# weakest side in the arrow



## glücklicher (Aug 23, 2008)

One little trick to find the weakest point in the arrow.
I do that if I build a new set of arrows. So I can be sure this is an arrow like the others.
In the video, I press an arrow on both sides is a point. You will see that the arrow always bends to the same side. To make it look better, I have monted in the middle of the arrow a Vane.
If a nock is already mounted, this trick no longer works.


*A click in the picture will run the video*



Nock is already installed, you still need an additional tool. With this part , the arrow will turn again at his weakest point.

*Only one picture no video*


----------



## straddleridge (Apr 28, 2010)

*weak side*

This looks very interesting. I have a dozen shafts I just bought. I measure all my new shafts including spine of 4 sides. They are Cabella "stalker extreme" shafts made by Easton.

I tried your method on 6 of the shafts and your method agrees with my spine measurements of 4 of the 6 arrows. I will re try the spine measurements on the 2 that are different. Here is a picture of how I tried your method.

View attachment 1123856


I have tried floating the arrows in water but that doesn't work for me. Your method is very easy to do.


----------



## loomis77 (Jan 30, 2011)

Not trying to be a [email protected] @ss here....but to what advantage is this procedure?

The only thing I can think of is so you can orientate this weak point the same on every arrow. Therefor acheiving the same flight for each other. Is this correct?

Leigh.


----------



## straddleridge (Apr 28, 2010)

Weakest side should be highest spine deflection. Idea is to fletch arrow so that odd vane is on strong side and up. You are correct - this should help to make arrows fly the same.


----------



## carbon arrow1 (Jul 9, 2008)

loomis77 said:


> Not trying to be a [email protected] @ss here....but to what advantage is this procedure?
> 
> The only thing I can think of is so you can orientate this weak point the same on every arrow. Therefor acheiving the same flight for each other. Is this correct?
> 
> Leigh.


correct. that is why people often turn the nocks a little while tuning if they can't get an arrow to tune. It may be a good arrow, just needs to be rotated because of this issue.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

So... which side is the weak side? The low or the high?


----------



## straddleridge (Apr 28, 2010)

EPLC:

That is an interesting question. There may not be a straight foreward answer - Glucklicher may be able to answer it. For instance on one arrow I tested the spine measurements were 0 degrees 411, 90 degrees 408, 180 degrees 404, 270 degrees 400. The highest spine deflection occurred at 0 degrees and on that arrow the part that bent outward (down) was at 0 degrees. This happened on 4 of the 6 arrows I tested. It would seem that the opposite sides are involved in bending. I have often wondered when measuring spine on 4 sides why the highest deflection does not always happen on opposite sides i.e. 0 and 180 or 90 and 270. Glucklicher's method may be more accurate and is certainly easier.


----------



## glücklicher (Aug 23, 2008)

straddleridge said:


> EPLC:
> 
> That is an interesting question. There may not be a straight foreward answer - Glucklicher may be able to answer it. For instance on one arrow I tested the spine measurements were 0 degrees 411, 90 degrees 408, 180 degrees 404, 270 degrees 400. The highest spine deflection occurred at 0 degrees and on that arrow the part that bent outward (down) was at 0 degrees. This happened on 4 of the 6 arrows I tested. It would seem that the opposite sides are involved in bending. I have often wondered when measuring spine on 4 sides why the highest deflection does not always happen on opposite sides i.e. 0 and 180 or 90 and 270. Glucklicher's method may be more accurate and is certainly easier.


excuse my bad english . I am a German.
Often have an arrow two soft or hard spots. If you have a tip on both sides from the arrow, they can you rotate him in the taut state. Then you will notice it ,when turning. It is very felt to find the softest side from the arrow.
When a carbon arrow has the hardest body is not the softest spot opposite. Aluminum arrows, however, are production-related material in the spine and more accurate.


----------



## autoguns (Apr 27, 2010)

good info


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

straddleridge said:


> EPLC:
> 
> That is an interesting question. There may not be a straight foreward answer - Glucklicher may be able to answer it. For instance on one arrow I tested the spine measurements were 0 degrees 411, 90 degrees 408, 180 degrees 404, 270 degrees 400. The highest spine deflection occurred at 0 degrees and on that arrow the part that bent outward (down) was at 0 degrees. This happened on 4 of the 6 arrows I tested. It would seem that the opposite sides are involved in bending. I have often wondered when measuring spine on 4 sides why the highest deflection does not always happen on opposite sides i.e. 0 and 180 or 90 and 270. Glucklicher's method may be more accurate and is certainly easier.


Regardless, I think the side I would want my cock vane would be the high side of the bend when using a release. Same for a finger release but I wouldn't turn the nock to get the high side up for fingers. This would have the arrow bend away from the plunger. Of course, bending into the plunger may be better?


----------



## straddleridge (Apr 28, 2010)

I built a Ryobi shooting machine (Beastmaster thread from AT) that will consistantly put the same arrow in the same hole at 20 yards. After using Glucklicher's method on all 12 of my new arrows (10 of the 12 had the outer bend on the high spine[weak] side) I used my shooting machine and shot two groups of 6 bare shafts. Each created a 3 to 4 inch group. I then turned the nocks on the "flyers" from each group so that the weak side from Glucklicher's method pointed towards the direction of the arrow from the center of the group. This created two 6 shot groups of less than 1 inch. I then put 2" fusion vanes on one of the flyers so that the "weak side" still pointed in the direction it flew and it touched the same hole made by a known good fletched arrow.


----------



## GWFH (Jan 22, 2006)

Great idea, but how do you assure the points are running true to the centerline? Any slight offset of the tips could read a false positive.
It would be ideal to have two machine centers (60 deg included) that stayed coaxially fixed to the vice. Then you can place a raw shaft directly to the same setup.

...or have you gotten repeatable enough results that compare to another spine tester?
Very nice. I usually align spine before fletching even though I rely on dynamic tuning (if needed)


----------



## straddleridge (Apr 28, 2010)

I have been thinking about building a jig to make sure the points are aligned. I made a spine tester and had checked the spine on 4 sides of all of the arrows before Glucklicher started this thread. I also had squared the ends of the shafts. I don't think the alignment is that critical. In Glucklicher's video he squeezed the arrow between a table and a wall and it still bent the same way.

A guy from Alaska had a post on here one time where he rolled the arrow on his hand with the tip on a flat surface while it was bent and he could feel the stiff side. I tried that but got inconsistent results.


----------



## OBE (Dec 4, 2009)

A lot of great studies and results posted. Thank you all for sharing this with us. 

straddleridge...please excuse my ignorance on this question (I am still in the beginning stages of trying to grasp the physics and terminology that goes with archery)

Can you please explain this a little more for me? 
_I then turned the nocks on the "flyers" from each group so that the weak side from Glucklicher's method pointed towards the direction of the arrow from the center of the group. This created two 6 shot groups of less than 1 inch. I then put 2" fusion vanes on one of the flyers so that the "weak side" still pointed in the direction it flew and it touched the same hole made by a known good fletched arrow. _

thanks for your help with this.


----------



## straddleridge (Apr 28, 2010)

6 arrows created a group that was about 3 1/2 " in diameter. 3 of the arrows were clustered in the center and 3 more were more than an inch from the 3 clustered arrows. I called them "flyers". I marked all of the arrows weak side per Glucklicher's method. I then rotated the nocks on the 3 "flyers" so that the weak side mark pointed towards where the arrows flew. For instance 1 arrow was 1 1/2 inches right of the group. I rotated this arrow so that the weak side was to the right. Reshot the arrow with my shooting machine and the arrow's impact point moved into the center cluster.

After rotating the nocks this way on all 3 flyers the diameter or the impact points for all 6 arrows was less than 1 inch.

When I test arrows with my shooting machine I use a known good arrow. I shoot this arrow first and last and normally it will hit the same hole or at least be within 1/4". I do not bareshaft tune my arrows so the bareshafts on this test were about 1 1/2" to the right of my known good arrow. I fletched one of the flyers with 2" fusion vanes and reshot the arrow and it touched the hole of my known good arrow.


----------



## OBE (Dec 4, 2009)

Got it. Thanks for the help.



straddleridge said:


> 6 arrows created a group that was about 3 1/2 " in diameter. 3 of the arrows were clustered in the center and 3 more were more than an inch from the 3 clustered arrows. I called them "flyers". I marked all of the arrows weak side per Glucklicher's method. I then rotated the nocks on the 3 "flyers" so that the weak side mark pointed towards where the arrows flew. For instance 1 arrow was 1 1/2 inches right of the group. I rotated this arrow so that the weak side was to the right. Reshot the arrow with my shooting machine and the arrow's impact point moved into the center cluster.
> 
> After rotating the nocks this way on all 3 flyers the diameter or the impact points for all 6 arrows was less than 1 inch.
> 
> When I test arrows with my shooting machine I use a known good arrow. I shoot this arrow first and last and normally it will hit the same hole or at least be within 1/4". I do not bareshaft tune my arrows so the bareshafts on this test were about 1 1/2" to the right of my known good arrow. I fletched one of the flyers with 2" fusion vanes and reshot the arrow and it touched the hole of my known good arrow.


----------



## soonerboy (Sep 6, 2004)

I'm building one tonight.


----------



## straddleridge (Apr 28, 2010)

*weak side tester*

I did build a tester. Picture is attached. With some carbon arrows to get consistently repeatable bends on the same side it is necessary to stand the tester on its end. If it is horizontal the best arrows I have (almost even spine on all four sides) will bend towards the bottom side on two sides that are 180 degrees apart. Apparently this thing is so sensitive the weight of the arrow will cause it to bend down on arrows where the spine nearly even. Standing on end it always bends the same direction.

View attachment 1153795


----------



## soonerboy (Sep 6, 2004)

Gravity would be part of the equation---see it or not.


----------



## luckycharlie (Nov 29, 2010)

This may be an obvious answer, but I just wanted to make sure. I getting ready to build a set of outdoor arrows for my son and I want to confirm before cutting and fletching arrows.

Is it recommended that you try to keep the weak side of the arrow down with a release shooter? 

Thanks for the help.


----------



## straddleridge (Apr 28, 2010)

yes, weak side down for a release shooter is correct.


----------



## fleetmarine (Dec 22, 2009)

Would one expect that the "heavy" side of the arrow is the "strongest" or "stiffest" side?


----------



## straddleridge (Apr 28, 2010)

The arrow will bend towards the weakest side of the arrow. The strongest side is not necessarily opposite the weak side. See Glucklicher's post #8 in this thread. This is particularly true for carbon arrows.


----------



## atjurhs (Oct 19, 2011)

EPLC said:


> Regardless, I think the side I would want my cock vane would be the high side of the bend when using a release. Same for a finger release but I wouldn't turn the nock to get the high side up for fingers. This would have the arrow bend away from the plunger. Of course, bending into the plunger may be better?


How can you get both the high side up and the cock feather mounted to the high side? I've always mount the cock feather perpendicular facing out from the bow, so if I mount the feather on the high side, I would always end up with the high side facing out from the bow.

Todd


----------



## thwackaddict (Sep 1, 2006)

straddleridge said:


> yes, weak side down for a release shooter is correct.


So you want the arrow to bend down and into the rest when it is shot? I would think that having it flex up and away from the rest would be better?


----------



## straddleridge (Apr 28, 2010)

thwackaddict 

After looking at your post - I may be having second thoughts. I am sure I have read in several posts that the strong side should be up, however after thinking about it and looking in some old college physics books I am now not so sure.

It is obvious that the goal is the best grouping and I believe everyone will agree that the strong or weak side of the arrow should be nocked in the same direction.

I am going to try to do a force verctor analysis of the arrow on and leaving the rest. I was convinced that the frictional force would cause the arrow to bend up, but now I am thinking it will bend down. In my case it shouldn't make any difference since I am using a drop away, but it may make a difference on other style rests.


----------



## straddleridge (Apr 28, 2010)

Made my measurements and calculations:

I calculated(with some measurements) that the force required for the arrow to overcome friction against the rest is about 0.07 pounds. The force required to cause this arrow to start to bend is about 26.2 pounds along the axis. 

My conclusions are now that the friction between the rest and the arrow are not significant enough to matter and weak side up is probably the way to go.

Just for the heck of it I am attaching a graph of the results of shooting 3 different arrows in 3 different orientations from my shooter.

View attachment 1306158
Did my analysis

Each color is a different arrow for each shape. The same 3 arrows were used for each orientation. I made my friction measurements on the arrow that is black on the graph. Notice that the weak side up and weak side down groups are nearly identical only about an inch apart vertically. The low spine up is not grouped nearly as well.


----------



## thwackaddict (Sep 1, 2006)

So you should probably fletch them so that they bend up and away from the rest? Is this what you mean by weak side up?

BTW I like your analysis and graph!


----------



## straddleridge (Apr 28, 2010)

I would fletch them so they bend up and away from the rest and that is with the weak side up.


----------



## thwackaddict (Sep 1, 2006)

straddleridge said:


> I would fletch them so they bend up and away from the rest and that is with the weak side up.


Thanks and keep up testing and analysis!


----------



## ILOVE3D (Feb 4, 2009)

tagging, I like the simplicity of this method. I am going to fletch a few this way and see if any fliers. Wish I had access to a spine tester.


----------



## ron w (Jan 5, 2013)

EPLC said:


> So... which side is the weak side? The low or the high?


 EPLC,
the weakest side would be the side that went into compression, or the inside of the bend. the stronger side will more readily resist compression in a round tube.


----------



## b0w_bender (Apr 30, 2006)

OK I tried this method thinking it would be a simple and straight forward method. What I found was that with the slightest change in the angle of the compression you get totally inconsistent results. No matter how accurate I seemed to make the jig I couldn't get the arrow to bend in the same place every time. I would mark the arrow and rotate it and of course it would not bend in the same place again. I then started plotting data points and rotation and well you can probably see where this is going. I eventually came to the conclusion that I was participating in a spine based witch hunt. If you like the idea of this setup I encourage you to try it perhaps you'll get better results then I did. I finally gave up and built a traditional spine tester. Even with that I found that spine variance in most shafts were pretty insignificant. Particularly the higher end shafts the spine variance just wasn't measurable.


----------



## zmanastronomy (Jan 29, 2013)

I have a question. Do you think that the bend could be caused by the .003 - .006 discrepancy on the straightness of the arrow ?
It's sounds small, but that would still put the exact center line off by that amount. Allowing a bend in that direction.
It would still be a accurate way to nock tune the arrow. It would still bend in that direction know matter what upon the release of the string.


----------



## ron w (Jan 5, 2013)

you're absolutely right and it's the very reason arrows should be dead straight and the reason the straight ones cost what they do!.......
it affects how they settle in the float test also. to be brutally realistic....the float test is only legitimately valid if the shaft is dead straight...absolutely no run out. any bend in the shaft will influence where the backbone "clocks" in the water as it floats. the only condition that will truly indicate the backbone, with a shaft that has any bend, will be if the back bone is on the outside of the bend. then the shaft will float bend up and heavy side down. any other condition, is actually a bias between the heavy side's clock position in the shaft and the shaft's buoyancy, in relation to the severity of the bend, not necessarily exposing the soft side as, "in the 12 o'clock", position, as it floats.


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

Cool rig. I've used an inline press to do the same thing. Put a field point in each end of the shaft and "press" the arrow in between the square tubing on the press. It'll bend with very little effort and is consistent. I wondered if gravity had a part in how they would bend so I would bend one, rotate the shaft 180 degrees and it would bend in the opposite direction toward the same side that it bent toward before. Gravity did not seem to effect it enough to not get repeatable results.


----------



## thwackaddict (Sep 1, 2006)

b0w_bender said:


> OK I tried this method thinking it would be a simple and straight forward method. What I found was that with the slightest change in the angle of the compression you get totally inconsistent results. No matter how accurate I seemed to make the jig I couldn't get the arrow to bend in the same place every time. I would mark the arrow and rotate it and of course it would not bend in the same place again. I then started plotting data points and rotation and well you can probably see where this is going. I eventually came to the conclusion that I was participating in a spine based witch hunt. If you like the idea of this setup I encourage you to try it perhaps you'll get better results then I did. I finally gave up and built a traditional spine tester. Even with that I found that spine variance in most shafts were pretty insignificant. Particularly the higher end shafts the spine variance just wasn't measurable.


Bow bender,

Did you have a practice point in each end of the shaft? I have never tried this but wanted too next time I built some shafts. Some where, (maybe in the video above) I watched a guy do this and he could even put the arrow on the press pretty crooked and it still flexed the same every time.

I do think this would pay off a lot more with cheaper shafts. Heck maybe if it works good enough I could start buying cheap arrows and still get them to fly as good as the high dollar ones?:teeth: Doubt it though...especially when putting fixed blades on. The straighter the better!!!


----------



## b0w_bender (Apr 30, 2006)

thwackaddict said:


> Bow bender,
> 
> Did you have a practice point in each end of the shaft? I have never tried this but wanted too next time I built some shafts. Some where, (maybe in the video above) I watched a guy do this and he could even put the arrow on the press pretty crooked and it still flexed the same every time.
> 
> I do think this would pay off a lot more with cheaper shafts. Heck maybe if it works good enough I could start buying cheap arrows and still get them to fly as good as the high dollar ones?:teeth: Doubt it though...especially when putting fixed blades on. The straighter the better!!!


I did not, I admit I had a nock in one end so I cannot speak for the two point system. When you do it I recommend that you try rotating the arrow 30 or 40 degrees and pressing it at every location. For me it would bend in the same place a couple of times but what I would find is that as I rotated it it would do a lot of crazy things and bend in a lot of different directions. I spent a whole day messing with it. Unfortunately I haven't tried the double field point system. Having said all that I cannot completely discount the validity of this test I'm only reporting my experience. I just wanted to alert people to do a bit more than just stick it in the clamp and bingo you had your answer. By rotating the arrow in small increments I found that the initial mark was seldom the only place it bent.

I like the water idea, I wonder if you mapped the float test against the spine test results if you would get overlapping data points.


----------



## straddleridge (Apr 28, 2010)

I made a video with an explanation and demonstration of this process. It appears from some of the posts that there is some confusion about how to do it. Have never posted a video before so I hope this works and helps. Here is the link.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZpHByW5ZZEQ&feature=youtu.be


----------



## zmanastronomy (Jan 29, 2013)

straddleridge said:


> I made a video with an explanation and demonstration of this process. It appears from some of the posts that there is some confusion about how to do it. Have never posted a video before so I hope this works and helps. Here is the link.
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZpHByW5ZZEQ&feature=youtu.be


Nice video, I like that you simplified the process by using hand pressure and some simple blocks on each end. Thanks for sharing.


----------



## kc hay seed (Jul 12, 2007)

i am just asking,if you closed the ends and floated them in the bath tub would the heavy side turn down(strong side) and the week side turn up???


----------



## straddleridge (Apr 28, 2010)

Read post #8 by glucklicher - with carbon arrows the strong side is often not opposite the weak side. My spine measurements confirm this.


----------



## thwackaddict (Sep 1, 2006)

Well, I gave this squeeze test a try. I used full length carbon injexions. I pulled the nocks out and put a field point in each end so that there was a very sharp "center line" point.

I messed with three arrows compressing each one about 10 times. What I decided was that gravity rules! Which was a sweet and sour discovery. I guess these shafts are good enough to not have a significant weak/strong spine side. The bad thing is that I was hoping to see them always flex the same according to the shaft. They did always flex the same... down! Didn't matter how I moved the shafts around or if I even put them in the jig crooked. They always flexed down due to gravity.

I can't turn my press vertical, but still am curious as to if they would consistently flex a certain way under pressure.


----------



## GRIMWALD (Sep 28, 2012)

thwackaddict

Here is some reading material for you, it references golf shafts in particular but the information applies to arrow shafts. It's a lot of information to digest, so I would recommend reading it through completely, including the information you don't think applies and then re-read some of the information concerning F.L.O testing.
I have been using F.L.O. for about 4 or 5 years and I will try to answer any you might have but I don't normally wander in to here, so you may have to PM me to get my attention.

http://www.tutelman.com/golf/shafts/allAboutSpines.php
http://www.tutelman.com/golf/shafts/FLOphysics.php#outofplane

GRIM


----------



## thwackaddict (Sep 1, 2006)

straddleridge said:


> I made a video with an explanation and demonstration of this process. It appears from some of the posts that there is some confusion about how to do it. Have never posted a video before so I hope this works and helps. Here is the link.
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZpHByW5ZZEQ&feature=youtu.be


Just got to watch this video. Nice job. I may try to go back and check my arrows in a vertical plane so that gravity isnt affecting them.


----------



## thwackaddict (Sep 1, 2006)

Update time.

Last night I re-squeezed my injexions. This time I placed a set of machine ground pliers on top of a bar stool. This gave me a smooth steel surface on the bottom end of the arrow. On the top end I used a tape measure with a large metal belt clip on it.

Once again I put a field point in each end of the shaft. When I squeezed them this time they all flexed the exact same every time. No matter which way I turned them or leaned the tape measure they always flexed the same. This is a super easy way to try to find the weak side and strong side of the arrow.... or at least which way it will flex when the string is cut loose.

Thanks for starting this thread, and thanks for the video by straddleridge!

A vertical press would make it easier to mark the arrows but this is still super simple to do.


----------



## GRIMWALD (Sep 28, 2012)

A drill press makes for a very good vertical press but an inverted flex board would be much easier to deal with and would give you a number value to allow you to sort you arrows buy their deflection numbers.

Grim


----------



## thwackaddict (Sep 1, 2006)

GRIMWALD said:


> A drill press makes for a very good vertical press but an inverted flex board would be much easier to deal with and would give you a number value to allow you to sort you arrows buy their deflection numbers.
> 
> Grim


I had the thought of using a drill press. The reason I didn't is that my fathers drill press is about 8 miles away.


----------



## glücklicher (Aug 23, 2008)

sorry for the bad english, i am a old german :wink:


Here is another way the spline ( bannister Spine ) to measure .
Who cheap carbon shafts (will 'd better say inferior ) has , with this method certainly reduce the spreading of the arrows.

From my own experience I can tell , the bsp.weise of St Epic of Easton 1.Generation built according to the N- fused principle , the last garbage is .
However, you can meet with it when they mechanism involves " turning Nock " with .

Easton ACE are hardly affected by spline inaccuracies. If you turn this arrow by the tester can feel distributes many small spikes on the perimeter.
The measuring device can actually recreate each easily .
You only need :

Folding work bench (20 € Ebay)
3 ball bearings or ( Inlineskats of children cannibalize )
1 Brick ( pedestrian walkway there abundant )
1 fine scale (10 € Ebay but should any archer already have )



It should be noted that one very emotional clamps the ball bearings, otherwise it will not stop turning .



Here the overview screen of the experimental setup. The geteste arrow is this St Epic crutch. Links in the workbench, the two ball bearings are easily clamped. Right is the fine scale and the third ball bearing attached to the arrow






Detail image of the scale to the underlying brick and the ball bearing on the arrow shaft.




]Detail shot of the workbench with the clamped ball bearings and the arrow.





Here is a short video as I turn the arrow and measure. The arrow is biased with about 1.5 N (150 grams) and rotated under this load.
The measured values ​​vary from 146 are 165 gram.
That's extremely much. Actually, you do not need any balance these almost 20 gram difference in Spine, each Grobmotoriker clearly felt.
If you turn the arrow under tension builds on the already small torque, because he wants to turn into its softest position independently.
In the video you can see it from the arrow turns back again when I let go of him. When turning I tried to stop the arrow to give a bit of time to measure to the scale. This was achieved also from time to time. 





*Click in the picture to start the video*. Could be that it takes a moment. Ne is approximately 60MB file, not in the mood had still to edit (shrink runs damits liquid)



addendum:
Of course you can also manually 5-10cm bend the crooked arrow and rotate the arrow without a scale. The results are even more evident.


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

glücklicher said:


> sorry for the bad english, i am a old german :wink:
> 
> 
> Here is another way the spline ( bannister Spine ) to measure .
> ...


This is awesome! I love this idea. Thanks for sharing.


----------



## Deezlin (Feb 5, 2004)

ron w said:


> EPLC,
> the weakest side would be the side that went into compression, or the inside of the bend. the stronger side will more readily resist compression in a round tube.


I agree with this. I guess, I don't see any advantage to this over using a good spine tester. Unless you don't have a spine tester. I have been using a spine tester for years. You might still want to check point run out and try different nocks too. If the nock is off center it will effect how the arrow comes out of the bow.

Another thing you might want to look into is how having the arrow rest of the node affects the arrow flight. I do agree that a hooter shooter or other type of shooting device can help you tune your arrows. Personally, after using spine testers and hooter shooters, I became a believer in aluminum and ACC arrows again. They flight a lot better.


----------



## Reverend (Nov 2, 2004)

subscribed...


----------



## soonerboy (Sep 6, 2004)

Tagged


----------



## IRISH_11 (Mar 13, 2004)

tagged


----------



## glücklicher (Aug 23, 2008)

Here is a Copie from my Idea :shade: http://tec-hro.de/schiesssport/de/bogensport/231-tec-hro-spinealigner.html


----------



## guido316 (May 4, 2010)

Tagged


----------



## whack n stack (Dec 23, 2007)

Tag


----------



## swbuckmaster (Dec 20, 2005)

straddleridge said:


> I built a Ryobi shooting machine (Beastmaster thread from AT) that will consistantly put the same arrow in the same hole at 20 yards. After using Glucklicher's method on all 12 of my new arrows (10 of the 12 had the outer bend on the high spine[weak] side) I used my shooting machine and shot two groups of 6 bare shafts. Each created a 3 to 4 inch group. I then turned the nocks on the "flyers" from each group so that the weak side from Glucklicher's method pointed towards the direction of the arrow from the center of the group. This created two 6 shot groups of less than 1 inch. I then put 2" fusion vanes on one of the flyers so that the "weak side" still pointed in the direction it flew and it touched the same hole made by a known good fletched arrow.


Having a hard time understanding this. Are you saying glucklichers method marked a stiff side but when you shot them through the shooting machine it didn't give you your tightest group and you still had to twist nocks?

That tells me your no better off using the glucklicher method then grabbing a dozen arrows and putting them on your shooting machine and twisting nocks till they hit because that seems like what you did. Did I miss understand what you wrote. Or did it speed up your your tunning process?


----------



## brianb68 (Jun 7, 2009)

I've been reading all these post. I understand the importance of having the stiff(spine) up on compund realease shooters. So that all arrows are aligned with nick and I even weight match all my arrows. Maybe to the point of OCD. I don't understand the method that's being talked about. Is this method something for diy dude to do. I've started building my own arrows and even testing different weights of arrows. Our arrow choices are important. More than some realize. Anyway I'm getting off topic. Back can someone explain the method of the actual test. Spine testers are expensive. But so is everything else in archery. LOL. Well thx.


----------



## BPT (Sep 23, 2008)

Reminds me of finding the "Spline" while rod building.


----------

