# No peep



## DwayneR (Feb 23, 2004)

No other way to go my friend....It IS a wonderful way to go... I will never go back...

Timberline No-peep...

Dwayne


----------



## Bowtech Joe (Aug 24, 2004)

Actually it has been around for several years. I converted this years. Takes some patience to get it adjusted properly and a shooting session or two to get used to it, but it is very nice afterwards.

I really like it and wont go back to a peep.


----------



## buckshot047 (Oct 14, 2005)

*question about no peep....*

for those of you whohave it how exactly does it work....I know it mounts on the sight or bow but how does the alignment work and what does it look like when you are looking at your pin?
Thanks


----------



## Bowtech Joe (Aug 24, 2004)

after you get it adjusted properly you will draw the bow to your porper anchor point, at that time you can see the no peep, you will see a dot inside a circle inside a border, if you alignment is off you wont see the no-peep properly.

then you just shift your eye slightly to focus on your pins. with practice ou will begin to be able to use the no-peep in peripheral vision without actually focusing on it. over time you will become so used to the repetitive action of using the same anchor point that you wont actually need the no-peep.

I followed some of the advice in the instructions and it said that afterawhile you can draw with your eyes closed and when you open them you will be properly aligned. I tried it and it worked. The no-peep helps train you to use a conisitent anchor everytime.


well i am sure i made that as clear as mud. if you have a shop nearby take a no-peep and hold it at arms length and you will uderstand better i think.


----------



## Deezlin (Feb 5, 2004)

Bowtech Joe said:


> after you get it adjusted properly you will draw the bow to your porper anchor point, at that time you can see the no peep, you will see a dot inside a circle inside a border, if you alignment is off you wont see the no-peep properly.
> 
> then you just shift your eye slightly to focus on your pins. with practice ou will begin to be able to use the no-peep in peripheral vision without actually focusing on it. over time you will become so used to the repetitive action of using the same anchor point that you wont actually need the no-peep.
> 
> ...


Joe is correct, I use a kisser with mine also. But, as for the original question. The Timberline No-Peep has been around for quite some time. But, there is a new one on the market with is larger.

http://www.archeryinnovations.com/

I haven't saw or used it. It looks very large and seems like it could interfere with viewing your main sight. I have often wonder why, you couldn't mount a no peep, directly over or under your main sight, or have in incorporated in the sight housing in some way.


----------



## DwayneR (Feb 23, 2004)

Timberline No-peep is tried and true... It has IMO big advantages over bigger no-peeps.

I have hunted with the very first no-peeps, and the newest ones. The older ones, the "Glass" was right on the "edge" of the peep, and Two things happened. 

1. It would scratch.
2. The sun would sometimes hit it, and ruin the "image" by making it fuzzy.


Since then, they have "embedded" the glass into the peep. This solved a lot of problems.

The only problem which has *not* been solved, is "dirt" getting on the glass and a easy way to clean it. Though I only cleaned mine about 1 time every 2 or 3 years, I am always careful. This problem is difficult to solve, because if they place something over to protect that lens from dirt, they that object will get dirty or scratched. BUT!!! I have found a extremely cheap solution for that....

Go get some Scotch tape, the tape is wide enough to completely cover the entire hole that the lens sits in, and more. Carefully place that tape as a cover over that hole, take a sharp knife and cut around the edges, and presto.... instant protection from dirt, twigs, and everything else... and if it gets dirty...cheap to replace. It does not affect the amount of light or visibility.

The no-peep allows one to shoot well into the darkness... So if you are in a forest area...dark... you can still shoot. 

For 35 or 40 dollars...Its worth every penny of it... EVERY penny.

Dwayne


----------



## Dean Lawter (Feb 15, 2005)

I don't have one, but I have shot one. I'm not sure how accurate it would be for target archery since you don't see any top ranking pros with it. For hunting though? It may be great. I was putting arrows in the kill every time at 30 yards with my friends and I had never saw one till that day nor had I ever shot his bow.

As for what it looks like, to me it looked like an eye. imagine someone with green eyes with a dilated pupil from the dark. when you are anchored properly the pupil will be in the center of the iris.


----------



## bowbreaker (Sep 6, 2005)

I will not shoot without a Timberline NO-PEEP, it has taught me a lot about my grip!


----------



## bowar (May 14, 2003)

Has anyone had any problems aligning a no-peep and spot-hogg on a allegiance?


----------



## bowar (May 14, 2003)

Ttt


----------



## cloquet (Jan 12, 2004)

I used a no-peep for a few years, then I heard about the new oversize anchor sight. Called the company and talked to the owner. He said try one out and if you don't like it send it back. I tried it, I liked it, and I still am using it. IMHO it is much better than the no-peep. Easy to install, easy to use and very bright. It does cost twice as much as a no-peep but you get what you pay for.


----------



## t4daddy (Jul 27, 2005)

Deezlin said:


> Joe is correct, I use a kisser with mine also. But, as for the original question. The Timberline No-Peep has been around for quite some time. But, there is a new one on the market with is larger.
> 
> http://www.archeryinnovations.com/
> 
> I haven't saw or used it. It looks very large and seems like it could interfere with viewing your main sight. I have often wonder why, you couldn't mount a no peep, directly over or under your main sight, or have in incorporated in the sight housing in some way.


 That is what I did, just mounted it to the sight bracket above my sight pin. If any one wants I will post a picture, it will explain futher. And by the way I love mine.


----------



## Unkljohn (Sep 16, 2005)

t4daddy said:


> That is what I did, just mounted it to the sight bracket above my sight pin. If any one wants I will post a picture, it will explain futher. And by the way I love mine.


I would like to see it. I'm thinking of a No-Peep or hind-sight on my Tribute when it comes in.


----------



## lucretius (Jul 25, 2005)

*No peeps*

Well I have tried both the Timberline no-peep and the Anchor-sight from archery innovations. And while they are similar and share the same principles, the Anchor-sight in far-and-away the better of the 2 products for many reasons.
First, the Anchor-sight glows in the dark and low light conditions, timberline does not. Not a huge deal but very nice nonetheless. The Anchor-sight also has adjustment for sensitivity, making your dot inside the recticle larger or smaller to your liking. The circle/ dot alignment is red on black(which I prefer) as opposed to black on black. The anchor-sight is much clearer, even the newest version of the Timberline no-peep was harder to see "very" clearly at low light and would glare over is the sun was at my back. You can also remove the back of the Anchor-sight for easy cleaning and maintenance(simply screws apart). And last but most important. The Anchor-sight is 100% easier to set up and adjust. The tension screws are awesome. I have set my Timberline no-peep up many, many times (helped friends as well), and it just can be flat out frustrating to set up for a first-timer. 
All that said, the "no-peep" principle is a great one. It is not a "sight" at all, but a visual reference aid. Once you establish your anchor and apply the no-peep and use it properly, you will flat out shoot better. It is an awesome hunting tool and you can do well on targets as well.


----------



## t4daddy (Jul 27, 2005)

Unkljohn said:


> I would like to see it. I'm thinking of a No-Peep or hind-sight on my Tribute when it comes in.


 Here is my set-up. Also Unkljohn you have p.m.


----------



## lucretius (Jul 25, 2005)

*Clearance issues*

Also forgot to include that I haven't had any clearance issues with the Anchor-sight or the Timberline no-peep. The Anchor-sight mounting bracket seems to have a bit more versitility I feel. My setup is a Anchor-sight mounted beneath a HHA-OL 5500 slider single pin. I get no interference from the Anchor-sight even when I slide my sight all the way down.


----------



## kiwibowpro (Apr 24, 2003)

Sorry to rain on your parade but I have never seen anyone shoot well, or consistently with a no peep yet !!

perhaps this is why you never see target shooters using them !~


----------



## lucretius (Jul 25, 2005)

*No rain here*

Rain on my parade? The no-peep is not a "sight" at all bud, it takes the place of a peepsight. Just a visual reference is all. And BTW Olympic shooters dont use a peep at all and shoot better than most using a consistant anchor(which is what the no-peep principle is about).


----------



## DwayneR (Feb 23, 2004)

Hello Kiwi,

Then you haven't been around Archery enough. No Peeps are a step beyond the normal archer. I use a No-peep on all my compound bows...And I may not shoot a perfect 300 score, I can blast the white hole out of a 20 yard target...And the ones that don't hit the white hole are definitely my human error.

A person can learn a tremendous amount from a Timberline No-peep. I believe the reason why most people have a hard time setting one up for the first time, is because their form is not as good as they *thought* it was. Those folks with good form usually can set it up within 15 min or so.

Thus, if it doesn't work for you... then don't knock it!... It works for many others!

Dwayne


----------



## DwayneR (Feb 23, 2004)

Hello Lucretius,



> Well I have tried both the Timberline no-peep and the Anchor-sight from archery innovations. And while they are similar and share the same principles, the Anchor-sight in far-and-away the better of the 2 products for many reasons.
> First, the Anchor-sight glows in the dark and low light conditions, timberline does not. Not a huge deal but very nice nonetheless. The Anchor-sight also has adjustment for sensitivity, making your dot inside the recticle larger or smaller to your liking.


 I have never tried the Anchor-Sight. I have been with Timberland No-peep for years... SOoooooo...

I called the guy up and talked with him for 30 mins (the inventor). We had a wonderful converstation, and we talked about both Timberlines and his Anchor-Sight.

Some things he said, was his sight is all plastic type composites... the Timberline is housed in Metal. (Which made me hesitate a little). He mentioned a set screw that was a locking mechanism, and mentioned a graduated "Clicking" screw for adjustment. Each click was about 4 inches at 20 yards. I wasn't sure if I like this or not... Maybe because I want accuracy to the tee....But all in all, I was empressed by what he had to say.

Now with THAT said, I thought it would be only fair for me to do a evaluation myself. So I ordered a Anchor-Sight from him, and he said I could send it back if I do not like it. Thus, I am willing to spend a little money to evaluate, play, and have a little fun with another kind of No-peep. I am curious to see how much light it takes for this Anchor-Site, because the No-Peep works right down to almost no light for me...Granted the image is rather DARK, but I can still distinguish the image and shoot well. I am curious on how much lighter the image on the Anchor-Sight will be in low light. I am also curious on the "Tightness" and easibility the alignment of the No-peep mechanism will be. 

Dwayne


----------



## kiwibowpro (Apr 24, 2003)

Lucretius - I never mentioned the word "sight" in my post !!!

Dwayne -- your quote "And I may not shoot a perfect 300 score," -- I rest my case !!!! (incidentally I've been around archery for 35 years)


----------



## Eric P (Sep 11, 2003)

*No Peep*

I have been using the no-peep for hunting for the last 3-4 years, I really like it. As others have posted, you adjust the no-peep to align the bubble in the circle at your anchor point. Then when you draw you glance at it to ensure you are achored properly. Adjustment takes a little time, but I didn't think it was a big deal as long as you have a little patience. 

It will tell you about your grip, your form, how shooting up/down, with your body twisted etc (if one is paying attention to it). I learned this year how much my anchor changed when I started shooting a slick glove vs. bare hands.

As far as accuracy goes, I don't know if I shoot groups as small with the no-peep, but overall from many positions the average groups are smaller. 

Another benefit of the no-peep is removing the weight of the peep and alignment tubing (if you use it) from your string. This equates to free arrow speed or reduction in draw weight.

Link to the Timberline website where it is explained
http://www.timberline-archery.com/default1.asp

Just my experience, good luck.

Eric


----------



## DwayneR (Feb 23, 2004)

Hello Kiwi,

Kiwi>>Dwayne -- your quote "And I may not shoot a perfect 300 score," -- I rest my case !!!! (incidentally I've been around archery for 35 years)<<

<chuckle>... No, you haven't rested your case. I *know* a archer that HAS shot a 300 with one...

I have *never* shot a 300 in my life... with or without. I shoot my compound about 10 hours a year total. Yet I can shoot pretty darn good groups for what I do. I can plug that Bulleye to shreads. And Yes, some hit in the 4 ring... and it is totally my fault for the miss. I shoot my recurves 98 percent of my time. 

Thus my friend, I really do not believe you know what you are talking about. Granted, it is a new device in the last 10 years or so, but understanding the principal of the device and how it works is a different story. 

Since you have been around for 35 years, then we both can agree upon that it is the PERSON who shoots the 300, not the devices. And we both can agree that each person is different, thus may use a different device to achieve that degree of perfection. 

The No-peep is a extremely well made device that will tell you much about your form and anchor. It can (and will) allow you to place that arrow in that Bullseye every time...in the "X". It allows you to do it without looking through a tiny hole in a peep. It allows you to have full view of your target, along with full lighting. 

Thus my friend... I have already admitted previously and now, that I am not a professional shooter that shoots 300's. Resting your case on me is rather rediculous. Thats like saying you have never seen cop shoot a person, while pointing to a trainee cop who has only shot at a paper target saying "I rest my case".

Sorry... It just does't float... 

Dwayne


----------



## DwayneR (Feb 23, 2004)

Hello Eric,

Eric>>It will tell you about your grip, your form, how shooting up/down, with your body twisted etc (if one is paying attention to it). I learned this year how much my anchor changed when I started shooting a slick glove vs. bare hands.<<

Well said Eric...very well said. Those who don't shoot a no-peep, will never know how much their grip and form *can* change. (unless you are a pro). It is important IMO for those folks to *know* that there is a difference. I have seen folks just "stick on a glove", expecting nothing to change. Some folks can do it, others can't. I do quite well with or without a glove. But prefer bare hands.

Eric >>As far as accuracy goes, I don't know if I shoot groups as small with the no-peep, but overall from many positions the average groups are smaller. <<

That no-peep is doing its job. Making a better archer out of you by pointing out small minute differences that take place throughout our archery experiences. 

You want to shoot a 300??? EVERY and I mean EVERY shoot has got to be almost exactly produced the same way every time. This includes grip, form, and release. The No-Peep will help *anyone* produce these consistancies by showing them where the inconsistancy is.

Dwayne


----------



## Deezlin (Feb 5, 2004)

Dean Lawter said:


> I don't have one, but I have shot one. I'm not sure how accurate it would be for target archery since you don't see any top ranking pros with it.........


Several years ago, many golfers would not try the long putter because none of the pro golfers used them. Now, in all fairness, if a pro is having trouble with his putting game in golf, he is not a pro!!!!!!!

I don't necessary buy what the pros say as gospel. In many cases what they are using is what they are selling. I am not saying they should not promote manufacturers and equipment, but whether this brand or that will bentifit me is questionable. I am sorry, that is just the way I feel.


----------



## Deezlin (Feb 5, 2004)

DwayneR said:


> Hello Kiwi,
> 
> Then you haven't been around Archery enough. No Peeps are a step beyond the normal archer. I use a No-peep on all my compound bows...And I may not shoot a perfect 300 score, I can blast the white hole out of a 20 yard target...And the ones that don't hit the white hole are definitely my human error.
> 
> ...


Boy, you hit the spot with that one!!!!!!!:RockOn: :RockOn:

I wouldn't hasitate to use a NO-PeeP for target use, except, I use a lens. When you are using a lens a peep might be better, but Dwayne is correct a No-Peep will teach you a lot!!!


----------



## lucretius (Jul 25, 2005)

*Kiwi*

Sorry if I put you on the defensive, I never claimed you said the no-peep was a sight. I was pretty much telling you that,....whereas it is not a device that you look through like a scope or line up on the target. It's a visual reference to how you hold (or torque hehe) your bow. My point is, to say a no-peep is more or less accurate than a peep (which is basically what you stated in your post, if I read too much into that again I apologize) is something that simply isn't true. It all comes down to the shooter really.
But I do know for a fact the no-peep will tell you when you're putting torque on it or when you're hold your head wrong or twisting. Visually telling you when "your" form is wrong or right. A peep sight does not do this, and in the heat of the moment I want to make my shooting experience a no-brainer. It just cuts my pre-shot and shooting checklist in half. I love the thing is all I can say. Peace guys.


----------



## EXTREME 1 (Jan 24, 2004)

One thing that was not mentioned was that it even helps when hunting especially from out of tree stands and uneven ground. When the ground is not flat or shooting up or down you not really knowing it change the angle of your ankor point which can cause you to shoot high or low of the target.


----------



## DwayneR (Feb 23, 2004)

Hello Lucretious,

LL>Sorry if I put you on the defensive, I never claimed you said the no-peep was a sight. I was pretty much telling you that,....whereas it is not a device that you look through like a scope or line up on the target. It's a visual reference to how you hold (or torque hehe) your bow. My point is, to say a no-peep is more or less accurate than a peep (which is basically what you stated in your post, if I read too much into that again I apologize) is something that simply isn't true. It all comes down to the shooter really.<<

Bingo.. well stated. IMO you put noone on the defensive. You did a tremendous job of stating a fact. 

We both know how the No-peep works. We both know what it can do, what it is supposed to do, and how it keeps the "consistancy" up, so that one *can* become a better shot. Check out the Olympic Recurvers.... No peeps at all... they are professional anchorers. The very principal ( as someone has already mentioned) the No-peeps base themselves on.... After that anchor... Its up to you to fix your own form.. 

Dwayne


----------



## DwayneR (Feb 23, 2004)

Hello BrokenBlade,

BB>Has anyone on here tried that new no-peep system where the bullseye is in place of the peep. How does that work and would you suggest it.<<

Here is another way to look at it BB. I know of about 20 people that have gone to the No-Peep (or similiar KIND of No-PEEP, like the Anchor-Peep) None have reverted back to a peep. Though I am *sure* there are people out there that have gone from Peep to No-Peep, and decided to stay with Peep, I would be willing to bet they are a very small percentage of people.

The other side of the coin is, *most* people who try it will not go back to a peep, or leave it on their bow permamently. There is a reason for this <g>.
Once you have shot a No-Peep, and gave it a honest try, you will definitely like it. 

Dwayne


----------



## kiwibowpro (Apr 24, 2003)

Hi guys - I wasn't offended by the way ! While a no-peep will tell you what you are doing with hand torque etc - even if you have a consistent anchor point you can still move your head about - by that I mean your eye can still be in an inconsistent position in relation to the sight. 

And for fast hunting action I would imagine a no-peep would be a distraction if you had to stop and check how it all lined up? I find a conventional peep much better for me in both hunting and target/3D situations. 

I guess we will continue to having differing views.


----------



## mav_rc (Oct 7, 2002)

Looks like I'm on the other side of the fence too.I tried the no peep for about 2-months 5-6 yrs ago.It cost me two shots at deer and one at a yote.Shot very well with it in the backyard,but at the moment of truth couldn't find that sucker for nothing.Don't tell me that I didn't have it set up right,I'm 63 and been in this game longer than I can remember.Found out the hard way that for me I didn't need another distraction.I've killed over 50 without it.

Mav


----------



## DwayneR (Feb 23, 2004)

Hello Kiwi,

Kiwi>>Hi guys - I wasn't offended by the way !<<

Good, I am glad you were not offended. Its kinda neat that there are so many different gadgets out there, and some work for one kind of Archer, but not the other.

Kiwi >> While a no-peep will tell you what you are doing with hand torque etc - even if you have a consistent anchor point you can still move your head about - by that I mean your eye can still be in an inconsistent position in relation to the sight. <<

If a person moves their head about, the No-peep will instantly tell you. Your eye *must* be in the exact location every time. Without a consistant anchor, grip, and form, the No-peep will tell you.

Thus, I am rather confused on your example or description of "moving your head about".

Dwayne


----------



## Eric P (Sep 11, 2003)

*No-Peep & Hunting*

A few more of my thoughts & experience regarding the No-Peep & hunting with it.

I switched to it from a peep because I couldn't get consistent peep rotation without an alignment tube, which I refused to use (my choice). This caused me to miss opportunities elk hunting.

I too had some trouble getting the no-peep to align the same when I left the relatively pristine conditions of my back yard. I fought it for a while, but then started focusing on my anchor point, draw length (too long a draw length will hurt form badly), grip, etc. It's really amazing how much a change in shot angle (up/down), body twist etc. affects how you anchor (and thus what the no peep looks like when you try to anchor).

Relative to ease of use in hunting, I like the no-peep better because with practice you don't even need to look at it. As the no-peep instructions recommend, you can practice with the no-peep covered (w/tape or something) and see how you shoot. Sort of a test to see how well your muscle memory has "learned" your proper anchor, again it takes practice. I also do this in case at the moment of truth the no peep is not visible for some reason (wet, muddy, broken). Just a way to avoid Murphy's Law.

Good discussion.

Eric


----------



## DwayneR (Feb 23, 2004)

Hello Eric,

Eric>>A few more of my thoughts & experience regarding the No-Peep & hunting with it.

I switched to it from a peep because I couldn't get consistent peep rotation without an alignment tube, which I refused to use (my choice). This caused me to miss opportunities elk hunting.<<

I remember those days too <g>. I did not care to use that hose either. And if they broke, and you replaced it... your sights would be off.

Eric >>I too had some trouble getting the no-peep to align the same when I left the relatively pristine conditions of my back yard. I fought it for a while, but then started focusing on my anchor point, draw length (too long a draw length will hurt form badly), grip, etc. It's really amazing how much a change in shot angle (up/down), body twist etc. affects how you anchor (and thus what the no peep looks like when you try to anchor).<<

Eric, you hit it right on the nose. When a person leaves (I like your word) the "Pristine" place that they have practiced for X number of hours/weeks/years, and take to the fields, they forget the most important thing of all... Practice in the environment they are shooting in.

You made a extremely good point (along with someone else). All the twisting, bending, and standing on your head in the woods *always* forces a change in your form. It is sometimes difficult to "correct" the inconsistancies from these movements, and re-align your form as it properly should be. There have been many articles on "Bending at the wast". And the focus on these articles is *form*. Proper form and anchor.

When people (who do not have a No-peep sight) attempt to shoot these kinds of shots, they end up missing....all because of improper form, grip/torque, and/or anchor. The pro's do not miss... why? because THEY know EXACTLY what the form should feel like from all angles. (They even write articles on it, on why people miss, shoot high, or shoot low <g>).

With the No-peep, these improper stances are immediately exposed to the archer. If Archer sees this, he must do 1 of 2 things.

1. Use improper torque, anchor, or form to GET the No-PEEP ALIGNED (which is wrong, and will cause a bad shot).

2. Adjust his position to where his form *IS* proper. And the No-Peep WILL tell them they are good, and THEY will FEEL the proper Anchor point, form, and grip of their bow. This means BENDING at the waist...TWisting at the waist, and keeping your BACK STRAIGHT. (along with others things).

#1 is definitely wrong.... #2 is definitely correct. Which is more ethical?? Which is more consistant and accurate?? (Don't raise your hands...I will let you answer that one yourself).

Eric >>Relative to ease of use in hunting, I like the no-peep better because with practice you don't even need to look at it. As the no-peep instructions recommend, you can practice with the no-peep covered (w/tape or something) and see how you shoot. Sort of a test to see how well your muscle memory has "learned" your proper anchor, again it takes practice. I also do this in case at the moment of truth the no peep is not visible for some reason (wet, muddy, broken). Just a way to avoid Murphy's Law.<<

bingo Eric... You have said much in this paragraph. This is the EXACT purpose of the No-Peep. I think of it this way... *IF* you want to become a better shot, you must be consistant...The more consistant you are, the more accurate you are. Pro's have a very stable anchor, grip, and form. So-So shooters have variable anchors, grips, and forms...though the variables are *small*, it is enough to make the difference between a pro and non-pro.

Dwayne


----------



## DwayneR (Feb 23, 2004)

Hello Lucretius,

Well, as promised, I purchased the Anchor-Site, and decided to give it a thorough check through...I received it today... I have not attached it to any bows yet, but The following things I have noticed, I think could be improved tremendously...

As with the Timberland No-Peep, the magnifying glass is inset just a little, but one major problem that will be a larger major problem/factor with the Anchor-site.... The exposed Magnifying lens.

The lens is not of glass, and is exposed to the elements. I was able to solve this problem with the Timberland No-Peep, by using clear scotch tape to produce a "barrier" from the elements and the lenses. With the Anchor point, the diameter of the lense is about 2 times the diameter of the Timberland No-Peep. Thus exposure is much greater for scratches etc. What i am going to try to do, is use two strips of clear scotch tape to make a barrier between the outside elements and the lense when I get home.

I am not sure if I like the way the Micro adjustment works....I noticed on the frame, when you do the micro -adjustments, you are actually "bending" the plastic composite, and putting stress on it. This in my books is not good. But!... I think it has been tried and proven to some degree, so this issue may not be a issue at all. The Timberland is not putting stress on anything when you micro adjust... It has a small spring that keeps tension for the screws to act against. The Timberland has excellent "windage" adjustment, but lacks elevation adjustment. Thus, you must set your elevation FIRST, and get it right. Then the windage will come easy. This is IMO the downfall of setting up the Timberland. With no Micro adjustment on the verticle source, one must be patient and adjust very small, until the verticle (or your anchor point is set like it supposed to be)... I will find out how well the Anchor point does this, when I set it up.

I am not sure if I like all the "plastic" composites as a material to build such a device...Timberline is all metal....But this could be just a preference, and should have no bearing on its functionality.

This is (so - far) my evaluation between the two... It is now time to mount it, shoot it, and see how it does in lighting conditions.

Dwayne


----------



## wiesmanr (Nov 3, 2005)

who makes the Anchor-Site and do they have a website? I am interested in getting the No-Peep or Anchor-Site but just want to study up on them before i decide


----------



## DwayneR (Feb 23, 2004)

Hello Weismanr,

the No-Peep is made by Timberline, and are found all over the place on the internet... Timberline No-Peep.

The anchor site is made by 

http://www.archeryinnovations.com/


I have decided to do a "review" or comparison between the two sites. I was needing another No-Peep for my friends bow, and decided I would try the Anchor site... About two posts above this one (maybe three), I have done a writeup on the sights... The differences. I am trying to be 100 percent non-judgemental, and pointing out what I call "flaws" in both sights. (or at least things that would make the sight much better than it is now). So far mechanical and material wise, the No-Peep wins hands down. For the following reasons.

Advantages of No-Peep:

1. No-Peep has metal casing, Anchor doesn't
2. No-Peep has MUCH wider range of ajustment... Anchor doesn't even come close to the amount of adjustment No-Peep has.
3. No-Peep adjustments are not stressing the sight, Anchor adjustments are.
4. No-Peep is easier to protect the lens....Anchor is more difficult.


Advangages of Anchor:

1. Anchor has twice the size viewing of No-Peep.
2. Anchor is easier to sight in.
3. You can adjust sensitivity of the sight.


They both have IMO the same in :

1. Difficulty of installation.
2. Ability to use low light conditions.


Now, until I "shoot" the Anchor Site, I cannot give a honest evaluation of it compared to the No-Peep. 

One thing that does make me wonder, is the no_peep has the alignment filling the WHOLE lens... thus a larger, darker, and easier bulleye to see. The Anchor sight has this wonderful large lens, but the Bullseye is very small in comparison. Until I shoot this sight, my tendency is to say I like the Larger Bullseye.

Dwayne


----------



## JCinMN (Sep 27, 2005)

Any verdicts on the anchor site vs the no-peep?


----------



## shockwave (Mar 4, 2004)

*NO-peep*

I been using the no peep for seven or eight years now , I guided a bear hunter who had one and I like the idea of it so I bought one , I put it on my bow , within twenty shots I was shooting as good as I did with a regular peep sight. I find that properly adjusted the first time your anchor point is consistent , its great for tree stands, if it doesnt line up your form is out, if lined up, it always shoots the same. I find the it a must for bow hunters because you can probably gain fifteen minutes of shooting time especially in heavily wooded areas. As long as you can see your sight you will always see your peep because it works in any kind of light at all. Just my opinion...


----------



## invisible (Nov 15, 2005)

I really like my timberline no-peep. I will not ever use a peep again.:RockOn:


----------



## DwayneR (Feb 23, 2004)

Installed Anchor Peep, and gave it a try.

It installed nicely... Light gathering was very nice. The dotted lines used to bring your attention to the Bullseye was nice. To describe the Anchor Sight, there is a small dot (Bullseye) and 4 separate dotted lines going out from the dot... similar to a rifles "crosshairs".

the alignment of the AS (Anchor Sight), was nice. I was able to align it up fairly quickly...But that could have been because I have used the No-Peep for years. On initial line up, the large lens did *seem* to give a a faster "starting place" before I locked down the Verticle screws on the Frame. I think I can safely say the larger lens gave me a advantage of setting the AS up quicker.

With the AS installed...I ran into one major problem...Adjusting the windage (Horizontal) adjustment screw. It seemed that the frame was always in the way. The only way I know how to possibly correct this, is to reverse the frame and put the AS on the inside of the bow...But I did not spend time to do this. I solved the problem instead, by mounting the AS at the TOP of the frame, so to expose the necessary screws for fine adjustment.

Tweeking was scary.... I hated turning *any* screw that places "stress" on a little 1/4 " x 1/4" piece of plastic like material. The screws actually "Bent" the piece of plastic like material. Too much adjustment I think would or could cause problems of breakage. But I am sure the design has been tried and proven to some degree...but the thought is not very good to me.

Shooting...I thought it was wrong for *me* to test it out, because of my experience shooting Timberline no-peeps.... So I chose a volunteer who has never shot one before. The AS was easier for them to find the bullseye... It showed a larger "correction" angle, thus "fixing your form" was faster. With the TimberLine, it took them a little longer to find the "Sweet spot"...

There was one problem with someone else trying out the No-Peeps...That is, Both No-Peeps were set for *MY* form. Thus the person had to configure themselves to *my* form. But, at the same time, a person was able to "find" my form with the No-Peeps. They were able to find it faster with the AS.

Both Peeps shot well...I could not tell the difference. One thing I have to say about the AS, is that the AS could "dial" in the sensitivity. That was nice. But in the long run...I was not that much impressed, because you usually set it at one point and forget it.

Both sights had avantages, Both had disadvantages. Personally, I would not purchase the AS again. Mainly because of the following reasons.

1. All plastic composite Body.
2. Lens is too big, and its tough to protect that lens from nature.
3. The Micro-Adjustments and "stress" is not impressive to me.
4. Range of adjustment is greater...And no worry of breaking it.

These things above are important to me...But may not be as important to someone else. Thus, you can take this with a grain of salt <g>.

The AS has the avantage of the following:

1. Bigger lens for easier alignment.
2. You can actually take it apart and clean it...(Why would you? Its basically sealed, but the option is there!)
3. Easier to set up.


One may harp on the setup, but if you get right down to it, after the setup, you never worry about it again...So why harp on something that happens once? Even if you spend 2 hours setting it up, its over with and done. I think most can set either up in about 30 min or so. Maybe 15 with the AS.

Conclusion:

Both sights are excellent. Both shoot the same. Both are nice. Both allow low light shooting. Both do the job of teaching proper form. The real question is: What "items" or details of each is more important to *YOU* as an individual, and how much money do you want to spend. The AS is 50 to 70 percent more money.

I would recommend both for their job that they do. I would only recommend the Timberline for what I would consider "Durability", strength, and problem-free. I would only recommend AS for its ease of setup and variable sensitivity.

Have fun with them guys... They are worth it!

Dwayne


----------



## JCinMN (Sep 27, 2005)

Cool, thanks for the review. I sure wish I could paw either one of these products before buying, that's my big issue. I have a hard time spending even the 40 bucks on a no-peep without being able to even see one on the shelf. Seems the moment one shows up used around here it's snatched up real fast.


----------



## lucretius (Jul 25, 2005)

While I will agree that the basic construction of the Timberline no-peep "may" be more durable than that of the Anchor-sight, I have been using my anchor-sight all this season hunting various conditions and it has withstood them all. And performance was great.

Some people will naturally prefer an all metal or metal alloy construction when it comes to accessories for their bows so that alone may sway opinions. I have metal and plastic both attached to my bow and neither has given me problems so the material doesn't concern me. They are both made and constructed well. I will add that saying too much "stress" is being applied to the anchor-sight is misleading,... neither of these devices need that much adjustment to begin with when mounted properly. Therefore there shouldn't be very much tension applied to the adjustment screws for the anchor-sight.

As far fine adjustments go,.. this simply isn't an issue. Although in my experience this is more difficult to acheive on the timberline no-peep because of the constant lossening of the locking screws. Again this causes the frustration when first "learning" to set the Timberline up, and can become easier to deal with by simply doing it again and again.

The scratching of the lense wasn't an issue with either of these no-peeps so that "I" feel isn't a basis for rejection. Regardless, if there ever was an issue of sub-standard material or "faulty" construction and you as a consumer are concerned I urge you to call the fella at archery innovations and ask him some of these question if you need peace of mind. He is first class all the way. And I have dealt with him personally.

I know DwayneR and i may differ on preference with these two items,... but the fact is I feel every hunter should try one or the other(both if you can). And give it an honest evaluation,..it is a great hunting tool


----------



## DwayneR (Feb 23, 2004)

Hello JC,

JC>>Cool, thanks for the review. I sure wish I could paw either one of these products before buying, that's my big issue. I have a hard time spending even the 40 bucks on a no-peep without being able to even see one on the shelf. Seems the moment one shows up used around here it's snatched up real fast.<<

There is a reason why they get sucked up fast...they are good. They preform like they are supposed to. They are a great asset IMO to archery. ESPECIALLY to those who do not realize what proper form, anchor, and consistancy is all about. And many many archers are not aware of this.

They DO have a LEARNING curve on the setup. They do have a learning curve as you learn to be CONSISTANT with shooting. And both No-Peeps accomplish this very task.... One runs between 30 to 40 dollars the other about 65 to 68 dollars. 

I understand why you would be hesitant on purchasing a product without a Look-See, I am that way too.

I am in no way associated to any of these inventors or manufactures of these products. I am an individual, just like you, that felt they had found a product that is a asset to archery...A hidden gem at that. I switched to a no-peep, because of lighting and refraction of light giving me problems. I later found out that competition bang stickers had the same problem to some degree, and started measuring their score not by how close to the Bullseye they came, but the distance between 3 holes the slugs made. 

I started out with a Peep... I would shoot all day in the indoor range and plug Bullseyes all day long...I would blow the Bullseye out of the target. Then I would go outside and be shooting about 6 to 8 inches to the left... and NOTHING had changed!. I would then sight back to the bullseye... go hungint, and be off 6 to 8 inches to the RIGHT when I went back indoors! This was getting rather old. I would carry a target with me every time I go hunting.. just to make sure my sights were correct for the outdoors. A long time friend of mine told me about my problem and explained what was happening...I just couldn't believe it...but that was the best possible explaination I have heard yet...He even showed me on the Competition targets, how they scored and why. 

So I read about this No-Peep. I was reluctant. But I bit the bullet and went for it. Set up was easy (But for my case, I had good form). And I gave it a try. It was easy to shoot with inside, and when I went outside, my arrows were hitting with a inch or so of where I was supposed to hit... *I* was extremely well pleased. I no longer have to mess with my sight between indoors and outdoors. I no longer have that tube on my bow. I no longer have to "untwist" the peep in the string with my nose. I no longer have to look through a little hole that deminishes light. All for 40 bucks....They have my money...It is well worth it for *ME*.

I have heard one person say "I missed my game while hunting because of it". I just roll my eyes... They miss because of their inability to practice in the different environments they are shooting in. If you miss anything, it is not because of a no-peep. It is because of "no-Practice", "poor form", or buck fever.

A No-peep will even tell you if your form is correct when you shoot out of a tree, on the ground, around a bush, up a hill, or down a hill. No other device will tell you this. *IF* there is a device that will tell a person their form is not consistant (which there is, the no-peep or Ancher sight), I would think a person could only benefit beyond their imagination by using such a device....Its like having your own personal coach beside you.

After a few 100 shots, the AS or No-peep will actually become "useless" to some degree. Why? because you will have trained your body to properly Anchor, draw, and settle into your "consistant" form. The Peeps will actually be a "Subconscience" thing that you check, not a "conscience" item to check. Anytime you shoot, your subconscience will immediately tell you that you are in correct form by the eyes of the No-Peeps, Anchor sights.

Dwayne


Let me say one thing... I consider both Anchor Site and Timberland no-peep sights both equal in what they accomplish...Both are excellent, and I would recomment either to anyone.


----------



## DwayneR (Feb 23, 2004)

Hello Lucretous,

L>>I know DwayneR and i may differ on preference with these two items,... but the fact is I feel every hunter should try one or the other(both if you can). And give it an honest evaluation,..it is a great hunting tool<<

In actuallity Lucretius, we do not differ at all. I agree with all your points. You even brought up a point I forgot to mention, which IMO was very important:



> Although in my experience this is more difficult to acheive on the timberline no-peep because of the constant lossening of the locking screws. Again this causes the frustration when first "learning" to set the Timberline up, and can become easier to deal with by simply doing it again and again.


 Thank you very much for this point. Since I have not set up a TimberLine for quite some time, I forgot all about the locking screws that would change the Timberline ever so slightly as you tighted them down. I solved this problem by keeping one screw (the pivot screw) snug, and then adjusting. after adjusting I would tighten down the pivot screw, then the other screw.

I think because of the above, the Timberline is harder to Adjust...a disadvantage.


L>>I will add that saying too much "stress" is being applied to the anchor-sight is misleading,... neither of these devices need that much adjustment to begin with when mounted properly<<

You have another point here too... which I agree upon...I hope I did not mislead anyone by my "opinion" when I say stress when adjusting. I guess I feel a little uncomfortable screwing in a screw that pulls a "U" shape piece of plastic like composite together. And that "U" is a extremely small 1/4" by 1/4" piece of material, that is also holding a device on the bow also. I also tried to say "It has been tried and proven to hold up in the field". So this may not be a issue to most people. And you are correct...when properly mounted, there is VERY LITTLE adjustment that is needed. Thank you for pointing this out.

The Gentleman at Archeryinnovations was a extremely nice fellow, and I would trust him. He stands behind his product. And IMO it is a fine product to have. 

Since there are two extremely fine products to have, the Anchor Sight and Timberline, it is really up to the individual to decide what features they think is more important to them. Since each and every one of us thinks different features are more important, we may choose a produce according to our liking. I tried to point out both good and bad on both... I tried not to be biased. I will also say that I would recommend BOTH products to *anyone*.

Thank you Lucretius for pointing out things I have missed, and may have misrepresented by accident.:thumbs_up 

Dwayne


----------



## JCinMN (Sep 27, 2005)

Dwayne, you described my problem almost to a "T". I've got two indoor ranges that I shoot at and an outdoor range and at each one, I end up moving my sights. Not only that, but from day to day I shoot a little differently. I think that because I'm always chasing my sights from location to location and from day to day I don't establish a consistent anchor point. Occasionally I get it, because I'll put the put up and everything feels "right" and if the sights are adjusted correctly (meaning I haven't played with them yet) I'll hit exactly where I'm aiming too. But that seems to be the exception more than the rule. I end up spending more time trying to align the sight window through the peep than concentrating on my anchor.

You know what's funny actually, I shot a bowtech tribute this weekend. Bare bow except for the factory nock and a rest. So I had no sight, I just put the bow up and concentrated on the target. While I never hit the bullseye, I had a straight vertical line on the target with about a 2 inch spread horizontally. Vertically it went 6 inches, but it was tight horizontally and I can only attribute that to being that without a peep sight distracting me, I was anchoring consistently.


----------



## bowar (May 14, 2003)

I put a Anchor Site on my Allegiance and so far I am quite satisfied. I like the larger diameter which is much easier to line up during a shot. I have only used it down my basement so I can't comment on different lighting conditions. I have had 2 no-peeps and found that the Anchor site was far more easier to use and less complex to set-up. being made out of plastic is not a disadvantage, half your car is plastic now. also the vert.and horiz. adjustment is easy to use. I have shot several hundred arrows with the sight and see no problems.:thumbs_up :thumbs_up


----------



## taigo (Oct 18, 2003)

*no peep and target shooting*

i'm in target shooting foor 100%
I use a speciality peep with lenses and had no complains with it. 
it gives me a good secure feeling, allthough when i misses it is not due the sight peep misalignment but more of not having the exact copy of the form when i was hitting the bullseye
Enough light is not really an issue so for that reason i don't have to quit using a peep

reading your comments i understand the no peep is helping a great deal of recopying the exact form shot after shot.

Now my question: would it be wise of combining the two:
1. peep and scope to hit the bullseye
2. no peep to correct and recopy the same shooting form, anchoring position ...

or is this no a great idea and why?


----------



## DwayneR (Feb 23, 2004)

Hello JC,

JC>>Dwayne, you described my problem almost to a "T". I've got two indoor ranges that I shoot at and an outdoor range and at each one, I end up moving my sights<<

<chuckle> I did not say, but I put up with moving my sights from indoors to outdoors for probably 15 years. I got so used to it, I had two marks on my sight...They were about 1/16 to 1/8 inch apart... I knew when hunting time comes, I would slide that sight over and be right on target. At first it bothered me, because no-one else had this problem. I was told I was "canting" the bow...I proved to them I wasn't. I was told my form was wrong...they saw me shoot on straight level ground... the only difference was the target was on the ground at 20 yards, instead of on a shelf that made the target at chest level. So I dealt with it. <g>.

I know I have bad astigmatism that is uncorrected. maybe that is the cause...I have no idea. (don't care either <g>). What was important to me, was the ability to move from indoors to outdoors and not move my sight. The idea of not looking through that little hole was a extremely nice thought too. The idea of playing with twisted peeps in teh string sounded nice too.

Another problem I had with peeps, is the tube. I found out earlier in years, the tube will DEFINITELY affect your sights. If your tube broke, and you put on a new one, I had to re-sight the bow back in. No more now...

Its a gadget that works for me. It may not work for others, because we are all different. But I just don't understand how anyone can't benefit from such a device... a personal coach that is always watching every shot you make.

Dwayne


----------



## DwayneR (Feb 23, 2004)

Hello Taigo,

Taigo>>Now my question: would it be wise of combining the two:
1. peep and scope to hit the bullseye
2. no peep to correct and recopy the same shooting form, anchoring position ...

or is this no a great idea and why?
<<

I think it is a great idea, but I also think a problem may arise from it. I have shot Peep/scopes. I think it was a 2x or 3x scope... I can't remember... Its been too many years.

Please correct me if I am wrong, ok? The setup I shot may be different from yours, and since you shoot his method much more than I, My memory could be in error. The setup that *I* shot was *NOT* my equipment, so I did not shoot very much with this kind of setup.

The last time I shot Peep/scope, the Peep made the scope "focus in" where it was not "blurry" anymore. I also seemed to remember that the "bullseye" took most of the space of the peep....In other words, you had very little background, or wasted space. Your concentration was the target, and that target filled up most of your peep sight. With a No-peep attached, I don't think you would be able to see the No-peep device, and be able to use it. 

I think you have a excellent idea...It may be something you may want to try. But only you know your Peeps "Vision?" (for lack of a better word). If that No-peep is not in your Peeps vision, my guess is, you will be distracting yourself between looking through a peep and not looking through it...And *IF* this is so, the No-peep will never work. If you switch your eye even the tiniest bit, that No-peep will tell you...instantly. Thus switching your eye between looking through a peep and not will never work.

Dwayne


----------



## PMantle (Feb 15, 2004)

Of all the many benefits, I think the one that has helped me the most was the lesson that my old grip really sucked. I was moving my pins all the time, left and right, because I could not get a consistent grip. Of course, I did not know this.

When I got my no-peep, I spent a couple of weeks constantly adjusting windage. I almost threw it away. Then I read a tip. I bought some micro-fiber gloves that are slick as otter snot. My hand skin could no longer catch on the wood of my bow grip. I had to make another windage adjustment. After that, the no-peep was set. Now, if I draw back and my windage is wrong, I know the bow is slightly torqued. My left and rights are almost gone, and my worst groups are in a line up and down.


----------



## DwayneR (Feb 23, 2004)

Hello PMantle,

P>>Of all the many benefits, I think the one that has helped me the most was the lesson that my old grip really sucked.<<

<chuckle> Yes...that no-peep will show that quite well. And the way you solved it was excellent. I am glad you didn't through the No-Peep away... it was trying to tell you something, and sometimes "fixing" that something is harder than we want it to be. No Peep devices are coaches. It is up to use to "fix" what it is telling us. 

In order to be a Pro, you must do everything EXACTLY the same way... every time. The more you can accomplish this exactness, the better shot you are. People like me (I am *not* a pro), but I can shoot some dandy scores, do not have the perfection the pros have... Or we would be pros. The No-Peep devices have helped me achieve better grip and anchor points.
I do not shoot a compound that much, but when I do, I enjoy it. My main bow is the barebow Recurve. I am not a "Pro" in Barebow, but some folks would say I was a semi-pro with one. I shot in the 270's. You can't use a No-peep device on Olympic Bare Bows...<g>. (and I wouldn't want to)...But for my compound shooting, Its really nice to have that no-peep there. I use it Sub-Consciencely<sp>...And in may ways, I don't use it at all now...but it is there for a "check" reference.

Both No-Peeps are valueable assets IMO. I just can't say enough about them... The hardest thing for people to do is to "LISTEN" and "FIX" what those No-peeps are telling you. Many people just can't believe their shooting, form, grip, or whatever is *that* far off....

Dwayne


----------



## taigo (Oct 18, 2003)

hey dwayne

thx for your reaction,
i will get one no peep and will try the combination, if this could work

once i tested this setup i will let you know how i managed

sorry for my bad english, but it is not my motherlaguage


----------



## DwayneR (Feb 23, 2004)

Hello TAigo,

T>>thx for your reaction,
i will get one no peep and will try the combination, if this could work<<

Like I say, on the setup I shot, It would not have worked. I lacked the amount of vision to see the no-peep, if I looked through the peep sight. But each bow is set up differently...Maybe if they would have drilled the hole of the peep out a little bit more, it may have worked.

What you are doing, is venturing into something no-one has ever tried before...that I know of.

Using both a peep and nopeep with scopes... interesting concept...only you would know. The only way I would know if it will work, is to look through your peep mounted on your bow... then I would know...

Also, I was thinking...*since* you are looking through a peep, you are automatically aligning your eye to the peep, then to the scope. This means that adjusting the no-peep sight will be even more critical. Thus, IMO I think the Anchor Site would be MUCH MUCH easier to adjust to such conditions. (Yeah, I know I like the TimberLine much better). But I know that the Anchor Sight will be a better choice for minute kinds of detail. I think *both* no-peeps will be equally as easy to set up for the horizontal plane... But the verticle plane will be much harder to set up with the Timberline. Its been a while, but if I remember correctly the Timberline does *not* have a "micro-adjust" for the verticle plane, and the Anchor sight does. Would someone correct me if I am wrong out there???? I do not have my bow in front of me, and its been a few years since I ahve touched my timberline..

T>>once i tested this setup i will let you know how i managed
sorry for my bad english, but it is not my motherlaguage<<

You are doing GREAT!....Keep up the good work. I actually thought you were in the USA.

Dwayne


----------



## cameron (Sep 15, 2005)

Dwayne,

Your assessment of the two products was excellant reading. I was looking at a red dot sight, but now have decided to try the No-peep. Thanks for sharing this valuable input.

Cameron


----------



## DwayneR (Feb 23, 2004)

Hello Cameron,

Cameron>>Your assessment of the two products was excellant reading. I was looking at a red dot sight, but now have decided to try the No-peep. Thanks for sharing this valuable input.<<

Thank you very much. I tried to be as unbiased as possible, because I know that biasness doesn't give true meaning to both objects.

Now... about your idea of a Red-Dot... I have news for you...I have used a Red Dot scope before... I had it mounted on a Mathews LX, and hunted with it for 1 season.

Problems with Red Dot scope:

1. You had to set your yardage before you shot, *OR* set it at a known position (like 20 yards) and aim high or low depending upon the yardage.

2. Don't lose the lens caps!!!... or else!

3. Don't forget to turn on your scope!... or else.

4. Granted the Red Dot is based upon the same principal of the No-Peeps, the Red Dot did not have *any* way to "Bullsye" the little red dot....Thus, you had a 2 inch (just a guesss here) lens, and you had to Center that dot in that two inch lens, then aim the dot on the target. If you can imagine having a 1 inch peep hole in your string, and centering the sight pin inside that 1 inch peep, there is a LOT of room for error... I found by playing, if I wasn't exactly in the center, my arrows would not hit where the red dot was! Thus a *false* sensation of "Dot on target, means hit" was given to the user.

I have removed mine from my bow, and reinstalled my pendellum sight. I spent 160 dollars for nothing (you have to buy a slideable mount to mount the Red Dot to your bow).

I also had one other problem... There is a "friction" adjustment. After every shot, the scope was so heavy, that the Sight mount would slide just a little... throwing your shot off. You could tighten the friction mount, but then it was so tight, you couldn't move the stupid thing. I couldn't find a happy medium.

I would not recommend the Red Dot to any Archer. BUT!!! I think it would be a EXCELLENT Cross bow sight....

Dwayne


----------



## cameron (Sep 15, 2005)

Well, I am comfortable with red dots from my pistol shooting, but I never tried one on a bow. I also currently shoot a one pin sight, and ususlly hold high or low. Several pins only confuse or make me second guess yardage on my deer.
I was not excited about the field of view either. The no peep seems like the product I need for low light hunting, and that is where I am looking to gain.

Thanks again!


----------

