enjoy your method Pete. Its more like what real world archers will actually get.
thats also why we dont post our own info.
we are not interested in spoon feeding people. We are interested in showing people how to assess a bow, And hopefully from there you can choose a better bow.

I know its this data driven approach that has helped some people test thier own kit. And helped hank to test bows for himself. Bows are massivly interesting things if you care to look.
thats my take.
 

·
ryan brodrick
Joined
·
2,136 Posts
Pete, This Is what I keep sayingand I've been saying it for a long time.

If someone doesn't like how someone else is doing it, and they feel they are such an expert then go and do it yourself and observe and share your results.

Instead we have complainers and experts abound, cluttering up threads and spending their time attacking poor Sid (ha! Just kidding because I think Sid loves it) and telling everyone how they need to be doing it.

Look if Pete puts silencers and uses too-heavy arrows and releases with a cooking mitten on his hand then his results are still going to be comparable TO HIS OTHER RESULTS. I can extrapolate what's going on and still observe which bow is faster. The same bow will also be faster for me. Maybe not the SAME speed but I can still observe his results and draw conclusions. It seems to me the biggest complainers all have other agendas ( don't like Sid or borders) and aren't only concerned with the scientific process of testing.

Btw an N=1 experiment is still valid, you just have to be careful how you draw conclusions.

If I take every bow Pete has tested and look at all if them, I can probably very easily (and correctly) conclude that the fastest and most efficient bow for Pete will indeed be the fastest and most efficient (quiet etc) bow for most people as long as I'm controlling for some real basic things like draw length.

Rasyad didn't need a 20person control group or an array of hooter shooters: he observed a pool of available and varying data and saw trends in it (I'm assuming all if this Rasyad), did some communicating with bowyers, archers and testers, also did some testing on his own and from all of that put together the fastest and most efficient bow possible FOR HIM. this bow most likely has other great qualities besides speed and efficiency. There is enough data out there to draw conclusions. That being said, I would live to see more exacting, controlled for data as well. I've been challenging borders to do this for a few years but until someone does we just have to go with what we've got.

Edit: Posted simultaneously with Sid ,hence the redundancy
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rasyad

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,505 Posts
Sid,

You touched on a sore point with me..

Many, many times I see queries on which (bow, rifle, fishing rod, golf clubs, you name it) should I choose.

Tell them time and again, the criteria they should be evaluating, in order to make their own decision.

Falls on deaf ears.

Why?

Plain lazy?

I also see innumerable responses from people that don't even ask basic questions before offering solutions. End up with every alternative known to man.

Why?

Do they think they are helping the individual?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,799 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
Jim,

Wish it were so..

You only have to look at the so-called velocity specs advertised by compound manufatures.

With buyers' penchant for speed, they respond by pulling every trick in the book.

Never, in real life, will you match the advertised speed on compounds, even those these compounds are fired from "machines" .
Webster...Hoyt compound bows meet, or exceed, the advertised I.B.O. speeds..All of mine have...But, I agree that there are some that fudge the numbers.....Take care....Jim
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
638 Posts
I purchased my first recurve about four months ago, after being away from archery for many years.

I am purely astonished at how much the performance of that bow has improved - in all respects - since I've owned it. Smoother. Way more quiet. Accurate. The list goes on.

:cool:

Regards,

Salskov
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,799 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
it seems that the tone of the response to this post is that I am referring to Border archery....Not so....I am just saying in general terms...Many times over the years I've read posts from owners of bows that tested a bow, and reported it, even folks such as Pete W., among others, that test a bow as handshot, and with string silencers...Too much variance in this test...For me, since Trad bow performance is a big deal now, the scientific testing the likes of what Emery J. Loiselle, and Norb Mullany did years back was the ticket, and as I wrote, would seem to settle any debate, for the most part...I've followed the many threads and posts about the new Covert Hunter, and what I'm reading, and seeing (the Covert Hunter is a sexy looking bow, for sure) is that the Covert Hunter just might be the first legit 200 f.p.s @ 10 g.p.p./28" bow....This is fantastic, no doubt...As a short draw Archer, maybe even better news to me, than for some of Y'all with long draw lengths...My post wasn't just about Border bows, or Pete W., just a general statement of what I see wrong with how most folks "Test" a bow...As for me not complaining about how other folks test bows, I've stated on here more than a few times that I have a Hooter Shooter, accurate digital scales, and Easton Draw Force mapper, and at work I have full access to many precision measuring tools, including a pretty decent CMM...I test everything I own, but dont post many results, because they are just my results, and what I'm getting isnt going to jive exactly with what someone else might get...I've been on here a long time, and dont have an agenda against anyone, or any bow, I have my opinions, but mostly I keep them to myself...That being said, I'm open to folks sending me a bow to test, if nothing else, shooting it through a good Chrono, using a Hooter Shooter, at any range of draw lengths/arrow weights they want to see tested.....Y'all Take Care.........Jim
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
230 Posts
Yes all very valid questions in my mind.
but the draw back is. some bows dont mind being underdrawn as much as others.
so depending on your techneque, you might get whats listed, but you might not. this is going to create a world of debate anyhow. which is why we dont state numbers. we only recite what others are getting. If you can get 10 reviews that put you in the same ballpark, then thats what the next guy is going to get.

We kinda work on what reviews on mass say and not a single review.

that way you also average out a dodgy chrono in the midst.
or an over excided user who is over pulling just to make thier new bow look good.
Offer a bow that you felt performed the best at the tested draw length?

If the test was to prove a bows performance at a specific draw length then testing a bow optimized for that draw length would be kosher right? Don't know what testing an unoptimized bow would prove.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,825 Posts
In reading the last few threads concerning Border's newest offering, the Covert Hunter, and other threads about the subject matter of arrow speed, brings a few questions to my mind...Why are bows tested for arrow speed, with string silencers on them??..Why aren't bows tested at the middle range of the Manf. recommended brace height range?...Why not test the bows in the over-all length range that fits the draw length??..And for crying out loud, why are folks testing bows shooting with Finger release???...Finger size and release technique variance from archer to archer make too much difference to make testing a bow not being shot with a mechanical trigger kinda silly, to me... .A solid shooting machine is not that complicated, or expensive to build, and relying on someone to watch how far an arrow is drawn to judge draw length is kinda silly...Limb mounted Clickers are $15.00....String material, construction method, strand count, and serving length all make differences , so why not standardize this as well??...Many different attributes add up to make a good limb, but draw force curve graphs, and arrow speed testing done on an "apples to apples", scientific basis is the real deal, and should settle debates, and answer questions with facts.....Take care........Jim
Jim, I am waiting for IBO to require, like compounds, to chronograph bow after each class round.

This will settle some of the debates and require some manufacturers to come out with scientific data. Mainly with one piece or take down models.

DDD
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,444 Posts
Jim, I am waiting for IBO to require, like compounds, to chronograph bow after each class round.

This will settle some of the debates and require some manufacturers to come out with scientific data. Mainly with one piece or take down models.

DDD
The NFAA chronos all bows regardless of class. All it tells you is a speed number, nothing about any other set-up aspect the individual archer chooses to use.

-Grant
 

·
Civil but Disobedient
Joined
·
10,696 Posts
Part of the problem is folks expecting too much from the results. I get more out of the shape of the curves than the absolute numbers. That is why I like the first derivative of the DFC. Chrono numbers should give you an idea of what kind of speed you might get, not what speed you will actually get. My next step up will be converting my draw board to a shooting machine. I am more interested in doing it to be able to study changes with changing draw length (the shape of the curve), rather than getting better chrono readings on limbs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DDD

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,581 Posts
Your also forgetting that some hotrods are dam near useless to try and shoot.
so when testing a bow. There are other topics like vertical stability. Torsional stability. Riser deflex. Noise. Vibration.
Mass....
 

·
Civil but Disobedient
Joined
·
10,696 Posts
Your also forgetting that some hotrods are dam near useless to try and shoot.
so when testing a bow. There are other topics like vertical stability. Torsional stability. Riser deflex. Noise. Vibration.
Mass....
And there lies the rub. There are a lot of variables that affect the shot. Some easy to understand, some not. All this testing has one purpose, to try to serve as an indicator to points on the score board or meat in the freezer. In some cases, it boils down to comfort of shot. We do not have the ability to test every bow that we would consider buying. Testing can serve to help quantify claims from equipment manufacturers. There is not enough testing now, the tests are not standardized, but current tests can still serve as indicators. Ultimately, it is up to the archer to choose his weapon and learn how to shoot it.

I'll keep throwing my stuff out there. There is a void to fill and we are the ones that can help fill it.
 

·
Victim of Geography
Joined
·
1,160 Posts
Part of the problem is folks expecting too much from the results. I get more out of the shape of the curves than the absolute numbers. That is why I like the first derivative of the DFC. Chrono numbers should give you an idea of what kind of speed you might get, not what speed you will actually get. My next step up will be converting my draw board to a shooting machine. I am more interested in doing it to be able to study changes with changing draw length (the shape of the curve), rather than getting better chrono readings on limbs.
I think even if the speed ratings given by individuals are out you can still choose your limb/riser length/ make based on these 1st derivative that you produce.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
548 Posts
Instead we have complainers and experts abound, cluttering up threads and spending their time attacking poor Sid (ha! Just kidding because I think Sid loves it) and telling everyone how they need to be doing it.

Look if Pete puts silencers and uses too-heavy arrows and releases with a cooking mitten on his hand then his results are still going to be comparable TO HIS OTHER RESULTS.
I agree.

However, if you test a bow as described, and you want to make a direct comparison to another bow, you have to keep the parameters exactly the same. If you don't, the results are useless.

I have six recurves and any one of them will be faster than another depending on how I set them up. If I set them up exactly the same, shoot them the same and test them the same, there will only be one "fastest."

Using anecdotal results from individuals can be problematic in that we don't know how the bow was set up, how it was shot, where the draw length was measured from, etc.

Take two exact bows, and do nothing but measure draw length on one to the front of the shelf and one to the back of the shelf. That difference in and of itself will make one bow "average" and the other a "speed demon." Everything appears to be the same on paper, both are said to be drawn to 28" but in actuality one is being drawn an inch or more longer (or shorter) than the other. "Drawn to 28 inches" only means anything if it is the same on every bow tested.

People don't care what the parameters are, or what is the right way or wrong way to test, but for the purpose of a comparison, unless the testing is exactly uniform, it is useless.

I can very easily set up any 45# Bear Grizzly and have it shoot faster than someone else's 45# Covert Hunter. Does that make my testing wrong? No. Does it mean that my Grizzly outperforms a CH? I guess so...as it was set up. Is it a valid and useful comparison? Not even close.

The "buy one and test it yourself" idea doesn't help much when people are looking to make comparisons prior to making a large investment.

If I want to know how many MPG an automobile gets, I don't buy one and test it myself. I look at what the EPA dynamometer testing shows for each vehicle. I fully understand that my results might well be different, and probably will be, but at least I know, based on the same parameters, how each vehicle stacks up.

Auto manufacturers are required to submit to such independent testing. I'm sure, if given the choice, they'd rather just call a few customers, ask them what mileage their getting, and advertise the best one. Heck, I followed a lady on the expressway the other day that I am absolutely positive was getting far in excess of the stated "highway" MPG rating. When I had the opportunity to get around her, I can assure you I was getting much less than the stated rating.

Asking for consistent testing for the purpose of comparison isn't being a "complainer." However, those that make that accusation give an entirely different optic.
 

·
thumbless stringwalker
Joined
·
1,719 Posts
I think it is impossible to set a standard bow test, so it shows the full potential of a bow.
You take one bow and give it to three different archers. Each one will tunes it to his shooting and, then, you get three different performances from the same bow. But, this different test will help you to know how the bow performs if you know how to “read it”. Each one that try it shows only one way to do it.
As my mother use to say: “nothing is completely useless, he always can serve as an example of the wrong way to do it”
JMHO
Martin
 
1 - 20 of 60 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top