Paper and Bare shaft tuning? Different results?

[Chris Shelton]

#5389

Hello everyone. I was not really sure what type of tuning I liked best so I did both when my new Beeman ICS bowhunter shafts came. I knew they were spined right for my bow, but I didnt know at what length they would be best spined. So I fletched one shaft and decided to tune, with the Traditional bowhunters handbook by my side!:D

I figured out that my shafts were flying perfect left to right at 29 and a half, not bad, usually I like my shafts a half inch shorter at 29 even. The only problem now is the porposing part, when I paper tuned the tear was origionally perfect aside from a slight tear to the left(before I cut them) but no up and down, however when I bare shafted it was shaft down? Can anyone help/explain, or give advise!

[Ed Ashby]

#40301

I gave up on paper tuning several years ago. I’d have everything perfect, then change nothing except my shooting distance and the tear would be ‘off’ again. When I get my bare-shaft tuning finished now (I start close and work back to 40 meters) the point of impact is both ‘strait’ in the target and ‘matching’ for all ranges, with the bare-shafts, fletched field points and fletched broadheads.

For the first couple of years after changing to bare shaft tuning, when the tuning was completed I would go back and see how my bare-shaft tuned arrows ‘looked on paper’. Just like the paper-tuned ones, they would be perfect at one range and a bit off at other ranges. Nowadays I NEVER check how my bare-shafted arrows look ‘on paper’, it just messes with my mind!

Ed

[Chris Shelton]

#40377

thanks alot Dr Ashby, I greatly appreciate it! I was actually going to ignore the paper tuning anyway because the tears were extremely minor, like 1cm! So that was not enough for me, I have the bare shaft basically perfect!! So thanks again!
Chris

[Patrick]

#40415

Dr. Ed Ashby wrote: I gave up on paper tuning several years ago. I’d have everything perfect, then change nothing except my shooting distance and the tear would be ‘off’ again. When I get my bare-shaft tuning finished now (I start close and work back to 40 meters) the point of impact is both ‘strait’ in the target and ‘matching’ for all ranges, with the bare-shafts, fletched field points and fletched broadheads.

For the first couple of years after changing to bare shaft tuning, when the tuning was completed I would go back and see how my bare-shaft tuned arrows ‘looked on paper’. Just like the paper-tuned ones, they would be perfect at one range and a bit off at other ranges. Nowadays I NEVER check how my bare-shafted arrows look ‘on paper’, it just messes with my mind!

Ed

Hmmm…I’ve only paper tested. I’ve never understood how bare-shaft tuning is better. My concern with bare-shaft tuning has always been with the target medium. If I shoot into a target, will not the arrow follow the path of least resistance, thereby skewing the results? I’m probably asking a question that’s been answered, and I’m admitting ignorance. Could someone direct me to the info…pretty please?

[Ed Ashby]

#41303

Patrick,

Done correctly, bare shaft tuning totally ignores the ‘knock kick. It’s not a factor. Tuning depends solely on the point of impact between bare-shafts, fletched shafts with field points and then fletched shafts with broadheads. It’s well described, step by step, on O.L. Adcock’s web site.

Hope that helps you out a bit,

Ed

[Jason Wesbrock]

#41328

Patrick wrote: Hmmm…I’ve only paper tested. I’ve never understood how bare-shaft tuning is better. My concern with bare-shaft tuning has always been with the target medium. If I shoot into a target, will not the arrow follow the path of least resistance, thereby skewing the results? I’m probably asking a question that’s been answered, and I’m admitting ignorance. Could someone direct me to the info…pretty please?

Patrick,

I use both paper tuning and bare shaft tuning. What I’ve noticed is that when I paper tune, my bare shafts fly great, and when I bare shaft tune, my fletched shafts shoot bullet holes through paper—two roads, one destination.

The problem most people have with paper tuning is that they either start out at the wrong distance from the paper, or only shoot from a single distance. If you start out too far away, the arrow could already be correcting before it hits the paper. If you only shoot from one distance, you could be shooting through the paper between oscillations.

Start out about four to six feet from the paper, tune accordingly, back up a few feet and repeat. When you’re properly tuned, your arrows will tear bullet holes from any distance. Your bare shafts should also fly straight.

For detailed tuning instructions, you can download the Easton Tuning Guide here:

http://www.eastonarchery.com/pdf/tuning_guide.pdf

Ed is correct that, when bare shaft tuning, you should ignore the nock kick itself and look at the point of impact. If you get 20 yards or so away from your backstop, the nock kick out of the bow will cause the bare shaft to plane off line. If the nock kicks to the left out of the bow, the shaft will fly through the air with the tip pointed slightly to the right, causing the shaft to plane in that direction.

Both tuning methods will work just fine if done properly. Once you are correctly tuned, both methods should yield identical results. If they don’t, your tuning may not be as good as you think. That’s why I always use one method as a double check of the other.

[Patrick]

#37804

I hope you guys don’t mind me resurrecting old threads from the dead. Anyway…

Since writing my above post, I’ve done a complete 180. I no longer paper tune and only bare shaft tune. It seems you guys know what you’re talking about. 😉

PS: There was never any doubt. I knew I just wasn’t grasping the concept.:oops:

[Author]

Posts