Hey fellas,
I just acquired a new back quiver which I love. The problem for me is I did not take into account that my arrows are a little longer for spine reasons. But it makes it a little more difficult drawing them from my back quiver. So I would like to shorten them by cutting them and adding weight up front.
So here's what I currently shoot Beeman MFX 400s 30.5 in. 100 grain insert with a 125 point. 3-5in. Feathers.
I'd like to get them down to 28.5 so I would have to go to 200 gr. point and a 100 gr. insert equalling 300 up front. According to the spine calculated I'm right there,as,I am with my current arrow.
My bow is a big Jim buffalo @50 lbs at 28 my draw about 27.5
Would this be overkill for my set up I know it's only 2 in. But I have some older arrows cut to 28.5 and they draw so much nicer out of my back quiver and once I add BH it they will even be longer
Thanks for you opinions
Tim
I think if you cut 2 inches off youre going to need to go to a .500 spine class. 2 inches is a lot!
QuoteOriginally posted by 9 Shocks:
I think if you cut 2 inches off youre going to need to go to a .500 spine class. 2 inches is a lot!
Obviously going to a 500 spine would be ideal I would give up some weight but could easily get the shorter length. I'm trying to get by with what I have. According to the spine calculator by going from a 125 up to a 200 I could cut 2 in.
If you got an arrow to spare give it a go. I think the spine calculator is off when it comes to cutting carbons and adding point weight to compensate. Carbons IMHO seem to respond more to length changes than point weight changes.
QuoteOriginally posted by Mr. fingers:
QuoteOriginally posted by 9 Shocks:
I think if you cut 2 inches off youre going to need to go to a .500 spine class. 2 inches is a lot!
Obviously going to a 500 spine would be ideal I would give up some weight but could easily get the shorter length. I'm trying to get by with what I have. According to the spine calculator by going from a 125 up to a 200 I could cut 2 in. [/b]
Not saying those arrows couldn't work for you but I agree that cutting 2" off of carbon stiffens them up more than 75 grains would offset.
I would try adjusting the way you wear the quiver and give yourself time to get used to it before putting yourself through all the trouble of cutting arrows.
I am with the guys above, you need to go to 500 spine arrows.
cutting 2" off you are going to need more than 75gr increase. I would say 250-300gr increase.
When trimming my carbons I go 1/4" at a time.
I agree, I don't think you could possibly add enough weight to compensate for cutting two inches. As already said,carbons react much more to changes in length than they do to point weight.
I think your nuts man. Lol. If you have a well tuned arrow that you are accurate with why start all over? Just trad the back quiver for one that fits better or sell it and buy one that's longer! Tune you methods for carrying your arrows around your arrows not vice versa man.
I am in the same camp as those who say do not cut the arrows. You will have a tough time selling carbons cut that length (short). Even with your draw I would not want to cut the 500 spine less than 29inches. My draw is about the same as yours and that is what I cut my carbons to for my 55# and 60# bows.
So I get what you are all saying 2 inches is a lot for a carbon. ive entered the different numbers of my current set up and the shorter set up with heavier heads and they come out the same.
Not saying I'm going to do it. But I have some 28.5 in arrows with a 2 in footing and a 160 gr. head that I have been shooting with my longer arrows and it groups with them ok but I can see it kick tail right occasionally which makes me ponder would 40 more gr. even it out.
Nothing wrong with the back quiver like I said my arrows are a little longer than they should be.
I do have other quivers for hunting I have a big Jim bow quiver and an safari tuff arrow master. And a cat quiver I just like the idea of a back quiver. I can draw arrows,fine out of it but like I said the shorter ones I don't have to extend my arm as much
That said looking at the prices of 200 gr. heads new inserts sharpening system etc... I may just reevaluate. And wait til next yr and get some 500s
I was,just wondering if 300 up,front is overkill.
Tim
I shoot 31" arrows and use a back quiver sometimes.
I can't reach the arrow nock so I have to grab it by the shaft.
I'm not into rapid fire though so I really don't care. While walking in the woods, as often as not, the quiver is slid down under my bow arm so the arrows clear the brush anyway.
75grs increase may get you 1/4" to 1/2" max shorter and be in tune. I agree with others, you will need to go down an arrow spine for 2".
Nothing wrong with 300 up front, higher foc shoots and penetrates well. Increasing front weight is good as long as total arrow weight remains reasonable or trajectory at distances comes into play.
Is this a case of the tail wagging the dog? Your arrow setup should drive your quiver setup, not the other way around.
Might be cheaper to get a deeper quiver anyway.
That is exactly the reason that I like wood and the older narrow width thick walled aluminums like 1920s and 1918s. Having arrows sticking that far out of a back quiver is a pain for a still hunter. As John Sculz put it,"getting that second arrow out of the quiver and onto the string will pay off in bowhunting."
Well,
Not that I don't believe any of you your probably right but I've punched the numbers in over and over again and according to the calculator they will work. I ordered some 200 gr. feild points. I will play around with my 28.5 in arrows from my recurve first and just see what kind of flight I get.then maybe check through paper then bare shaft tune before I cannibalize my existing set up.
I'll let ya know what I get.
Tim.
I don't particularly like arrows longer than they need to be. I cut all mine to 1 inch beyond the back of the bow at full draw and tune with insert, adaptor and point weight and side plate thickness.
You're right on the edge of being too stiff if you cut off 2 inches, but why not do it on one arrow and see how it works out.
Turn it into a side quiver. Leave the arrows alone.
In response to your questions about 300 grains up front being overkill for your setup.... I don't believe there is any such thing as overkill for bow hunters. Don't worry about that. I would tune the quiver and not the bow, but that's just my opinion.
Good luck with it,
Jake
QuoteOriginally posted by NBK:
QuoteOriginally posted by Mr. fingers:
QuoteOriginally posted by 9 Shocks:
I think if you cut 2 inches off youre going to need to go to a .500 spine class. 2 inches is a lot!
Obviously going to a 500 spine would be ideal I would give up some weight but could easily get the shorter length. I'm trying to get by with what I have. According to the spine calculator by going from a 125 up to a 200 I could cut 2 in. [/b]
Not saying those arrows couldn't work for you but I agree that cutting 2" off of carbon stiffens them up more than 75 grains would offset. [/b]
300 grains of point weight isn't going to equal cutting 2" off a carbon shaft.... If you want shorter arrows... go to 500's.......
Getting used to your sight picture with 2" shorter arrows is going to be a factor too..... your point on is going to increase significantly.
I agree with not cutting the arrows. Just a half inch makes a big difference in arrows.
Ok let me clarify
My arrows are 3 in too long as is I left them long for spine reasons. I do like my sight picture better with the 28.5 over the 30.5s . I don't gap shoot so point on does not mean that much to me. I'm not really doing it just for,the quiver I'm not sure I will hunt with it or not. I have other quivers as I mentioned earlier.
So I'm not tuning to the quiver.
I have been shooting a 28.5 with a165 head up front and it groups right along with my 125s on 30.5s (100gr. Inserts) in both. Trust me I'm not going to cut them til I see how how the work on my existing 28.5 arrows.
The numbers I got from the calculator were bow 50 arrow 49.9 dynamic spine that's with the Shorter arrow with more weight up front.
I think the 3 five inch feathers are covering up tune issues. I could never get 2" shorter arrows to tune with only adding 40 grains to point.
Spine calculators are a starting point. Recommend bare shaft tuning.
Oh I plan on bare shafting for sure. Funny thing the shorter arrow that I have now with the 165 head that groups with my longer ones the Fletching is so beat up its almost non existent.
I'm not that Gung ho on shorter with heavier heads. I just ordered a hat and t shirt from 3 rivers so I got some 200 gr. FPs to play around with mostly out of curiosity.
I'm actually adding 75 gr. For the 2 in. And I wouldn't just cut off 2 in. I would start with a 1/4in then when I get close 1/8 in til tuned.
I don't think you will like what you find....if you cut two inches off your tuned arrow. Calculators are frequently wrong and adding point weight won't significantly affect spine.
Most arrows ...too weak or stiff will look like they fly well when they are fletched.
bigjim
Well here ya go,
Got my 200 gr. points last night. I took 3 MFX 400 28.5 in with a 2 in 2018 footing. Stripped the fletch and wrap,off of one. Took the 3 arrows and shot threw paper the bare shaft showed a little tail high. The fletched actually showed a slight tail left (weak). I shot again with coach feather out and got a decent bullet. Then I got company.
Went out this morning and shot my MFX 30.5in with 125s along with the 28.5s with 200. There wasn't much difference as far as where they impacted the bare shaft with the 200 did fly tail high and would impact tail high but would still hit with the others. I was,expecting as you all predicted a stiff reaction impacting to the left. But it didn't get it. Overall I liked the performance of my longer arrows. finer tuned I suppose. I may puts some more time experimenting. Where I sit now I'm not seeing as big of a reason to change . I think 300 up front maybe a bit overkill for my set up.
Tim
Cut away! I agree with pavan. Before carbon was invented, almost all bowhunters cut their arrows at 1" beyond their draw length so they were less likely to get tangled up in brush, easier to get out of your quiver and onto your nock without snagging a limb,etc, If you look at used vintage arrows for sale, you wont find many that are over 30" and, to the contrary, you'll find lots sold by Bear, Ben Pearson and others that were cut at the factory to 28 or 29". Carbon is more sensitive to length because it is much more uniform in diameter , across a wide range of spines, than wood or old fiberglass arrows. Aluminum offers the greatest range of options to get the spine and length you want, recognizing that aluminum bends and stays bent to some degree. I favor old Micro Flite fiberglass..tough, straight, made in 13 different sizes to find a good fit for different bow weight and draw length .
Regardless of static spine, some materials that are slower responding, like fiberglass, simply work better in shorter lengths out of some bows. I suppose pure center shot bow designs are made so to help with carbon spine requirements. Anyway, Microflite 12 and 90 pound longbows were made for each other. Two years ago, I lost a 27" bop #9 with a Schulz head after it blew through a deer. I found the deer easy enough, but I still keep looking for that arrow when I hunt there.
Played around a bit today. Both sets of arrows seem to,fly about the same. My form wasn't the best. I took a break then before putting my bow away I decided to put a few shots through paper with the short heavy arrows I got near a perfect bullet but slight tear high. Then I Checked my longer arrows weak and tail high. So a slid my nock point down. Shot the longer arrow slight weak but near perfect.
Then I grabbed the shorter heavier arrow with no fletching and got the most perfect bullet hole. Shot 3 more times and perfect bullet. Then grabbed a shorter heavier fletched arrow and perfect bullet.
Then I put the bow away.
Tim
I thought that might work. :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
QuoteOriginally posted by Orion:
I thought that might work. :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
I think you and I were the only two.
Thanks :
Tim.