Blacky\\'s Centaur test click here  
  Black Swann test click here
  Predator bow report click here
i couldn't find Blacky's ACS report.  i can't wait to see his review of the new Black Swann.

Jesse, the force draw is plotted out for the same pair of limbs on each of the riser choices. Out to 32" it is 3# an inch on either riser. The risers choice changes the preload. The backmount riser puts more in the riser so draws 28" and less will get a more efficient bow and the bellymount is good out at least to the 32" it was charted to.

Arvid was on the board chaired by Norb Mullaney that wrote the AMO specs by the way.

That's Norb Mullaney--not Herb.

Thanks for catching that Chad. Fixed it.

this is an interesting first for me ...  

a hybrid 55# longbow with a centershot shelf that demands 75#-100# spine arrows?  

what am i missing?

It's a recurve.

QuoteOriginally posted by vermonster13:
It's a recurve.

ok, a recurve it is - wasn't sure by looking at the pics if only the loops touched the limb nocks.

still, that's a buncha spine for such a low holding weight bow.  why does this bow require so much arrow spine, particularly if its center shot?  i have 50-55# near center shot longbows that work well with carbons no stiffer than .500 35-50#.

This bow is a 41@29 Hybrid shooting CX Heritage 250 which spines at .373 with 175 grain tips. The bow shouldn't be able to shoot that but(a bunch of folks shot this bow at ETAR including Chad Holms).

 

I don't know the why, but the Swans tend to handle heavy spines well.

Longer arrows makes a big difference.  I have a black swan 45@30" and I am shooting mfx 400's full lenth with a 250 grain head and they are a little weak.  I might feel comfortable cutting a half inch off and that could make up the difference.  A 29" carbon acts alot stiffer than a 31.5".  I like to shoot arrows no shorter than 31".  With a solid 30" draw and a big hand I don't want the broadhead touching my finger.

QuoteOriginally posted by vermonster13:
This bow is a 41@29 Hybrid shooting CX Heritage 250 which spines at .373 with 175 grain tips. The bow shouldn't be able to shoot that but(a bunch of folks shot this bow at ETAR including Chad Holms).

I don't know the why, but the Swans tend to handle heavy spines well.

I've been following this thread, mostly because I'm very confused about what's being discussed here with respect to arrow spine. Here's what you posted earlier...

QuoteOriginally posted by vermonster13:
It likes a seriously stiff spine. ACC 300s with 100 up front worked ok until about 28 yards when they showed weak. The CX Trads in the pic had 145 up front and were good out to about the 20 yards that pic was of. I tried some Victory 250s, but at 31" they were way to weak. Seems that some carbons lose spine faster than others.

If the bow was slightly weak with ACC .300 spine shafts and 100grain tips, how could it shoot OK with CX shafts spinning .373 with 175-grain tips? The CXs are a lot weaker, and you were using a heavier tip. And how then could a Victory 250 (which spines at .250) be even weaker still?

QuoteOriginally posted by rastaman:
 Blacky\\'s Centaur test click here  
  Black Swann test click here
  Predator bow report click here
i couldn't find Blacky's ACS report.  i can't wait to see his review of the new Black Swann.

I have the ACS Report and it is 1fps slower than the predator.

QuoteOriginally posted by Jason R. Wesbrock:
 

QuoteOriginally posted by vermonster13:
This bow is a 41@29 Hybrid shooting CX Heritage 250 which spines at .373 with 175 grain tips. The bow shouldn't be able to shoot that but(a bunch of folks shot this bow at ETAR including Chad Holms).

I don't know the why, but the Swans tend to handle heavy spines well.

I've been following this thread, mostly because I'm very confused about what's being discussed here with respect to arrow spine. Here's what you posted earlier...

 

QuoteOriginally posted by vermonster13:
It likes a seriously stiff spine. ACC 300s with 100 up front worked ok until about 28 yards when they showed weak. The CX Trads in the pic had 145 up front and were good out to about the 20 yards that pic was of. I tried some Victory 250s, but at 31" they were way to weak. Seems that some carbons lose spine faster than others.

If the bow was slightly weak with ACC .300 spine shafts and 100grain tips, how could it shoot OK with CX shafts spinning .373 with 175-grain tips? The CXs are a lot weaker, and you were using a heavier tip. And how then could a Victory 250 (which spines at .250) be even weaker still? [/b]

Jason that is a different bow. I was just putting it up to show that the Swans tend to like higher spines. It is a hybrid and 41@29. The Wave that liked the 250s is 51@29.

dave, what are the spex of the wave and the hybrid, and what are arrow types, weights and spines that you've found work well with each?

QuoteOriginally posted by vermonster13:
Jason that is a different bow. I was just putting it up to show that the Swans tend to like higher spines. It is a hybrid and 41@29. The Wave that liked the 250s is 51@29.

Thanks for the clarification, but I'm still confused.

I shoot a TradTech Titan with Winex limbs (which are considered very fast) that pulls 56# @ 32" (5# more weight and 3" more draw length than your Wave) and it bare shaft tunes perfect with a .340 and 125-grain heads (plus a 20-grain insert). My Thunderstick MOAB (another top end fast hybrid) pulls 57# @ 32" and bare shaft tunes with the exact same arrows.

How much weight are you putting on the front of a .250 spine shaft to get it flying well out of a bow only pulling 51# @ 29"? In order to get a .300 spine shaft to tune well out of either my Titan or MOAB, I have to put a total of 265 grains up front. I can't imagine how much I'd have to front load a .250.

I'd give even money that if I set up the fastest compound on the market for a finger shooter pulling 51# @ 29" that a .250 shaft and a 125-grain head would still be overspined.

I don't know much about carbon arrows, but if Jason can find someone to take that bet I want in on it.

Ok, I have to admit--I cheated and looked at the chart.  

http://www.huntersfriend.com/carbon_arrows/hunting_arrows_selection_guide_chapter_3.htm

Doesn't each individuals release come into play with how a bow tunes with what arrow.

The release can make a difference, but not a huge one.  I can't see the absolute best release in the world vs. the absolute worst release in the world, shooting the most unforgiving and finicky bow in the world, making that kind of difference.  I haven't shot with Jason, but I would be quite comfortable putting money on him having a good release.


"ACC 300s with 100 up front worked ok until about 28 yards when they showed weak."

That statement has really been puzzling me.  How does an arrow--aluminum, carbon, wood, aluminum/carbon composite--loose spine downrange a certain distance?

I think what he is saying is the groups were close enough out to 28 yards that you couldn't infer any tuning issues. At 28 yards, he noticed they started to indicate a weak condition. The further distance you tune from, the finer the tuning. (I guess I assumed he is bareshaft tuning, I don't know)

Wow--if that's the case, he (they?) should be shooting professionally.  I'd love to be good enough that I had to back up nearly 30 yds. to do my fine-tuning.      I must have it backwards, because for me the feathers have plenty of time to stabilize the arrow by then, unless the spine is WAY off?

Any chance ya'll will be at the IBO Trad World's in TN this year?  I won't embarrass myself by trying to shoot beside someone that good, but I do love watching an excellent shooter perform.

I don't think anyone said they were a good shooter. With bareshaft tuning, just keeping it on the bale is good enough. After enough shots the trend becomes apparent. Seems people are reading information into the posts that isn't there.  I believe OL Adcock mentions bareshafting is possible out to 70 or 90 yards.