# Nano Pro Extreme and Eli Revolution 3 Vanes



## gairsz (Mar 6, 2008)

Nano Pro Extreme with three spine technology and Eli Revolution 3 Vanes.

Check out the arrow correction and spin about half way through the video. The arrow stops bending and spins like crazy about 1/3 of the way to the target.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Cool video Gary, but if you look closely, the arrow is still in paradox all the way to the target just like every other arrow. I certainly does recover and dampen very quickly though. 

Lennie told me about these in Vegas. I've still not tested them and am in no hurry yet since I am still shooting indoors, but once Louisville is over I'll be trying them out for fita field and possibly the TX Shootout.

The recent modifications to the original Nano Pro will make them more conducive for finger shooters by offering more clearance through their "smart spine" technology - something that was holding the original Nano Pro's back for us recurvers. I had the opportunity to test some of the prototypes with smart spine, and my clearance issues disappeared immediately, and my scores reflected that. 

Best 36-arrow competition score prior to the smart spine Nano Pro's at 70 meters was a 336 during the first stage of the 2012 trials, but I added five points to that for a 341 in Chula Vista with this new technology. The improved clearance allowed me to use Elivanes with no contact.

I also understand that CX will put premium class smart spine arrows within reach of most archer's budgets in this next edition of target arrow offerings. 

It's been a long journey to this point (I've been testing prototypes since 2007), but serious recurve target archers will finally have a choice.

John


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

would be neat to see that arrow flight against a solid, dark background...

Also, I think the real question to be asked here is, does the string hit his arm...?  ha, ha.


----------



## gairsz (Mar 6, 2008)

Watching these arrows fly in person, there is a noticeable difference. 

As for the back ground, I don't think I can cut those trees down. 

Gary


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> Watching these arrows fly in person, there is a noticeable difference.


Difference vs. what?


----------



## gairsz (Mar 6, 2008)

limbwalker said:


> Difference vs. what?


What do you think.


----------



## gairsz (Mar 6, 2008)

12 arrows. 6 with Eli p3's, yellow, and 6 with revolution 3's, white. The revolution vanes are one inch longer. There doesn't seem to be an affect on the height or distance of the arrow at 70 meters. There was a slight breeze from left to right. We are finding that the arrows are grouping slightly better with the revolution vanes, at least for Matt right now.


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

why isnt he trying the Eli P2s? 


Chris


----------



## RickBac (Sep 18, 2011)

I see what you are describing. My big question is what slo motion camera are you using?


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

RickBac said:


> I see what you are describing. My big question is what slo motion camera are you using?


Casio EX FH100
Casio exilim

They need a lot of light for the slo-mo settings, but for sunny outdoors, it works great. 
Chris


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

gairsz said:


> What do you think.


I wasn't a rhetorical question Gary.

Vs. the previous Nano Pro, or vs. other arrows. 

People deserve to get a straight answer. There are enough sponsor sock puppets on AT already.

John


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

chrstphr said:


> why isnt he trying the Eli P2s?
> 
> 
> Chris


P2's are too low to control adult-sized arrows. My daughter uses them on her CX Medallion XR 2000's with great success, but for a full sized arrow even the P3's are a touch on the small side. Michele is using some custom height parabolic Elivanes (call them P4's?) and I chose to use the S3's instead, with very good results. They grouped much better for me than the P3's or P2's.

John


----------



## gairsz (Mar 6, 2008)

limbwalker said:


> P2's are too low to control adult-sized arrows. My daughter uses them on her CX Medallion XR 2000's with great success, but for a full sized arrow even the P3's are a touch on the small side. Michele is using some custom height parabolic Elivanes (call them P4's?) and I chose to use the S3's instead, with very good results. They grouped much better for me than the P3's or P2's.
> 
> John


exactly.


----------



## gairsz (Mar 6, 2008)

limbwalker said:


> I wasn't a rhetorical question Gary.
> 
> Vs. the previous Nano Pro, or vs. other arrows.
> 
> ...


Are you saying that Matt and I are sponsor sock puppets? 

We have been testing these arrows for a year and a half now for CX. We have sent them countless videos too help make these arrows what they are today. Matt had to shoot countless setups and different spine arrows during that time with many times the results were not optimum. His frustration was obvious, but it was all worth it in the end in our opinion.

All I can say is, during this past year and a half when we couldn't say what we were actually shooting, there have been many people that have noticed the difference in the flight of these arrows. I have not seen Matt shoot and X10 for a long time now, but I know they never flew like his current arrows. Maybe that was a tuning issue on our part, or maybe not.

Gary


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> Are you saying that Matt and I are sponsor sock puppets?


Nope. I'm saying we have enough of those here already, so it helps whenever someone has new information AND they can back it up with facts.  So, I'm simply hoping you'd explain, that's all.



> We have been testing these arrows for a year and a half now for CX. We have sent them countless videos too help make these arrows what they are today. Matt had to shoot countless setups and different spine arrows during that time with many times the results were not optimum. His frustration was obvious, but it was all worth it in the end in our opinion.


Good for you guys. I spent years doing the same, as have others. These arrows are the product of a LOT of trial and error and testing by some of the best in the world. It's a thankless job by the way. 

But in the end, it's very rewarding to know that some of the same sponsor sock puppets that criticized and ridiculed me and others for stating the facts about the qualities of CX Nano XR's and Nano Pros are now (wait for it...) shooting them... 

A "new" arrow winning Olympic gold in London was a major breakthrough for recurve archers, I think.

John


----------



## gairsz (Mar 6, 2008)

limbwalker said:


> A "new" arrow winning Olympic gold in London was a major breakthrough for recurve archers, I think.
> 
> John


I agree. 

Plus, these arrows are nearly indestructible. From our experience.


----------



## Matt Z (Jul 22, 2003)

I'm not finding the 'Extremes' anywhere. Are they not on the market yet and curious to the price point?


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

According to the papers i got with my P3s and my P2s, 

the Eli vanes insert states, 

the P2s are for compound and elite recurve archers
the P3s are for intermediate recurve archers,and barebow. 

Perhaps i have incorrect info from Eli . I am currently shooting P2s and the P3s. Eli states the P2s do better in the wind for compound and elite recurve archers. 
I take it to mean that elite archers have a better release and need less correction from the fletchings. The insert states you get less drag and less wind issues with the lower profile.

And my arrow is 26 inches long. Perhaps i should contact Eli and ask for clarification. I dont want to shoot a vane that is not for me. 

Chris


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

I have sent Eli an email for clarification. 



Chris


----------



## gairsz (Mar 6, 2008)

Matt Z said:


> I'm not finding the 'Extremes' anywhere. Are they not on the market yet and curious to the price point?


Not available yet. Soon. Matt is shooting his prototype arrows and is awaiting for the final version with the artwork. Estimated 60 days from the Vegas shoot Matt's arrows. They are supposed to be on the market by then.

I don't know the price of the extremes, but I was told the Nano XR version, I don't remember what they are calling them, will be $50 less that the ACE. I thought it was around $229. So two versions of the three spin technology will be available.

Gary


----------



## gairsz (Mar 6, 2008)

chrstphr said:


> According to the papers i got with my P3s and my P2s,
> 
> the Eli vanes insert states,
> 
> ...


Matt tried the p2's but the p3's worked better. He was going to try the s3's but they came out with the revolution 3. There were made for indoor fat arrows. We thought we would give them a try outdoor. We are still going to try the s3's eventually, but we like what we are seeing right now.

Matt's arrows are just over 31 inches long with 120 grain point 450 spine at around 50 pounds. Longer heavier arrows seem to fly better with a larger vane. At least for Matt.

Gary


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

gairsz said:


> Matt's arrows are just over 31 inches long with 120 grain point 450 spine at around 50 pounds. Longer heavier arrows seem to fly better with a larger vane. At least for Matt.
> 
> Gary


my arrow is 26 inches inside of nock to end of shaft. I shoot a 500 spine with 100 gr point at 49 lbs. 

Perhaps the P2s will work better for my short arrow. I am still testing them against my spin wings and the P3s. 

Chris


----------



## edgerat (Dec 14, 2011)

Have you tested the prototype shafts to verify the 3-spine technology? After the ad campaign for the CE hunting arrows "dual spine weight forward" technology was proven to be nothing more than ad rubbish, I am skeptical. That said, I agree that the Nano Pro is probably the very best arrow ever made. 
Isaac


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> I take it to mean that elite archers have a better release and need less correction from the fletchings.


Must be why the S3's grouped best for me then... ha, ha.



> Have you tested the prototype shafts to verify the 3-spine technology?


Tested in what way? I can tell you that I seemed to get better clearance from the smart spine Nano Pro prototypes than from the original Nano Pro's, which is what I needed. I somehow managed a 336 with vanes that struck my rest every shot. I knew this because I had to re-set my rest arm every shot as it was stuck under the plunger. Those were the original Nano Pro's. Best compound outdoor arrow made, but still needed some tweaking for finger shooters to gain a little clearance. They (CX) seemed to have managed that with these smart spine Nano Pros. I've not had any incidence of contact with my newer arrows and the Elivanes. 

That's all I can tell you.

I have a spine tester, but it's set on a 28" span. I can't test spine in shorter areas of the arrow.

John


----------



## edgerat (Dec 14, 2011)

Thank you John.


----------



## gairsz (Mar 6, 2008)

Matt had the same problem with the standard nano pro. Clearance issues shooting fingers. That problem has been resolved with the extremes.

Gary


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Yup, getting good clearance with the original Nano Pro's shot with fingers was indeed tricky. It could be done, but more often than not a bad release would result in the fletching striking the plunger and/or rest arm. Then the arrows would flutter down into the 7. If you looked at my scores from the 1st leg of the trials, I shot as many 10's as anyone but had many more poor arrows. In most cases this was the result of an arrow flying poorly from striking the rest or plunger, exacerbating an already poor release. If I shot the arrow well, I almost always got a great result. 

With the variable spine Nano Pro's, I immediately saw my poor shots start catching gold. And the Elivanes would have showed any clearance issues, which there were none, thankfully.

I'm anxious to try the latest iteration of the Nano Pro. Lennie tells me they have a machine set up to duplicate a finger release, and can adjust the release to be real clean or real sloppy. Using this shooting machine, they filmed lots of shots to verify whether their variable spine technology was working, and to dial it in for different spines. I'd love to see some of that film! I hope they release it on the CX website for everyone to see.

I'm also very happy to hear they will be dropping the price on the Nano XR to something in the McKinney II range, or below. This will certainly make the Nano XR the arrow of choice for many advanced amatuers and serious club-level archers.

John


----------



## HikerDave (Jan 1, 2011)

gairsz said:


> Matt had the same problem with the standard nano pro. Clearance issues shooting fingers. That problem has been resolved with the extremes.
> 
> Gary


I've heard from a local coach that a clean release can lead to clearance problems.

I played with the simulator that James Park recently published on the Australian Forum (sorry I can't find the link) which has a setting for deflection of the string by the fingers and you can pretty much see the clearance issue happening with a simulated slow-motion arrow.

Even without a simulator, imagine that the arrow is not deflected at all by the fingers, and there's no paradox. The feathers are going to hit the plunger and rest because there's no deflection. More deflection on the release means more bending of the arrow and easier to get clearance. You can also add bow-hand torgue. If it's in the right direction that increases clearance as well.

Thanks for the heads-up on the new arrows coming out.


----------



## gairsz (Mar 6, 2008)

HikerDave said:


> I've heard from a local coach that a clean release can lead to clearance problems.
> 
> I played with the simulator that James Park recently published on the Australian Forum (sorry I can't find the link) which has a setting for deflection of the string by the fingers and you can pretty much see the clearance issue happening with a simulated slow-motion arrow.
> 
> ...


Matt's clearance has always been minimal. Not sure why. We know that his tab tends to make arrows fly stiffer, and the string follow through on his win&win is dead center. The combination might be the cause. 

We were able to get the standard nano pros to clear, but like John said, it took some work. The new arrows were much easier to tune. We still do not have the final version. From what we were told, the final version will be tapered on the very end of the back to weaken the back just a tad bit more to improve clearance. 

Gary


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> Even without a simulator, imagine that the arrow is not deflected at all by the fingers, and there's no paradox.


So long as an arrow is set up off-line against a plunger button, the column loading will cause paradox. Even compound shooters' arrows will flex in a vertical orientation when the arrow is set square.


----------



## calbowdude (Feb 13, 2005)

So if I am reading this right, then this will be similar to the barreling that Easton uses for the ACE/X10's, correct? I've not had clearance issues with my Nano Pro's, but I don't shoot the scores that John and Matt shoot. I probably have plenty of paradoxical clearance going on!



gairsz said:


> Matt's clearance has always been minimal. Not sure why. We know that his tab tends to make arrows fly stiffer, and the string follow through on his win&win is dead center. The combination might be the cause.
> 
> We were able to get the standard nano pros to clear, but like John said, it took some work. The new arrows were much easier to tune. We still do not have the final version. From what we were told, the final version will be tapered on the very end of the back to weaken the back just a tad bit more to improve clearance.
> 
> Gary


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

They aren't barrelled. They are parallel with variable spine technology. Same principle, but no aluminum core so they won't take a set bend and they will recover more quickly from paradox.

John


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

John,

"They are parallel with variable spine technology" ...

So, the stiffness of the shaft differs from one section of the shaft to another, in order to make it more flexible where it needs to be more flexible, right? Is this achieved by the interior walls of the shaft be thicker in some sections to attain more stiffness?


----------



## gairsz (Mar 6, 2008)

lksseven said:


> John,
> 
> "They are parallel with variable spine technology" ...
> 
> So, the stiffness of the shaft differs from one section of the shaft to another, in order to make it more flexible where it needs to be more flexible, right? Is this achieved by the interior walls of the shaft be thicker in some sections to attain more stiffness?


CX didn't tell us how they did it. I assumed it was barreled on the inside. I can tell you when you bend the arrow you can see the stiffer section of the shaft. I was told that the very back end of the final version will have a slight tapper for two reasons. It makes the back half slightly weaker, and something about nock size. I don't remember the details on the nock size reason. 

Michelle Gilbert has a set of the final version. I will try to get more details in the morning.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Larry, more specific details will be available soon.


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

heard back from Eli on the P2 vanes for elite recurve shooters, here is their response...

_usually Compound archers use P1 or P2 and recurve use P2 or P3
in the prostaff (recurve) some archers use P2 and many prefer P3 ... you can consider if you positioned P2 inclined have the same downforce a straight then P3 vanes
thamnks for your interested at our products 
maurizio _

Chris


----------



## Humdinger (Apr 4, 2012)

haha i watched this video on Facebook.. Pretty cool! I didn't know you and Matt post on here?!?


----------



## gairsz (Mar 6, 2008)

First shot has Eli p3 vanes. All subsequent arrows have Eli Revolution 3 vanes.


----------



## gairsz (Mar 6, 2008)




----------



## gairsz (Mar 6, 2008)

Michelle Gilbert wins gold at the Texas shoot out with Nano Pro Extremes and Eli Vanes. 

Congratulations.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

That's fantastic. I had the chance to visit with her for a while yesterday, and she was shooting fantastic. I was watching her little 750 Nano Pro's and Elivanes fly like lazerbeams to the target. Very impressive performance by a fine young lady.


----------



## John Hall (Jan 10, 2013)

Looking at CX arrows for next level as opposed to just blindly sticking with Easton (A/C/G, A/C/E, etc.). The two I'm looking at are Nano SST and Nano XR... any thoughts on how these two compare?

John


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

SST's compare favorably to A/C/E's at more than $60 less per dozen. Nano XR's are a great compound arrow (all the arrow just about any compounder would ever need) but CX now has better options for recurve archers.


----------



## Cephas (Sep 7, 2010)

Would be nice if we could actually get a hold of some of those SST's. They were up on Lancaster, I called to ask about them and they aren't available now till the middle of summer which is too late.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

These things take time. I'm not sure why CX chooses to release information about arrows they don't have complete inventory for, but that's what they have decided to do.

I have a couple batches of SST's to play with for testing in the middle to weaker spines. Very comparable diameter to an A/C/E and nearly as light. 

They are going to be a better mid-cost option for many recurvers than A/C/G's with A/C/E-like performance at significantly lower cost.


----------



## midwayarcherywi (Sep 24, 2006)

Not having product during beta testing can build excitement for it! It serves a purpose. Vetting a product in real world situations is the final step in product development. The Magera's and Zumbo's out there are fortunate to be on the leading edge.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

And Frangilli's... 

Michele is pounding out some incredible scores in Italy with his SKY TR-7 riser and Nano Pro's


----------



## gairsz (Mar 6, 2008)

midwayarcherywi said:


> Not having product during beta testing can build excitement for it! It serves a purpose. Vetting a product in real world situations is the final step in product development. The Magera's and Zumbo's out there are fortunate to be on the leading edge.


We are very fortunate. CX has been very generous to Matt and very patient while Matt transitioned into his new form from the NTS, we are very grateful.

These arrows are worth the wait.

Gary


----------



## hwjchan (Oct 24, 2011)

Limbwalker, would you say SSTs would be worth switching to if I'm currently shooting XRs?


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Medallion XR's or Nano XR's?

Also, what spine are you shooting?


----------



## hwjchan (Oct 24, 2011)

Shooting Nano XR 830s out of a set of KAP Challenger Carbons marked for 36, probably 34 on the fingers. Beiter pins (switching to outs), Eli P3s, and 100gr points.


----------



## Easily Confused (Jan 7, 2012)

Has anyone had chance to try those revolution 3 vanes in windy conditions yet? They do look good but over here in the UK we tend to get a fair bit of wind and rain!

Also, I've heard that the spines required for CX arrows are quite different from easton arrows for the same poundage. Is this true or just another rumor?


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Easily Confused said:


> Also, I've heard that the spines required for CX arrows are quite different from easton arrows for the same poundage. Is this true or just another rumor?


The difference really is between tapered, or variable spine shafts, and parallel shafts. Not necessarily between Easton and any other brand...

Variable spine shafts will have a weaker dynamic spine than parallel shafts. A/C/E's and X10's and the newest CX Nano's (SST and Extreme) are variable spine shafts, and will tune a half size to one size weaker than a parallel shaft, even though the share the same static spine measurements.

Nano Pro's and Nano XR's are parallel shafts, so yes, they tune at least 1/2 to sometimes 1 full size stiffer than an A/C/E or X10 of the same static spine reading. In other words, a 450 Nano Pro may actually tune a bit stiffer than a 410 X10 or 400 A/C/E. 

The newest variable spine Nano's are being developed for finger shooters, and will most likely be fairly close in dynamic spine to the A/C/E and X10's. 

Personally, I was shooting 410 X10's and 400 A/C/E's, but found myself shooting 500 Nano Pro's (parallel) and now shoot 450 Nano Pro Xtreme prototypes. 

Hope that helps.

John


----------



## teebat (Oct 28, 2013)

Thanks to all of the people here for the knowledge that is being freely given. I have only been shooting for 2 years and this forum has been instructional and inspiring.


----------

