Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
in reply to: My first "harvest"… #51396
I don’t know about you guys, but I’ve never had any luck hunting them from a blind, or a stand. They are strictly a spot-and=stalk species, imo. That said, getting within stickbow range of a wary pack of morels is one of hunting’s greatest accomplishments, surpassed only by how they taste sauteed with shallots and garlic, over a rare elk steak. 8)
in reply to: FOC Evolution… #51263Well I bareshafted the 5575’s @ 28.5″ today, with point weight increased to 360gr, and they are definitely too weak – consistent nock right @ 10 yards.
So, I guess I’ll start building out the sight window a bit and see how that goes.
Or, I’m also considering just getting some 7595’s at full-length for cheap and then truly bareshafting them with the point weight above…
in reply to: My Elkheart has arrived!! #50085Etter1 wrote:
I never thought I would be much into bow collecting but I’m up to three now and only three years into this stuff.
No kidding. I fully, in theory, believe in having one good bow and being thoroughly familiar and proficient with it. But then the next one starts winking at me from across the table…
in reply to: Question For Troy & Dr. ED? #49761Sharpster wrote: To expound a bit, Smiley1’s initial post reinforces the results I’m seeing. On paper he’s underspined yet the arrows are flying great. As he said, he did cut the shafts to 27.5″ which stiffens them up a bit but I’m guessing they would still fly very well from his bow with a longer draw and more point weight. Like I said in my previous post, I’m still experimenting but I’m beginning to believe that the dynamic spine of carbon shafts tends to remain far more static with varying point weights and shaft lengths than we automatically assume. Certainly carbon shafts tolerate far greater variances in point weight and shaft lengths than wood or aluminum shafts of similar spine. The question that remains to be answered is how much more…
Ron
Very interesting Ron. I’ve wondered about that as well, just based on my own minimal experimenting with various point weights. I’d be curious to hear what others think.
I also wonder if the increased/more efficient recovery from paradox observed in EFOC arrows might have something to do with this higher tolerance as well? In other words, dynamic spine remains more static across a wider range of point weights simply because of more efficient recovery and transfer of energy.
in reply to: Getting in shape #49211David Petersen wrote: When I’m into serious upper-body strength training, like now, I increase the weight from American pints to British pints and double the reps in my daily bow-arm-curling workout…:lol:
Dave –
I’m curious – do you pay attention to specific gravity with your pint lifting as well? I now personally, I’ve found Imperial Stouts and Scotch Ales, for example, help me achieve my peak threshold a lot quicker….
in reply to: My Elkheart has arrived!! #48904Nothing like the anticipation of a new bow on the way! Especially once you know it’s finished and in the mail. Looking forward to more pics, and a review once you’ve spent a little time with it, Alex.
in reply to: FOC Evolution… #48710Thanks folks. I think my next step will be to bareshaft with the added point weight and see how they fly, and then assuming that’s all good, go ahead and fletch them with the 2-1/2″ x 4, and check flight again. If they seem weak, I’ll experiment with building out the shelf.
in reply to: "The Untamed" – film #48646It’s excellent, Clay. And even better in a larger format, on Vimeo. I’m exited to see this evolve. And the music works for me. 😉
in reply to: FOC Evolution… #47567Yeah, I was thinking about that last night. They are flying just fine with 335gr. up front right now, and I would only be adding another 30gr. or so. But eliminating the wraps will likely also contribute to weakening the spine as well. Just have to see what happens.
My two recurves and my hybrid, being all cut 3/16″ past center, seem to be quite tolerant of spine variation. But of course everything has its limits. It’s my job to find them…8)
in reply to: FOC Evolution… #46935smiley1 wrote:
If you went to a 125gr adapter you would increase FOC and be right around 650 gr total weight.
So…hypothetically, I could go with;
125 gr. steel adapter
50 gr. brass insert
190 gr. Meathead
for a total point weight of 365gr, which would put my total weight just over 650…
Sorry, I’m just geekin’ and thinking out loud…
in reply to: FOC Evolution… #46896Troy Breeding wrote: Bruce,
I know you may not want to hear this, but you can up your FOC as much as 2% by simply dropping those wraps….
Ha…yeah, I know and I probably will. I just need to “get over it” and kick them to the curb. 🙄
Troy Breeding wrote:
As for gaining FOC, you will gain more with weight in front of the insert as opposed to behind.
Had to learn that one the hard way myself.
Troy
Agreed, and that’s part of the reason I’ve been leery of “add-on” insert systems, and weight tubes, in the past. So I guess there’s really no escaping a heavier point, if I really want to get there…
in reply to: FOC Evolution… #46854Thanks, Dave. I should have added that my “combined point weight” already includes 100gr. inserts and carbon collars.
I suppose I could switch to threaded inserts like the Gold Tip system that allow for add-ons. Or look at weight tubes, though I’ve heard mixed reviews on those.
Also, I draw 27.5″ Bare-shafting with the 28.5″ shafts that I’m currently using was good.
in reply to: best fletching jig? #46840The Bohning and the Martin appear to be identical (except for color/logo) as far as I can tell from pics. Anyone who’s used both who can say for sure?
in reply to: best fletching jig? #46399I’ve been using a Martin J-8 for years with no complaints. It’s a simple, inexpensive jig that gets the job done just fine. Works great for 3 or 4 fletch (and it’s pretty easy to switch between them), and helical is easy to adjust. I haven’t found a compelling reason to spend more on anything else so far.
-
AuthorPosts