Trad Gang

I have read several threads on this site concerning Skinny strings and performance.  I figured why not see what all the hype was about.

So I ordered some strings and set about shooting them.  At least with my recurve I was seeing no additional speed, and to my deaf ears they pretty much sounded the same.

Then I figured why not make a video of me shooting each string through a chronograph using the same arrow.  Fortunately for me there is just this set up right down the road from me.

The intent of this video is not to create an argument, I did it for fun.  I tried to upload to youtube, but they have a 2 meg limit, photobucket has a 10 minute limit, and my video is 26 minutes long, so I had to upload it to my website.

Just so everyone knows I shot my bow with the following strings on it through the chronograph using a hooter shooter.  With each string I used the exact same brace height and used the exact same arrow.  In addition I used a grain scale to weigh my arrow and each string prior to testing.

14 Strand D97
12 Strand D97
10 Strand 8125
10 Strand TCD-150
14 Strand TCD-150

On most strings I shot two shots at 28" and one shot at 30" of draw.  

The results may suprise some, to some it may not.  I was surprised.  If you have some time, the video is 26 minutes long, but I think entertainig.


I am ordering an 8 strand and 10 strand D97, if someone has anyother suggestions please let me know and I will do the same thing all over again, it was fun.


http://onestringer.com/index.php?page=mods/Video/gen_win&vidid=11

Click on the above link to take you to the video

Great work!  I don't think it will be a "be-all-end-all", but it shows a lot.  My thoughts were the same as yours with the 10 strand 8125--oh well.

I'm not going to spoil it for everyone else.  I'll probably chime in more when more have watched.

Chad

I like the video. Impressive. 1 thing I did see was that your silencers changed from string to string with the D97 having 4 rather than 2 and still 168 fps.

You need to test a B50 so I can dismiss the FF type strings and not think I need to upgrade to bow that will handle them.

Well not to contradict but I've did tests myself, first off I think to qualify as a "skinny" string your talking a maximum of 8 strands but more likely 6 to 4 strands. I've been making my own recurves and endless loop strings for about 12 years now. With my own chrono set up on the same day switching from a 50lb recurve with a 12 strand B50 string and then changing to a 8 strand D97 I gained 10fps shooting the exact same arrow combo(500grain), the bow just "felt" better shooting and atleast to me was way more quiet. Originally the arrow bareshaft tuned PERFECT with B50 but with a "skinny" D97 string showed weak spine. Your mileage may vary though.I've since switched to Ultra Cam though.

It is what it is.

You forgot to use a skinny string!  :bigsmyl:

I have a 10 strand and 8 strand D97 coming, any more suggestions.  I don't think I will see any difference in the 10 strand, but the 8, who knows.

I would LOVE to have a Hooter Shooter.  I've thought about looking for one on the bay, but am a little worried what would show up on the search   :eek:

QuoteOriginally posted by Bjorn:
You forgot to use a skinny string!      :bigsmyl:    

X2      :goldtooth:  

IMO the idea is to get a light as you can and still be safe. With your bow at 49# @ 30" you could very well shoot a 6 strand Ultra Cam string with one pair of silencers and 5" of serving. you will see a huge string weight differance. Try that against a 12 strand D97 and see what you get.

I my self even go as far as to make the string at a lenght that when its shot in it only has about 1/2 twist per inch. The more twists you have to put in it to get brace is just that much more material you dont need in the string.

Man is ts fun to tinker isn't it. Love what you are doing. Go even skinner and give us another show.

If im not mistaken and if i am please correct me Bjorn but on a bow or two, Bjorn shoots a 4 strand D97, now thats what you call skinny.


If you would like give me your actual string lenght and i will make and send you a 6 strand Ultra Cam for your next test.

Great test!!!!  I'm with Chesapeake....shoot a B50 to really throw another wrench in the gears.

Mike

Nice test,I enjoyed it.

I agree. You need to try a 6 strand and possibly a 4 strand.

"If im not mistaken and if i am please correct me Bjorn but on a bow or two, Bjorn shoots a 4 strand D97, now thats what you call skinny."

That is correct. I have a 35# 1959 Bear Grizzly that has had a 4 strand D97 string for about a year.

interesting stuff!  results certainly were not what I expected!

QuoteOriginally posted by Onestringer:
...
14 Strand D97
12 Strand D97
10 Strand 8125
10 Strand TCD-150
14 Strand TCD-150

...

i don't see any 'skinny strings' that you tested.  low strand count strings are near or less than 1/2 the current hmpe fiber strand count.  this is for the SAME fiber type - different fibers have different diameters, mass weights and dynamic properties to take into consideration.

at the MOST, 8 strands versus 14 strands, or 6 strands versus 12 strands.  i won't go below 6 strands, other folks do go lower.

no question in my testing with lotsa different bows that the skinnys make for less noise.  i dunno or care about the speed factor, but they HAVE to be faster since mass string weight is GREATLY reduced.

all speed testing should be done in a controlled environment using at least a single point release aid.

what are the result? my computer wont run the video

interesting

I got more speed on my bows, but I went from 14 strand to 8.  Also I don't need as much for silencers with the 8.  In fact on some bows the bare 8 was quieter than the 14 with silencers.  It is a package deal.

I have found on D-97 that 10 strand is the peak and 8 strand or 12 strand start to loose performance.

I can't open videos on this computer so don't know any results you might have had.Why not just post the numbers instead?

QuoteOriginally posted by Al Dean:
I have found on D-97 that 10 strand is the peak and 8 strand or 12 strand start to loose performance.

change to a less stretch fiber like f8125, 8 strands.

Essentially, each string shot the same.

28" draw was 168 fps
30" draw was 183 fps

Can't remember exactly, but I believe the 12 strand D97 @ 30" went a whopping 184 fps!

Must have been shooting some heavy arrows.

I don't consider any of those skinny strings either.I see some build a smaller string and then double serve a whopping 9" of serving on it.If that is the case you add more serving weight than you lost in string weight and put it in the worst possible place on the string.You can't expect much change when that happens.Part of building a performance string is not just reducing strand numbers but reducing serving weight as well.Never seen a skinny that was not faster and quieter than a larger string.Some so much so you don't  need a crony to tell it either. jmo

yes, 9" of doubled center serving negates some of the advantage of a low strand count string.  so, don't do that.  there is no need for any string to have a center serving more than 6", and never a need to double serve it ... mine are 4" or less, i have no arm string slap.   :)

Mine are around 4" as well.Never needed any more than that.  :)

I havent read everyone's response to this point but I cant really say that you told me anything that I didnt already know.  YOu were shooting an arrow well over 10gpp.  Skinny strings do nothing for heavy draw weights or heavy arrow setups. You have a really heavy arrow there. Second, what kind of silencers are you using. I dont want to make accusations but they look like cat wiskers. I would challenge you to replace those with something lighter like beaver balls or a little yarn from walmart.  

The point I am trying to make is that we did not test the skinny string in the environment in which it can benifit us.  Its benifit comes in when your using a light poundage bow like yours with a light arrow.  Get a 7 gpp arrow and take those cat wiskers off if thats what you were using, replace with some 3 dollar a roll yarn from walmart, and watch that 10 strand 8125 take off from the pack.

Very interesting to see the speed change at 30"

Shame your using a widow though cause most of my bows run a 6.75 to 7.25 brace. I would like to see what if any change that makes. Widow's just have a high brace.

QuoteOriginally posted by LC:
Well not to contradict but I've did tests myself, first off I think to qualify as a "skinny" string your talking a maximum of 8 strands but more likely 6 to 4 strands. I've been making my own recurves and endless loop strings for about 12 years now. With my own chrono set up on the same day switching from a 50lb recurve with a 12 strand B50 string and then changing to a 8 strand D97 I gained 10fps shooting the exact same arrow combo(500grain), the bow just "felt" better shooting and atleast to me was way more quiet. Originally the arrow bareshaft tuned PERFECT with B50 but with a "skinny" D97 string showed weak spine. Your mileage may vary though.I've since switched to Ultra Cam though.

I agree with LC. There is a speed increase when going from a thick to a skinny string. I realize this thread is a test of speed but to me that's not the best benefit to going "Skinny". To me the benefit is the padded loops on the skinny strings allowing us to increase performance while making our bows actually quieter. Before padded loops were widely know of a skinnier string meant an increase in bow noise.

Seems to me some folks are getting caught up on speed, period, rather than the comparison itself.

Maybe you don't consider 10 strands of 8125 to be "skinny", but compared to 14 strands of TCD 150 it is.  Of the three string weights shown at the beginning, the heaviest is 197.5 grains, the lightest is 138.9 grains.  The lightest weighs over 40% less than the heaviest.  That is a HUGE difference--but the speed is identical.

Also, the TCD 150 is a very low stretch/creep material.  It is similar to Ultra Cam.

Anyhow, point being that in the test shown he didn't gain anything as far as speed/performance go with a material that has practically no stretch (TCD) vs. a material than has a tiny bit (8125) vs. a material that has just a little more (Dynaflight '97), or a string that weighed over 40% less than another.

Honestly I was a little suprised.  I expected the lighter weight string(s) to show slight increases vs. the heavier ones.  I didn't expect any earth-shattering differences, and don't expect any when the next round of tests are performed.

OS, reckon you could come up with a decimeter to gauge the noise difference?  From what I can gather, there is a noticeable difference there.

Chad

Thanks for your time making the vidio.It was very interesting.I enjoyed it.

Can someone tell me in country yokel what I've missed because I can't view the video and don't understand most of whats being written. Just plain old country boy english might work...lol

God bless,Mudd
"Ain't no point in being ignorant if you don't show it!" Papa.

Mudd

All the strings tested, shot the same speed at a draw length of 28 (168 feet/second) and 30 inches (184 FPS) with the same arrow.  This is intersting since the strings masses were different and the amount of strand were different.

Mike

QuoteOriginally posted by Rob DiStefano:
yes, 9" of doubled center serving negates some of the advantage of a low strand count string.  so, don't do that.  there is no need for any string to have a center serving more than 6", and never a need to double serve it ... mine are 4" or less, i have no arm string slap.     :)  

That's always been my take on skinny strings, part of the benefit is overall less mass, but this is just put back on via padding on the serving.

But it goes further than that, to me it seems there is way too much serving on a string as it is, I like your idea of a 4" serving Rob.

you didn't miss much of anything, mudd,

Thank you MSwickard, I understand that!!

So you basically can save money by using less material if you trust the string to stand up under your bows draw weight.
The overall weight of the string can be kept lower by keeping the serving shorter(4")..

Did I understand correctly?
Thanks!
God bless,Mudd

Here is a note off of the A&H archery web site. They sell two kinds of string for their bows this is the skinny one made by SBD strings.

"In testing on our bows we have found the SBD Ultra string up to a 6.3 fps gain with a 30" draw on light weight limbs and a 2.8 fps gain at a 28" draw. Heavier limbs will show less of a performance gain. These strings should not be used on bows above 53lbs."

QuoteOriginally posted by wtpops:
Here is a note off of the A&H archery web site. They sell two kinds of string for their bows this is the skinny one made by SBD strings.

"In testing on our bows we have found the SBD Ultra string up to a 6.3 fps gain with a 30" draw on light weight limbs and a 2.8 fps gain at a 28" draw. Heavier limbs will show less of a performance gain. These strings should not be used on bows above 53lbs."

interesting ... not 50# ... not 55# ... but 53#    :saywhat:

QuoteOriginally posted by Rob DiStefano:
 

QuoteOriginally posted by wtpops:
Here is a note off of the A&H archery web site. They sell two kinds of string for their bows this is the skinny one made by SBD strings.

"In testing on our bows we have found the SBD Ultra string up to a 6.3 fps gain with a 30" draw on light weight limbs and a 2.8 fps gain at a 28" draw. Heavier limbs will show less of a performance gain. These strings should not be used on bows above 53lbs."

interesting ... not 50# ... not 55# ... but 53#     :saywhat:  [/b]

Yup there the ones that have to warranty the bows so i guess they have to draw the line some where.

OL originally turned us on to skinny strings when he made one for my son. We shoot 50# ACS bows with 12 GPP woodies and 6 strand D97 strings down from 12. We went to small wool silencers and no more rubber whiskers.
Our experience has been that the bows are even quieter-though not noisy before either.
We have always used 5-6" of serving and fairly small nocks.
After the change we both needed stiffer arrows-we cut almost an inch off to get the same bareshafting as before.
Speed increase was 4 FPS for us, and that's free!
Have not tried lighter gpp set ups, and we don't shoot them anyway.
D97 has too much creep-so we have now got Chad making 6 strand 8125 strings with less creep.
For us skinny strings have been a definite plus.

LBR said, "Seems to me some folks are getting caught up on speed, period, rather than the comparison itself."

Well the speed is the focal point of the testing, regarding the different strings.  And I'm sure 4 less strands will be significant from 10 strands....maybe another 60 grains....who knows without a complete test.

It is interesting, but not all-inclusive until the real skinny strings are included.

JMHO, but I aint never gonna bet my hunt on six strands.

That's why I gave up the CB. Got tried of messin with my equipment all the time and wondering if there was something I could do to the bow to make it faster/quieter.

Shoot one bow, get it tuned, shoot alot and stop changin stuff all the time.
It will pay off.

Robert, some of us (even old farts like me) want to maximize the shooting process, even if it includes that terrible "faster" word.  Fact is Robert, the skinny string helps me maximize my accuracy and makes for a quiet bow...which I consider a good thing and worth "messin" with.

I agree that one should get their bow tuned and shoot for accuracy and comfort.  What really pays off is understanding that somethings are worth changing and not being closed-minded...like I was for many decades.  Sometimes change is beneficial in ways not immediately apparent.

I shoot my traditional bows because I love them, but I also have finally figured out that they can be made a little better, in many facets....not just speed.  I am very much impressed with the strength and functionality of a six strand string, and my accuracy has been enhanced by using them....and I will bet my hunt on that. 8^).

QuoteLBR said, "Seems to me some folks are getting caught up on speed, period, rather than the comparison itself."

Well the speed is the focal point of the testing, regarding the different strings. And I'm sure 4 less strands will be significant from 10 strands....maybe another 60 grains....who knows without a complete test.

It is interesting, but not all-inclusive until the real skinny strings are included.

I have to disagree.  Speed was not the focal point.  The  difference  in speed (or lack thereof) in different weight strings and different materials was the focal point, not speed itself.  40% less weight is 40% less weight, doesn't matter if you are comparing huge, moderate, or tiny.

10 strands of 8125 is skinny, or at least it was a year or two ago.  8125 is near the same diameter of original FF, and 18-20 strands of FF was the norm not too long ago.

I rather see a test with a decimeter than with a chronograph.  I don't think zero variance is normal, but I don't think it will be huge with most any bow, even going from a "fat" 14 strand Dynaflight '97 to a "skinny" 6 strand 8125.  The one exception may be the ACX, with lighter than normal limb mass, and even they acknowledge the gains are reduced when reaching more moderate to heavy draw weights.

I agree it's not an all-inclusive test.  Testing different bows would help, insuring the nock fit is the same for all, tuning is the same for all, etc.  

For my part, even if it can be proven you can gain 10 fps going to a tiny string, I'm quite happy with a more moderate (dependable, safer, less susceptable to Murpy's Law) strand count.

as lots of folks, including our beloved resident curmudgeon george  :D  , have already posted, there are low strand factors that to us are important than some added fps, me included.

but this thread is about some chrono'd results of some 'skinny' strings versus some 'normal' strings.  

my take is that i don't think the the skinny strings were of a low enuf count, nor were there enuf proper like string fiber comparisons, nor was there a diversity of bows for the test.  there are other factors to consider about any bowstrings, such as 'breaking' each string in to allow initial stretch to work out.

Rob DiStefano wrote:  " no question in my testing with lotsa different bows that the skinnys make for less noise. i dunno or care about the speed factor, but they HAVE to be faster since mass string weight is GREATLY reduced."

My feelings and findings as well. I have a lot of D-97 string so that's all I've used or care to use until I run out (and that will be a long time)

I've read a lot of posts on the subject and regardless of what others may say, I KNOW what I SEE, FEEL and HEAR. I'm using 8 strands with 16 in the loops and yarn silencers. I like! I use!

I recently got a bow to test from a reputable bowyer. I'm not sure what type of low stretch material was in the string he sent. I wanted to see if there was a difference with one of my 8 strand strings so I made one for the bow. I saw a noticable difference in noise reduction. Can't say for sure about speed because I don't chrono bows but it did SEEM to be a bit quicker.

When I sent the bow back, I also sent my 8 strand D-97 and told the bowyer to give it a try. After he tried it he said he noticed the same.

Your mileage may vary.    :D

I shoot a 6 strand Ultra Cam on a BW PAX 63#@29. It is 14 fps faster than a 14 strand D97 and quieter with the same arrow. I choose to put the reduced string weight back into the arrow and shoot a heavier arrow at a slightly higher speed for more momentum and stability.

George, I don't mean to say that it might not help in some areas of shooting. Do what's best for you, and have fun doing it.

I'm not closed minded, but I do realize that once I quit tinkerin' and just tuned my bow to easily acquired arrows/strings/broadheads and practiced with that instead of tinkerin' I became much more deadly and confident. I spent more time shooting for accuracy instead of trying stuff out and getting arrows to fly good with my new "set-up."

Will 6-8 fps and less string silencer material help me kill more animals?

If it would I would do it, but I have been down that road.

By the way I love your stumpin' video George. It made me go outside and fling a few.

I tried 6 strands on my 74# ferguson.  String blew after about 200 shots.  That never happened before, and won;t again as I use no less than 12 now.  Not worth it IMHO.

QuoteOriginally posted by michaelschwister:
I tried 6 strands on my 74# ferguson.  String blew after about 200 shots.  That never happened before, and won;t again as I use no less than 12 now.  Not worth it IMHO.

where did the string break?  

6 strands of what fiber?  

flemish or endless?  

padded loops?

imo, 6 strands for a 74# holding weight is good for a flight bow and not a hunting bow.  10 strands of d'02 or f8125, w/padded loops, will last for a long time with decent proper care.

I enjoyed the video learned from it and apreciate you taking time to do it and post it on here for us .

mike

There's probably close to 1200 shots on my 6 strand ultra cam.

The biggest gain from using a "Skinny String" is how quite the bow gets. This Should be more inportent than a few feet per second. The last time I checked No bow/arrow is faster than the Speed of Sound...... This will help us when bowhunting. I have found 9-12 strands of TS1+ & 9 str of D97 work best for me...YMMV

I use 8 to 10 strands of 452x or 8125 or dyna flight 97 all strong enough for my bows from 55 to 60 Lbs I pad the loops for flemish or will double serve the end loops (nock ends)for endless strings  just to make it a bit more quiet a shot, I probably will get a few thousand shots per string at least never had one break!

Interesting results, many variables to control.

I would still use the skinny string even if they were a little slower than thicker strings since they are quieter for me. But I have found them to be better at putting energy into the arrow.

TS 1 flemish twist, loops not padded. Was shooting 820 grain arrows. String broke 2" below the upper loop.  120# per strand makes a #720 pound string, for multiple of nearly 10.  Old school for flax string was shooting for a multiple of 6 (444# flax string required for this bow).I only hunt, and shooting over 10g ppd (11.8 with that setup) I saw no advantage to a skinny string.  Maybe with a light recurve and ligth arrows, but not a hunting longbow setup.

QuoteOriginally posted by michaelschwister:
TS 1 flemish twist, loops not padded. Was shooting 820 grain arrows. String broke 2" below the upper loop.  120# per strand makes a #720 pound string, for multiple of nearly 10.  Old school for flax string was shooting for a multiple of 6 (444# flax string required for this bow).I only hunt, and shooting over 10g ppd (11.8 with that setup) I saw no advantage to a skinny string.  Maybe with a light recurve and ligth arrows, but not a hunting longbow setup.

no matter how far above 100# a string fiber manufacturer rates a strand, i call it 100#.  55# longbow, 6 strands of f8125 or df'97 or d'02, etc. = 600# tensile strength.  it'd take at least 14 strands of dacron to come close to that strength (B50 or B500 is s'posed to be 50#/strand but i call it closer to 45# in reality).  

i'd bet that loop padding would have saved yer string.

i find the opposite of your findings - low strand count strings are quieter on all my longbows.  dunno about the speed thing.  don't care.  

no matter what the latest fashionable gear or trick has come down the pike, whatever works best is just the right ticket for each of us.    :wavey:

I want to add one more thing.
Any bow if totally silent will still make a whooshing sound off the string. That will make a deer duck the same as a whack or thump. In other words be prepared for it. They will try to duck the string with any sound even a whoosh.

yep, ain't no such thing as a 'deer quiet bow'.  lotsa other critters apply as well.  :D

Yep, it can be a hundred decibles or twenty and the deer will duck the same amount.

Has anyone actually tested string noise with a decimeter or a similar device?  Judging string noise with your ears is like judging arrow speed with your eyes--it's very unreliable at best.

I remember several years ago I took a chrony to a rendevous for giggles.  A bunch of us were shooting and comparing, and a fellow asked if he could give it a go.  For what it's worth, he was an older guy, seemed to be experienced, certainly not a newbie.  He guessed he was getting around 200 fps from his recurve.  The chrony gauged him in the mid 160's.  I'd bet most folks who use nothing but their eyes to gauge speed are in the same boat, as are folks who use just their ears to gauge noise.  

Lots of us, especially older ones and/or those of us who have worked in construction, around heavy machinery, etc. have some hearing loss and pick up on some pitches much better than others.  Therefore, the pitch you pick up on will sound louder to you, even if it's actually quieter.  Even if you have perfect hearing, it's hard to distinguish a noise level, especially if the pitch is different (as is often the case between different string materials and strand counts).

The actual controlled tests that I know of put the BEST gains at around 7 fps, with most being maybe 3-4 fps.  You can get that much difference going from a poorly made string to a well made one--same material, same strand count.  The same goes for noise--well made will be quieter.  The only way to KNOW this, for sure, is to test it with the proper equipment--not your ears....just like the only way to KNOW what is faster is to use a Hooter Shooter and chrony, not just your eyes.

I'd love to hear some actual noise tests, with equipment made to gauge noise.

Chad

Robert and Rob posted while I was typing.  I agree--even with a totally silent bow, the arrow/feathers will make noise, and the critter will hear it.

I also agree that whatever is new/fashionable doesn't matter, it's whatever works best for the individual.

Chad

Yep,  All this is good information, one must try and find what works best for his or her set up.

Is it spring yet?

LBR- Nothing with a meter, Larry and I shot different bows and string combos indoors. We are just going by the sound it makes in a small area (hallway).

From  CB bow, but still should be the same meaning. Abunch of CB bows were tested for sound. Very expensive, big brand name down to average Joe type bows. At the bows, decibles ranged from very high to low. The same bows down range all registered the same decible levels.

That tells me it just don't matter. Deer still hear any noise, loud or subtle and react the same.

And myself being around wild horses I can attest to that. They jump whether it's a slight noise or a loud one.

chad, your points are well taken by me and i agree.  without empirical data, it's all conjecture and theory.

if we know that trad bow launched arrows won't fly past the sound barrier, they will make noise upon release and everyone will hear that noise.

the question then becomes what is an animal's reaction to that released bow/arrow noise - not just the decibel level, but the frequency.

question: are there specific sonic frequencies that freak out critters more than other frequencies?

that's the question that makes the most sense to me.

a bow that has a high freq noise sounds bad to my ears.  quieting that frequency - that is to say, equalize the frequency (audio EQ) - and bias it on the lower frequency scale is what i think we're hearing as we 'quiet' a bow.  the tone of the bowstring twangs sound less harsh to our ears since it's now a lower freq.  

does that 'low freq quieting' not startle game as much as higher freqs?

QuoteAnd myself being around wild horses I can attest to that. They jump whether it's a slight noise or a loud one.

I think that is an excellent comparison, at least for those of us that have been around horses.  A spooky horse will jump at dang near anything.  A calm, relaxed horse won't let much bother it, to the point where you can shoot firearms off the backs of some of them (and not have your own personal rodeo).

 

Quotewithout empirical data, it's all conjecture and theory.

Dang...you took all my typing and put it in one short, sweet, easy sentence.  You are right on the money.

 

Quotequestion: are there specific sonic frequencies that freak out critters more than other frequencies?

That's another excellent question, and I have no idea.  I do recall some testing that Lee Robinson did some years ago (he used to own "Keep it Simple Archery"), and as I recall he found that lower pitches (which we don't pick up on as much) actually carry further.

Sometimes I think some of this stuff is like camo and fishing lures--meant more to fool the customer than the critter.  'Course, also like camo and fishing lures, if you have confidence in a certain one then it seems to work a lot better.

Chad

I can also say that I have one wild as heck horse and he jumps at any kinda noise...high or low frequency. If he has not heard it before he jumps regardless of volumn or frequency.

Break a stick, cough, brush against your clothing...it doesn't matter...the deer will duck before he jumps at any unfamiliar sound.

When I came over to the good side I wondered where to hold on a deer. I almays held low with a CB due to it jumping. Well when I started with trad I just looked where I wanted the arrow to go, hence I shot over every freaking thing!

I then started concentrating on a spot well below where I wanted my arrow to hit..MONEY! I started killing every deer I drew on.

All I'm sayin is noise aint that big a factor. It is there and even if you reduce it you still ahve to geal with it the same.

Although a very brisk thwack or low swoosh makes a bow seem so much better than a loud thunk or crack. If a skinny string gives you that go for it.

I am glad most people enjoyed the video, I really did it for myself just to see what happened.

In the next couple of weeks I am trying

8 strand D97
10 strand D97
6 strand ultra cam
B50
And 450x something

I have actually tried using a decibel meter while shooting a couple of different strings, but we had to watch the spikes because we were not in a sound proof room, but that would sure be fun.

I enjoyed your video. Lookin foward to the rest. Thanks for your efforts.  :thumbsup:    :thumbsup:

The thing that may have surprised me most was the 15fps pickup between 28-30" draw  :eek:  Makes me grateful for my long draw..I thought the pickup would be between 6-8fps. I knew draw length made a big difference but that was more than I anticipated. I'm sure it's different with different setups though.

Craig

I wrote a pretty good reply, but erased it. Let everyone shoot what they want, but hey, back in the '60s folks wanted bows to shoot faster and faster. Theres always gonna be ways to make 'em faster, look on the outdoor channel and see where it leads!

QuoteOriginally posted by Robert Honaker:
JMHO, but I aint never gonna bet my hunt on six strands.

I wouldn't either.   :thumbsup:

QuoteOriginally posted by Rob DiStefano:
does that 'low freq quieting' not startle game as much as higher freqs?

i recall reading about the low frequency "whoo" sounds Indians used to communicate w/o spooking game. very interesting subject. i'm curious about low frequency noise and wildlife reactions as well.

Here's some food for thought.  Lower frequency is less directional than higher frequency.  I have a friend who gun hunts.  He can shoot a muzzle-loader that produces a low frequency sound and he can miss a deer without the deer moving, because it doesn't know where the noise came from.  However stepping on a twig will send them running because even though quieter the noise is more directional.

Also, people forget about tuning.  If a bow is untuned it doesn't preform it's best.  It's not as fast as it can be nor is it as quiet as it can be.  This is the main reason that b-50 users think ff materials are loud.  They don't retune their bows for the fastflight material.  They would all think b-50 was louder if the bow was tuned for ff and switched to b-50.  The test won't show the true benefits of skinny ff strings if the bow isn't retuned for each string.  This is also why a lot of people are puzzled as to why b-50 is quieter on one bow and ff is quieter on another.  A skinny 8125 or ultra cam that is tuned to the bow will be quieter than a b-50.  The simple reason is that less material on the string and less drag makes the bow more efficient.  This is the same reason that heavier arrows make a bow quieter.  Less energy is used to make handshock and noise and instead is transferred into the arrow.

Michelschwister, ts 1 is not a good candidate for skinny strings.  It stretches too much and isn't actually so strong.  A good rule is that you need 5x draw weight for breaking strength of the string and that the manufactures claim 2x as much breaking strength as actual.  Or you can use the rule of you need 10x draw weight and use the manufactures suggestions.  Anyways the string you tried was not safe for that draw weight especially out of ts 1.  If you use 8125 6strands is good up to 73# of draw weight 8 is good up to 98 and 9 is good up to 110.  If you make 2 bundle use 8strands if you make 3 bundle use 9.  Then pad to 15 or 18 for 3 bundle or 16 or 18 for 2 bundle.

Also the 45#-50# bow comparison was good but I think ol's finding found more of a 45-60# bow difference.  Meaning one bow is 60# one is 45#. They both shoot the same arrow the same speed, they're both the same price, but the 45# bow is quieter and has less vibration.  Which bow would buy?

Over the last few months Ive made dozens of strings for my bows(D97, UltraCam)  In my case it seems that longbows gain more in fps but still 4 fps was the most I gained.
While curves seem to be a little quieter.  When I go down to strand counts between 6-10 compared to 14-16.  Anyone elser have anything like this?

I didn't see the video, but I clearly had to use shorter arrows with my 10 strand 8125s. My widows seem to like a 12 strand 8125 (shooting with the best feel and cast I guess). Sometimes you just have to disregard somethings.

Strings: 174 gr endless loop 14 str B50 vs 108 gr 8 str D97 SBD flemish. Both strings have yarn puff homemade silencers.

Bow 45#@28 Shakespeare X-12 Wambaw, still perfecting bow scale setup, just say 40-43# at my draw.

A single arrow 465 gr cedar used.
B50 avg 146.9 fps stdev 2 fps
SBD avg 154.3 fps stdev 2 fps

Are those 'few fps' important to me? dang straight they are. 9 months after hurting my string shoulder the 55#widow is still gathering dust. Maybe i'll work back up to it, if not I want to be the best I can with what I can pull. The 7.4 fps gain with the SBD skinny amounts to a 10.3% gain in KE and 5% gain in momentum.

Before i got the Chrony for Christmas i got the SBD earlier in Dec. I could tell right off the arrows were sinking noticeably deeper in the target and flying flatter. Guess that means yeah you can see 7 fps without a machine.

I had the old Wambaw quiet and tuned with the B50. I got it 30 years ago brand new as a young jarhead so i know it prettly well, enough to know that putting the SBD skinny on it was like DANG, A NEW BOW! Now with the SBD brace height is not critical and to both mine and my son's ears is much quieter.

If I'm reading the scale correctly, the 28" draw is getting 44.5# and the 30" draw is 49.7#.  So the gain is 5.6# which contributed to a 15 fps advantage. So essentially, each inch past 28" was adding 2.6786# of draw or roughly 7.5 fps.  

Seems pretty efficient, but I have nothing to compare it too.

Mike

I have enjoyed the video. I finally watched it. What is the resolution on the chronograph? I don't trust electronics after having worked with them for 25 years. If you test anymore, I would try 1/4" above and below 28" and see if the numbers change 1-2 fps. I doubt the chronograph is having a problem but it would be something I would test.

If you can see the difference in 146.9 fps and 154.3 fps, that means you can see the difference in .408441 seconds and .388853 seconds--the time it takes that arrow to travel approximately 20 yds.--if you can keep your eye on it from the time it leaves the bow until it strikes the target.  That's .19588 seconds, or roughly 2 tenths of a second difference.  

I wish my eyes were that good--anywhere close would be great.

Think you missed a decimal point there. That's 2 hundredths of a second.  I was thinking 20 yards is similar to the 66 feet from pitches mound to home plate. 2 tenths of a second would be easily discernable but 2 hundredths is not. Its like knowing the difference of a 110mph fastball and a 115mph fastball. If the chronograph has an accuracy tolerance of say +/- 1 foot per second, that is a 2 fps range. It's entirely possible that the range of error is more than the speed gain/lost from the strings he used.

You don't see the difference with the human eye, in the speed of the arrow, you see the difference in the character of the arrow flight. Like taking the tip protector off the lower tip and seeing the arrow hit six inches higher at 35 yards with the noc starting to show high left where it was straight before. Indoors in poor light at twenty yards it probably wouldn't show. Well that's my claim anyway, that you can really "see" small increases if your eyes are good.

I shot a eight strand D97 string all summer and fall last year. I made several of them. My bow is a ACS CX 45 and 55 pound limbs. I played with it all year because of all that I read about the advantages gained with a smaller string. Maybe I did something wrong I don't know but it didn't seem to be any quieter. And the speed of the arrows seemed the same. I also didn't noticed any difference in the spine issue. Gary

Good video. I liked it, it was very interesting. It surprised me. I would have expected a couple FPS difference.

I make 8 strand 8125 for all my bows (50-55lb), and use small (1.5") strands of wool yarn for scilencers, pad the loops to 16, and double serve. Some of my bows had 12 strand d97 & 8125 others had thicker strings of unknown materials. I have shot my bows through the crono but not to compair strings.

All I can say is that all my bows are now quieter, faster, and have less hand shock. I haven't used a crono, Db meter or strain gauge to measure these benifits. I used my eyes, ears, and sore sholder. And since I am the one that shoots the bows and gets enjoyment from shooting the bows I am very happy with the change.

With the right string, arrow's, and proper tuning a bow can go from a clunkey stick and string to a sweet smooth work of dynamic art. This is why we play with these things. Isn't that right George? :thumbsup:  

Steve

Well I guess I am lucky but at those speeds I can easily tell when one is faster than the other.If you think 7fps is not enough to see why do guys shoot bows as heavy as they do? Why not just shoot a lighter bow if you can't tell any difference in how fast an arrow is flying anyway?   ;)   I love it when people say a little speed is nothing and they shoot 55-60lb bows for deer hunting.If performance was not important why would you shoot a heavier bow in the first place?  :biglaugh:

When i said i could see 7 fps I didnt mean i could stand by the tartget and resolve fractional seconds of passing arrows like the counters and atomic clock we have here at the lab- what i meant was:

Before the hurt shoulder when I loosed an arrow from the 55#widow MA2 i couldnt tell a whole lot about the arrow flight from 20yds and under- just bam and its sticking in the targ.

Now that I'm working with 40-45# bows and 13gpp arrows i have a lot more opportunity to observe porposing, fishtailing and whatnot. I got used to seeing the flight of an arrow with a particular bow and B50 string, then ordered a skinny SDB string and immediately could see the same arrow flying flatter and sinking in deeper. No super eyes involved, i think anybody could see it.
When i got the chrony I found i could measure what i was seeing. I'll be repeating the experiment if it ever stops snowing and raining here, and if i can stop shooting that new Dryad Windtalker  :)

Thanks--details are a bugger.  I don't think I could see 2/10th's of a second, much less 2/100ths.

I never said performance isn't important.  The fact of the matter is 3-7 fps isn't a deal breaker for most any of us.  Nothing wrong with picking up a few fps, but if you are relying on an extra 3-7 fps to make the difference in a kill or a wound, IMO you need to change weapons.  

To answer the question, I started shooting heavier weights because I thought I needed to.  When I started there were no internet gurus to consult (there was no internet), and I didn't know anyone in my area that shot traditional bows.  Over the years I learned more and dropped down in draw weight.  I found that I have a lousy release with a light draw weight, and rather than work on my release I opted to shoot a little more weight because it gave me a cleaner release and I'm comfortable with it.  

I finally settled on a bow and have been shooting it for around 15 years now, and when I get another one I'm going to drop at least 10# of draw weight (my release has improved a bit).  FWIW, my selfbows (that I just started shooting a few years ago) are lighter in draw weight than my main bow, and they are nowhere near as fast.  I know without a doubt they will do the job just as well, as long as I do my part.  I've shot higher scores at tournaments with my selfbow vs. a much faster longbow.  Go figure.

Now, the flip side to your question.  If speed/performance is the be-all-end-all, why shoot/hunt with a traditional bow?  There are much faster/better performing weapons available.  If 3-7 fps is so important, why not use a weapon that is 100+ to 1,000+ fps faster?

It's a rhetorical question--no reply needed.

The advantage of lighter strings for me became apparent when I found that going from 16 strand FF to 12 strand FF required about 5# more spine on my 65# r/d longbow and resulted in a few fps increase in speed through a chrono with the same weight arrow. Shooting wood, that meant to me that I could shoot a stiffer and heavier arrow at the same speed as a lighter one, which is a hunting advantage.

My bare-shafting experience (I tuned hundreds of people and their bows when I was in the arrow shaft business) taught me that you have to retune for a significant change in string weight, whether it's a different strand count, different string material, more or less serving, or different weight string silencers. Changing the position of string silencers affects tuning, too. Every change affects tuning, and tuning is critical to arrow speed and performance.

Easy answer. Trad because there's more to it than performance only. The light beautiful wood bow is alive in my hand. I enjoy looking at it as much as shooting it. Thats why i gave up wheelbows. Same with the POC arrows i make. On the other hand, best new science from this excellent council of elders on Tradgang on subjects like higher FOC and skinny strings just makes it more enjoyable for me and I know I'm not alone.

We supply on all our new bows 8 strand D97 and soon D10 8 strand. My personal bows I shoot 6 strand. I couldn't tell you anything about increase in speed, I suspect they is an icrease. But the sound alone convinced me that was the string to use. It doesn't require a meter to tell a difference. 2 year ago I was hunting with 6 strand 8125( Super skinny) hunted Texas and Ohio all season, had 2 dry fires sting did fine..
   Looks like a lot of wasted time on this subject. Shoot what you want and don't keep trying to convince me I need a fat string, Been ther done that. Main fact the 8 strand and under is quieter period and may pick up some speed,if so good.

Bob, correct me if I'm wrong, but as I recall you have a bit of hearing loss?

If you can't hear a dog whistle, does that mean it makes no sound?

Obviously a lot of us don't feel like it's a waste of time at all.  I love these discussions, because I learn from them and hopefully others do also.

Nobody has tried to convince anyone that they "need" a "fat string".  My goal is simply to point out there are trade-offs, and nothing is "free".  Obviously some don't mind the trade offs, while others do.  Same 'ol same 'ol--we all have our preferances, there's no one perfect anything for everyone.  

Remember Nitro Excellerant?  That's one of the reasons I try and find out as much as I can before jumping onto any bandwagon--so I don't wind up using or offering an inferior product like that was.

What happened with Nitro Excellerant Chad? Was that not a good string material? That came out in 1998 if I remember correctly?  Rick J

IMO it was junk.  I tinkered with it and found that, to me, it wasn't worth making a string with.  It was taken off the market--didn't last too long as best I remember.  Made by Western Filiments.  

It was a braided material, and I talked to at least one person where it broke with no warning--seems the braid worked against itself and cut itself.

However, when it first came out a few folks really pushed it (on a different site - pre TG).  First impressions were good, especially about it being quiet.  It was made from HMPE and Carrera--very similar to materials like 450+ and Ultra Cam, except those aren't braided.  It was rated as very strong, and one of the first materials I saw used in a small string--at least it was considered tiny then (8 strands of 450+ was considered tiny then too).

Chad

You know, Chad makes a point that bears repeating.  WE think our bows are quieter...that doesn't mean DEER think they are quieter.

Kinda like camoflage.  We know what makes hunter hard for us to see...we are guessing what makes hunters hard for deer to see.

QuoteOriginally posted by Jeff Strubberg:
You know, Chad makes a point that bears repeating.  WE think our bows are quieter...that doesn't mean DEER think they are quieter.

Kinda like camoflage.  We know what makes hunter hard for us to see...we are guessing what makes hunters hard for deer to see.

exactly.

which is why i posted a question asking if audio frequency plays any part in a bow string's noise, 'cause deer will more than likely hear that string/arrow release.

Spot on Jeff.  We know deer are faster than any bow.  We know that some of the absolute spookiest deer (we have some of them here in MS, TX has their fair share, etc.) have been killed by some very noisy bows.  

I like a quiet bow myself.  I tune for a quiet bow.  I get comments at tournament about how quiet my bow is.  I feel more confident with a quiet bow.  Even if I have my bow totally silent, the arrow still makes a heck of a racket going downrange.  Do the animals care?  I really have no idea.  

I don't believe camo is nearly as effective as we are led to believe, at least with animals.  Deer have natural predators that have better camo than anything we can manufacture.  However, it makes us feel better to wear it.  Kinda' like fishing lures--meant more to fool the fisherman than the fish.

Chad

QuoteKinda' like fishing lures--meant more to fool the fisherman than the fish.

Classic!

spot on, chad.    :thumbsup:      :campfire:

QuoteOriginally posted by MSwickard:
 

QuoteKinda' like fishing lures--meant more to fool the fisherman than the fish.

Classic! [/b]

My maternal grandmother used to tell me that, God rest her soul. Years later I came to understand that she wasn't just talking about fishing lures.   ;)

Chad I'm not deaf yet    :)    But I can hear a difference. And I also know that most game will hear things we don't. We are never going to get a string quiet enought to fool wild animals, Fact.. There are several things I like about skinny string, I real don't need string silencers, I do put on 1" rubber, I don't like the twang after the shot. And for less than $ 20 you can try and string you what, and decide what you or I like,,,,And that doesn't mean everyone has to shoot what you or I like. Chad you are a custom string maker, If I want a 2 strand you tell me why not, but if that is what I want,,,, I get it with NO garrantee it will work.(Or you just refuse to build it). Only one thing for sure you do need a string to shoot your bow.

Ok I'm perplexed here then. So Chad and everyone else why are you so dilegent in tuning for quiet if it really doesn't matter? Why wear camo if it doesn't work?  All good questions. Why waste money on string silencers?  Funny ain't it how we all chase our own tail sometimes.

There was a thread that passed through recently something along the line of "whats all the hype of skinny strings about". It brought back memories of several years back when myself and a very few others touted the benefits of carbon arrows! Man you'd have thought we was the anti christ! Even some of my best friends laughed at me then. Funny how that turned out. Oh well I'll bet Fred Bear caught some hell the first time he suggested manufacturing bows with GLASS!

AGAINST all odds I'll go on record and say I like the "speed" from my skinny string. Ok there I said it, throw me out with the bath water. But first what that speed means is that the bow, if using the same arrow weight, is now more efficient! It will shoot flatter and penetrate deeper! It's like shooting a 5 lb heavier bow or pulling another inch or so draw length. Or now you can shoot a heavier arrow with the same trajectory.Who wouldn't want that? Yeah but the nay sayers say "yeah but at what cost"?  Noiser bow, more hand shock,  but the answer seems to be consistently the OPPOSITE. But still there is the nonbelievers. I guess in the end like everything else it's up to the individual to decide what works for them. It will be interesting to see if 10 years from now there will be a thread for ol timers to recollect and remember the FAT strings or ropes we use to use! lol

I agree with Bob and Chad I like skinny strings for only one reason make my bow as quiet as it can be! for me a more quiet bow is a more in tune bow with less vibration and shock, to me that is part of a good bow tune properly splined arrows with enough weight to harness as much energy as I can to the arrow,oh yea almost forgot a Whitetail allways hears your bow go off how much noise he hears will change his reaction a great deal so a more quiet shot allways pays off for Me

I'll say again, I'm not trying to tell anyone what they should shoot, I'm just laying out the facts as I know them, along with my opinion.  There's been a lot laid out as if it were written in stone, and that isn't the case.  Opinions are just that--no more, no less.

I didn't say quiet doesn't matter.  I don't know if it matters as much as we've been led to believe.  Until there are legitamate studies done, we don't know how much quieter, if any, certain strings or materials are, or if they are just different pitches that we don't pick up on but animals may--hence the dog whistle example.  If musical instruments are any indicator, smaller strings have a higher pitch, and that's what we humans don't pick up on as well.  Obviously it's not always a deal breaker.  

I already said I tune for a quiet shot, and sometimes I wear camo, just because it makes me feel better.  I know that plenty of animals have been killed with noisy bows, and plenty have been killed by hunters wearing no camo.  I wouldn't quit hunting if I couldn't get my bow quiet or if I couldn't get any camo, and I really doubt my success rate would change much if at all.

If you are gaining 5# worth of energy just from a different string, you are the exception, not the rule--either that or you are switching from a really bad string to a really good one, and/or there was a difference in tuning.  'Course you can pick up a lot more peformance by changing things other than your string, but who's talking about those?

There are trade-offs, and I've pointed them out several times already, and others have verified.  

You loose adjustment, which is very important when it comes to tuning.  A tiny string simply cannot be twisted up or let out nearly as much.  

You loose durability.  You may hunt your entire life and never have an accident like touching your string with a sharp broadhead, but what if you do?  Lots of folks hunt from stands and never fall, so does that mean we should disregard safety harnesses?  

You have an increased potential for stretch and creep.  I put around 300# of torque on my strings when I make them, but they still settle in some, and creep in hot weather.  I don't claim to be an expert, but I'm pretty sure I know how to properly make a string.  It's the nature of most all string materials to stretch and/or creep some, especially in hot weather.

Yeah, it's brought back memories for me too.  I've been a string nut for quite a while now.  I've asked questions about several things when it wasn't popular to do so....like questioning certain materials.  I got blasted, but danged if I wasn't right, and the materials were taken off the market.  Not because of anything I said, I just happened to notice some things a bit sooner than most.

I'm obviously not posting to promote my business, else I'd be saying what I thought the majority wanted to hear, or I'd just be keeping my mouth shut, period.  I'm giving my honest opinion and experience.  

I'm not saying skinny strings are evil, I'm simply pointing out the facts--everything has it's trade-offs.  Is it wrong to point this out to folks that otherwise wouldn't know?

the bottom line, imo, is that EVERYTHING about trad archery/bowhunting is fraught with subjectivity, and everyone can find good and not-so-good in everything.

like every other topic, this one brings out opinions.  opinions are dual edged buggers - take them for what they are, the likes/dislikes/questions of other people. no more, no less.

good, bad or indifferent, if a topic like this gets you to trying out something different, so be it.

this is what the cyber campfire is all about.

maybe this thread has run its long winded course and we're all starting to regurgitate what's already been said many time over.

imo, this was a good topic, with lotsa good ideas and comments brought out on the table for all to share.     :wavey:    

anyone seeing a need to reopen this thread, please pm me.