[tom-wisconsin]

in reply to: Brass insert preventing failure? #16011

David Petersen wrote: Sapcut — thanks for the photo. Why do you use a double sleeve rather than just one layer?

Sapcut did you ever answer Dave’s question? ❓

[tom-wisconsin]

in reply to: HOW SHARP IS SHARP ENOUGH? #16001

Thanks Ron et al. Always learn something here.:)

[tom-wisconsin]

in reply to: HEAVIER HEADS….?……..NOW WHAT? #13102

msarcher, Hi are you shooting bare shaft? Doing so should help with selecting wt up front. If it flies good bare shaft you can be sure it will fly good with feathers. Also need to compare fletched field pts with fletched broadheads.

[tom-wisconsin]

in reply to: Anxious Dreams #13089

Good hunting Steve.

[tom-wisconsin]

in reply to: Moose scouting pics… #13084

Great pics. Thanks for taking us along. Makes me wish to move to Alberta.

[tom-wisconsin]

in reply to: i got a Q. #10084

Welcome 1/2 T. This is a great place to learn trad. I know they continue to help this newbie.

[tom-wisconsin]

in reply to: The before and after of the Super Kodiak #59061

Beautiful job CW. Great looking bow. I bet it is smooth to shoot.

[tom-wisconsin]

in reply to: I finally figured out what to do with this ol Badger #59058

great looking badger quiver.

[tom-wisconsin]

in reply to: New Member #59047

Welcome and Aloha! Can you tell us about hunting in the islands?

[tom-wisconsin]

in reply to: hi,I am new in town… #59045

Glad to have you with us, Luca.

[tom-wisconsin]

in reply to: Sorry….Just a pet peeve of mine. #51991

For me when I want to say something I just need to get it out first, whether in words or on paper. Later if I have time I will do the spell checking or grammar. I have probably made errors already in this post.:D Please forgive I do not mean to offend. Sometimes I am grammatically challenged.

[tom-wisconsin]

in reply to: brace ht 1965 Indian Archery recurve? #45482

Had brace ht set at 8 1/4 inches but when I was adjusting the arrow nock I was using a metal nock and the nock pliers cut some threads of the string. So I bought a new string and no longer am I going to use the metal nocks. Lesson learned. The arrows were just a tad too stiff with that set up using a 58 inch string.

Just put on a new string, 57 1/4 inches long, marked 58 inches. Now at that brace ht my arrows are too weak. They were too stiff with the old string. Any one know about bow physics to explain this to me? Very frustrating to have to start over with tuning.

Tom

[tom-wisconsin]

in reply to: EFoc and Carbon Arrows #36837

sapcut wrote: I make them out of field points. I make them from 160 gr. to 270 gr. They work really well.
One of the best benefits is that the heavier ones allow for 1″ extra draw clearance. That allows me to cut the arrow up to 1 inch shorter than normal giving me a stiffer arrow. That of course allows for supernatural front loading like I like it.
My 978 gr. arrow has a 270 gr. adapter included in the
685-700 grains up front.

Richie

Richie

Can you tell us how you shape the field points?

Tom

[tom-wisconsin]

in reply to: Follow-up to EFoC and Carbon Arrows #36811

Mike
I know I have read it somewhere in the Ashby reports that because the bare shafts are flying straight you have the most efficient use of the arrows energy or you are saving the energy for impact instead of loosing some because the fletchings are working to keep the arrow straight. So even if the arrows with the fletchings look like they are all flying straight with three different lengths the action of the fletchings were hiding the best flight possible. Can any one else back up my logic on this? I am pretty sure this is what is correct but I am still learning this stuff.

[tom-wisconsin]

in reply to: Broadhead of choice let's hear it #35980

Saw new ad about the Grizzlies stating they are now sharper. I am not sure which bh I am using this year yet. But I am going with ultra=efoc.

[Author]

Posts