Trad Gang

Recent article compared a dozen recurve bows by calculating a stat the authors called "comparative efficiency" (velocity/draw wt).
Just wondering what calculation YOU think is the best for head to head comparison. PLEASE, PLEASE focus on performance and NOT that the "grip has to fit, individual preference, etc".

Please state the rationale for your response as well. Not trying to start an argumet, just a healthy discussion.
look fwd to responses.
mg

I believe every aspect of bow performance including fit and finish should be looked at closely. I personally believe in the complete package. for instance I do not want a fast bow that has bad handshock. I conversely do not want a slow bow the is quiet and smooth with little speed.
Bow performance according to Steve is a fast, quiet, smooth bow , completely sealed against the elements, Well formed and finished in a professional manner. I see absolutely no reason that we should have to settle for less than great in all aspects.  In other words Matt IMHO there is no single best stat if it sacrifices or does not address all other factors which constitute performance./ Including fit and shootability.

God bless you all, Steve

Game taken   :readit:

If you're talking performance ONLY, then the only way to measure THAT in a bow is with a chronograph. When comparing a bow's performance with another, everything must be the same: arrow weight in grains per pound of draw weight, draw length, type of string, etc.

Thank for hte post. AM talking performance ONLY. I don't disagree with the total package theory. I'm wondering if we shouldn't 1. tune for perfection in case tuning alters chrono speed observed and then 2. calculate an efficiency rating using velocity and grains per lb of arrow weight.
Something has to be standardized - a 60lb bow with 180f/s and a 50lb bow with 170f/s are not fairly compared if the arrow weighs the same.
any body else?
mg

http://www.dryadbows.com/Defining%20Bow%20Performance%20Dryad.pdf

Personally, I think efficiency or how much of the bows energy goes to the arrow is the best stat to compare.

I believe Norb Mullaney used the AMO Standard when testing out Recurves and Longbows. I think it was 60# bow at 30" with a 540 gr arrow. Now I just woke up after working a 12 hr night shift so I could be fuzzy on the specs....     :readit:

Speed means nothing unless it is compared against something. I would suggest that if all bows were compared on an equal basis as suggested say 28 in machine draw and release with same chronograph . same weight of draw , same string type and strand, same weight of arrow. that a lot of manufacturers claims would be going out the window. It is a very fast bow that will put a 10 gpp arrow drawn 28 inches over 190. There are a couple that will do that. Not many.
God bless, Steve

Now Steve your not saying that some bowyers would fabricate the speed numbers are you?  LOL

That's why we send ours to Blacky for testing.  Total standard criteria on every test every bow.

Then live with the results.  Heck sure I wish ours was a few feet faster but it is what it is when Blacky runs the tests.


Mike

As long as controls like Mike talks about are used, FPS is a reliable way to compare bows to one another.

It's not the best predictor of penetration performance, but that's a measure of bow and arrow as a unit, not just the bow itself.

The best way we found is to see on the same curve: speed according to GPP of bow, Dynamic efficiency and KE. This way gives a really good info and it is easy to compare different bows

(http://i758.photobucket.com/albums/xx225/hybridbowhunter/diagramme.jpg)

From a pure energy standpoint, you want to compare how efficient the bow is in transferring energy to the arrow. That means you have to look at the force draw curve and consider the bow's total potential energy, then shoot an arrow to get the velocity of the arrow to calculate the kinetic energy in the arrow.

The parameters that the article uses, velocity/peak draw weight, will give very rough estimates of the bow's energy efficiency for they are nested in the potential energy/kinetic energy scenario I presented above. Those #'s will only give a rough estimate because the peak draw weight does not consider the shape of the force-draw curve. For example, a compound bow will have much higher potential energy then a recurve at the same peak draw weight and it is evident as to why when looking at the force-draw curves. I suspect the author chose to do it like that because that information is readily available whereas a force-draw curve is not.

Looking at velocity or FPS alone is, IMO, a selling tool and not a good comparative tool.


Hybrid Hunter - can you elaborate on the dynamic efficiency curve on your graph? I have not seen that before, what does it mean?

ZZE86,

Dynamic efficiency change with arrow weight and as we know with the draw force curve the store energy of the bow@ drawlength, it is easy to calculate DE according to arrow mass:
Store Energy X DE= KE= 1/2 X m X V2
As we measure Store energy on our draw force curve and can  get arrow speed (with chronograph) with several arrows we accurately weighted, determining DE for each arrow mass is easy (and we use Excel software to make the curves)

If you can hit what your shooting at with a given bow, then the performance is spot on...at least for you!!   :saywhat:

QuoteOriginally posted by wingnut:
Now Steve your not saying that some bowyers would fabricate the speed numbers are you?  LOL

That's why we send ours to Blacky for testing.  Total standard criteria on every test every bow.

Then live with the results.  Heck sure I wish ours was a few feet faster but it is what it is when Blacky runs the tests.


Mike

Mike, Absolutely not on purpose but many do not run tests that are truly comparative. some use IBO ect and they do not compare to trad values like 10 gpp at 28 or even 29 inches would .
As for me I will have Kirk do all my testing when his program is all computerized. He is going way past what anyone is doing at the present time and I am going to be utilizing his expertise and his testing facility. Which by the way is right here in the USA. (Grin)
As to your bows, I can look at the new one and know it is pleanty fast. No flys on that baby at all. I don't have to have Blackies report to know that.

God bless you all, Steve

I want a decibel reading in there somehow.  I hate to take a fast bow that is easy for me to shoot but noisy.  Nothing more embarassing than a compound shooter coming into my shop and shooting recurve only to comment on how it is louder than his compound.

This is a neat thread with a lot of good info!

However for me, it is hitting where I look.

I don't base my bow decisions on calculations, oh sometimes I go to Blackie's site, can't think of anything I buy that would be based on formulae. Not saying it is bad mind you just can't see the use. With bows you gotta' shoot them in your own hands-it is personal.

QuoteOriginally posted by hybridbow hunter:
ZZE86,

Dynamic efficiency change with arrow weight and as we know with the draw force curve the store energy of the bow@ drawlength, it is easy to calculate DE according to arrow mass:
Store Energy X DE= KE= 1/2 X m X V2
As we measure Store energy on our draw force curve and can  get arrow speed (with chronograph) with several arrows we accurately weighted, determining DE for each arrow mass is easy (and we use Excel software to make the curves)

ahhh...I see now. I like it and you're right it does present a lot of good info all at once.

Good info here.  :thumbsup:

Best comparative date for performance....how long does it last on the classifieds!

QuoteOriginally posted by LostNation_Larry:
I want a decibel reading in there somehow.  I hate to take a fast bow that is easy for me to shoot but noisy.  Nothing more embarassing than a compound shooter coming into my shop and shooting recurve only to comment on how it is louder than his compound.

I agree and this goes to the question , What is performance? I still contend (gently of course) that performnace is far more than but does include speed. If we guage bow performance by speed alone we could possibly have an unshootable piece of garbage on our hands that stacks terribly and is unacceptable in the shock and awe department.

This is exactly why many people that are trad shooters come against speed every time it is mentioned. They hearken back to the day when bowyers in bunches built radical bows that really stunk for shooting in general. Even Bear went there with the cubs ect that were strictly reflex with no deflex at all. They shot great if you could hold on to them. Those designs eliminate themselves thankfully but they are the hype of the day.

God bless, Steve

Call an engineer or physicist and they can answer this one easily.  Oh, wait a minute the answer is posted above by an one.    :clapper:  

I love the technical aspects of archery.  Yet shoot a 55 lb bow that throws a 584 grain arrow at 16

As mentioned before I think that the bows ability to transfer the stored energy in the limbs to the arrow is the best stat. for a particular bow.

Interesting topic.
Hybridbow hunter ( I noticed that the graph that you showed has a very high DE yet it did not reach the 190 ft per sec with 10 grs per lbs. How many of the bow that you tested reached the 190 ft per sec at 10 grs per lbs?
Abe

Abe, That sir is getting right to the heart of this matter.
Do the bows impart the stored energy to the arrow when tested equally?
Since most here seem to believe that speed is the only important aspect of performance we would have to conclude that given same poundage, Same arrow. Same draw length, that the fastest bow tested is the winner. Its a no politic kind of thing and I can accept that.
However I will never accept that speed alone is the sole critera for assessing a bows performance.
Shootability , quietness, stability ect should enter into the equasion since all of those things are scientificaly measurable.

I will put it this way. If (if) my EagleWing is the fastest bow in the world I would still be saying that it should be quiet and have good stability and little or no vibration or shock.

God bless you all, Steve

Hello Abe,
DE doesn't mean all in speed performance of bows: the store energy @ draw length is also really important and the store energy per pound of draw force SE/PdF is a good way to assess it.
Our test protocol is not done to make "nice" number for selling purpose or for advertising and we use bows we purchased and not given by bowyer in order to test the speed. We test bows on shooting machine with accurately weighted ,unfletched, test arrows , @ 28" drawlength with 12 strand modern string in ready to hunt conditions (silencers on, brace hight half way to the lower and higher values recommended by the bowyer) . We think that assessing speed only for 9 gpp doesn't mean anything since we are bow hunters and most of us shoot heavy arrow and lot of 3D shooter will go lower in the 8 gpp or less. So we decided to test the bows in a large range of gpp (8 to 14 or more) to give large and reliable info from "the real world" . This protocol showed us some impressive difference between bows and sometimes huge difference in speed between "official "magazine test and the bow of Average Joe. This way of testing will also show the hunter which bow will perform @ their usual hunting arrow weight or the "sweet spot arrow weight" of their model.
I will not bash any brand here but with some really famous ALL MODEL tested were measured 12 to 15 fps lower than those official magazine tests while other are really close or in the values reported like ACS CX bow which are really FAST....
In our test protocol, no bow until now went over the 190 fps @ 10 gpp. Even all the ACS CX. The graph i showed upper is the one of the A&H ACS 12" riser/64" AMO (special order)

Regarding your hybrid bows, they are along with the fastest if not the fastest on the market of trad bows (built without carbon) reaching 181+ fps for 10 gpp . Which is really fast for conventionally built bows in the way we test the bows. All of them: Peregrine, Wolverine and silverfox. We didn't test for the moment the SLynx and the recurve bows.

       (http://i758.photobucket.com/albums/xx225/hybridbowhunter/wolverine.jpg)
as an exemple, here is the wolverine test: as you see compared to ACS bow the speed difference is 7-8 fps @ 9 gpp but is reduced to 2 fps @ 12 gpp. And a simple 9 gpp test won't give that interesting info for a hunter willing to use heavy arrows.
If we compare a 58" AMO ACS CX to the wolverine, difference in speed will be much lesser in hunting arrow weight (both very close), but your bow will accept 29,5 " draw length as drawforce curve show it and still in the sweet spot while the other will blow...

Hybrid:. We think that assessing speed only for 9 gpp doesn't mean anything since we are bow hunters and most of us shoot heavy arrow and lot of 3D shooter will go lower in the 8 gpp or less.

That thinking could well be wrong. A bow that is more effecient when tested against other bows at set parameters will always be more efficient no matter which weight arrows are used. For example I will use the stats you gave on Abes bow. You show it to be 8 fps less than the  ACS at 9 gpp but only 2 fps less at 13 gpp. That is because the heavier arrow is absorbing or using more of the bows energy. It is not because the bow is becoming suddenly more efficient. The truth is that it will never come to the place , no matter how heavy the arrows used where it will actually surpass the ACS. It is obvious that in the two individual bows you tested that the ACS happens to be the most efficient bow at imparting its stored energy.
You only notice the gains because it is actually working against a heavier object as you go up in arrow weight. The ACS cannot impart as much more of its stored energy because it was doing so back at the 9gpp and it does not have as much unused energy to impart.

God bless you , Steve

wow!  this is getting pretty complicated.  I appreciate the thought process, but I wonder how I would actually use a truly quantitative/comparative bow performance test.  For example, a ferrari can go a lot faster than a ford fiesta, but a ford fiesta goes plenty fast to get me to work and costs a lot less.  For the money, the fiesta performs better (mph/$).  I'm just saying...

disclaimer:  I don't drive a ford fiesta.  I'd be embarassed to drive that car...

Sixby, whatever the reason, the fact is :using 12 gpp arrow speed difference is going down dramatically compared to 8 or 9 gpp. So for a 3D shooter, this ACS will give a real significant advantage in flatter trajectory for 25+ yards shots while for a hunter shooting 600 gr arrow from a 50# @28" bow there is no really significant difference in using that bow.
That is just what our test shows and nothing more and of course the fastest bow @ 9 gpp will remain the fastest whatever the gpp.

I will give you another interesting example:
2 recurve but different limb and riser design

     (http://i758.photobucket.com/albums/xx225/hybridbowhunter/BWgpi.jpg)

     (http://i758.photobucket.com/albums/xx225/hybridbowhunter/rergpi.jpg)


As you see difference @ 8 gpp is 3 fps between both but this speed difference is increasing (little) to almost 5 fps with heavier arrow @ 12 gpp so the RER is already faster but works even better with heavy arrow. If you compare now with Cari bow and ACS, at 8 or 9 gpp difference is highly significant but at 12 gpp the RER is getting really close within 1 fps with the cari bow and 3 fps with the ACS while with the BW speed difference remains significant.

Sixby I was hoping to respond sooner.The word performance will not cover all the aspects that are related to purchasing a bow. But like John H and Hybridbow they can help someone decide where they want to start looking. I wish like most bowyers there bows were closer to the ACS in performance.
I also think that we are all looking for creditably from our fellow archers and that is why John H and allot of other bowyers look to others for there testing.
Having people like Hybridbow and Blacky do the testing leaves us out of it.
Is this perfect I'm not sure we will ever know but if archer's  ever found out we where involved I'm sure creditably would suffer.
I thought maybe the 10 grs at 190 may have set  the bar a little high but looking up is probably more interesting then looking down.
Abe

Abe, I agree that it gives a place to start. However if we go in the direction that Hybrid is advocating at 13 gpp then we will find  exactly what he is saying and unless the bow is truly a dog there will be minimal difference in performance if we look at speed as the only criterion of performance.

I know that as a bowyer that you do not do that and you build very fine bows that are great bows in every aspect. You definately go all the way in building a bow that shoots not only fast but fit and finish is great and shootability is great ect.

When you say that the bar of 10 gpp and 190 is perhaps a bit high. My own bar is 10 fps higher than that unless it is a glass bow. From the reports on your bows and several others I assume that likewise your personal bar is a bit more too.


God bless you all, Steve

I've shot probably 200 different bows through a chronograph both myself and friends shooting them, and through a bow shooting machine built by a friend (read: MYTHBUSTER!).  Essentially, the verdict was that nearly every bow we tested, with an arrow weight 9 grains per pound, drawn to 28 inches, will shoot around 170 fps.  10 grains per pound will drop the speed to 155ish.  

We've tested a few that were blazing fast, the fastest being built by a gentleman who builds them for fun, and admitted that even if he wanted to he could never sell them.  When (not if, when) they break, he just builds himself a new one.  You could never put a warranty on a bow with as much pre-stress as he put in his design.  

As a side note it is actually pretty good fun to invite someone who has "a really fast bow" to come and shoot it through the chrono and watch their face drop in dismay when the numbers start coming up.  Like I said, read: MYTHBUSTER

Cheers-
Nathan

QuoteOriginally posted by Sixby:
...

When you say that the bar of 10 gpp and 190 is perhaps a bit high. My own bar is 10 fps higher than that unless it is a glass bow. ...


God bless you all, Steve

Sixby,
you know that building a bow in order to blow out the chrony numbers is one thing, but what kind of life expectancy will have this kind of bow? What will happen if the archer under adrenaline draw one more inch? what will happen if suddenly an arrow nock is breaking when releasing? what if arrow is less than 8 gpp by mistake etc...

For me speed is one important parameter in performance but reliability, tolerance in reasonable overdraw , low gain in pound  at the back end of draw (that means comfort), low level of noise, no handshock, balance, design of arrow shelf allowing a great clearance for tolerance and for easy tuning and a bow built to last is a lot more.

if really your bows in ready to hunt conditions are in the 200 fps range for 10 gpp @ 28",  you really build as a standard "the fastest bow  in the world",  letting all other bowyers more than far back.
Is that the one the Marvel Super Hero shoots in the Avengers movie ??     :biglaugh:    
God Bless

hYBRID:Is that the one the Marvel Super Hero shoots in the Avengers movie
No.  Performance according to Steve also includes building a bow that does not blow up or break down in time . You have to build a bow that is dependable.
There are ways to increase performance without building an unstable over stressed bow. God is good and has blessed me to be able to do that.

Did I say my bows shoot 200 fps? I said that is my performance bar. As to the fastest bows. Centaur did shoot a 10 gpp arrow under controlled machine testing drawn exactly 28 inches for an average of 205 fps. Several other bows were right at the 200 mark and several more in the 190s including the Sasquatch all glass bow . ACS was 191 and was in 7th place in the testing if I remember correctly. CAribow was not tested but I am sure it would be right there. BTW Abe I am a fan of your work. Outstanding.

I believe I'll just let my bows speak for themselves until they are independantly tested.

Hybrid:For me speed is one important parameter in performance but reliability, tolerance in reasonable overdraw , low gain in pound at the back end of draw (that means comfort), low level of noise, no handshock, balance, design of arrow shelf allowing a great clearance for tolerance and for easy tuning and a bow built to last is a lot more.

Go back and read my posts. That is exactly what I have been saying from the start of this. Speed is not the only factor that we should use in judging performance. I am glad you agree/

God bless you all, STeve

Sixby, as i told you, in our bowhunter association (ATO), we test the Average Joe bow and not the WTT special speed bows. 205 fps @ 10 gpp/ 28" is really fantastic...although the only centaur tested by us, a chimera model (not the fastest model in Mr Neaves products), was in ready to hunt set up @ 181 fps for 10 gpp: a great performance by the way.
As many here, i am a "bow maniac" and i thank you and all bowyers for your work and the great journey you give us in the quest of the "perfect bow"   :clapper:    :clapper:

Hybrid, Thanks,

Here is what happens. When any bowyer does what no one believes can be done it changes the bar for everyone that wants to credibly compete. Some of those bows at WTT were hotrods, Some of the fastest were not. Most of those guys are still building fast bows that are holding up very well.
I was not involved in WTT but I know some that were and I do know that the tests were uniform and probably the most credible ever run. Those bowyers and their products have set the bar. The tests that other testers have done have not changed the entire industry nearly as much as a plethora of small shop bowyers have that are producing top performance bows by sharing information which has dramaticaly effectd over all bow performance.

Here is the thing. If bowyers find themselves content with producing bows that shoot 170 fps year after year suddenly run into having to compete with bows that shoot almost 30 fps faster or 10 lb lighter bows producing the same speed as their 10 lb heavier draw bow they wake up. They have to take notice and work to produce a better bow. This goes throughth the entire industry and it is good for all of us. Bowyer improves, quality improves,. Archers and archery benefits.
Like I said my bar is 200 fps with my carbon bows./ When a glass hunter that is not a hotrod will do over 190 , and two did that at WTT. Then the bar is raised.

God bless you all, Steve

HYBRIDBOW I AM JUST CURIOUS AS WHAT ARE THE TOP 5 BOWS YOU HAVE TESTED AT 10GPI AND IF YOU HAVE A CERTAIN TESTING FORMAT ?
  :dunno:    :confused:

Sorry for reviving an old thread but I find this subject really fascinating.

Hybridbowhunter, thank you for sharing the results of your test. This is exactly the kind of performance data I was looking for. What other bows have you tested? Do you have a webpage where more tests results can be found? If not can you post the results for Caribow Peregrine?

I do find the results very interesting as I have always read that longbows do better with heavy arrows while a recurve can more efficiently shoot light arrows. These results shows just the opposite. What is really surprising is the graph of the ACS CX there is hardly any drop in efficiency or energy going down from 12 gpp to 8 gpp. I suspect with such a bow one can blow through animals with a 9 gpp arrow as easy as with a 12 gpp arrow from another bow.

How does the new static recurve design stack up with the ones tested? I know that Bigfoot, Eaglewing, Cari-Bow, and RER have bows either in developlment or on the market.

''Ease to shoot accruately w/''

Only stat that matters to me.

Speed,smoothness,quietness,ect,ect will always take a step behind accruacy.

If I have a bow I'm dead confident in,I could care a less what joe blows bow shoots thru a chrony.

Lots of sound reasoning in this thread.  I've only experimented with a couple dozen bows over the past 3.5 years. However, I started keeping a spreadsheet of my bows with FPS out of a Pro Chronograph divided by draw weight at my 26" draw very early on.

It is my only objective performance rating. I agree with Steve (Sixby) that so many other things are important besides this measure. I also agree, and have experienced this myself, that readings can be impacted by operator error.

If I had a random pile of bows in front of me most would never be tested. If I don't like the look or the feel, I don't care how it shoots.

Conversely, if the bow shoots very fast that won't make it a keeper for me if it is harsh to draw and shoot. I despise hand-shock and any bow that disrupts the mental and physical aspects of my shot is headed out the door.

The most surprising thing I've learned by doing all this is how little difference there is, at my draw length and the same draw weights shooting the same weight arrow in many top bows.

I have one bow that is 24 years old (1999). It has the highest performance rating (according to my protocols) than any bow I have owned. I have some very close runner-ups. Some of them are slightly smoother drawing so they get a bit of a nod over this older one.

That bow is the 1st LH Mamushi Chris Cox and Habu made (1-piece). I bought it here from the Classifieds. It is also the 2nd most inexpensive recurve I have owned. It is the only Mamushi I have ever seen pictured on Trad Gang.

deleted my original response as it didn't follow thread topic.... sorry I didn't go back to first page.  

For me, I would want to see the stat comparing how bows shoot a heavy hunting arrow.  I don't care about IBO standards as I never hunt with an arrow that light.  Not every bow that performs "best" with light arrows does the same with heavy arrows.  I am not to concerned with how fast an arrow gets to its target, much more interested in what it does when it gets there.

Easy to shoot and shoot where you look. Those are important qualites no doubt but a little subjective depending on the person. A more efficient bow will allow one to shoot the same as a heavier bow but at a lower draw weight. That often means better accuracy as you are in full control of the bow. That's what this thread is about: quantifiable and measurable differences in efficiency between bows.

Sorry delete post.

a bow that is dead in the hand

Accepted and thanks Steve.

God bless you all, Steve

Everything is subjective including performance!  Just because someone chronographs one bow it does not mean the next one built by the same bowyer will produce similar results.  Furthermore, you could shot a bow at 200fps hand it to the next guy who can only get 190fps.... same arrow, draw, etc.... there are too many factors (especially when adding in human differences in shooting mechanics)to compare a brand of bows based on one bow/one shooters performance.  For me, the final stat, which I know will not meet the orginal intent of this post, is the string of game that fell to a well placed arrow from a good bow.  I have one or two bows that just get it done time after time and have produced confidence for me in that bow. I will take that every single time over handshock, balance, fps, kinetic energy, etc., as the truth is there really is not a heck of a lot of performance difference between modern bows of the same style/make.  There is a heck of a lot more variables/differences between modern archers.

I think Laurent (Hybridbow Hunter) hit it on the head. Efficiency across a range of arrow weights paints a very detailed picture. With that said, it also requires the most information collection, but you cant get something for nothing.

DaveT1963 ... this is a basic philosophic problem. Some level of evidence must allow us to make a reasonable inference about the future. I.e. a bow of one design and construction providing a certain performance leads us to reasonably assume the next bow which is as identical as possible, will perform the same or at least nearly identical. If we can't accept that, then no testing can ever tell us anything except about one particular, unique item.

This year we are going to test under our  protocol border HEX6 bb2 black Douglas, RER the Vital, Big Jim Buffalo , Toelke Lynx, and a few others.

To date with a naked string the fastest bow mesured by us ( aka Foudarme here on TG) Is the 2013 black Douglas border 62"w HEX6 bb2 at low brace 6 5/8": all at 28" on a Hooter  shooter

206@9gpp
197@ 10 gpp a monster speed...
171 @ 14 gpp        :scared:    
156. @ 17,16 gpp        :scared:            :scared:      (980 gr arrow out of a 57# @ 28"   !!)

Over the years I have owned lots of bows from the best makers. Realy the biggest difference is not speed. It's stability, shootability or forgivness, whatever you call it some bows will punish you much more for minor form and rlease flaws. I have found that these bows are usually harder to tune and picky about the arrows they like. My theory about why some of the older bows were so great is that they were designed before everyone had a cronograph.
We each have to figure it out for ourselves our bow arms are stronger or weaker we each deflect the string more or less on release so the bow that is great for me may not be for you.
Chuck

QuoteOriginally posted by ron w:
If you can hit what your shooting at with a given bow, then the performance is spot on...at least for you!!    :saywhat:  

If that ain't working for you, nothing else matters.  :thumbsup:

QuoteOriginally posted by hybridbow hunter:
This year we are going to test under our  protocol border HEX6 bb2 black Douglas, RER the Vital, Big Jim Buffalo , Toelke Lynx, and a few others.

To date with a naked string the fastest bow mesured by us ( aka Foudarme here on TG) Is the 2013 black Douglas border 62"w HEX6 bb2 at low brace 6 5/8": all at 28" on a Hooter  shooter

206@9gpp
197@ 10 gpp a monster speed...
171 @ 14 gpp         :scared:      
156. @ 17,16 gpp         :scared:              :scared:       (980 gr arrow out of a 57# @ 28"   !!)

Smoking results. Those hooks really work like cams for energy storage. Do you have results with a fully with string silencers for a fair comparison with other bows?

If people spent more time worrying about the target and less time about the bow and how it is performing, all bows would perform better.

The best bows that I have shot didn't even exist the moment I set eyes on the target.

BigJim

BigJim has a strong point. Of course then we could all save money and trouble and stop at the first bow we lay hands on.

A lot of my fun in archery has nothing to do with the target though.

Some of us have a little of the High School hot rodder left in us; Building the machine is just as much a part of the fun as driving it. JUst cannot help myself. I see this stuff in my sleep. LOL its way more than a job; Its like a journey with something new around every corner.

My experience of over 55 years with bows and archers is that a lot of us are tinkerers. Good enough is not existent in our lives. We always look for a way to improve the current status quo. Raise the bar to a new level; It may even be the human nature;

The Borders numbers are impressive indeed; We now need to raise the bar to 210.  :bigsmyl

God bless you all, Steve

Performance is way to broad a term, because for me a bunch of things add up to performance. I can perform a back flip, it may be lousy but I can, same with a bow just because it is fast does not mean it performs well. As Joe said AMO standards were 60#s at 28"s and 9gpp(540 grain arrow)that would bea great place to start on the how the bow performs in the speed department but there are way more things at least for me that dictates how a bow performs and what performs well for me may not perform well for others. Shawn

Speed isn't everything. That's a given. However, draw smoothness, Stored energy, dynamic efficiency, noise and even handshock can be measured and give a pretty good indication of a bows shooting qualities. A bow that stacks badly will have poor stored energy figures. A bow with lots of handshock and vibrations usually have poor efficiency figures. Now both of these are directly related to arrow speeds. As long as you keep brace height reasonable the fastest bows are usually the most comfortable to shoot. A smooth curve at the end of the draw and greater arrow speeds also help in vertical groupings.

I use 10 grains of arrow per pound of draw weight at 28" to comapre bow to bow.  However, the ability to consistantly put an arrow where I look is the metric I use when deciding rank order in the stable.

For comparing performance, I like cast.  It takes a long field and a day with little or steady wind, but you can really compare differences in bows, arrow weights and designs and it's absolutely more fun that shooting over a chrono.

One advantage of speed is when you have a bad shot you know about it quicker ....

  Cheers from the Westcoast of Canada...

Excellent discussion. I have one question: poundage is not discussed, so, when you measure speed, it would seem logical that a 65# bow would shoot faster than a 40# bow, even if average weight percentages were the same. True or False?

Duncan, false. All else being equal a 40# bow will shoot the same speed as a 60# bow. GPP., Draw length, etc. etc. Shawn

Thanks for that Shawn that's what I always sort of thought,but never wanted to ask.

I'm with Bjorn, I prefer to shoot one before I buy one.  My idea of handshock is different than someone else's.  My idea of smooth with no stack will also be different.  I can read your glowing review of a bow and hate the bow when I shoot it.  I think that most of the established/well known bowyers produce bows that are very close in performance with their competitors.  How the bow looks and feels in MY hand is what matters.  The graphs, statistics, and reviews are nice , but---.

In the end, only two things count.  The speed of the arrow and the weight of the arrow.  Sure, there are lots of other things that help or hinder, but to make comparisons between bows, you need only those two numbers.

ChuckC