Request for those who are starting a new bow.

[PatM]

Pat, I imagine this is done in large part to illustrate a point to me about the formual I have been pushing. Im watching closely and enjoying this.  Im waiting to see more and do it myself before making a conclusion.  Thanks Steve. 

Pat, im sure there is a badgering jome to be made, but you sure are loud right now. Why?

 I don't like tests skewed to give the "right" answer.   I have no objection to a formula for a level playing field as long as the field is open at both ends and the data is interpreted realistically.
 

[Badger]

  That's my point Pat, how to interpret the data accurately. I have said all along a proper formula does not exist. Efficiency doesn't lie. If you want to go through the work of plotting a curve on a fresh 24" bow and then plotting it again at 28" and then plotting it again at the broke in bow shooting 24" you will see an obvious answer. I have done this many times. It is clear concise and consistent in favoring the fresh 24" draw bow. Now the only possible way for the 28" draw bow can have an increase in performance instead of decrease is if the design were changes while tillering out to 28". or the tiller shape was changed or the tips were lightened up etc. Lots of variable and it does require a large sample for meaningful results.

    On a personal note, if I thought you were actually trying to take this some place that would give us better information I would support you 100% but this thread and other threads you get involved in seem to be nothing but efforts on your part to discredit whoever it is you have a hard on for that day. Correct me if I am wrong here,

[PatM]

 How so?  It's irrelevant unless you are going to shoot light arrows at 24". It doesn't matter if the bow lost performance at 24" as long as it has a net gain at 28 " or dare I say 30 ".

 On this thread and others I'm just trying to stall dogma from developing.

 But you sure can't be upset for shutting down a discussuion and then re-opening it.

[Badger]

Pat, I see the problem now. You don't seem to be comprehending the conversation. No one is argueing that a bow doesn't perform better at 28" draw. We are demonstrating that a loss of efficiency takes place in that last 4" in most cases. We are also demonstrating that if we attempted to handicap the bow using a different arrow weight the shorter draw would have a potential advantage. This same thing has been said over and over and over. If you fail to comprehend please don't keep badgering people with your version of what you think is happening here.

[PatM]

  Revisionist history.

  Even with the much lower GPP for the short draw  the advantage just isn't there. Especially if you actually put a regulation sized broadhead in the equation.   

 I'm also thinking people with actual short draws are going to be generally shooting proportionally shorter bows and so likely to be shooting bows equally broken down.

[Badger]

 That is your opinion Pat but I have done extensive testing that says otherwise. It would all depend on the amount of handicap, wouldn't it? And then you follow up with another " opinion" about what people would be shooting. You are trolling Pat and I am filing a complaint against you if you don't come up with more specific genuine arguments. Allen Case and I challenge and disagree all the time but when we do we are specific about what we disagree on. You will have to do better than just what you think.  Inviting new bows to test on here was done to eliminate opinions and let everyone view a non biased test. So stop trolling or I am filing a complaint with the moderators. You have become a nuisance and boring! Please do better, I know you have it in you.

[PatM]

I never thought you would run to the teacher just because you weren't getting your way, Steve.

[Selfbowman]

Well I'll say. I am still waiting for info on my data. The test if I did it right has not been graded yet . Just to lighten the discussions a bit. I do think that there is something that I have learned here. You can figure your loss of efficiency that I did not see in my forse draw curve.and if it was present I did not See or understand it. I also understand that the grade is pretty useless once the bow is built. For me I see mass and try to place it as a builder . Many on here go at it from a mathmatics side which is great. They make most of the short cuts. Then there is the trial and erra guys like me. Which might make the smart duds stop maybe laugh and maybe think of a new angle. None the less I will continue the test for a while if  can find better arrows to match up. Arvin

[Badger]

Well I'll say. I am still waiting for info on my data. The test if I did it right has not been graded yet . Just to lighten the discussions a bit. I do think that there is something that I have learned here. You can figure your loss of efficiency that I did not see in my forse draw curve.and if it was present I did not See or understand it. I also understand that the grade is pretty useless once the bow is built. For me I see mass and try to place it as a builder . Many on here go at it from a mathmatics side which is great. They make most of the short cuts. Then there is the trial and erra guys like me. Which might make the smart duds stop maybe laugh and maybe think of a new angle. None the less I will continue the test for a while if  can find better arrows to match up. Arvin

  Arvin, I couldn't come to any conclusions on yours. They appeared to be reflecting a bow that took no set at all after 24". Your test resembled a test of a bow that was already drawn to full draw or didn't take any set. I am hoping for several more samples over the next few weeks.

    The issue of handicapping short draw bows for broadhead is already settled so from this point on we are just looking at the effects of set. The two most useful numbers here are the comparisons between the two 24" draw tests one when fresh and the other after it had been tillered to 28". Of course the bottom line will always be the finished product. So as long as the 24" test is done with the same grains per pound it really doesn't matter much what is used 10 grains per pound would be fine.

[Badger]

  Pat, if getting my way means not putting up with someone just asking the same questions over and over then yes I hope I get my way. But don't despair they might find you in the right here and tell me to tone down. I would rather just not deal with you in any way in the future. You don't ask intelligent questions, you are not specific, you basically just harass people.

[DC]

OK 24/28 first
40#@24"=184fps   348grains  should be 342

40#@26.5=185fps   400grains   correct weight  (later,May 11,40#@28"= 192fps)

33#@24"=180fps   294grains   should be 282


now 18/22
40#@24"=189  322 grains  should be 327

40#@26.5=185fps   400grains  correct weight

33#@24"=180fps  294grains  should be 270

I included as many numbers as I could think of so you could check my work. The bow is a Maple backed Yew with a bit of Perry reflex. This one didn't gain any reflex while tillering. It took about an inch of set but most of it happened in the first half of tillering, whatever that means.

I started taking pictures of this bow to post it and noticed that the bottom limb was way too stiff, looked awful. There was a bit more defex glued into the bottom limb but no, this needed fixing. 15 scrapes sorted it out and also brought the bow out to 40#@28". More in line with the test so I ran it through the chrono. At 10gpp(400grains) I got 192fps(My PB at 10ggp ) Strangely the 24" draw weight didn't change.

[Badger]

  At 192 you have pretty much achieved about as close to perfection as you can get. That is smoking fast!  If you wanted to calibrate a formula to use on future bows of that same design you could simply find the arrow weight at 24" that matches your 28" speed. And then find out which formula will give you that. Each design of bow with different FDC's will use a slightly different formula, that's why I discount them as being of no real value.

   That bow would do extremely well at the flight shoots because it not only stores good energy but is also very efficient. I hope you can make it one of these years or find yourself a good shooter to represent you.

[Bayou Ben]

192 fps!  That's smoking

Yeah quit splicing those handles so you can come back down closer to my level...

[Badger]

  D/C  if you started using about 7.7grains per pound for that design at the 24" Mark I think it will give you a good prediction on potential

[sleek]

OK 24/28 first
40#@24"=184fps   348grains  should be 342

40#@26.5=185fps   400grains   correct weight  (later,May 11,40#@28"= 192fps)

33#@24"=180fps   294grains   should be 282


now 18/22
40#@24"=189  322 grains  should be 327

40#@26.5=185fps   400grains  correct weight

33#@24"=180fps  294grains  should be 270

I included as many numbers as I could think of so you could check my work. The bow is a Maple backed Yew with a bit of Perry reflex. This one didn't gain any reflex while tillering. It took about an inch of set but most of it happened in the first half of tillering, whatever that means.

I started taking pictures of this bow to post it and noticed that the bottom limb was way too stiff, looked awful. There was a bit more defex glued into the bottom limb but no, this needed fixing. 15 scrapes sorted it out and also brought the bow out to 40#@28". More in line with the test so I ran it through the chrono. At 10gpp(400grains) I got 192fps(My PB at 10ggp ) Strangely the 24" draw weight didn't change.

I want all the bow dimensions to this please!  Also an unbraced pic from side and top?