# W&W TF Apecs



## BergerButton

Well I want one!


----------



## Xcreekarchery1

ya its cool but its really ugly


----------



## rgauvin

Xcreekarchery1 said:


> ya its cool but its really ugly


I actually like the looks, a shame it is only comes 25 inch risers.


----------



## therazor302

Xcreekarchery1 said:


> ya its cool but its really ugly


+1

It is pretty ugly, kind of reminds me of the W&W Xpert http://www.lancasterarchery.com/product_info.php?products_id=5914&osCsid=cu2ib89ssncgfdfa9os0oh6202

another ugly riser.


----------



## Archer 4 Life

Alt. Archery lists the riser at $720; for that price it better hit X's for me while I sit back and watch it shoot without me.

However the limbs look like something to look into.


----------



## Vittorio

On November 2nd, my club has hosted a presentation by Mr. Park Kyung Rae, President of Win & Win Archery, about Apecs line of products. Several members of the Italian National team and some top Italian coaches have attended to the presentation and have had the possibility to test the new riser and limbs.










The partecipants










TF-Apecs riser and Apecs Prime limbs - On back, Amedeo Tonelli and Elena Tonetta











Luca Melotto, Junior Target World Champion 2008, shooting TF Apecs riser and n-Apecs limbs


----------



## midwayarcherywi

Vittorio,
What impressions and conclusions did your shooters have of the riser and limbs? Are the limbs faster than the INNO limbs? Are they smooth? What type of vibration is present?
Does the riser produce less torque?
Thanks,
Gabe


----------



## Xcreekarchery1

as i said before the riser is uguly. but i think the limbs look SWEET.


----------



## Vittorio

Just a short sunmmary of the presentation and testing:

- TF Apecs Riser
--------------------- 
Carbon with inner carbon frame same as the inno, front bridge like the Expert for better rigidity, toal weight 1250 without the TF . Total weight decided by th e market request, not by the technology.
TF weigh can be incremented by 100 gr additional weights. 
TF is working on inner special rubber with memory form, not sensible to temperature change. TF has been shown working much before the arrow leaves the bow.
No back bushing, based on principle that back weights decrease the stability of the bow.
Grip similar to the INNO one but slightly larger.

- Apecs Prime Limbs
--------------------------- 
Nano technology carbon same as used by Carbon Express for Nano arrows, new curve, inner wood core giving better stability fealing. 
External face white, inner face black with green signs
Suggested by Mr Park to top level shooters.

- N-Apecs Limbs
--------------------------- 
Identical to Apecs Prime, but inner core made by new Nano technology foam.
Mr Park has defined them the most technologically advanced limbs that can be made today.
Slightly faster than Apecs Prime but probably less stable. Addressed to the markedt that wants higth tec limbs without wood.
External face white, inner face black with orange signs.

Immediate feeling of the limbs has been different depending from the archers. For instance, Luca Melotto preferred the n-Apecs, but Michele liked the Apecs prime. Both limbs will be on top of the W&W range for speed.
Riser is really quiet and stops vibrations almost immeadiately. Unfortunately, it is 1 cm larger than the 12 cm Bare Bow ring, so can't be used for bare bow.


----------



## Dave T

Thanks for the analysis/report, Vittorio!

Dave


----------



## Archer 4 Life

Sounds nifty! Can't wait for some videos of these things in action!


----------



## BergerButton

It "looks strange or ugly or weird" I wonder how those opinions deal with carbon nano-tubes or what looks like a lovely riser from WinWin? This is a pleasant surprise the way I look at it. Naturally my opinion is biased since I shoot an INNO. Frankly, several of my friends have shot my INNO and as a result purchased their own as WinWin makes fantastic equipment. Why would this new riser be any less of riser than the INNO? You can tell from the photos above that it is a work of archery art!
:greenwithenvy:


----------



## Warbow

Vittorio said:


> No back bushing, based on principle that back weights decrease the stability of the bow


Don't a couple of top shooters use a single stab in front and a back weight? Is that configuration inherently unstable?


----------



## Vittorio

Warbow said:


> Don't a couple of top shooters use a single stab in front and a back weight? Is that configuration inherently unstable?


Any weight on the low back of the riser is making it tilting upward, so when someone puts it there, is generally to counterbalance the reaction of the long rod, only. But its presence generates the necessity to add more weight in front of the long rod or a longer rod, and so on... It works, of course, but has been shown billion of times that it is a less efficient system than the V-bar schema. At world level, top archers using long rod and countebalance only, without v-bar and extender, are a negligeable minority, nowdays. 
Anyhow, what I have reported was Mr. Park's answer to a specific question. IMHO, they had to add tha back bushing to all their risers, just for for simple marketing reasons...


----------



## Vittorio

It seems W&W has changed the inner graphics signs of the Apecs Prime limbs from Green to Yellow... So is the pair received just now by Michele...


----------



## Vittorio

Yesterday Michele has tried the TF apecs + Apecs prime in our regional championship, just after four hours of set up and tuning the day before. 
The stuff is promising, but needs some additional adjustement.


----------



## huffy

An interesting photo Vittorio, has Michele added extra weight to the bottom of the riser?

Best wishes, Mark


----------



## titanium man

*Apecs*

Interesting stuff. Did they say anything about it's mass weight, (riser), vs. other risers in the W&W line? With all the composite materials, they still seem to be a bit heavy. jmo It's really sharp looking though!!

T-Man


----------



## TGStan

titanium man said:


> Interesting stuff. Did they say anything about it's mass weight, (riser), vs. other risers in the W&W line? With all the composite materials, they still seem to be a bit heavy.
> T-Man



In an earlier post Vittorio mentioned that the weight is specific to industry standard/consumer expectations - i.e. they _could_ manufacture it lighter, but people seem to prefer a riser to be around 1250-1350 grams. That's how I read it anyway. 

Thanks for the update Vittorio, the riser looks quite a lot nicer in that photo than the ones on the W&W site. 

:darkbeer:


----------



## Vittorio

Michele does not like light risers, so he has added 2 weights on the bottom (by an additional v-bar in vertical position), exactly as he was already doing with the Inno Carbon riser. 
Discussions about riser weight can go on forever. Basicaly, I will never talk about riser weight, but instead about full set up weight. Michele's is in the medium hight side of it, while for instance Ilario di Buo is at the top of it. 
Never forget that total setup weight and weight distribution must be related to the effective poundage and to the front shoulder position (related to the bow hand position). 
Hight poundage - low shoulder - low hand automatycally means heavier setup. 
The bow in the picture has been set up with same stabilizers and weights as the Inno, but with a 5" extension instead of a 6" one, as the long rod bushing is already more than 1" in front of the usual (Inno) position. 
Other change from Inno has been to remove the top FDS short weight-stabilizer, as now the TFS weight is positively replacing its function in a better (lower) position. 
TFS has been set up with the addition of all the thicker rubbers availble in the kit supplied with the riser and all the 3 weights. Of course, strenght of the rubber inside the TFS and its weight has to be adjusted to the poundage shot... 
As far as speed (efficiency) is concerned, comparitively this set up seems to be slightly faster than Winex+Inno and at same level or better than Inno+Inno Power.
Not to mention, original grip has been of course replaced with a Gillo old hand made grip that ha been rapidly adjusted to fit the new riser. 
String has been made intentionally slower (20 strands 8125 + very long Halo .19 serving) than usual to face expected faster results by limbs.
Limbs tend to bend at full draw in the midddle rather than the top, quite different from Inno and Winex and so a little bit harder undert he cliker, but even small changes in draw lenght and bracing are having a significant influence on this.
As mentioned, total 4 hours of set up including deciding what arrows (ACE 400 with 115 gr tungsten points), how o distribute the weights, and how to fit the grip and were to position the cliker is not enough to consider the set up as a final one. More work needed, of course. 582 the score is promising, as said, and there are still 2 weeks to Nimes ...


----------



## jmvargas

for someone who likes plain solid colors the riser looks like a nightmare....i cannot seem to understand nor appreciate win&win's obsession with graphics on their new risers and limbs....JMHO...


----------



## triode

I have to agree on that solid colors had been nicer without the big decals. If I buy a new car I don't expect it to be all covered with the manufactures name and model... :shade:

Interesting report Vittorio, do you know if the n-apecs limbs behaves in the same manner (limbs bending in the middle and are a little bit harder under the clicker compared to Inno/Winex)?


----------



## BLACK WOLF

triode said:


> I have to agree on that solid colors had been nicer without the big decals. If I buy a new car I don't expect it to be all covered with the manufactures name and model... :shade:
> 
> Interesting report Vittorio, do you know if the n-apecs limbs behaves in the same manner (limbs bending in the middle and are a little bit harder under the clicker compared to Inno/Winex)?



Using terminology used by the sport compact car scene...that riser looks riced out 

I would love to hear some more reviews on the limbs also!

Ray


----------



## Rick McKinney

I received my new TF Apecs riser and limbs just before I left for the ATA show. I can’t wait to try them! The looks are great! Like everything else Win&Win makes, the aesthetics is far ahead of the rest. After looking at the TFS, I think I understand the dynamics of what they are trying to accomplish. Years ago, K-Products of Japan made something similar or at least a similar result was accomplished. This part does cut back on torque well and it even allowed me to use a weaker shaft by one size due to the change in dynamics. The problem I ran into back then was the way Mr. Mizuno made the part, it was inconsistent. This new TFS idea looks like it could be more consistent, but only time will tell. I have to hand it to Mr. Park, his ideas are a cut above the rest of the recurve designs. When I get home, I will put the bow together and shoot some. I’ll let you all know what I find.


----------



## Rick McKinney

Ok…first impression is that the bow does have some nice features. I like the looks, but that is more subjective than anything else. I put it together relatively easily. Like the typical Win&Win set up the company understands that it is much more sellable if the tiller and limb alignment is close if not just right when you first start. 

I first decided to use my INNO limbs to specifically test the riser (one variable at a time). There was little I had to change to get the bow up and shooting. The plunger location was close, the limb alignment was excellent and like I said the tiller was good. The brace height was a bit high compared to the INNO X-Lite using the same string so that is something to consider when getting the new riser. However, it is minimal for you to at least hurry and shoot it like most people want to do. I spent about 20 minutes tearing down my X-Lite and putting all the goods on the TF APECS. 

The shot was quite and there is a dampening that I can feel different than the X-Lite. And I have not even played with the TFS yet. This is probably due to the bridge design in front. Green Horn developed this some time ago and Win&Win have followed up with it.

Like Vittorio stated in his earlier posts, if you want a similar reaction with your bow you will have to use a shorter v-bar extender. I just kept it the same and used longer side rods to get a similar effect. However, the bow really does move forward quickly which I like anyway. I agree with Vittorio about the single rod in front and a back weight. This was very popular with archers who switched from compound to recurve (Butch Johnson). Or the coach (Tim Stickland). Both liked this reaction and were very happy with the results. Most of us who tried it went back to the V-bar. 

As you noticed from Vittorio, setting it up and shooting it takes a lot of time with lots of trials and errors to find what will work and what will not. This is just my first impression. I will do more as soon as I can.


----------



## titanium man

*Apecs*

Thanks for the info Rick, it's good stuff to know. 

I have a question for this bow and for all yours ( W&W) in the past. 

Have you experienced a less than tight fit in the tolerance in which the limbs fit into the pockets? I've been told a variety of things and you would think the standard thinking would be an exacting limb alignment and no slop in the seating of the limbs. I've experience the entire spectrum in W&W's, in their top end stuff, I'd really like to know what the pro's (you) think, in this regard. I suppose once the bow is strung, it'll be consistent every shot, but may be a bit unsettling to someone who is unsure. Thanks in advance for your reply.

Jason


----------



## Rick McKinney

titanium man said:


> Thanks for the info Rick, it's good stuff to know.
> 
> I have a question for this bow and for all yours ( W&W) in the past.
> 
> Have you experienced a less than tight fit in the tolerance in which the limbs fit into the pockets? I've been told a variety of things and you would think the standard thinking would be an exacting limb alignment and no slop in the seating of the limbs. I've experience the entire spectrum in W&W's, in their top end stuff, I'd really like to know what the pro's (you) think, in this regard. I suppose once the bow is strung, it'll be consistent every shot, but may be a bit unsettling to someone who is unsure. Thanks in advance for your reply.
> 
> Jason


Actually you would want the limbs to go back to the least resistant place. When you lock down the limbs like some of the older setups, you force the bow to create a torque unless it is absolutely perfect, which none are. :mg:

Earl Hoyt Jr. developed the first “floating pockets” with the GM. This freaked out a lot of archers who wanted to keep everything solid or one piece with lock down limbs to the riser. The GM was one of the longest lasting risers in takedown history. Meaning that it was highly popular and there was no need to offer an other type riser. It says a lot. Thus, I would expect that the Win&Win is using that concept with a bit less flair. 

Now how important is this small movement in the limb pockets or “slop”? Well, Stanislov Zabrodsky used a very sloppy limb/riser setup when he won the World Target Championships in Switzerland, 1989. He set a new world record of 1342 beating Darrel Pace’s record of 1341 (Pace set the record in 1979 in Japan). I watched the Russian coach and Stanislov shoot every morning using a play-doe type substance to see how the string was hitting the limb when shooting. He would put shims in the pockets of the riser to position the limbs to make sure the string hit right where they wanted it to. Personally I thought it was a silly exercise, but he did win the title. 

After the event was over, the Russians came to the president of Hoyt, Joe Johnston and told him that he had problems with the bow and Joe was astounded. Joe’s comment to me was, “How in the world could someone complain after winning the world title?!?” Well, as we all know, champions are not sheep and do not flock together. They stand out and definitely beat to a different drum. :shade: Well, you don’t knock success. If this was what it took for Stanislov to win, then it was the right thing to do. Just like Darrell had to wear red socks all the time in order to win. I tried it and it didn’t work for me! ukey: 

I’ll check the last four bows (Nxpert, Inno, Inno X-Lite and TF Apecs) to see if there is much slop. I have not noticed it much but who knows? 


----------



## titanium man

*info*

Thanks Rick!!

I appreciate your input. It's good to know whether it's necessary to get the sheet metal out and fabricate some shims.

JC


----------



## Rick McKinney

Well my second time I have played with the bow, I started working on the TFS. I broke it down, tore it apart and looked at how it works and my assumptions were correct. This part of the bow will be a big move for recurve archery. As I mentioned before I played with a similar system back in the late ‘70s and early ‘80s and it really worked but I could not get the part to stay consistent. It was big, added too much weight and was hard to maintain. The system that Win&Win has come up with is by far superior and yet so simple! The piece that I played with was not even a part of the riser. But the concept is right on! 

Essentially, the weight that is in the middle of the riser just near your index finger will be very active when you release the string. As you draw the bow back, the riser bends ever so much. As you release the string, the bend of the riser straightens out and actually the grip presses more into your hand while the limb pockets move away from you. Remember this is very minute so you will not see it nor will people feel it since there is so much dynamic movement happening all at one time. What this little weight device does is move in the opposite direction of the riser and so you get the riser moving in one plane, back and forth, thus cutting back the torque from your release or your bow hand tension. It is very hard for the bow to move in two different planes at one time, especially if the movement in one plane is so dominate which this appears to be the case. 

I have looked at Win&Win’s CD/DVD sample. I wish I could download it for you to see but it is about 61 mb. If anybody knows how to make this available for you all to see let me know (I’m sort of internet illiterate). PM me. It shows the action of the TFS as well as explains what is happening with the rest of the riser. It is kind of hard to read since English is either a second or third language for them. However if you have patience you can figure it all out. Here is the link to Win&Win’s site of the explanation as well (http://www.win-archery.com/tftech.htm). That’s enough for now. Enjoy!


----------



## TGStan

Thanks, Rick. Keep 'em coming


----------



## pilotmill

*new win riser*

Thanks Rick for the post on the riser, great insight. Yea, I put my red socks away a long time ago also. I just read the size of the riser and my heart sank, hoping for a new barebow (high tech) riser. Perhaps Win will get interested in that aspect and work on that too. Great job all.


----------



## Rick McKinney

Sorry for taking so long to come back to you. Work always seems to get in the way! :sad:

I started today working on setting up the bow a bit better. First, I found the right length v-bar extender. Thus, I could use my normal stabilizers. Since the added weight is in the TFS I took a little off the end stabilizer so I could keep a total weight similar to what I am used to. Plus the balance of the bow appears to be similar once I did this. Taking into account of the front bridge design, this probably gave me the forward motion of what I was looking for even though I took two weights off the end of the long stabilizer. I am a bit opposite of Michele Frangilli who likes a lot of weight. I like light weight. I kept the weight ends the same on my v-bar stabilizers as I used with my INNO X-Lite. 

Next, I put the new limbs on and adjusted the weight to fit what I was shooting which was between 39 to 40 pounds at my draw. This feels the best for me right now and I don’t plan on adding any more. I like to shoot good shots and this is all I can control near 100% of the time. I found a string that was close and used it. I put the Beiter limb gauges on to make sure everything was lined up. I did have to move my Beiter plunger in about 1.25 turn to get my arrow lined up. Thus, this riser might be a bit thinner than the Inno X-Lite. I put the nocking point in the same location as the Inno X-Lite and when I shot a bare shaft it was spot on! However, the arrow was way stiff! This is as I suspected. With the TFS it allows for a weaker arrow if you are near medium-stiff to begin with. 

The limbs are the wood/carbon instead of the foam/carbon. I have not shot wood limbs since the early 80’s! I tested Hoyt’s original prototype foam limbs and never shot wood again. Mostly, there was a huge difference in different weather conditions with wood/carbon compared to foam/carbon. Thus, I felt there was no need to go back to any wood material. There were many times when I shot wood/carbon, I would have to keep an eye on the change of impact over the course of the day. It was very common for me to have moved my sight about a ¼” by the end of the day, especially in the heat. 

What I found with these limbs are that they are very smooth. With my near 30.5” draw, I can feel most limbs stack on me. Now, the WinEx limbs did not stack. The first INNO limbs did. The second pair of INNO limbs I got did not. These new limbs do not stack either. However, unfortunately one set of limbs do not guarantee all limbs will be the same. I am happy with these limbs but I will have to test them this summer to see what kind of differences I experience in different weather conditions. 

Next, I finally got to shoot the thing. I liked the balance of the bow, the weight of the bow and definitely the reaction of the bow when I shot it. Now, I don’t shoot as good as I used to but I still love to feel a good shot. I was really surprised as to the consistent reaction I got with this bow. Normally I torque a shot every once in a while which causes me to hit my arm guard or see the riser/stabilizer twist to the left, but so far with this bow I did not get that. The grip is lower than most, which is just fine with me! This grip is one I have not even tried to change which is a first in a long time. 

That’s about it for now. I will include some pictures to show you my rest/clicker setup and one with the v-bar setup with a third one that just gives you an overall view.


----------



## Rick McKinney

Here are the photos I mentioned yesterday....


----------



## Apecs73

*Question about Rick's Photos*

Hello Rick,

I have just joined this forum because I received my Apecs a few days ago and I am interested in the experiences of other archers with this bow.

I just looked at the photos of your bow and was wondering, why you put the cushion plunger in the front bushing and not in the back one. My knowledge up to now was, that the cushion plunger should be above the pivot point of the bow grip.

I am looking forward to your answer.

P.S.: Sorry if my english is not perfect. I am from germany and my last english lesson in school has been 17 years ago.


----------



## Rick McKinney

Apecs73. I have had a lot of success using the forward plunger position. All but one of my 1340+ scores were shot with the plunger in that position. There could be several reasons for this. First, it seems to give me better clearance with my spin wing vanes. Since the bend of the arrow gives me more time to clear the rest/plunger area. For some they may have more contact with the vane if they used this forward plunger location. You need only try it to find out if it affects you or not. Secondly, it weakened my arrow just a bit since the flex of the arrow is a bit longer due to the location of the plunger. I found this to be good for me since I always seemed to require a weaker shaft to begin with and like about all of us, we are usually in the middle of spines of two arrows and hardly ever do we get the perfect spine for our draw, poundage and arrow type! Yes, you are correct that in theory the arrow contact should be at the pivot point of the grip. However, again, play with both locations and see which one gives you the most accuracy and forgiveness. Score is everything….theory is good on paper but it may not give you the best score. :wink:


----------



## TGStan

Rick, are you using long limbs for a 70" bow?

What does (marked weight) +/- (location of limb bolts) + (your proximate draw length) = ?? 

In other words, how does all the theory we read match up with reality with the new W&W gear? I've heard and read some conflicting reports regarding some of the different manufacturers out there.


----------



## Rick McKinney

TGStan. I am currently using 68” limbs. I was using the 70” limbs but I did not tell Win&Win that I had switched. It’s of little importance now since I am mainly shooting for pleasure. I have always used the 68” limb or medium limb during my competitive years. I wanted as much efficiency as I could get. My limbs are marked 40 lbs, but I crank out the limb pockets as far as I can which allows for my lighter poundage than marked. My draw is about 30.5” plus/minus .25”. Yes, I cheat! :zip: Currently I would prefer the 70” limb because they feel better but I know that they are not as energy efficient as the 68” limbs. The longer limbs are not as hard on my old body. I have found that the Win&Win manuals are a good start to follow but then you will need to make adjustments due to your form compared to the norm (which nobody has ).


----------



## Warbow

Rick McKinney said:


> Currently I would prefer the 70” limb because they feel better but I know that they are not as energy efficient as the 68” limbs.


I keep hearing that. What are the numbers for the difference?

I draw 30 AMO, but as a non competitive FITA Recurve shooter (Oxymoron?) I have a soft spot in my head for the smooth FD curve of a longer limb...how much does one give up by using longs?


----------



## Rick McKinney

Warbow. I couldn’t tell you the actual numbers. I can tell you that my sight gap opened up somewhat with the longer limbs, which is to be expected. The grouping was similar, but not enough for me to be satisfied to use the 70” setup during those competitive years. Keep in mind, I was averaging around 1320-1330 at most events thus I was trying to eek out a few more points. The 70” setup was not going to do it and chances are I figured I would drop about 10 points on average so it was not worth the smoother “feel”. 

Now, since I am shooting in the low 1200’s, I really don’t care about that 10 points anymore! :wink: It’s more about enjoyment. For most archers I highly suggest you go for the good feel and if/when you get to that higher level, go for the efficiency of your setup. It really amazes me when I see someone with the ultimate slicked up equipment and they shoot around 1050-1150. Working on form consistency will give a person around 100 points while equipment is more of 10-20 points by tweaking here and there. But I have to admit, the slicked up stuff is more fun!


----------



## limbwalker

> It really amazes me when I see someone with the ultimate slicked up equipment and they shoot around 1050-1150.


I guess my "modest" upbringing has something to do with this, but I have exactly the same reaction. I'll never forget my first JOAD Nationals and USIAC's that I attended. Almost all of those kids had more expensive gear than I did, and that was the year I made the Oly. team! 

Parents these days...

I certainly have at my disposal much more expensive gear today than I did in the spring of '04, but I still have yet to shoot better scores... Like Rick says, proper training will gain you far more than expensive equipment.

Now, having said that, I will admit that most archers will not shoot to their potential unless they have complete faith in their equipment, and there is a percentage of folks out there that will always doubt their gear if they think something else out there may be just ever so slightly better...

John.


----------



## BLACK WOLF

That's why I base most of my choices on looks. I have to like the look of it if I'm gonna buy it  Kind of like women and cars...ooops...that may get me into trouble 

Don't get me wrong...it has to be of sound design and actually function like it's suppose to...but I know...the bottom line...it's primarily the person behind the bow that will determine if they win or loose....no matter if it's the latest and greatest bow...or an antique.

Just like all relationships...whether it between a man and a woman or an archer and his bow...I still want something that is forgiving of my errors when I make them or helps keep me from making as many 

Ray


----------



## jmvargas

as one of those who like to have the "ultimate slicked up equipment" i have always believed that if i have the best equipment i can afford i have nothing or no one to blame except myself when i am not performing as i expect.....it's one of my motivations for me to improve....and besides it's fun trying out the best and the latest!!.....PS..i think we're also called "equipment junkies"!!!


----------



## midwayarcherywi

Amen Mari. Just because an archer likes the trappings of having the latest and greatest, does not mean that the archer is looking for an easy way to better scores. 
I think there are lots of us out there that work extremely hard to improve our form, while enjoying shooting different and yes...new equipment.


----------



## zal

Sort of easy equation for me: if you have the $$$, it most likely won't cost you any points to change to top of the range stuff :wink:

I've always been a bit of equipment junkie myself, and using stuff that I really like gives me a good confidence about my equipment. One item less to worry about. Do I think it makes a difference for a top class archer? No, probably not. For others it just gives a good excuse to blame poor scores...


----------



## Lindy

Rick McKinney,

Thank you for you expert analysis of the Win&Win riser and limbs. I am shooting the older Win&Win Xpert riser and Winex limbs. I love the Win&Win product and I am seriously considring buying the newer Win&Win products in the near future.

By the way I am currently shooting the McKinney II arrows (outdoors) and think they are a great product. 

Regards,


----------



## Rick McKinney

Ha…Ha…! Sorry for those who took my comments personal. Just so you know, I was laughing because that is what I do now! I like the new bows and new equipment and change faster than a cat pouncing on a mouse! My comments were directed more towards those who really believe that it is the fault of the equipment so they continue to keep changing. There is nothing wrong with those of us who love to play with equipment (manufacturers love you!) just as long as we keep it in perspective and like some of you mentioned….you have the money to do so! 

Case in point. When I was involved with equipment distribution for the world teams helping a couple of manufacturers, the two people who needed the least amount of equipment each year was Darrell and myself. When we found a bow that worked we did not want to mess with another one. I used my arrows for about 2 years before I needed more. Normally I would request three dozen and then work with those for the two years. Now, however, I like to play a lot and test a lot when I can find time. 

Lindy. Yes, that was a good setup for me. I popped off some decent scores with the Xpert riser and WinEx limbs. It was a good combination. :thumbs_up


----------



## Xcreekarchery1

i love my inno. i think you need absolute confidece in ur equi[pment to shoot good scores. also i think you have tot like the way the bow looks for you to have complete confidence. personally i think the apex is uguly but thats just me. also if you think it shoots better in your mind then it does, i think i shoot better iwht my little olympic band thingys from nationals on my bow so i do lol. anything that helos you uptop will help your scores tremendousily.


----------



## Rick McKinney

Xcreekarchery1. Ahhhh…..here I will have to politely disagree with you. I hated the Radian riser with a passion. I even took a jig saw to it so I could cut out specific areas to make the weight of the bow more “palatable”. However, I shot a couple of 1340’s (1346 & 1347) with it so I could not really say it hurt my shooting performance…. John Williams hated the TD 1 grip when it first came out, but he won the Olympic Gold with it, setting world & Olympic records with it. There are many examples of top archers not really liking the bow but since it shot well, they shot it. ukey:

I remember when I was using my TD1 way back in 1972…. I was really getting into the groove with the bow, finishing 2nd at the National Outdoor Championships at my first adult division and in 1973 just missed making the World Team (thanks Darrell… :crybaby2. . In 1974 I finished 2nd (again…:ill at the National Target Championships with my TD1 and made my first International Team called the Championship of the Americas. Earl sent me a TD2. right after making the team. The riser was new and he felt I should use it. I was so upset and told him no way! I was climbing the ladder and was solidifying my #2 position in the nation and he wanted to “trick” me by using a new bow which would hurt my shooting (I wasn’t really thinking conspiracy here….after all, he liked Darrell more than me… :BangHead: ). I told Earl I was not going to use it and I will send it back to him. This guy knew what he was doing. He told me to just slide it under my bed and play with it if I felt like it. So….as any curious “cat” would, I played with it and it shot better than my TD1. I used it to win “The Championship of Americas”. I think he knew more about me than I did…. Ahhhh….the good old days! hwell:


----------



## Xcreekarchery1

isnt that the point of the discussions on at? to have slight disagreements lol. mabye its just me thats like that.


----------



## Apecs73

Xcreekarchery. From my point of view you are absolutely right that you need to have absolute confidence in your equipment. That matches my own experiences. I am not a world class archer as Rick, so I am happy with any Result of 280 points or more for 30 arrows at 18 meters indoor. I think, that is quite good for a hobby-archer who can only practice about 300 arrows a week.

I was shooting a PSE Zone for approx 10 years and loved it, because it felt really good. Last year I took 2nd place in our county championships with that rather old bow and could even kick out a national team member in the final round. I was quite surprised and happy about that, because I never expected such a result. So I thought it was time for a new bow as a reward for me. I bought a Hoyt Nexus. It felt quite good shooting it, but I did not hit anything! Hard as I tried I could not find the error, so I went back to my good old PSE and was again shooting rather well.

The exact opposite happened now with the Apecs riser. I got the riser last week on wednesday and had my first tournament on sunday. In the first round I shot only a 275, but was quite happy with it (new bow, little practice time...). I got more and more confident with it and shot a 282 in the second round, which made me really happy. The special thing about that second round was, that I was standing at 231 point with 6 arrows to go. So there was a 290 round coming up, but I screwed it with a 51 in the last two ends. I think, I got a little nervous in the end... :wink:

But that all shows to me, that you have to be absolutely confident with your equipment. I do not know, why I did not get along with the Nexus. I think, every archer has to find out, which bow suits to him/her.

But that is only my experience. Maybe there are some guys, who can shoot good scores with anything that looks like a bow. I think, I have found my bow for the next 10 years (if the Apecs is as long lasting as the PSE was).:wink:


----------



## Xcreekarchery1

yeah i shot a pse xfactor for the second third of my shootin year lol. it was good but i just like it alittle less then my inno. i think me being a teenage guy might have something to do witht the equipment junkie thing lol


----------



## jmvargas

i have been shooting and loving my x-factors for the past 5 years but if something newer comes up with similar features such as being as lightweight, nicely balanced, responsive and with a backweight provision.....who knows????......


----------



## Selil

Rick McKinney said:


> It really amazes me when I see someone with the ultimate slicked up equipment and they shoot around 1050-1150. Working on form consistency will give a person around 100 points while equipment is more of 10-20 points by tweaking here and there. But I have to admit, the slicked up stuff is more fun!



Shooting really good equipment means you have no excuses. It also means that it may be a lot more fun because you have to be honest with yourself. But, that is my opinion.


----------



## Xcreekarchery1

Selil said:


> Shooting really good equipment means you have no excuses. It also means that it may be a lot more fun because you have to be honest with yourself. But, that is my opinion.


yes that is how i feel. in my mind it limits all of the error to me and well i get better lol


----------



## massman

*Keep trying*

This past year I started shooting the ProAccent with my winex limbs. I loved the bow out of the box and then changed to a jager grip and loved it more. The only thing I did'nt like was the bow rolling towards the sight side during followthrough. I experimented with using a Doinker stubby with weight on an offset bracket mounted on the lower stabilizer mount and on the main stabilizer mount. No matter what position I'd place the bracket in, close to the riser or away from the riserthe bow and I were just so inconsistent. I ended up stripping the doinker off of the riser and just living with the rolling to the sight side. Then this fall I decided to give a V bar set-up a try. Using a 4" extension and a cartel V bar block and 10" Doinker siderods I did use different size weights on the siderods to offset the weight of the sight. WHAT A DIFFERENCE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Now this set-up seems so forgiving, I cannot wait to get back outside and try this with my outdoor arrows.

Regards,

Tom


----------



## Rick McKinney

OK….I have been fletching my arrows and working on the TFS of the TF Apecs. I sent an e-mail to Mr. Park to discuss with him how to operate the patent pending TFS. There are several pieces of “memory foam” that comes with the TFS. Depending on how many pieces you put in the TFS will determine how it works (stiff or soft). I have only tried around medium so I will be playing with it some more to see if I can tell a difference. I just finished fletching a few of my arrows with some neat looking vanes. :zip: Since I am shooting indoors I thought I would play with those as well to see if I can get clearance with them. 

Mr. Park is working on the manual for this new bow since there are some very different characteristics with it. First is the TFS which adds weight to the front of the bow and will cause the balance you are accustomed to with the normal risers to feel quite front of center. This will cause the bow to quickly fall forward and spin. However, if you use about a 2” shorter v-bar extender and if you take off one or two weights from the long rod, you should be all right. He also recommends for you to use a shorter long rod, but I am not sure if that is necessary. You can if you want but I didn’t. 

Sorry it is taking so long for me to give you more reports but I don’t take the time to shoot like I used to.  I can say there is so much to play with on this bow. For instance, I want to try a small extender for the TFS to see if it causes any different reaction. I want to add and take away the weights of the TFS to see how it reacts. The TFS comes with about 12 memory foams of different thickness and types. I want to try them in varying ways to see the outcome. I also want to position them were there are more in front of the base and also more in the back of the base. I have taken a picture of his illustration for the TFS so you can get a better idea of all the neat little parts that come with it and how to put it together to start with. You have the slider which is a Teflon piece that maintains the integrity while sliding on the TF shaft . You have the M Foam which are the memory foam parts. You have some solid which sit behind the TF shaft and you have some with holes in the middle so you can fit it right on the TF shaft. I feel like a kid in a candy store! :tongue: 

Massman. You are right about less torque action with a v-bar. Sometime I will have to go over the history of the v-bar and why Earl developed it and how it has evolved. :wink:


----------



## Rick McKinney

I shot some on Saturday and was pleased with the shooting. I was averaging about 28.5 per end. I played with a fairly sharp angle with some 1.75" spin wings and found them to work pretty well. When I shot a bad shot though I rippled the fletch which would bother me. However, it did not seem to bother the score any. The bow works. I want to play with brace height once I build a new string.


----------



## Apecs73

Hello Rick, I have shot my second tournament with the Apecs riser yesterday and ended up in first place with a 567. The feeling of the riser is absolutely great. I am looking forward to my new limbs. I am going to get the Apecs prime limbs in the next weeks. My archery dealer did not have the right length/weight combination for me yet, so I am still shooting with my 10 year old PSE-limbs.

I have tested the TFS-damper in practice in several combinations of weight and foam rings. The best set up for me is the standard (2 foam rings and all 3 weights). Although I don't think that the construction of the TFS is a real revolution I was quite surprised, how different the reaction of the bow is, if you change something. I believe, that the real revolution is the position of the TFS-damper on the riser. This positioning makes it work really good and sensitive to any adjustments.

Working with the TFS is real fun, to say it in your words: Feel like a kid in a candy shop. I couldn't say it better...


----------



## Rick McKinney

Apecs73 said:


> Hello Rick, I have shot my second tournament with the Apecs riser yesterday and ended up in first place with a 567. The feeling of the riser is absolutely great. I am looking forward to my new limbs. I am going to get the Apecs prime limbs in the next weeks. My archery dealer did not have the right length/weight combination for me yet, so I am still shooting with my 10 year old PSE-limbs.
> 
> I have tested the TFS-damper in practice in several combinations of weight and foam rings. The best set up for me is the standard (2 foam rings and all 3 weights). Although I don't think that the construction of the TFS is a real revolution I was quite surprised, how different the reaction of the bow is, if you change something. I believe, that the real revolution is the position of the TFS-damper on the riser. This positioning makes it work really good and sensitive to any adjustments.
> 
> Working with the TFS is real fun, to say it in your words: Feel like a kid in a candy shop. I couldn't say it better...



Congratulations Apecs73. It's nice to see improvement no matter what the reason! 


I think that you have part of it correct. The location of the TFS does make a big difference and I believe Mr. Park did a great job at figuring out the correct location. However, I am fairly sure there has never been a device that moved just in and out before. Most “compensators” moved up, down, right, left and hardly ever moving in and out. With the special Teflon washers in the TFS it is virtually impossible for the weights to move anyway except in and out (due to the special foam used) which is the reason for less torque. It’s a great innovative design. 

What I find interesting is that Win&Win is moving toward new innovative ideas and designs while some companies are trying to go back to square one and start from what they had 20 years ago. One company had designed new products for the last several years but the archers continue using the older designs. Another company continues to claim innovation and yet comes out with the same technology they always have (a little smoke and mirrors). There is no doubt in my mind that Win&Win are the current recurve technology leaders in the world.


----------



## Apecs73

Hi Rick, thanks for the gratulations. It's not only been the bow. I took my part in it too :tongue:

There has been a damper that was designed to move in and out. I think it was only available in germany and was called "AMBO Prellschockdaempfer". It was mounted in the front bushing of the bow and replaced the extender for the v-bar. It worked like a damper in a car. As far as I remember was it in fact working with an oil-filling.

The device worked well in so far, that the bow was really quiet without any great vibration after the shot. The problem was: The device really worked only when the arrow was already gone.

And I must admit: This is really an improvement of the TFS-system. I saw it working in high speed films when Mr. Park was in germany for the presentation of the Apecs riser. I don't know, if it helps me personally to improve my scores, but I tend to believe it. I really made some ugly shots in the last time, that still hit the yellow. Was it just luck or the bow? Well, I like to put it on the bow...


----------



## Seattlepop

It is an interesting innovation, no question. I have to wonder if we may see new definitions added to the rules regarding moving parts on a riser. The way this has been described, it may not fit the definition of being attached to the riser since it moves independent of it. Could it also assist direction of string travel? 

How about a built-in gyroscope that you initiate with a string (like a lawn mower w/ string clutch) as you draw the bow. Should I apply for a patent? 

Where, exactly, should the line be drawn?


----------



## Warbow

Seattlepop said:


> It is an interesting innovation, no question. I have to wonder if we may see new definitions added to the rules regarding moving parts on a riser. The way this has been described, it may not fit the definition of being attached to the riser since it moves independent of it. Could it also assist direction of string travel?
> 
> How about a built-in gyroscope that you initiate with a string (like a lawn mower w/ string clutch) as you draw the bow. Should I apply for a patent?
> 
> Where, exactly, should the line be drawn?


You are going to need multiple gyros to cover more than one axis of movement, and a free-wheeling clutch arrangement so you can engage the gyros once the bow is on target


----------



## Rick McKinney

Apec73. You are correct about AMBO. I will have to look at it a bit closer if I can find it. I have one somewhere in my tool box…. :wink: And yes, your confidence level might have shot up some as discussed by some of our more illustrative speakers on this thread. 

Seattlepop. Politically you could be right. After all, it isn’t made by the giant of the industry and they have amazing political power to make things become illegal or find some form of fault to eliminate the competition. However, if you look at the simplicity of the device it is amazing that it hasn’t been thought of before. There are virtually no amazing mechanical properties attached to the bow per se. However as for incredible inventions for recurve bows, it might (and I use this term very strongly – might) become one of the greats like carbon & foam limbs, dyneema/fastflite type strings, stabilizers, plungers, sight extensions, TFC’s & Doinkers, take-down riser/limbs, etc. I am sure there are more, but these seem to be major home runs when they came out. 

And by the way, we talked about a gyro system attached to a bow years ago…. So get cracking!  

As far as a line drawn….well, so far there does not appear to be so great of a difference that it is an unfair advantage over the competition, just an advantage….I remember when Easton came out with the first A/C arrows. The US team had them and virtually the rest of the world did not. There was no where in the rules that said it was illegal and a major Canadian Judge and high ranking FITA member insinuated that it was not illegal but questionably unethical for us to use the arrows at the Pan Am Games. We did end up using them and at the 1983 World Championships they were used by the 1st, 2nd & 3rd place men individual division. I would suspect there was an advantage but non-the-less if you did not use it you would not have been able to win…. A very ethical question for those to ponder….Here are some other interesting facts:

John Williams and Doreen Wilber used the very first TD1 winning the Gold at the 1972 Olympics (they were the only ones that had them at the Games).
Pace used the first v-bar at the 1975 World Championships winning the title by 90 points (Rod Baston was the only other person to have them).
Pace used the first carbon limbs at the 1976 Olympic Games winning easily (he was the only one to have them).
I used the first v-bar extender at the 1977 World Championships winning ( I was the only person to have them) 
Vladimir used the Bemans for the first time in 1987 winning the title and the German Team won the Gold using the Beman as well (several archers in Europe had them).
I am sure there are more, but you get the point…..

Silly ones to laugh at: Hans Wright used the peep sight and performed well enough for FITA to make it illegal (this was in the ‘60s) and it is still illegal! 
I used a “Tunnel” sight pin in 1975 and the next year it was illegal. Now why they did this is beyond me since Darrell spanked me by 90 points with his very new v-bar.


----------



## Warbow

Rick McKinney said:


> I used the first v-bar extender at the 1977 World Championships winning ( I was the only person to have them)
> Vladimir used the Bemans for the first time in 1987 winning the title and the German Team won the Gold using the Beman as well (several archers in Europe had them).
> I am sure there are more, but you get the point…..


I'm eagerly awaiting your history of the development of the V-Bar. I'm especially curious as to why the extension rod rather than using a more obtuse v-bar to put the end weights at the same spot/plane. I assume there is good reason for the extension and the Frangilli's are adamant that the extension rod is one of the keys to a proper V-Bar set up.


----------



## Borja1300

Hey Rick!

When you'll post that pics of your new bow as you promises us??

We're waiting!!!

Just joking, take your time master


----------



## Rick McKinney

Borja1300 said:


> Hey Rick!
> 
> When you'll post that pics of your new bow as you promises us??
> 
> We're waiting!!!
> 
> Just joking, take your time master


Ha! If you go to #30 something on this thread you can get it in PDF file. There are three pictures of the bow in different angles so you can see the TFS, the arrow rest, clicker area and a picture of a broader view of the bow.


----------



## Borja1300

Rick McKinney said:


> Ha! If you go to #30 something on this thread you can get it in PDF file. There are three pictures of the bow in different angles so you can see the TFS, the arrow rest, clicker area and a picture of a broader view of the bow.


haha! my ansious became blindness!!

I'll take a look and see what it's going on with that bow.

And, another question Rick. 

My (old shhhhh! :zip father need a new limbs. Something about 36# and he is doubting wich ones. He needs the ones wich let him arrive easily at 90mts but with the less force posible. He is using now and old carbon plus 36#-66" and he is more or less fine but his draw lenght are about 29 so the limbs one of this days...you know haha

Wich of the w&w limbs do you think is softer with more gain in sight marks? inno power? winnex? apecs? apecs prime?


----------



## Apecs73

Is the TFS-System illegal or not...?

Hello all together. When I looked at the discussion above I thought, that there is a wrong impression going around about the TFS-System. If one never had an Apecs riser in his hands yet, he could get the idea, that the TFS is a free floating system. But it is not that way!

I just opened up an old TFC damper to compare it with the TFS. As far as I see it there are these differences:

1 - The TFS uses foam rings to dampen the vibrations, an old TFC has rubber inlays
2 - The TFS is part of the riser, a TFC is mountet in a bushing of a riser or v-bar (but I think I can remember some riser with integratet TFC's as well, am I right there?)
3 - The weights are mounted directly at the TFS-system, while a TFC normally was added with a stabilizer

I think, a TFC could work in a comparable way, if it was equipped with foam inlays instead of rubber and if it was mounted in the same position as the TFS.

From that point of view, the TFS is not very different from the old TFC's. This supports my idea, that the greatest innovation of the TFS is the positioning on the riser. I am sure, that in short time there will be other risers on the market with a comparable system or a bushing in the same position where you can put an external damper on.


----------



## Rick McKinney

Apecs73. I seriously doubt that the riser would be considered illegal. Yamaha had built-in TFC’s in the mid to late 70’s in all their bows. The only division that this was illegal was the barebow division due to it being considered extra weights (no weights were allowed in this division in the 70’s). I would imagine that Mr. Park has talked with FITA about this in order to be in compliance with FITA rules. After all, he is a good sponsor with FITA. 

I found my AMBO SHOCK-EX (Prellschockdampfer). Now I will have to play with it again but I agree that it would take time for it to move and it would be after the arrow has left. Since the TFS is right near the center of riser flex it should react during the shot. Also, I think the over all weight of the AMBO device was an issue. If you get a chance to talk with Fritz Haufman (sp?) who designed it he might be able to give us a better explanation on it. I think he was living near Duisburg when I talked with him (Amerika Bogen). I remember him telling me that the recurve bow generated near 70 g's of force. It was an interesting number to say the least. It was promoted as a shock absorber more so than anything else.

Borja1300. I am not familiar enough with the Apecs limbs to make a definitive statement on those. However, with my limited experience between the INNO limb and WinEx limb, I feel that the WinEx limbs should work great for your father. Obviously if he uses a light arrow (subliminal hint) it will make it very easy to get the 90 meter distance.


----------



## Borja1300

Thanks Rick.

He's using ACE so, should be no problem with the arrow.

Regards


----------



## mbu

It looks like Rick's "subliminal hint" did not work: McKinney II arrows are usually lighter than ACE.:wink::wink::wink:


----------



## Borja1300

what? I don't see anything...


----------



## Rick McKinney

:set1_STOOGE2:


Borja1300 said:


> what? I don't see anything...


Wise guy, hey? :set1_STOOGE2:


----------



## Apecs73

Hello Rick,

yea, now I can remember. It was the Yamaha YTSL II with the built in TFC's.
My first coach had one of them. And as far as I remember, you had one as well, right? Saw a picture of you in a book from Gerhard Gabriel (german coach).

By the way, don't you have enough to do with the new riser, or why do you want to play around with that old shock-ex? :wink:


----------



## Seattlepop

Apecs73 said:


> Is the TFS-System illegal or not...?
> 
> Hello all together. When I looked at the discussion above I thought, that there is a wrong impression going around about the TFS-System. If one never had an Apecs riser in his hands yet, he could get the idea, that the TFS is a free floating system. But it is not that way!
> 
> I just opened up an old TFC damper to compare it with the TFS. As far as I see it there are these differences:
> 
> 1 - The TFS uses foam rings to dampen the vibrations, an old TFC has rubber inlays
> 2 - The TFS is part of the riser, a TFC is mountet in a bushing of a riser or v-bar (but I think I can remember some riser with integratet TFC's as well, am I right there?)
> 3 - The weights are mounted directly at the TFS-system, while a TFC normally was added with a stabilizer
> 
> I think, a TFC could work in a comparable way, if it was equipped with foam inlays instead of rubber and if it was mounted in the same position as the TFS.
> 
> From that point of view, the TFS is not very different from the old TFC's. This supports my idea, that the greatest innovation of the TFS is the positioning on the riser. I am sure, that in short time there will be other risers on the market with a comparable system or a bushing in the same position where you can put an external damper on.


I'm mostly curious about the moving parts question. I think your comparison only relates to the vibration-dampener characteristics of the units. 

The TFS uses a moving part as a motion-dampener which is where I see the birth of the "arms race" of archery. It may serve techno-philes but I'm not sure it does anything for the sport of archery.


----------



## Rick McKinney

Seattlepop said:


> ... It may serve techno-philes but I'm not sure it does anything for the sport of archery.


Seattlepop. I think you want time to stand still. This device is just another item that helps archers raise their scores, giving them more consistency. Eventually all bows may incorporate it so that there is no real advantage. Sort of like using spectra string material (dyneema/fastflight). These items raise the bar for consistency but recurve archery is a far cry from 1440.


----------



## Seattlepop

Rick McKinney said:


> Seattlepop. I think you want time to stand still. This device is just another item that helps archers raise their scores, giving them more consistency. Eventually all bows may incorporate it so that there is no real advantage. Sort of like using spectra string material (dyneema/fastflight). These items raise the bar for consistency but recurve archery is a far cry from 1440.


Don't know about time standing still, but I don't want MLB to ever give up wooden bats! 

I guess I'll just have to disagree with everyone on this one. Changing string material doesn't change the basic design or function of the string, changing limb material from wood core to foam doesn't change the basic design or function, changing riser material from metal to carbon doesn't change the basic design or function. But, adding a moving part to a riser does change its basic design and definitely changes the way it functions. 

Sure wish I had a patent on the new Gyro-bow coming out next year!


----------



## Rick McKinney

Seattlepop. I can see your point, but we both are on the far side of the spectrum here. The string material virtually eliminated stretch inconsistencies even during shooting. It definitely increased scores. Not only was it more consistent than Dacron it generated more speed. If you compare it to Kevlar string, spectra lasted far greater than the 1000 shots Kevlar provided. The carbon/foam limb eliminated inconsistencies in temperature and humidity changes during a tournament. This could have been due to the glues used as well, but definitely some dramatic changes in scores did occur. You did not have to keep moving your sight down every end in order to keep up with the rapidly declining performance of the standard setup. Also you had to keep an eye on your limbs due to twisting. Carbon eliminated this. These two items I personally experienced first hand. The same goes with adding a stabilizer to the bow. Even the simplest item such as a clicker increased scores to a much higher level of shooting performance. Each of the items made it a bit easier for the archer to shoot a higher score. However, when all archers have the same item on their bow or a part of their bow, there is no advantage. It just allows all of the archers a bit more consistency and a little higher score. Where does it end? Hard to say, but for the mean time, the TFS is just another little step to better performance.  Oh…did I forget to mention carbon arrows over aluminum? Or aluminum over wood? :wink:


----------



## Vittorio

Apecs73 said:


> ...From that point of view, the TFS is not very different from the old TFC's. This supports my idea, that the greatest innovation of the TFS is the positioning on the riser. I am sure, that in short time there will be other risers on the market with a comparable system or a bushing in the same position where you can put an external damper on.


I 100% agree that the innovation is in the position of the TFS system, not in its construction. 
Basically, a TFC is exactly the same in construction, and when mounted on the long rod, has a very similar function for compensating torque at the release. 
But TFS is designed to have its weight (slightly) moving in and out at the realease on the direction of the shot, also. By this way, it simulates the effect obtained in the past by mercury filled llong rod weights. Inside these weights, the mercury was moving along the axis of the shot during release, first in and then out, helping dinamic torsional stability. Michele has used Mercury stabilizers for many many years and their way of working and reacting was really similar.
By present Fita rules, TFS is just another stabilizer attached to the riser by a rubber support.

Back to limbs, Michele is presently directly comparing Apecs Prime and N Apecs limbs, and he says that at his draw lenght, feeling and stacking are very similar. Reaction seems faster with the n-Apecs but vibration dumping seems faster on the Apecs Prime. He has even shot some arrows mixing the limbs, with no significant difference on grouping . More tests are needed to really comment about differencies.


----------



## Apecs73

Hello Vittorio, I am really looking forward to the results of Michele's limb testings. Especially because Mr. Park said that he would prefer the Apecs prime limbs.

He said, that these limbs would give the archer a better feeling while the n-Apecs are a little bit faster. Because of his statements I have ordered Apecs prime limbs for me.


----------



## TheShadowEnigma

The grip looks a little awkward, having the hole for the fingers to go through instead of it being open. Not having shot it or seen it in person, so I'm only going on what the pictures look like, but that seems like that might bother me. Anyone who has shot it have an issue with where the grip is?


----------



## Apecs73

The grip is no problem at all. I have been shooting the bow for about 3 weeks now and it is absolutely normal to use like any other bow.

The STB-bridge is far enough away from the fingers, so you won't get in touch with it with your bowhand. :thumbs_up


----------



## OutPerformed

The two leading brands are going opposite directions with riser design.

W&W is focusing on extra stiff risers and Hoyt is going back to more flexible ones.

The reaction of the bow will be very different? Comments?



Rick McKinney said:


> Essentially, the weight that is in the middle of the riser just near your index finger will be very active when you release the string. As you draw the bow back, the riser bends ever so much. As you release the string, the bend of the riser straightens out and actually the grip presses more into your hand while the limb pockets move away from you. Remember this is very minute so you will not see it nor will people feel it since there is so much dynamic movement happening all at one time. What this little weight device does is move in the opposite direction of the riser and so you get the riser moving in one plane, back and forth, thus cutting back the torque from your release or your bow hand tension. It is very hard for the bow to move in two different planes at one time, especially if the movement in one plane is so dominate which this appears to be the case.


----------



## Rick McKinney

I think you are misunderstanding why we have stiff versus soft. Both companies are using different materials to promote. One is using all carbon with an amazing framing system and carbon is fast becoming a more viable product while aluminum is being used by the other company where they probably feel more comfortable in using this material. It is not as drastic but it is similar to comparing aluminum arrows to carbon arrows…. :zip:

I feel that Win&Win is advancing forward due to their understanding of the dynamics of a recurve bow. That is Mr. Park’s passion and his company philosophy is based around recurve archery development (for now….). Plus he has a haven of incredible archers to help him work on R&D. He has taken the road for advanced composite development and as you can see his all carbon risers are strong, durable and very accurate. There is no question it is the future. 

The other company appears to be struggling to re-new their presence in the recurve world. Most of their recurve designs after Earl left have been decent but not earth shattering. There were a lot of Europeans who liked the stiffness of the Radian. The disaster of the Avalon, although it was a good shooting bow, had to be redesigned so it wouldn’t break or crack so easily. Then they started playing with different angles, flexes, weights, etc with their other risers and really couldn’t figure out the right chemistry for the archers. So, they went back to the basics of their most successful bow ever, the GM developed by Earl himself. The GM and Avalon were similar in design (angles and things) and now the gmx. It will be interesting to see how this plays out. 

Now, having said all of this, one company focuses on recurve archery 100% thus they are a lot more motivated to continue their development in this area while the other company probably makes 5-10% of their line in recurves (this is just a guess on my part since I have not paid attention to them in years). Their focus is on the high end compound line where they compete against Mathews, Bow Tech, PSE, Martin, Bear and many others. Thus their resources are spread a bit thin and their efforts show this.


----------



## jmvargas

excellent analysis rick!.......and i completely agree....i would venture an analogy---ie--- "beware of the archer who has only one bow!"......hoyt has become a very minor player in the recurve arena for many years now....i, too, have totally disregarded their recurve line for the past 3-4 years.....pity..i started using all hoyt....PS..their decreased popularity was never so glaring as in beijing!!......


----------



## triode

I found an interesting review. Photos, some test data and also a draw force curve of the Prime limbs! :tongue:

bowreports.com/recurve-bows/win-apecs/apecs.htm


----------



## comp1

I love my New Apecs. It is vastly superior to all my Hoyts. I just cannot believe the difference. 
This has to be a huge hit on Hoyts reputation.

:jazzmatazzes:


----------



## TGStan

My Apecs Prime limbs arrived today - sadly the riser won't be here for a week or more.


----------



## Apecs73

TGStan said:


> My Apecs Prime limbs arrived today - sadly the riser won't be here for a week or more.


Hello TGStan,

I am really interested about your experiences with the prime limbs. I have already ordered mine, but didn't get them yet. Seems to be a little bit difficult here in germany. Most of the archery shops here only offer the n-apecs limbs. So I had to order the prime limbs and now I am waiting for them...

I suspect, that the dealers have problems to sell high end limbs if they are built with a wood core. Many german archers seem to think "If it is not completely made of plastic, than it is old fashioned and not up to date."

Well, some day I will get my new limbs (...hopefully...) ukey:


----------



## Vittorio

European Importers (3 companies) are deciding what is sold in Europe, not manufacturers. So, just aselection of the manufacturer's products can be easily bought in Europe.
This is the reason for instance why Samick Master limbs (wood core, widely used by the Korean national team members) are not imported and so not available in Europe since years... 

Same problem with new Apecs Prime limbs ... importers have decided to import n-Apecs models only, at the beginning, having no intention to sell wood core limbs anymore. So, no Apecs Prime limbs around by now...
Unfortunately for them, direct opinion from W&W that Apecs Prime are in many cases better than n-Apecs has spread around very rapidly, and now importers, under pressure from dealers, are trying to get them to the market. It also seems that Samick Master limbs will be imported again, following the market trend that is now going to back to wood core ...


----------



## Apecs73

Vittorio,

thank you very much for the view into the european archery market. Very interesting to know whats going on in the background.


----------



## styric69

After reading all your feedback on the new win&win riser, I have just ordered mine last week...hope to get it soon...lol


----------



## jmvargas

vittorio...when you say europe i presume you are not including the UK....AFAIK altservices has been able to offer the samick masters carbon/wood limbs since they became available...as a matter of fact they are now offering limited weights on sale of the exact same limbs marco galliazo used to win the gold medal in athens.....the apecs prime and nano prime limbs are also now being offered in their catalogue....


----------



## TGStan

My Apecs Prime came from AltServices - took a week or so to the east coast of USA.


----------



## Rick McKinney

Just a quick note. First I have not been able to shoot any so I have not been able to give you any more information about the bow personally. Work.... I have sent an E-mail to Mr. Park to find out his opinion of the wood/carbon versus foam/carbon limbs. It should be interesting.... 
Second, I received an e-mail from a friend who has shot 1300+ this last fall using the Inno setup and he is testing the Apecs. Here is his comment:

"Just wanted to mention that I shot the new riser tonight. **** **** put it together with my limbs and string and stabs and his sight, plunger, rest and clicker. totally untuned, bad brace ht, poorly stabilized and man! that bow has serious potential. I shot a 290 with it just like that. on a 3 spot. (296 with my white inno!) the hardest thing to adjust to was putting my sling through the front of the riser. **** also had some of the new carbon foam limbs and they were very very smooth. same weight as mine but mediums instead of my longs, and they were much smoother. nothing like the INNO limbs."

I am feeling the same when it comes to smooth draw. This guy has about a 30" draw like me and we both felt that the limbs were really smooth and felt no stacking. I have got to shoot a little more before my muscles turn to mush!


----------



## comp1

???


----------



## Xander

*Mine TF Apecs is there!*

I just received mine Apecs last tuesday, did all the basic setup wednesday night, and shot it yesterday for the first time.

So far I'm quite satisfied with the whole package. I've been shooting W&W since 2005, started with an ExpertNX + Winex, then went to the InnoCarbon + InnoPower limbs, and now the TF Apecs with N-apecs limbs. 

I've been thinking a while before ordering the limbs between the prime or the n-apecs limbs. Reason for me to go for the n-apecs version, is the carbon foam combination. Foam has less problems in different weather conditions. In 2004 I had mine Samick Master limbs break during a very hot tournament (World Fita Field in Croatia). Since then I've been shooting carbon foam.

On the other hand W&W stated that the foam version should be a bit quicker. I shoot 95% fita field tournaments, where I can use all the speed on the unmarked round ;-).

Setting up the bow asked some time (I like to check everything), but was quite easy. Like Rick stated, the factory settings are almost good enough just to put it together blindly and start shooting. 

First the limbs. Mine old innopower limbs (68-40) measured 45,4 in mine inno. The n-apecs (also 68-40) measured 45,2 in mine inno. In mine inno I shoot mine innopower limbs with 3mm tillering. Then n-apecs measured exactly the same tillering when installed on the inno handle. W&W left the tower principle the same for the n-apecs limbs. The yellow/white/black coloring from the foam of the innopower limbs, is in the n-apecs limbs just black and white. The graphics are really nice. The piano black base color together with the molucalor print is really nice.


Then the riser. The front bridge is in real not as ugly as it looks on the pics. I almost start to like it ;-). I have to get used to it a bit, because it's quite in the way when I put down mine bow in mine field stand. I've placed some pics where you can see some details of the handle. 

In the limb pockets, there are smal plates of metal glued to the area where the limb rest on the riser. On a friends advice I taped them, so I won't bump them of the riser sticking a limb into it. Then the TFS, you get a full bag of smal foam rings for tuning it. I took it apart to see how it worked. In side the riser there is axle with a stiff plastic ring where on top the foam part goes. The connect is to the riser you screw the head cap to the riser to set the axle in place. On this axle you can place 1-3 weights. I started to shoot with 2, and will do some tuning later.

Setting the bow up took some time, but it was worth the wait. After aligning the limbs, the looked perfect, but after setting up mine stabs, from the back mine front stab was a bit to the left. After tuning it only half a turn, the limbs where perfectly aligned with the handel. Tiller came out on 0, moved it up a bit to 3mm, and afterwards placed all the bits and pieces, like stabs, button, rest, sight (yes shibuya is up side down, but is was a cheap 2nd handed buy;-)).

Then shooting: the bow has a really nice forward reaction. I raised mine tillering to 4mm, and removed a weight from mine front stab, to compesate the weight of the tfs. After the changes the bow now went really nice out of mine hand.

The feel of the limbs is nice. In the clicker zone it's quite a constant feel. On a pic taking by a friend of mine, the bend area of the limbs seems higher than on other limbs. About speed I can't really say anything. The feel is good, but I don't have an chrono to check it.

I only did some paper tuning, but mine arrows grouped quite nicely. After a couple of rounds I even managed a nice 60 on 18m 40cm face.

I will post more feedback after I shot the bow outdoors, to see how it performs there


----------



## Xander

more pics:


----------



## Vittorio

Xander said:


> ....
> In the limb pockets, there are smal plates of metal glued to the area where the limb rest on the riser. On a friends advice I taped them, so I won't bump them of the riser sticking a limb into it. ....


The small plates are positioned by W&W at the end of the production in order to make the planes of the limbs perfectly perpendicular to the direction of shooting and so eliminating any possible minimal twisting coming from the production of the riser or from its painting. It is the most important improvement in precision on the INNO Carbom riser, in my opinion.
On the INNO, the thickness of the painting in that area sometime nees to be filed to get a perfect alignemnt of the limbs. On TF apecs, this probelm is fixed at factory level. 
Then, they give a better and more stable plane for the limbs to work .
I would not reccomand to alter the factory adjustment by adding tape on it, as it just get everything back to the probelm of the (soft) painting htickness on the INNO.


----------



## halfphaze

Wow..

The TF Apecs riser sure does look great in use. :drool:
I'm tempted to buy one. But i just got an Innocarbon riser only last year.
The most likely thing i would get are the limbs from this new line.
Looking to the APECS prime limbs for a change..


----------



## Lindy

Thanks Xander for the great pictures and critique.

Very nice!!


----------



## omega_archer

The look does kind of grow on you. I might consider one if I decide to upgrade. Thanks for the info.


----------



## Archer 4 Life

I was able to shoot the n-Apecs yesterday evening after the State Indoor FITA in Texas, and I have to say, these are possibly the smoothest limbs I've ever shot. I've already ordered a set


----------



## Xander

Vittorio said:


> The small plates are positioned by W&W at the end of the production in order to make the planes of the limbs perfectly perpendicular to the direction of shooting and so eliminating any possible minimal twisting coming from the production of the riser or from its painting. ....
> I would not reccomand to alter the factory adjustment by adding tape on it, as it just get everything back to the probelm of the (soft) painting htickness on the INNO.


Vittorio, I agree that this is a big difference to the innobow.

The reason I added the tape, was a friend of mine (employee at an archery distibutor). He told me that they received one tf apecs back where accidently the tiny metal plate was bounced of the riser. Cause their quite small, I don't want to risk losing them.... I can't see why the tape would interfear. I used electrical wire tape, which works ok.

What are your preferences so far on the TFS, I use the standard suplied foam pieces and two weights. Haven't had time tuning it any further... Mayby this week


----------



## gig'em 99

Xander,

Just wondering where you purchased your TF Apecs from? Lancaster, Altservices, other?

I was looking at Altservices, and noticed that the riser cost went down $20...I'm assuming due to varying exchange rates. Anyway, I'm planning on the TF Apecs being my next major archery purchase, and right now Altsevices is almost $100 cheaper than Lancaster...I'm sure that shipping and any taxes would still be less that LAS...

Thoughts?

Gig'em


----------



## R2X

Gig'em 99

I noticed the price drop on the Altservices site as well. I'm also interested in the TF Apecs but unsure about the taxes an related costs for shipping to Canada as I've not purcahsed from them before. Any thoughts?

Thanks,
R2X


----------



## gig'em 99

R2X said:


> Gig'em 99
> 
> I noticed the price drop on the Altservices site as well. I'm also interested in the TF Apecs but unsure about the taxes an related costs for shipping to Canada as I've not purcahsed from them before. Any thoughts?
> 
> Thanks,
> R2X


Anyone from US or Canada purchased from Altservices? Can you all let us know about the shipping and tax? I've heard shipping is reasonable, but I'm not sure if they tax overseas sales...

Let us know!

Gig'em


----------



## Jason22

gig'em 99 said:


> Anyone from US or Canada purchased from Altservices? Can you all let us know about the shipping and tax? I've heard shipping is reasonable, but I'm not sure if they tax overseas sales...
> 
> Let us know!
> 
> Gig'em


No tax to USA, but you should make sure they have all items in order in stock. I waited over 4 weeks to get an item, not knowing that some of the order was not in stock when I ordered it. They kept saying it would arrive any day or in 3 days, etc. but kept saying it until I finally got it over 1 month later.

I always check a local shop or K1-archery.com first, then if not available Lancaster or Altservices. K1 is frequently cheaper on many items and Fred ships FAST.


----------



## Xander

gig'em 99 said:


> Xander,
> 
> Just wondering where you purchased your TF Apecs from? Lancaster, Altservices, other?
> 
> .....
> 
> Gig'em


I've ordered mine apecs through Van Dorst Archery, in the south of Holland (but they ship around the world ;-). They can deliver all main brands (Hoyt/W&W/Samick/etc) They have a internet shop at www.europearchery.com, have fun !!!

Grtz Xander

PS the site doesn't have the tf apecs yet, but an short email and they will help you perfectly!


----------



## Miltiadis

*best price*

Best price for new Win Bow 
at : www arcieria.arcoefrecce.it


----------



## R2X

Vittorio said:


> The small plates are positioned by W&W at the end of the production in order to make the planes of the limbs perfectly perpendicular to the direction of shooting and so eliminating any possible minimal twisting coming from the production of the riser or from its painting. It is the most important improvement in precision on the INNO Carbom riser, in my opinion.
> On the INNO, the thickness of the painting in that area sometime nees to be filed to get a perfect alignemnt of the limbs. On TF apecs, this probelm is fixed at factory level.
> Then, they give a better and more stable plane for the limbs to work .
> I would not reccomand to alter the factory adjustment by adding tape on it, as it just get everything back to the probelm of the (soft) painting htickness on the INNO.


Hello Vittorio,

Are these metal plates a recent Win&Win addition to the TF Apecs riser? I did not see these plates in the photos from a review (bowreports.com) of this riser or from Win&Win sources. Do you know if these plates are attached to the paint finish or to the carbon surface at the factory?

Thanks,
R2X


----------



## mjbs

*How to repair if the metal piece dropped off from the limb pocket*

Hi guys

Happens if your metal piece dropped off like mine. Here is how to repair it...


----------



## BLACK WOLF

Has anyone done any side by side testing of the N-Apec limbs and the Apec Prime limbs...such as speed, torsional stability, plotting force draw curves and sound (for those of us they may want to use them on our hunting rigs)?

Ray


----------



## xcaskah2x

Warbow said:


> Don't a couple of top shooters use a single stab in front and a back weight? Is that configuration inherently unstable?


butch johnson shoots with just a long rod and a back weight. he also shot a 594 at NAA nationals this past weekend


----------



## G4RB4G3M4N

*Long Rods Stabilizers*

Butch wasn't the only one. Joe McGlyn shoots with a long rod and backweight and Guy Gerig shoots with a longrod and a weight in the bottom v-bar bracket (inno riser). Watching those two shoot was great a left-hander with a blue GMX and a right hander with a red Inno (Red vs. Blue!). Jphnson finished with a 1177/1200. His (Johnson's) form was phinominal. Just watching the different idelogies of shooting was amazing. Joe McGlyn was hardly talking at all and had a face like a ghost and Johnson was joking around inbetween ends (everyone was serious on the line). 

Personially I just use a long rod (centralizer).

Equipment dosen matter too much. Guy gave me some great advice;
"What's the point in owining a Ferrari if you can only drive 55". So many people want the best equipment and so fiew can take advantage of it. It was kind of sad, the adult division had about 2-3 GMX risers and the JOAD (kidies) aera had about 7-8 GMX. No one had a TF apecs.


----------



## Xcreekarchery1

Equipment dosen matter too much. Guy gave me some great advice;
"What's the point in owining a Ferrari if you can only drive 55". So many people want the best equipment and so fiew can take advantage of it. It was kind of sad, the adult division had about 2-3 GMX risers and the JOAD (kidies) aera had about 7-8 GMX. No one had a TF apecs.[/QUOTE]

that is a great anology!!! i dont care much about how new or old the equipment is, i use what i think feels best. like in my mind i like the winexes alot better than the innos.


----------



## jmvargas

....and they will have to pry my x-factors from my cold...----....hands!!!


----------



## gpb

After reading rick mckinneys posts here on his expierence with his new apecs and doing some additional research I decided to try one. I've been shooting a matrix for the past 5 years and I wasn't real impressed with hoyts recent handle efforts. Like rick I felt they have been concentrating on compounds to the exclusion of recurves.Before the matrix I had a aerotek. It made my bowarm elbow sore. Before that I had a GM. With the apecs handle I really liked their idea of placing their tf weight on a bridge extended directly in front of the grip, rather than on the upper limb. That seems to make more sense for torque resistance, and indeed upon shooting it I've found it has a very nice forward reaction and no tendency for squirrey sideways reactions like the matrix had a tendency for. I recieved my handle from lancaster last month, set it up with my 45lb hoyt 900cx limbs, and made a half grip for it as I like a high wrist grip and win wins grip is way to low. I've been tuning and trying different configurations(brace hts, stab weights, tf stiffness, nock pt) etc... Its now shooting pretty good, in fact the best set up I've had in a long time. I plan to go to arizona next month and see how I can do in the winds of phoenix with it.


----------



## Buddyrice

*tf aspects orders*

Gpb, how long did it took for you to receive your riser from lancaster?


----------



## gpb

:smile:They had 3 in stock so it only took 3 days. I lucked out:smile:


----------



## anxietyman

*Apecs Limbs on Inno Riser*

I shoot a 25" Inno X-Lite with Long 44# Inno Limbs, which at my 31" draw is a bit much. I'd like to drop down a few pounds and am curious if anyone has tried the foam core Apecs Limbs on an Inno Riser yet. I'm wondering if the new Apecs limbs will be better than the Inno limbs were. Any ideas?


----------



## Oaklandish

anxietyman said:


> I shoot a 25" Inno X-Lite with Long 44# Inno Limbs, which at my 31" draw is a bit much. I'd like to drop down a few pounds and am curious if anyone has tried the foam core Apecs Limbs on an Inno Riser yet. I'm wondering if the new Apecs limbs will be better than the Inno limbs were. Any ideas?


I am currently shooting the nAPEC limbs on a 25" INNO riser. The limbs are marked 38# Longs. I normally shoot the 38# INNO long limbs on this riser. The nAPECS limbs are slightly shorter than the INNO limbs and will most likely require a new, shorter string. They did in my case. My draw is also about 31" and with these limbs I can get them to 46-49# easily on the fingers. I have had minimal time to really shoot them and score with them to tell what the difference is between them and the INNO's, but I can tell you that without a doubt they are smoothest limbs I have ever drawn back. The only smoother set would possibly be the APEC Prime limbs with the wood core. I also drew them back a few times on a friends bow. There is no noticable stacking through the clicker even at my long draw length. The best way to describe the feeling is to say they feel like I am drawing about 5-6 lbs less. But I am tuning the same set of x-10 410's that I was shooting with the INNO limbs. So clearly I am most likely not shooting less weight. They are also extremely quick to stabilize after the shoot and when tuned have a very quick and quiet sound to them. Other than that, the fit and finish of the limbs are typical W&W top quality. If you have the chance to try them out, do it, if you have the chance to get them, they are absolutely worth the price.


----------



## Borja1300

Michelle Frangilli shot with the Inno in the worlds. Does that mean that the TF apecs is not what they really wanted?


----------



## Vittorio

Borja1300 said:


> Michelle Frangilli shot with the Inno in the worlds. Does that mean that the TF apecs is not what they really wanted?


No, simply that TF Apecs + Apecs prime limbs are home, set up for the outdoor already.. :smile:


----------



## Apecs73

Vittorio said:


> No, simply that TF Apecs + Apecs prime limbs are home, set up for the outdoor already.. :smile:


Hello Vittorio,

I would find it interesting to know, what the differences are between Michele's indoor and outdoor setup.


----------



## Vittorio

Apecs73 said:


> Hello Vittorio,
> 
> I would find it interesting to know, what the differences are between Michele's indoor and outdoor setup.


In hte past there was no difference at all, but this time he has used INNO risers, n-apecs and winex limbs and 2213 Platinum arrows for world indoor, while he will probably use TF-apecs, Apecs prime limbs and Nano Pro arrows for the France Grand Prix of mid April. Or, at least, this is waht he was using today in training ...http://www.facebook.com/home.php#/pages/Michele-Frangilli/65466045638?ref=ts


----------



## G4RB4G3M4N

*Switching Bows*

It seems your son, Michele, is continualy swapping equipment. Every other picture of him has him with a different bow. How do you view the continued swapping of equipment between the different bows. Does that have any effect on how he "feels" the bow. 

What advantages do the Platinum arrows hold over the X-7 series, and Nano-pros over X-10's for outdoors. I assume that you two have a few intresting tuning ideas behind this. I've seen from some of your posts that you don't seem to rely on "marketing" and just shoot the most expensive bow of the day, I really respect that how the two of you keep trying (radically) new equipment setups. 

I find it odd that people are making such a big deal of wood being used in high end limbs. Of course they would be high end, look at the samick masters, and SKY limbs in the Olympics.

thanks for the great adivce on your posts


----------



## Vittorio

Sometime things tend to be easier than they look. 
For risers, Michele has changed back from Bernardini to W&W in December, but he only got one TF-Apecs riser and Apecs prime limbs to test in early January, so not enough to prepare for Indoor WC. So, he just went back to old equipments he had (Inno riser and various W&W limbs), and picked up his 2213 indoor he used before in 2001. Simply, combination of limbs and risers and arrows availabel were giving that result... 
As far as outdor is concerned, he already used last year Nano Pro since May, with excellent results, and only used ACE for the world field championships. 
Nano Pro is presently for him the best compromise in weight, precision end size, the first arrow that gives him some small advantage over ACE's , even over ACE's with tungsten points. As well known, Michele has never used X10, as considering them ever too heavy, with too low foc and too much critical to use in comparison to ACE's, even using tungsten points with them. He has used for some time Pro Tour's, for spine reasons, but foc with them was really too low, and they were too muck sensitive to a bad release. Definitely, a shaft for compound only.
So, he is presently using Nano Pro 450 as they have the spine of a 370 Ace or 380 X10, but the weight of an ACE 400, with a size smaller than X10 410. 
In addition to this, a basic set of 12 is much more consistent in dinamic selection than ACE's, it means the selection yield is much better than with any other shaft. To give an example, my daughter, also shooting Nano Pro, has got 22 good well grouping bare shaft over 24 new shaft selected... Totally incredible. 
Easton promised around one year ago to provide "new" X10 with improved spine (stiffer) and reduced weight, but nothing has still been made available to the market, yet. Hope this will happen, but sorry to say that at present my ranking for shafts is 1) nano pro - 2)Ace & McKinney II - 3) medallion XR 
Nano XR are out of the practical use for recurve as too heavy, X10 are surely good arrows, but they are competitive only in specific spine to lenght combinations, otherwise any other shaft will do same or better. 
To give you an example of direct comparison, today outdoor in a windy situation, our Italian Cadet Champion, Luca Maran (silver world medal by team in Turkey JWC 2008, Italian cadet champion with FITA score of 1324), was getting around 80 cm height difference at 70 mt between X10 with 100 gr point and McKinney II with 125 gr point that he usually shoots, not to say that the grouping was much better with the McKinney II, surely because of FOC and speed. 
Just to mention Medallion XR, they are very cheap arrows becoming very popular now in Italy and France, because they are performing at ACE level (while being a little fatter than them), with less then half the price. 
Our Junior Paoletta has shot them in Poland indoor world championship last week getting 568 (with a miss...) in qualification, and the Bronze medal with the team... And he has shot them at >570 level during the entire winter season and at >1300 cadet Fita level last year... 

ohhps... I'm out of topic, I realize...


----------



## Warbow

Vittorio said:


> ohhps... I'm out of topic, I realize...


True, but in a way that is wonderfully informative. Thanks.


----------



## Borja1300

Vittorio said:


> , even over ACE's with tungsten points.
> 
> 
> my ranking for shafts is 1) nano pro - 2)Ace & McKinney II - 3) medallion XR


Where I can get tungsten points for ACE? I think is from other brand, not Eston I mean.

And, what about medallion pro? Is better than the medallion XR o more or less the same?

Thanks


----------



## Vittorio

Ohhp.. I said Medallion XR (second version), but they are Medallion Pro (the third version)
Tungsten points for ACE are not commercially available.


----------



## huffy

Vittorio said:


> ohhps... I'm out of topic, I realize...


Yes , but you can be forgiving when the posting is as interesting and informative as yours. Judging by your posting do you feel that the Nano pro and Medallion arrows are a better product than the Easton X10 and ACEs?

Best wishes, Mark


----------



## Borja1300

huffy said:


> Yes , but you can be forgiving when the posting is as interesting and informative as yours. Judging by your posting do you feel that the Nano pro and Medallion arrows are a better product than the Easton X10 and ACEs?
> 
> Best wishes, Mark





Vittorio said:


> my ranking for shafts is 1) nano pro - 2)Ace & McKinney II - 3) medallion XR .


That's the answer for ACE and if you readed all the post from Vittorio you'll find what he thinks about X10


----------



## triode

Interesting facts about arrows from Vittorio!

There is only one thing that I don't understand



Vittorio said:


> So, he is presently using Nano Pro 450 as they have the spine of a 370 Ace or 380 X10, but the weight of an ACE 400, with a size smaller than X10 410.


According to the easton website the ACE 400 is 7.5 gr/inch, the 370 is 7.9 and Nano Pro 450 8.0.

Anyway the nano pro is an interesting option:darkbeer:


----------



## Vittorio

triode said:


> Interesting facts about arrows from Vittorio!
> 
> There is only one thing that I don't understand
> 
> 
> 
> According to the easton website the ACE 400 is 7.5 gr/inch, the 370 is 7.9 and Nano Pro 450 8.0.
> 
> Anyway the nano pro is an interesting option:darkbeer:


OK, I did not check the official weight charts, so I apologize.
Anyhow, Nano Pro 450 at officially 8.0 gr/inch is 11% better in weight than X10 380 at 8.9, with just a minumum difference to 370 ACE at 7.9, but with a much smaller size.
As far as ACE 400, they compare to Nano Pro 500, so is 7.5 gr/inch to 7.5gr /inch, again with much smaller size.


----------



## Drivingbirdie

Vittorio said:


> OK, I did not check the official weight charts, so I apologize.
> Anyhow, Nano Pro 450 at officially 8.0 gr/inch is 11% better in weight than X10 380 at 8.9, with just a minumum difference to 370 ACE at 7.9, but with a much smaller size.
> As far as ACE 400, they compare to Nano Pro 500, so is 7.5 gr/inch to 7.5gr /inch, again with much smaller size.


I hate to sound 'gay' but I really love your postings here on AT.


----------



## GIGABOW

*Arrows*

Vittorio,

OK - I see your no. 1 - 3 
1) nano pro - 2)Ace & McKinney II - 3) medallion Pro
... but where do you see the MyKineyII arrows ?
Is this your no. 4 ?

.. and why do you prefer ACE for McKinney2 ???


GIGABOW


----------



## halfphaze

I thought this thread was supposed to be about the W&W TF Apecs and its new line of products..


----------



## Warbow

halfphaze said:


> I thought this thread was supposed to be about the W&W TF Apecs and its new line of products..


What, 3+ pages about the TF Apecs weren't enough? Threads are organic, like a conversation.


----------



## Joe T

> Anyhow, Nano Pro 450 at officially 8.0 gr/inch is 11% better in weight than X10 380 at 8.9, with just a minumum difference to 370 ACE at 7.9, but with a much smaller size.
> As far as ACE 400, they compare to Nano Pro 500, so is 7.5 gr/inch to 7.5gr /inch, again with much smaller size.


Vittorio

Still off topic - but as someone who changes his arrow type each Millennium, how useful is multiplying the arrow spine by the grains/inch in determining equivalent arrows?


----------



## Vittorio

Joe T, sorry I don't get the point... equivalent arrow type is given by practical experience rather than matematics... usually. And i have ever quesitoned myself what "gr/inch" measure means for a barrelled shaft... 


Back to topic, W&W has changed some small items of the riser to improve them. Shown during World Indoor in Poland, and already in the new productions.

They are:
- Small plates on side of libs pockets in carbon instead of metal
- new expansion bolts to block the alignemnt screws instead of pass-throught bolts 
- Teflon washers insight the TF with less tolerance to the weight inner shaft.


----------



## jmvargas

GIGABOW said:


> Vittorio,
> 
> OK - I see your no. 1 - 3
> 1) nano pro - 2)Ace & McKinney II - 3) medallion Pro
> ... but where do you see the MyKineyII arrows ?
> Is this your no. 4 ?
> 
> .. and why do you prefer ACE for McKinney2 ???
> 
> 
> GIGABOW


....i think he puts ACE AND mckinney II equally in NO. 2......


----------



## DariusXV

I just recently got the TF Apecs and I have to say I'm impressed.

The craftsmanship is fantastic.

My scores have increased. I'd like to believe that some of it was due to my hard work...but there just might be something to the TF design that works a little mojo. In any case, it can't hurt to have confidence in this riser.

My only complaint so far is that there isn't any documentation on the TF system yet....granted, there are only so many pieces to put together, but I'm not sure if I should superglue the foam on the 3rd or 2nd weight yet.


----------



## Buddyrice

*arrow size*



Rick McKinney said:


> I received my new TF Apecs riser and limbs just before I left for the ATA show. I can’t wait to try them! The looks are great! Like everything else Win&Win makes, the aesthetics is far ahead of the rest. After looking at the TFS, I think I understand the dynamics of what they are trying to accomplish. Years ago, K-Products of Japan made something similar or at least a similar result was accomplished. This part does cut back on torque well and it even allowed me to use a weaker shaft by one size due to the change in dynamics. The problem I ran into back then was the way Mr. Mizuno made the part, it was inconsistent. This new TFS idea looks like it could be more consistent, but only time will tell.


According to what Rick said the part K-products made years ago allowed him to use one size weaker arrows by reducing bow torque. As the TFS is supposed to have the same effect, has anyone seen the same results with the apecs riser? or something close to it?

Thank you


----------



## gpb

Before I got my apecs handle I was shooting a hoyt matrix with 900cx limbs set at 46# at my 31" draw and nano xl 530's. the 530's were marginally overspined with the matrix but shootable. Now with the apecs I had to turn the weight down to 45# to get the spine right. I also have a set of Mckinney ll's size 450 that also were slightly overspined on the matrix but right on for the apecs.


----------



## manga23

I should recive my TF + APECS tonite...
I'm defenetly a novice with more money than common sense 
but....
my DL is 28", I bought 38# limbs and l'm planning to buy Easton ACE...
do i just stick to the table values? (spine 620)or what?
Thanks anyway!


----------



## Vittorio

manga23 said:


> i should recive my tf + apecs tonite...
> I'm defenetly a novice with more money than common sense
> but....
> My dl is 28", i bought 38# limbs and l'm planning to buy easton ace...
> Do i just stick to the table values? (spine 620)or what?
> Thanks anyway!


570


----------



## manga23

Well, Thanx but i did you figure it out?...
you know the story about giving a man a fish or teaching him how to fish...


----------



## manga23

never mind i just checked the table and 570 is actually listed...


----------



## Lindy

Manga23,

If you think the A/C/E 570 is a little too stiff I would suggest you cut the first few shafts a little longer say 28-1/2 or 29 inches. During the tuning process if you find they are weak it is always easy to cut a 1/2 inch off etc. until you get the arrows and bow tuned. 

Start with more weight; 110 grains in the beginning. Generally the arrows fly better in the wind with more weight up front. 


Regards and Good Shooting


----------



## manga23

Lindy said:


> Manga23,
> 
> If you think the A/C/E 570 is a little too stiff I would suggest you cut the first few shafts a little longer say 28-1/2 or 29 inches. During the tuning process if you find they are weak it is always easy to cut a 1/2 inch off etc. until you get the arrows and bow tuned.
> 
> Start with more weight; 110 grains in the beginning. Generally the arrows fly better in the wind with more weight up front.
> 
> 
> Regards and Good Shooting


I was thinking about using 120 grains and i'll defenetly start at 29"... and see from there 
Thanx a lot


----------



## Archer 4 Life

After changing decisions several times back and forth with Primes and N-Apecs and finally ordering a final product, I've recieved the N-Apecs limbs for my Helix riser.

I'm excited to see how they work out :shade:


----------



## manga23

mjbs said:


> Hi guys
> 
> Happens if your metal piece dropped off like mine. Here is how to repair it...


My spacer came off the 2nd time I unmounted the upper limb, neddless to say I'm very disappointed by this accident... and it took me and the fellow archer that help me more than an hour to find it in the grass!...
I really think that the spacer has a reason to be there or it wouldn't be there... so it should not come off that easy.
I do not intend to fix it myself considering the price i paid for this rest!
and hope this will not become a routine...
I've already contacted my "dealer" and I'm waiting to hear from him...
Let's see if costumer care is as good as the riser seems to be...

Too bad i could only shoot about 20 arrows before it came part even if I was very happy with the feeling of the riser and limbs...


----------



## manga23

W&W idea of solving the problem was sending me a repair kit, with instruction to how to fix it myself...
I do not think the solution is acceptable because i did not pay that much money to fix myself the riser , I also belive that doing so i will end up in the "detaching spacer" odessy, I think that if W&W had a working solution for the problem should have fix it before selling it, not after! and I beleve the glue that they would send it's the same they used to begin with, with no warranty of long lasting solution!
I do not intend to use i riser that might come apart at any time.

And that's why I'm getting my money back...


----------



## mjbs

manga23 said:


> W&W idea of solving the problem was sending me a repair kit, with instruction to how to fix it myself...
> I do not think the solution is acceptable because i did not pay that much money to fix myself the riser , I also belive that doing so i will end up in the "detaching spacer" odessy, I think that if W&W had a working solution for the problem should have fix it before selling it, not after! and I beleve the glue that they would send it's the same they used to begin with, with no warranty of long lasting solution!
> I do not intend to use i riser that might come apart at any time.
> 
> And that's why I'm getting my money back...


Yeah, you got your point there. Similar with my Malaysian friend , we too lost the plates after trying to repair it. During the last AGP in Bangkok, we removed all the plates and shot without using the plates at all. Hope W&W will do something about this problems.


----------



## mjbs

manga23 said:


> W&W idea of solving the problem was sending me a repair kit, with instruction to how to fix it myself...


What is inside the repair kit they sent to you? :eyebrows:

Mine just received from my dealer a packet contains of 4 pcs of carbon plates, yeah carbon plates :set1_thinking:. 

I've yet to fix it, not sure when though .. at the moment very :jam: with work schedules ..:set1_violent002:


----------



## Toxothise1440

It's interesting to see in photos from the World Cup that Marco Galiazzo is shooting Hoyt now (!)

It seems it is a Hoyt dominated event- 3 of the 4 men finalists are using it.

And why is Michele not in the event?


----------



## Vittorio

Toxothise1440 said:


> It's interesting to see in photos from the World Cup that Marco Galiazzo is shooting Hoyt now (!)
> 
> It seems it is a Hoyt dominated event- 3 of the 4 men finalists are using it.
> 
> And why is Michele not in the event?


From this year, European Grand Prix circuit is a separate circuit from FITA World cup, were only Antalya will be in common among the two circuits, thta also have close datas and so are difficult to manage with one team only. 
FITARCO is sending full teams to all first events of the two circuit, and because Santo Domingo was so early in the season, has sent there 7 our of the 8 that were at the Olympic games in Beijing, just replacing Elena Perosini (quit shooting for a while) with Jessica Tomasi. 
The first Grand Prix in Riom, France, will take place from April 13 and will see a very new Italian men team with the formerIitalian Junior National team that shot in Turkey YWC last October (Melotto, Mandia & Giori), plus Michele for men , and a very new women team with Filippi (also from the Junior team), Botto, Calloni and Sartori
Then, by the rules, the last archers in Santo Domingo (Di Buo and Tomasi) will be replaced by the top archers in Riom for the team that will go to Croatia WC, while the remining will go to Bulgaria second Grand prix. 
I's first time that Italy has more than 8 men archers >1300 score, and more than 8 women archers >1280, and also the budget to get them shooting all at international level. Of course, the process will leed to the selection of the 3+3 that will go to Korea WC in September.
For sure, other teams are doing the same, as the process to prepare the new teams for London 2012 is started already everywere. And, as travelling within continent of origin is much cheaper than going to the other side of the world, in future we will see less and less competitions with archers from 5 continents all toghether. Asians wil continue to shoot mainly in asian Grand Prix circuit, Europeans in the European Grand prix and so on. 
Riom Grand Prix has at present 18 European countries registered, with full teams from France, Ukraina, Russia, Poland, Great Britain and others...
Also compound team has been duplicated, and we will have different teams in Croatia and Bulgaria ...


----------



## manga23

mjbs said:


> What is inside the repair kit they sent to you? :eyebrows:
> 
> Mine just received from my dealer a packet contains of 4 pcs of carbon plates, yeah carbon plates :set1_thinking:.
> 
> I've yet to fix it, not sure when though .. at the moment very :jam: with work schedules ..:set1_violent002:


I returned the riser and got my money back!
I might consider to buy it again once I'm sure they solved this "bug"!
I would have accepted the rapir kit as a solution only if they promised to exchange the riser once they found a real solution for the problem!


----------



## Jason22

manga23 said:


> I returned the riser and got my money back!
> I might consider to buy it again once I'm sure they solved this "bug"!
> I would have accepted the rapir kit as a solution only if they promised to exchange the riser once they found a real solution for the problem!


Interesting contrast. Samick has new risers and limbs but they have delayed their release to improve quality before releasing to the public instead of rushing it before it is perfected. I prefer that approach rather than the "Here's some glue to fix your $700 riser" approach.


----------



## omega_archer

Assuming Win & Win gets the manufacturing problem worked out with time, is the TF Apecs worth it? Are you guys liking the way it feels and shoots?


----------



## mjbs

omega_archer said:


> Assuming Win & Win gets the manufacturing problem worked out with time, is the TF Apecs worth it? Are you guys liking the way it feels and shoots?


Absolutely bro....no doubt about it. Every equipments have the UPS and DOWN side.... 

TF Apecs & Prime still my no 1 chart. :thumbs_up

:wav:


----------



## omega_archer

mjbs said:


> Absolutely bro....no doubt about it. Every equipments have the UPS and DOWN side....
> 
> TF Apecs & Prime still my no 1 chart. :thumbs_up
> 
> :wav:


Good to hear. What did you notice most when you made the jump? Others please chime in as well.


----------



## WSSelite

Frankly, I think that the decals make it look cooler. all a matter of opinion, though.


----------



## omega_archer

Does anyone know if they have fixed the spacer problem yet?


----------



## shooter10x

*Spacer problem*

If you pruchase the flat black version I don't think you will have a problem. The problem is they glue the metal plates to the riser on top of the clearcoat. Its the clearcoat that lets go. Once the clear is pulled off you can reglue and it should stay. I havn't had any problemswith the flat back.


----------



## Borja1300

Vittorio said:


> Back to topic, W&W has changed some small items of the riser to improve them. Shown during World Indoor in Poland, and already in the new productions.
> 
> They are:
> - Small plates on side of libs pockets in carbon instead of metal
> - new expansion bolts to block the alignemnt screws instead of pass-throught bolts
> - Teflon washers insight the TF with less tolerance to the weight inner shaft.



So, thinking about buying one of this risers, couple of questions coming to my mind.

what's the function of this plates on the pockets?

And

in the reaction in the shoot, this riser is like the helix wich stays in hand or more like nexus wich goes to the target?


----------



## Borja1300

I been reading, and now I know the function of the plates.

By the way, I'm using a extender of 6". To have the same distribution of mass, how long should be the extender? 3"? 4"? 2?


----------



## Rick McKinney

Borja1300 said:


> I been reading, and now I know the function of the plates.
> 
> By the way, I'm using a extender of 6". To have the same distribution of mass, how long should be the extender? 3"? 4"? 2?


I use a 4" Doinker extender and it works great!


----------



## Rick McKinney

Rick McKinney said:


> I use a 4" Doinker extender and it works great!


I forgot to mention I took one weight off the long stabilizer to get a similar balance and reaction to the INNO. Originally I was using three weights at the end, but with just two it feels similar (except a little better...).


----------



## Xander

I use a 5"W&W HMC together with a W&W carbon v-bar, and 12: side rods. The weights of the side rods are about 1/2 inch behind the pivot point of the bow.

Works really well. I'm shooting mine innobow with the same setup, only changed the extender from a 5" to a 6".

Grtz Xander


----------



## Borja1300

Thanks guys.

And about the reaction in the shoot, the bow stays in hand or goes to the target?


----------



## DariusXV

Hey,

Here's a video of the TF in action.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=68nTsja80Yk

I had posted this in another thread regarding form...but if you hadn't seen that perhaps this will give you an idea about the bow's reaction.

Having only shot the Hoyt Helix before...I'd say the bow's reaction is very similar to that...stiff and dead. I've been told that the Nexus has a very different reaction...but I haven't shot one.

If you have access to one, I'd really recommend giving it a spin.


----------



## Edward666_6

R2X said:


> Gig'em 99
> 
> I noticed the price drop on the Altservices site as well. I'm also interested in the TF Apecs but unsure about the taxes an related costs for shipping to Canada as I've not purcahsed from them before. Any thoughts?
> 
> Thanks,
> R2X


I wrote to them, as shipping costs to Mexico are really high, and answered me that I could arrange some other company (like UPS) to pick the riser and bring it here. The shipping for a Seb Flute backpack qot from $200 to $20 with UPS.


----------



## Borja1300

Mine arrived today!

Fantastic riser!

quiet, smoth...

The painting work is excelent! mine is matt black/yellow

Just change the V-bar extender from 6" to 5" and remove one weight from the long stabilizer and works fine!


----------



## recurverules

Hello, i need a new riser, iv done a lot of research on the inno, know a few people with it and was wondering if you think the apecs is really better.


Thanks, i appreciate your responses in advance.



Paul


----------



## recurverules

Oh, i forgot to ask, which limbs should i get with the riser, inno? n apecs? apecs prime?


----------



## Saint555

Here is my archery history: 1982 - 1986:- Yamaha EX with Carbon Limbs; 2009:- Yamaha Eolla with Carbon Ceramic Limbs; Now:- Win & Win Apecs with Prime Limbs. My feedback is this: I shooting well and finally can also have some fun at the same time, so now I am hooked. I have the same color riser as Rick, and loving it. I have the upper tiller measurement 3 mm more than the bottom tiller. Brace height is at 9 1/8" for 70", and I am killing my nocks (with pins) and vanes with the accuracy indoor.


----------



## Saint555

*TFS Weight*



Rick McKinney said:


> I forgot to mention I took one weight off the long stabilizer to get a similar balance and reaction to the INNO. Originally I was using three weights at the end, but with just two it feels similar (except a little better...).


Hi Rick,

I wonder what would happen if I have more than 2 pieces of weight at the TFS. Shouldn't that work even better?


----------



## Rick McKinney

Well, in theory it should work better. If you add weight to the end of the stabilizer, it is more difficult to create toque or it at least slows it down so that the arrow has a chance to leave the arrow rest before it starts to move. However, on the flip side, if the bow is too off balance or too heavy you will have other problems. The smartest way to find out is to try both and see which gives you more consistent results. Either way, it's a great feeling bow!


----------



## GIGABOW

RICK,

I think Saint555 had an other question:

You can use the TF with 1 or 2 or 3 weights.

How many weights do you use - and why not less?

Did you get information from Mr. Park - why W&W makes the new Inno without TF ??


----------



## Rick McKinney

Thanks Gigabow. Sorry Saint555 I just assumed you were wanting to consider increasing the amount of weight. It still comes down to what you feel comfortable with AND what gives you the best performance. Just because one person does well one way does not mean it will work for you. Testing to see what gives you a better performance is still the best solution. I took one weight off because the balance was too front heavy for me. I noticed it when the bow is shot and it is really important to have a bow react in a way that keeps you relaxed without any effort (effortless). I did not get the information from Mr. Park. I just played with it to see what I needed to do to feel comfortable. 

With my discussion with Mr. Park at the ATA show, we did talk about what features he put with the new INNO CXT and why. I told him, personally I liked the APECS system and he agreed it is one of his best bow designs but felt that the archers were the ones who decide what is liked and what is not. Since the bow looked different it has had a hard time being above the INNO line. However, to be fair, the INNO did win the Olympics and that is just about as high a level you can get… IF one top archer ends up shooting the APECS and wins with it, the bow will grow much faster than it is now. However, the INNO design is one of comfort but Mr. Park decided to improve on it with the CXT by making it more torque free with the archers' suggestion. 

The one advantage that Mr. Park has over non-Korean made recurves is that he has 100's of 1350 shooters to tell him what they think. R&D is probably as high a level you could ever ask for in a product (similar to how the US companies were in the 50's-70's).


----------



## GIGABOW

RICK,

I think Saint555 had an other question:

Do you use your Apecs with 1 or 2 or 3 TF (not stabi) weights.
... and why ?

What is the difference - if you use 2 or 3 TF weights !

Thanks !!!


----------



## gpb

Rick; I agree with you the Apecs is a nice handle to shoot but it has a serious achilles heel. I'm referring to the silly little metal shims Mr. Park used to true the riser up. I remember just after the riser came out watching as post after post appeared complaining about these little shims falling off peoples new $700 Apecs handle. And then Win Win's solution was to send a kit of carbon slivers to glue back on. At the time I looked at my shiny new Apecs handle and slowely realized I probably had a marketing dud in my hands. Sure enough the handle has slowly dissappeared from the shooting lines, and sure enough one by one all 4 shims have come off my handle requiring me to carefully prepare and try to epoxy new shims back on with the same tolerences. I haven't been so sucessful achieving the same tolerences, but I did find better glue then they used. Altogether a rather frustrating experence. Now I watch them trot out a new handle that presumable has been tested as you said by many 1350+ shooters and Mr. Park is using the same faulty design to true his handles! I'm sorry but I won't buy another one


----------



## Blacky

gbp,

I asked about the shims at the W&W booth during the ATA show and got the following answer. One of the problems was the glue, not sticking to the finish. The new shims have a little nub (hope that's the right word for it) on the underside, that fits in a recession in the limb pocket. By doing this and different preparation of the pocket surface for glueing, the shims will not come off anymore.

Hope this helps.

Blacky


----------



## Vittorio

Rick McKinney said:


> ....The one advantage that Mr. Park has over non-Korean made recurves is that he has 100's of 1350 shooters to tell him what they think. R&D is probably as high a level you could ever ask for in a product (similar to how the US companies were in the 50's-70's).


Yes, this is the advantage for W&W, and the disadvantage, too... 
Korean archers are dedicated to Olympic style shooting at top level only, so the average solutions they choose and prefer are those selected in their system by their coaches. Nothinhg to do with offering a product to the western amateur archers, were the purchase decisions have many different influencies. Not to mention that by referring to Korean archers only for development means to totally abandon the big European market of Bare Bow shooters to other brands and solutions.


----------



## Sebastiaan

Blacky said:


> gbp,
> 
> I asked about the shims at the W&W booth during the ATA show and got the following answer. One of the problems was the glue, not sticking to the finish. The new shims have a little nub (hope that's the right word for it) on the underside, that fits in a recession in the limb pocket. By doing this and different preparation of the pocket surface for glueing, the shims will not come off anymore.
> 
> Hope this helps.
> 
> Blacky


Hello Blacky,

Yes, my TF Apecs arrived today. I asked my local dealer about the shims. He showed me the "new" construction with the little "nubs" in the pockets. Hope I am lucky.


----------



## gpb

I hope your lucky too Sebastiaan. They may or may not have solved the attachment problem, but they have not addressed the tolerence problem. Check your handle and see if its straight. We are talking only several thousanths of an inch and the handle is off. The glue line on the shim can vary by that much depending how much pressure was applied to it as it cured. My tf apecs was off when I recieved it. The string would always line up diagonally on the limb bolts after centering the limb tips. I had to glue a piece of feeler gauge on top off the low shim to bring the limbs square. Then my LUCK ran out when my fix detached along with the rest of their ridiculous shims, and I had to start the process all over again. The proper fix in my humble opinion, would be to permanently fasten(screw and glue) a larger aluminum plate to the limb pocket and then MACHINE the plate so the riser is square when it leaves the factory and it stays square no matter if its bumped installing or removing limbs. Murphys laws don't respect luck, they only respect good design and then only sometime.


----------



## Rick McKinney

Gigabow…ohhhh….  Now I get it! I use the three of them. I found that three felt better. When I used two or one I did not get the same reaction from the bow that I liked with three. I also played with the many different combinations of the material used to include with the TF weights. I ended up using the softer ones. Again, it was just by feel. 

Vittorio. That is true. However, like most large companies they focus on the majority of sales. Barebow, although may be large in Italy and some parts of Europe, it probably is not large enough for them to focus on at the moment. It is sort of like most US compound companies were not even interested in selling compound bows in Europe until there was a large enough need for them and now there are a lot of different compound bows sold in Europe. I am sure when Win&Win decide to make a barebow style riser, they will talk with the "experts" in Europe.


----------



## limbwalker

QUOTE]Korean archers are dedicated to Olympic style shooting at top level only, so the average solutions they choose and prefer are those selected in their system by their coaches.[/QUOTE]

Which is most likely the explanation for no backweight bushing in any Korean-made riser that I can remember ever seeing. I think that's unfortunate since even archers that use the "Korean approved" standard v-bars, extension and top rod will often add a backweight or damper if the bushing is available.

John.


----------



## Sebastiaan

Have my TF Apecs for a month now. I took it from my local dealer, he centered the string, brace height 23,5 cm and made a quick button adjust, he said; go on shooting now . I've read this thread and I thought when I left the dealer; What have I bought..................  I cannot describe the feeling of the bow, he is silent, drawes smooth (40# at fingers), it is just as if the bow controlles me  I am not a great shooter like many archers on this forum but even a bad shot of mine is often in the gold. I've even split two of my ACE's on 25 m. I hope the riser does not have failures in future as discribed in this thread. So far so good.

Greetz Seb.


----------



## Jin

*heh*

I've only been shooting W&W line risers and limbs, so I can't really compare the TF-Apecs to other risers like helix.

In my short archery career, I've shot WinACT, Pro Accent and the APECs. 
(I know the other two are low-end risers)

If someone wants to send me an INNO riser for free, I'll test it out :mg:

but-

When I first shot it without tuning the bow, I couldn't hear a thing on the release. It's a very quiet riser and I like it.

I also like how it can be made light or heavy by removing the weights on the TFS. (and I like it heavy because it feels more stable after the shot)



One problem is that the metal plates do come off, which can be simply re-attached by superglue or double sided tape (temporarily)

Strangely, I actually like how these things come off because you can see how much of the limbs are scratched off (near the place where the limbs contact the metal plate) and you can file them down to have them balance perfectly.) 

Of course some of you would say "oh datz so unprofesshunal trolllll" but I think its better than shooting without them and it'll at least have a placebo effect. :teeth:

By no means I'm not saying that APECS is the best riser, I'm saying that I favor this riser and to tell you should grab one in a shop and try it out.


----------



## SandSquid

Xcreekarchery1 said:


> ya its cool but its really ugly


Sounds like a girl I dated in high school. :shade:


----------



## mike hogan

i have one coming wednesday,the seller said his have the carbon plates that wont fall off,so my fingers are crossed-mike


----------



## Rick McKinney

I am amazed with this bow. I finally have taken the time to go out and shoot it at long distance (70 meters). I just shot a 327 and was I weak! I ran out of gas after the 3rd end due to virtually no practice for almost a year! 55-53-58-52-56-53.

I cranked the limbs out to 38.6 pounds (you got to love those computerized weight scales). They are marked 40# medium. I was using the McKinney II 650’s. The arrows were 31” from inside throat of the nock to the end of the point. I am using 200 Flex Fletch vanes and I am thrilled at how the setup was working. 

I normally use only Spin Wings but decided to go with Flex Fletch since I do not shoot enough to justify high maintenance Spin Wings. What I noticed right off is the speed drop. However, the performance was exceptional. I even had a 58 with an 8. 

What I noticed more than anything is how the bow reacted. I had hardly any torque while shooting and this is very unusual for me. Also, I noticed that when I shot a substandard shot the arrow still impacted near the 9 ring if not in the 9. I had just two 7’s which I can state that they were due to my fatigue. I think I need to work out a bit more!  I noticed some drift with the arrow, but then I am only shooting 38.6 pounds. Thus that should be expected. 

I was able to get through the clicker with relative ease even when I was getting tired. I just could not complete the shot as well as I wanted (this was mainly the last end). But what impressed me the most was the feel of the entire bow when I shot the arrow. It just jumped out of my hand slightly and did not go right or left. 

Although this bow is last year’s model I can only say that it is one of the finer bows I have shot. There are four other bows that I was as excited about over the years. The Yamaha YTSL, the Yamaha EX, the GM+ and the WinEx. Although the bow looks weird, it sure shoots great for an old guy like me! 

I shot on Saturday just to check for the tune and see how the Flex Fletch vanes would work. I was surprised by how good the groups were. I did not expect that. I was working my way back to 70 meters and I broke the string! I have not broken a string in years and was a little shocked by the reaction and….I did not have a backup. It was a 9 by the way so I was glad to see that it was not anything stupid like a cracked nock or something. I had to go home and make a new string. On Sunday I went back and re-tuned the bow (I did not record the brace height or nocking point so I had to start over in tuning the setup). I was tickled to death that it only took about 25 or so arrows to work my way back to 70 meters using bare shaft and fletched arrows at 20, 30 and 50 meters. 

And one more thing. It sure was fun! 60 degrees, soft breeze and sunny!


----------



## Miltiadis

*right or wrong?*

from yours *Target Arrow Chart *: 38# & 31" = MK 550. 
you are use Mk 650.
please tell us, what is right and what is (if...) wrong!!!

Miltiadis from Greece...


----------



## Rick McKinney

Good question Miltiadis. I have the arrow near the edge of the riser which is about 3” from the center of the first plunger hole. So, in reality I have about a 30.25” draw. The AMO standard is to add 1.75” from the center of the plunger location (which is 26.25”) for the draw length of 28”. So, if you go with the chart on the McKinney II it shows that I need a 600 spined arrow. However, I have always used one size smaller than most charts due to my body alignment (I’m behind line). Thus the chart is correct. 

Don’t forget that each of us has to find our form spine so to speak. Meaning that you should be able to read a chart and know automatically if you normally need one size larger or one size smaller than what the chart says due to your form. The chart can only give you a good start from “normal” parameters. 

The reason I even started with the arrow so long is that you can always cut it off but can never add it on so I kept it long on purpose to see how the bow would tune. I also noticed depending on the type of string material you use will stiffen or weaken the spine of the arrow. Using a 450 type string material weakens the arrow tune compared to 8125 material. Also, the 8125 appears to give you better sight markings. I have not really tested the other string material (BCY) but with using just these two string materials I found that the 8125 gives me what I am looking for. I get a bit stiffer arrow reaction and a faster shot. I noticed just a slight better grouping with the 8125, which is probably the more important part of the test.


----------



## Miltiadis

*thank you!*

thank you Sir! for the very useful informations.
all time I have a look for your threads.

regards
Miltos


----------



## Apecs73

Rick McKinney said:


> Good question Miltiadis. I have the arrow near the edge of the riser which is about 3” from the center of the first plunger hole. So, in reality I have about a 30.25” draw. The AMO standard is to add 1.75” from the center of the plunger location (which is 26.25”) for the draw length of 28”. So, if you go with the chart on the McKinney II it shows that I need a 600 spined arrow. However, I have always used one size smaller than most charts due to my body alignment (I’m behind line). Thus the chart is correct.
> 
> Don’t forget that each of us has to find our form spine so to speak. Meaning that you should be able to read a chart and know automatically if you normally need one size larger or one size smaller than what the chart says due to your form. The chart can only give you a good start from “normal” parameters.
> 
> The reason I even started with the arrow so long is that you can always cut it off but can never add it on so I kept it long on purpose to see how the bow would tune. I also noticed depending on the type of string material you use will stiffen or weaken the spine of the arrow. Using a 450 type string material weakens the arrow tune compared to 8125 material. Also, the 8125 appears to give you better sight markings. I have not really tested the other string material (BCY) but with using just these two string materials I found that the 8125 gives me what I am looking for. I get a bit stiffer arrow reaction and a faster shot. I noticed just a slight better grouping with the 8125, which is probably the more important part of the test.


Hello Rick,

great score. I wish, I could do the same with nearly no practice... :smile:

By the way, did you shoot again with the plunger in the front bushing? I remember that you told me in another thread, that you do this often in order to weaken the arrow.

Another question about that term: My wife's arrows tune too stiff. I want to test the front position of the plunger in the next training session. Would you recommend to also move the arrow rest to the front bushing?

Thanks for any comment.


----------



## GIGABOW

Hello Rick !

Next question :
What is the best distance between plunger and arrow point ?

I can do 1" = 2,54cm until about 2" = 5,08cm

What is the best and what is the difference for shooting ??


----------



## shooter10x

*Distance from the plunger.*

The plunger should contact the arrow right at the center of the node of the arrow. this dictates how much tip is beyond the plunger. It is a little give and take however with length for proper spine.


----------



## Rick McKinney

Apecs73 said:


> Hello Rick,
> By the way, did you shoot again with the plunger in the front bushing?
> Another question about that term: My wife's arrows tune too stiff. I want to test the front position of the plunger in the next training session. Would you recommend to also move the arrow rest to the front bushing?
> Thanks for any comment.


Apecs73. Yes, it would be a good idea so that the arrow, plunger and arrow rest are all at a pivotal point. However, if this is just a quick test I don’t see the need to move the rest. If the arrow tunes well, then go ahead and move the rest to the plunger. Moving the plunger forward weakens the arrow slightly, but what helped me most is that the arrow flex eliminated contact with the plunger and rest compared to using the normal plunger hole. With better clearance I shot better scores. 

Yes, I have the plunger and rest in the front hole towards the clicker.


> Next question :
> What is the best distance between plunger and arrow point ?
> I can do 1" = 2,54cm until about 2" = 5,08cm
> What is the best and what is the difference for shooting ??


Gigabow. Actually you are in the safe zone of what is normally recommended from 1” to 2”. Right now my arrow is 3” and it is working so I am content with the setup. Keep in mind that the tune is the ultimate above anything else. If it requires for you to cut the arrow down to get a better tune then do so. If it requires a longer arrow (like what mine is) keep it long. 



> The plunger should contact the arrow right at the center of the node of the arrow. this dictates how much tip is beyond the plunger. It is a little give and take however with length for proper spine.


Shooter10x. This would be really hard to determine. Actually you want the nodal point to be beyond the plunger as the arrow leaves the rest. This gives you a “theoretically” stable arrow. Obviously, the heavier the point the closer the nodal point will be towards the point, thus you can have the clicker closer to the plunger. I have found that with parallel shafts 1” to 2” is good for most setups. For the barreled shaft I found that I needed a longer arrow. I used to have to get about 1.75” or more to get a similar forgiveness with the shot. However, I have shot over 1340 with the point half way on the plunger and the clicker was actually touching the edge of the rest. 

What this tells me is that if you get a great tune, you will do well, no matter where the nodal point is or the length of the arrow. The most important thing is the tune. It is without a doubt the most forgiving setup you will get.


----------



## Apecs73

Rick McKinney said:


> Apecs73. Yes, it would be a good idea so that the arrow, plunger and arrow rest are all at a pivotal point. However, if this is just a quick test I don’t see the need to move the rest. If the arrow tunes well, then go ahead and move the rest to the plunger. Moving the plunger forward weakens the arrow slightly, but what helped me most is that the arrow flex eliminated contact with the plunger and rest compared to using the normal plunger hole. With better clearance I shot better scores.


Thanks Rick,

we have tested it in the last training session. My wife's arrows now tune perfectly with the bare shafts in the group with the fletched arrows. Grouping is also very good now.

Tell me, if you ever come to germany. I owe you a beer... :beer:


----------



## GIGABOW

... and 2 beers from me !

Lets have a party !

http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/images/smilies/darkbeer.gif


----------



## w8lon

I know this is an old thread to dig up, but just received my new Apecs today:smile:

Pictures of this old riser just don't do justice. The worry of the back of riser brace getting in the way of my enormous 3X Large hands is not an issue either, a plus. Lancaster has one more of these left as old stock at a great price in Lefty Blue. Fit and finish of this riser is impeccable, of course it should have been for the asking price when it come out. After looking the riser over decided to string it up with my new to me Inno Power limbs in Medium 36#. Upon checking brace noted that my string twisted to brace for Hoyt GM4's and my Cartel Midas which share the same geometry, is now 1/2" higher. Definitely has more reflex than the norm, should be more forgiving.Will have to check the limbs on my Midas with the Inno limbs to see if this is a combination of limb profile and riser geometry or both. I seem to be falling within the manuals suggested brace at 23.5cm though.

Nice to see that the bow is also on plane right out of the box. Back to setting everything up and tuning.


----------



## w8lon

Gotta love it when you can eyeball tune a bow, rob a plunger off an another riser and group well bare shaft and fletched so easily. After grouping thirty shafts bare bow I'm liking this kit. Great shot feel, dampening and easy tune, why would they just drop this riser from their line after so much work in design?

I went through this original posting with the downsides of shims falling off and decided to work with the issue. Packaging included the carbon replacement shims with stainless shims glued on the riser already. If they fall off so be it I have glues that will not fail.


----------



## w8lon

This new riser and me just fit together like PBJ. I have had many bows over the years some just fit others you have to get used to or adapt to, some fussier than others while others just fit. Nice to feel the magic again after all those bows. With aching shoulders from many years of construction work an afternoon of shooting the Apecs has caused no pain, TFC working perhaps.

First group at 18mtr with the sight robbed off my other bow. One destroyed pin, spared the shaft by a few thousands.


----------



## rasyad

I shot an TF Apecs for several years and loved it. One bit of warninng, don't over torque the limb adjustment lock as it is possible to break the double sided threaded main tube (right sides). I am still waiting for parts after 6 months. 

Now shooting a 27" W&W Inno Max. 

Enjoy your Apecs.

Rasyad


----------



## w8lon

Thanks for the heads up rasyad, haven't heard the issue stated otherwise on this thread. Well she is kind of a homely girl with a look that grows on you, but homely girls try to please harder:shade: OBTW the GT20's really shoot well, guess I got the last of the .000-.001 in the V3750 size until they can find another manufacturer.


----------

