# Rhino String Material On The SuperK...



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

"Rino" is just a lower quality copy of a BCY material...452X, I think. I'll have to check to be sure.


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

LBR said:


> "Rino" is just a lower quality copy of a BCY material...452X, I think. I'll have to check to be sure.


Strange you "think" that...Rick Barbee feela that the rhino imaterial is on parr with ultracam...makes no nevermind to me though...im sold on the rhino...seems as stable as angel majesty except way more durable and much much quieter.


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

A sound meter works good for comparing sound Bill


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

Didn't mean it as a slam Bill, or even an opinion--it's a fact. It's a copy of 8125G, except no GORE fiber and cheaper Japanese yarn. Should be more stable than AM (SK75 vs. SK65--AM is Japanese also), and I'm not surprised it's quieter. AM wasn't developed to be a hunting string, and Flemish is almost always quieter than endless regardless of the materials you are comparing.

A more even comparison would be Rino vs. 8125G, both in an endless or Flemish. If you like that, then I figure you'd really like 8190. Both 8125 and 8190 are more stable and more durable--just made from higher quality materials.


----------



## Big Country (Apr 25, 2003)

JINKSTER said:


> Strange you "think" that...Rick Barbee feela that the rhino imaterial is on parr with ultracam...makes no nevermind to me though...im sold on the rhino...seems as stable as angel majesty except way more durable and much much quieter.


I`m no expert on trad stuff Jinks, and I did NOT stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night, but I have been building compound strings for decades. 452X is a quality string material. Slightly slower than Ultracam, but possibly the best option for super hot southern climates. Tough to get 452X to stretch on a compound bow.


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

Yep--if you live in really hot climates, and shoot outdoors in the heat, then 452X or Trophy will give you the best stability. Speed difference will be negligible on a trad bow.


----------



## Easykeeper (Jan 2, 2003)

LBR said:


> Didn't mean it as a slam Bill, or even an opinion--it's a fact. It's a copy of 8125G, except no GORE fiber and cheaper Japanese yarn. Should be more stable than AM (SK75 vs. SK65--AM is Japanese also), and I'm not surprised it's quieter. AM wasn't developed to be a hunting string, and *Flemish is almost always quieter than endless regardless of the materials you are comparing.*
> 
> A more even comparison would be Rino vs. 8125G, both in an endless or Flemish. If you like that, then I figure you'd really like 8190. Both 8125 and 8190 are more stable and more durable--just made from higher quality materials.


What is it that makes the Flemish string quieter, the way a Flemish string is twisted together or is it the different way the loops are constructed?


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

I think (can't prove it) that the serving on endless loops adds to the noise. Flemish can vary in how quiet they are. When the "marriage" is tapered off nicely, they seem to be quieter. Padded loops are usually quieter, loops padded out with polyester are usually quieter, etc. Lots of variables.

Honestly I'm not usually too big on the "how and why" dept. If it works, I run with it. If not, I do something different, and rely on some good friends that are also string nerds to figure out the details. Well, one is a "yarn specialist"--he's real handy to have around for technical stuff.


----------



## Easykeeper (Jan 2, 2003)

Thanks for the info. 

I expect a big drop off in quality, at least at first, but it seems like a good time to start making my own strings since my usual guy is so busy...:wink:...:thumb:


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

Practice, practice, practice! If I can help, just holler. If you need a sample of something, let me know and I'll see what I can do.


----------



## Thin Man (Feb 18, 2012)

The serving on an endless is hard and tightly wound, presenting lots of contact area to hit the limb with. Flemish feels soft and the braids are hill and valley-like, perhaps allowing for a more gymnastic-like tumble against the limb, with the valley portions of the braid not even making contact. 

Half the surface area contact coupled with roundish braids ... maybe less noise. 

Don't know. Don't use endless. Maybe one day. Just not today. Nor yesterday. The day after tomorrow would be an option if I build a jig tomorrow. I'll sleep on that ... tonight.


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

The following is straight from Brownell - It is 100% SK78 Dyneema, just like Astroflight & D10, BUT it is spun up very differently, which makes a world of difference for the better in the strength & creep department. There are some other things about it that are proprietary & Brownell does not share that information.

With equal strand counts, Rhino actually out performs Ultra Cam slightly, but not enough you could notice in your shooting.
It stretches, and creeps less than Ultra Cam, and it does not fuzz up like Ultra Cam. Another good thing about it is it does not color bleed.

It is nothing like 452X, because it has zero vectran in the blend. 8125 is sk75 dyneema, so there's quite a bit of difference there also.

Rick


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

Well...i'll let all you string guru's battle it out cause I will openly and freely admit right here and now that I don't know dookey about string materials as compared to what some of you far more experienced string builders know...and right now?..alls I do know is this... 

I am super impressed with the rhino on both my bushmen longbow and now on my Super Kodiak...with the longbow?..i expected that sucker to be quiet...and it is...but I dug how "initial total stretch" of the rhino was like 3/16ths brace the first week...after that?...if I practice like 100-200 shots every night for a week?..it "might" need 1 twist at the end of that week...or not...and from what i'm reading and gleening here that one twist every now and then may also be the result of temp/humidty changes?...but the real shocker...obviously here and now?..LOL!...

was how freaking quiet it made my Super Kodiak...really and truly in now way was expecting what I experienced..as in..

It blew my mind how quiet it was/is...came as a very pleasant surprise...and no...if someone else told me this crap?..and all as a result of a certain type of string material?...I wouldn't believe them either...which is why I WILL make and post that sound check vid tomorrow so you all can hear first hand...and Lord do I love one piece laminated recurves with real quiet strings...

Fast, quiet, silent and deadly.


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

I believe ya Bill 

A well made string of the right material really wakes up a bow


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

> 8125 is sk75 dyneema, so there's quite a bit of difference there also.


Not really. There's quite a bit of difference between SK65 and SK75--not so much between SK75 and SK78. There's not a huge difference even between SK75 and SK90, at least that I can tell. The way I've described it is comparing them to the top shooters--once you get to a certain point, there's just not a lot of room left for improvement. That is where Dyneema is at, at least as best I can tell.

There was such a small difference between SK75 and SK78 that BCY didn't bother keeping Dynaflight 10 on the market, especially after they developed 8190.



> It blew my mind how quiet it was/is...came as a very pleasant surprise...and no...if someone else told me this crap?..and all as a result of a certain type of string material?...I wouldn't believe them either...which is why I WILL make and post that sound check vid tomorrow so you all can hear first hand...and Lord do I love one piece laminated recurves with real quiet strings...


I've seen it time and time again Bill, and heard it countless times too. Couple a good material with a well made string and a little tuning, it can be a real eye-opener. That's why I jump in on the string threads, especially when I see really lousy/incompetent/flat-out false statements or advice. I can't tell you squat about an Olympic bow's set-up, but I can educate most folks about strings--at least those willing to learn.



> BUT it is spun up very differently, which makes a world of difference for the better in the strength & creep department.


I'm not a yarn expert, but I do have access to one. From what can garner, there's just so much the spinning can do. Like people saying an endless string has no creep, even if it's made from B-50. Anyone who knows squat about string material knows that simply isn't true--how the string is made won't magically change the properties of the base material. Same seems to apply for the yarn the string material is made from. It is what it is--painting stripes on a pig won't make it a zebra.

There's definitely a relation in performance/initial stretch-creep and construction, but even the best made B-50 is going to stretch and creep; even the best made 100% Dyneema string is going to be affected by high temps.

Chad


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

All I know is I have never been a fan of any of the 100% dyneema blends until 8190 & XS2 were introduced, and even they didn't make me fall in love with it.

I was really concerned I would not be able to find a suitable replacement for the Ultra Cam. 
When Brownell told me about the Rhino & what it was I was very skeptical, but had them send me some anyway.

I tested the Rhino for several months, and was shocked to see how well it did compared to other dyneemas, and was completely blown away by it being even better than UC.
I called Brownell and asked them - How can this be? 
Their answer was - "The way the fibers are spun." 
I'm not in a position to doubt them, and they've never steered me wrong yet.

Back to the original post - Yep Jinks - It's Great Stuff.

Rick


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

I did a little more research. There's no mention of "Dyneema" on the Brownell site, or on any of their labels. Dyneema is a registered brand name. They can't use the name "Dyneema" if they aren't actually using that product. They can't be using SK78 Dyneema--or any other Dyneema--if they are using the Chinese yarn--not the same product.

I should note, I said "Japanese" earlier, which AM is, in referance to Brownell. I was wrong--sorry about that. Brownell uses the cheaper Chinese yarn.



> ...they've never steered me wrong yet.


If they told you they are using SK78 Dyneema they did.

I realize this probably means next to nothing to most folks. I just like to get down to the brass tacks on the facts.


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

JParanee said:


> A sound meter works good for comparing sound Bill


Radio shack sells them. I would lean toward a-weighted versus c. Both would be better. Multiple directions, standardized distances would be better. Full on waterfall plot would be cool, but you're going to have to upgrade hardware for that... maybe b&k calibrated microphone with a computer.


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

BarneySlayer said:


> Radio shack sells them. I would lean toward a-weighted versus c. Both would be better. Multiple directions, standardized distances would be better. Full on waterfall plot would be cool, but you're going to have to upgrade hardware for that... maybe b&k calibrated microphone with a computer.


Or?....I could just listen to the vid I posted. :laugh:


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

> The following is straight from Brownell - It is 100% SK78 Dyneema, just like Astroflight & D10,...


Was that in an e-mail? Because I can't find it on their site. The only referance to Dyneema I saw was mentioning it as a trade name--no claim to use it in any of their products. AF and D10 aren't the same material--they don't use Dyneema in any of their products, at least from what I can find. If they did, you'd think they would mention it.


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

BarneySlayer said:


> Radio shack sells them. I would lean toward a-weighted versus c. Both would be better. Multiple directions, standardized distances would be better. Full on waterfall plot would be cool, but you're going to have to upgrade hardware for that... maybe b&k calibrated microphone with a computer.


I have one for checking legal decibels on airboat and setting up surround sound systems


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

If anyone wants to call or e-mail BCY, they can find out first-hand about their materials and process. Nothing "proprietary"--no secrets. They'll tell you where their material originates and what it is.

That's something I've always admired and respected with BCY. Secrets bother me. People asked me about that a lot with the string making videos--"did you give away all your secrets??". I don't have any--got nothing to hide, like BCY.


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

LOL Chad.

Brownell uses what Brownell uses. The root ingredient is similar to, or the same as SK78.
The bottom line is - I haven't used anything else that compares to the Rhino, and that includes, well it includes just about every bow string material there is.
Ultra Cam is the only thing that comes close.

Two weeks ago I built a 9 strand string of Rhino for a fella that lives here in my area. It went on a 65# 62" recurve.
It had exactly 1/16" creep after about 100 shots, and hasn't moved again since.
Consequently, it has been real hot & humid here also.

Same as with Jinks, this fellas bow shot wayyyyyyyyyy quieter & noticeably faster with the Rhino string on it.
The bow is a Brack Drifter. Prior to the Rhino string it had a 14 strand df97 string on it, and the guy was constantly having to twist it up to maintain brace height.

Rick


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

> Brownell uses what Brownell uses. _The root ingredient is similar to, or the same as SK78_.


Afraid not. It's either SK78 Dyneema, or it's not (it's not). Just like it's either a Rick Barbee string, or it's not.

I see it like this--if there wasn't something to hide, there would be no secrets. BCY tells what their material is. Brownell seems to be pretending they use the same material as BCY, but they don't. Just makes me have more questions--like why are they pretending to use the same high-quality material as BCY when they don't? Are they ashamed of the material they are using? Why not name it?

If the guy was "constantly" having to twist up 14 strands of Dynaflight '97, there was something wrong with the string's construction. Even if the Rhino were SK78 Dyneema (again, it's not) there's simply not that much difference in the strength, stretch, and creep between SK78 and SK75 (Dynaflight '97). 

I invite anyone interested to contact BCY for test results and facts--no mysteries.


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

Out of curiosity...if UC is that great, why was it discontinued? Why do all the top bow manufacturers use BCY products on their bows, if Brownell has something better to offer?


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

UC was discontinued because it was to costly to produce, and still keep the prices affordable to the consumer.

The bottom line is - who cares what Rhino is made from, and that Brownell keeps their proprietary processes a secret. Don't take away from the fact it is the best.

I really don't care what someone else says. I test things for myself before I'm convinced of anything.

Rick


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

ooops. double post


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

Rick, here's Brownell's history on their use of Dyneema in all their HMPE strings. Not only did they pioneer the use of Dyneema in bowstrings, the last page pretty much sums up their exclusive use of Dyneema post Spectra. http://www.brownellarchery.com/BrownellCoverStory.pdf


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

JParanee said:


> I have one for checking legal decibels on airboat and setting up surround sound systems


I used to use mine all the time doing the dolby noise tone calibrations for surround systems as well. Also used it, C-weighted, with weighting offsets, to plot room response with continuous tones (or warble tones) in order to obtain the best information to set the notch filter to try to flatten out room modes.

However, since the newer systems started using really good auto calibration and room correction software, the battery in mine has gone dead , and my measuring tape used to set the channel delays has most often stayed in the bag with it.


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

Sanford said:


> Rick, here's Brownell's history on their use of Dyneema in all their HMPE strings. Not only did they pioneer the use of Dyneema in bowstrings, the last page pretty much sums up their exclusive use of Dyneema post Spectra. http://www.brownellarchery.com/BrownellCoverStory.pdf


Yep. Thanks for posting it.

Rick


----------



## Charon (Apr 17, 2011)

HMPE stands for "High Modulus Polyethylene".
Dyneema is a HMPE material. 
However not all HMPE material is Dyneema.
It does not work to argue that since a material is HMPE it is the same thing as Dyneema.
The assumption that such is the case is a logical fallacy known as a "false premise".

Its like:
All cows are purple.
That is a cow.
Therefore it is purple.

It all follows logically. Too bad it's wrong.


----------



## Charon (Apr 17, 2011)

The article was written in 2005, eight years ago. In their catalog Brownell no longer states that they use Dyneema.


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

> UC was discontinued because it was to costly to produce, and still keep the prices affordable to the consumer.


You don't think the top bow manufacturers--Matthews, Bowtech, PSE, Hoyt, etc.--could afford it? Just how much does a string made from UC cost? I don't buy it (no pun intended). Not to say that isn't the excuse they are using--it just doesn't stand up to logic.



> The bottom line is - who cares what Rhino is made from, and that Brownell keeps their proprietary processes a secret.


Well, for one, I do. Honesty is a big deal to me. In a short time we've gone from "The following is straight from Brownell" to "who cares?" when the wrong questions get asked.



> Don't take away from the fact it is the best.


Just your opinion. The market will dictate it--and it seems the market sorely disagrees with you. Time will tell. Now I'm even more anxious for next year's ATA show.

Sanford, again your willingness to dive off into the deep end without even checking for water amuses me to no end. You are great entertainment, especially when you don't know what you are talking about.


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

Spot on Charon...but who cares about the facts? I wasn't going to educate sanford--let him figure it out on his own. Much more entertaining that way.


----------



## Charon (Apr 17, 2011)

From Lancaster

Ultra Cam 1/4# spool $43.99

Rhino 1/4# spool $54.99

So tell me again, Ultra Cam was discontinued ....why?


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

> From Lancaster
> 
> Ultra Cam 1/4# spool $43.99
> 
> ...


Again, a quote from my favorite sitcom "The Big Bang Theory". Here goes. "There is no room for honesty on the internet!"--Howard Wallowitz

I may not have that perfectly correct, but the meaning is preserved.


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

Did they discontinue Xcel also? It's still on the web site (UC isn't)

Brownell Xcel String Material 1/4#
$56.99 

BCY's 452X is flying off the shelves--it retails for $52.99 (single color) and $54.99 (dual color). It's their second most expensive material(I think--I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong), but one of their most popular. How is that, if cost is such a factor? You can get quite a few strings from a 1/4# spool, and when you have companies buying hundreds of pounds at a time they surely get a good discount.

Something just isn't adding up.


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

What does a guy have to do to get a straight answer around here?


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

Chad, why don't you call Brownell, and ask them for yourself about UC.
That's the answer they gave me, and I have no reason to doubt them.

Rick


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

Brownell's customer service has been...lacking, in my experience--to the point I don't care to give them the opportunity to insult me again.

Like I said, I don't doubt that's what you were told--but obviously it doesn't hold up to reason or logic (the price thing). If they said they are using SK78 Dyneema, well, that doesn't hold up to factual scrutiny.

I had a few opinion questions that I wasn't asking Brownell, but no matter. I've learned quite a bit on this thread.


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

Well?...i for one dont give a dang if the label on the package says Kobe or Angus...nor do i care who owns the land the cows grazed in or what feed they were fed...a great steak is a great steak...and so far?...none of my bows have tasted anything better than..."Rhino"...so i say save the cows for milking. :laugh:


----------



## Charon (Apr 17, 2011)

Watched the video here:
http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2020590

Given that no actual measurements of speed or decibel output were made, not really sure what to make of it. Also to put string silencers on a string then declare that string quieter just doesn't make sense.


----------



## fotoguy (Jul 30, 2007)

:thumbs_up


Charon said:


> Watched the video here:
> http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2020590
> 
> Given that no actual measurements of speed or decibel output were made, not really sure what to make of it. Also to put string silencers on a string then declare that string quieter just doesn't make sense.


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

Wow, Jinks, looks like the whole peanut gallery is upon you! Guess you ain't speaking their language at the moment  You said all the magic Trad-bow string words: "quieter", "faster", "smoother".... you just applied them to the unapproved maker.


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

Bill, I'll say what I figure everyone who watched that video is thinking. That video didn't prove your bow is anywhere close to as quiet as the lighter--honestly it was a whole lot louder. I could barely hear the lighter over the sound of the air boat (airplane?) in the background--the bow noise was very clear. I've heard much quieter bows...but like Charon said, without a decimeter it's all just perception.

Doesn't matter to me--if you like it, run with it. Thanks for taking the time to post the video.


----------



## Charon (Apr 17, 2011)

It doesn't matter WHO made the string, WHO shot the bow, or WHO posted the video. It was rigged in order to "prove" a predetermined result.


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

> It was rigged in order to "prove" a predetermined result.


That seemed to be the intent, but IMO it went the other way.



> You said all the magic Trad-bow string words: "quieter", "faster", "smoother"....


Really? Anyone with sound on their computer can listen and make their own call on "quieter", since there's no decimeter. No chrony either, so "faster" is irrelevent. "Smoother"??? Did he say that? Please explain to us, oh string guru, how changing string material makes a bow pull smoother.

Oh, and thanks again for always choosing the "other" side. You make me look better than I ever could on my own! :thumbs_up


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

LOL!....This is hilarious!...."rigged"..."a whole lot louder"?...than what?...the D97 16strand oem rope the bow came with?...
which coincidently had the same amount of cat whisker PLUS yarn wrapped ends?...okay...i give...you guys are just way to sharp for me...i had my daughters boy friend rent a crop duster and do a fly by as i conducted this...hey...wait a minute here...i don't ever recall using the word "test"...but hey...don't let that stop you guys...just do me a favor...when your done making up all this crap?...make sure this thread gets moved to the "Fiction Forum" :laugh:


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

Hey Bill.

Just out of curiosity.
Do another video shooting the bow with the old string, and then with the new string.
Shoot 3 shots with each string.

Don't put silencers on either string.

I can analyze the audio of the video to see which one has the highest db levels.

Rick


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

> "..."a whole lot louder"?...than what?...


It was a whole lot louder than the lighter you were comparing it to.



> the D97 16strand oem rope the bow came with?...


I've said numerous times I haven't seen a "factory" (oem) string that I considered worth keeping. I don't doubt the rhino string was quieter than that--but you didn't shoot the oem string on the video--you flicked a Bic.


> i don't ever recall using the word "test"


I thought it was a comparison. Did you listen to it yourself, on the computer?



> when your done making up all this crap?


What was "made up"? You posted the video to "prove" how quiet you thought the rhino string was.



> "about the only noise I heard at the bow?..was the cat whiskers themselves doing their short dance at the end...which sounded like someone lightly shook a small baby rattle once from about 100' away on a windy day.


The video didn't verify that at all. 

If you like it, that's all that matters, regardless of the video results.


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

> Hey Bill.
> 
> Just out of curiosity.
> Do another video shooting the bow with the old string, and then with the new string.
> ...


How about analyzing the levels of the lighter vs. the rhino string. That was the comparison made.

If a custom string isn't significantly quieter than the "oem" rope, there's something wrong. Any decent string maker should be able to make a string much quieter than that.

'Course there are plenty of variables--nock fit, tuning, spine, brace height, etc. etc. etc. Going to take more than a few minutes and a few shots to do a honest comparison, even though we know right now which one is--or at least should be--much quieter.


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

LBR said:


> How about analyzing the levels of the lighter vs. the rhino string. That was the comparison made.


Okie Dokie.

Remember now he said not quite as quiet.

Pretty darn close considering the differences in energies exerted.









Rick


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

LBR said:


> Brownell's customer service has been...lacking, in my experience--to the point I don't care to give them the opportunity to insult me again.


*My experience with them has been quite opposite of yours.*
I've been dealing with them for a long time, and they have always treated me with respect, understanding, and helpfulness.
The materials I have ordered from them have always come to me in a very timely manner, AND occasionally include some pleasant surprises.

Rick


----------



## Charon (Apr 17, 2011)

Analysis of the sound track still proves nothing as the BIC is held 2 to 3 feet closer to the microphone than the bow. Given how decibels are measured and scaled, and the fact that the sound radiates in an expanding sphere, distance from the sensor (microphone) plays a huge part in the actual amount of energy that the sensor detects. 

Reductio ad absurdum, but for an extreme example hold the BIC next to the microphone and record it. Then drive 100 miles down the road and set off a hand grenade. You will have successfully "proven" that a BIC lighter is louder than a hand grenade. Pretty far out there, but in measuring sound intensity the principle still holds, and at these lower intensities we're looking at here, it plays a major role.


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

Got to go with my own experiences. BCY has never mislead me, i.e. say they are using something that they are not--before the internet, long before anyone ever heard of CCB. Brownell was very rude to me in that same time period--'nuff said.

I don't know how to read a decimeter--won't pretend I do. No idea how you isolate a sound from all the background noise in a recording--I was told that, in order to get a correct reading, you must have a controlled environment--much like any other test.

My totally unprofessional impression, based on what I see, is your meter would register only a small difference between a mouse fart and a car door slamming. Just going by what my ears told me while listening to the video. Guess we are similar in that respect--you go with what you experience, and so do I.


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

We were posting at the same time Charon. Astute observation--something an engineer would (should) know, but a layperson might not pick up upon. You'd think, for an honest review, this type of variable would be noted. Thanks for pointing it out.


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

> The materials I have ordered from them have always come to me in a very timely manner, *AND occasionally include some pleasant surprises*.


Hmmm...BCY won my loyalty by providing superior products and customer service, period. Again, long before anyone ever heard of CCB, back when my orders were paltry, I was treated like a million dollar customer and had direct access to the top from day one. In the 16 or so years I've been with them, they have only improved.


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

LBR said:


> Hmmm...BCY won my loyalty by providing superior products and customer service, period. Again, long before anyone ever heard of CCB, back when my orders were paltry, I was treated like a million dollar customer and had direct access to the top from day one. In the 16 or so years I've been with them, they have only improved.


And I can say the same for Brownell.

You asked for me to post the sound analysis of the video, and I did it for you. 
Then you take a stab at me with the engineer comment. 
I am very happy I am the kind of guy who can figure things out for himself, and don't have to totally rely on someone else for my knowledge.

The bottom line is - Jinks found a material he likes real well, and you can't stand it because it isn't a BCY product.

Rick


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

Rick Barbee said:


> Okie Dokie.
> 
> Remember now he said not quite as quiet.
> 
> ...


Rick...thank you for posting that...I can't believe some of the ridiculous accusations this post has spawned but I will add that these several glitches took place that morning...

Glitch #1. Is that I was so thrilled with how quiet my SK was with the rhino string?..i posted the night before that I likened it to the sound level of "Striking a Box Match" promising i'd make and post such a vid the next day for audio comparison...so figuring that doing this first thing in the morning while it's nice and still and quiet?..i head out to the back porch where our Box Matches (for our grill) have been laying out exposed to the weather for about 18 months now....the matchbox itself still slightly damp from the evening mist and strike a match for a sound check and?...nothing...and the matchstick just bursts into flame with near zero audible sound..tried about 3 more striking them harder and harder as they continued their damp magic show of bursting into flames with no audible sound as I figured..well?..that ain't gonna work! :laugh:

Glitch #2. So I grab a Bic Lighter and?..yep?..that sounds about right or at least close..and as fate would have it with the last name of Jinks?...LOL!...it wasn't until I grabbed the lighter for that first flick "while recording" that I realized that flicking a bic?...has two very distinct sound levels..those being...

A. Kinda Loud: when flicked with an open bare hand and?...

B. Kinda quiet: when encases in a hand which is covered with elkskin and ballistic cordura! :laugh:

Glitch #3: was...even though I went out to get this done early in the morning while all was still and quiet?..soon as I press the record button and grab my lighter?...some jackwad 1/2 block over fires up his fart can equipped rice burner to head out for the day. :laugh:

Glitch #4: was really bad and this was me dumbing up real bad...I was so excited about how much quieter my bow was and making the vid early and getting it posted up?..i failed to take into account that I had shot about 100 arrows the night before (with a brand new string) and then left it strung overnight and then?...shot that vid without first checking my brace height..and an hour later?..."REMEMBER"...which was a "omg moment for me" as...(I thought it sounded a touch louder than the night before but blamed it on the quiet morning LOL!) then broke out my bow square and discovered it had in fact done it's initial "new string" stretch and my bow was now 3/16ths under BH...only needed two but...since it's still new?..3 twists later it was 1/8th over brace but back to it super quiet self.

So imagine my humor level when I read someone posting accusations that....

"this test"...(which wasn't a "test" at all...just a shade tree level comparo to give folks an idea)....was..."RIGGED"? :laugh:

you bet it was..."RIGGED" :set1_rolf2:

The good news?..not only do I now have a super quiet Super Kodiak?...I also have the quietest box matches known to man! :laugh:

Rick...thanks again man...and I hope I can turn to you if I ever need a source for strings again. L8R, Bill. :cool2:


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

Rick Barbee said:


> Hey Bill.
> 
> Just out of curiosity.
> Do another video shooting the bow with the old string, and then with the new string.
> ...


Sounds reasonable. We won't know how loud either is in absolute dB levels, but it will give us a relative difference. The comment about the lighter being closer, though, is entirely spot on. Assuming a spherical radiation pattern, we lose about 6 dB every time we double distance (or about a factor of 4 in terms of actual power intensity).

You can't control the background noise, but based on what you're showing, the background noise is relatively swamped by the peak levels of the string, so I wouldn't freak about that. Because of the exponential relationship of Decibels, if you're 10 dB higher (or more) than your noise floor, that's a factor of 10, which means that if your noise floor had an increase of 20%, the difference it would have on peak levels would be negligible. What's more, since you can see the amplitude displayed as a function of time, unless you had a really string coincidence, you could likely see the source of sporadic noise differentiated from the bow sound.

I would, though, point out caution in interpreting the results.

The total vibration of the bow and the string is interactive between the components. One string may be close to silent on a given bow, and a given arrow, and louder on another. Tension (and elasticity, which will play a large role in the harmonics associated with the initial hit) and mass both play a roll in what happens when the string hits bottom.

Also, where the camera is, and the microphone, may not capture the same kind of sound characteristics as what Jinks is hearing, or for that matter what somebody standing in a different position might hear. While a 'point source' may radiate sound in pretty much a perfect sphere, a bow is quite far from that, particularly when you're relatively close. The string itself will behave somewhat like a 'line' source, radiating sound somewhat like the sides of a cylinder (with more towards the center of the string where the most movement happens, so it would be more like a bulging cylinder, while the bow limbs will be radiating sound in a more of a pair of dipolar radiation patterns, with some angle up and down due to the limb face positions. Most of the sound radiating off forwards and backwards, and much of the lower frequencies cancelling out entirely to the side where the wavelengths do become relatively omni-directional, since the energy from opposite sides of a surface will be in opposite polarity from each other. 

On top of that you've also got secondary reflections, from the ground, or other nearby objects (like maybe Jinks). It is truly amazing (at least to me), how much sound we don't hear when we're out in the open, or around sound-absorbing material. Standing between reflective surfaces makes quite a difference. Even standing next to one makes a significant difference. First time I shot a bow inside of a plywood outhouse (as part of a novelty shoot), I worried that something was breaking. Shot the bow out in the open again, bow quieted down, sounded fine.


So, with all of those qualifications, while I think it's a valid test for the circumstances, we need to keep it in perspective that it is for these specific circumstances. It may be useful to keep it in mind to accumulate it with other data that came before or after.


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

Barney...you may wanna read through (my) the last post on page #2.


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

Just had a brainstorm...check this out...I'm going to post back-to-back vids...turn your volumes up and leave them there and listen to them back-to-back..this first one here?...is my SK with the factory D97 16strand string equipped with cat whiskers AND yarn wraps and?..recorded from about twice as far away...


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

now here the 12strand rhino string...no yarn wraps...just cat whiskers..and recorded about twice as close as the D97...


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

> You asked for me to post the sound analysis of the video, and I did it for you.


Of course you did it for me.



> Then you take a stab at me with the engineer comment.


Took a stab? Did I say or imply something that isn't true?



> I am very happy I am the kind of guy who can figure things out for himself, and don't have to totally rely on someone else for my knowledge.


Ohhh...I get it. There's one of those "stabs" you were referring to--right? 



> The bottom line is - Jinks found a material he likes real well, and you can't stand it because it isn't a BCY product.


ROTF...surely you can do better than that. What bugs me, as I pointed out, is the lack of facts and honesty in this thread. For instance...



> The following is straight from Brownell - It is 100% SK78 Dyneema, just like Astroflight & D10,...


You are educated on strings and string material. You really didn't know that Rhino isn't SK78 Dyneema--it's not Dyneema at all, but a cheaper yarn from a totally different source? If you didn't, how could you say that Brownell has never steered you wrong, even after this was pointed out?



> Brownell uses what Brownell uses. The root ingredient is similar to, or the same as SK78.


Again, simply false. Did Brownelll tell you this?

I keep pressing for facts, we go from


> "this is straight from Brownell"


 to


> "who cares what Rhino is made from".


Looks like a complete 180 to me.

Then you thank sanford for posting a link to a totally out-dated and misleading article. As tight as you are with Brownell, you didn't know this information was no longer true, and hasn't been for quite some time?

Then you say rhino replaced ultra-cam because of cost...when the retail is Ultra Cam 1/4# spool $43.99; Rhino 1/4# spool $54.99; and X-cell is even higher--but X-cell is still on the market?? 

Maybe that's what brownell said--can you admit that it makes no sense and defies logic?

I note that all the major bow manufacturers are using BCY, but you say their products are inferior. Why are multi-million dollar companies, who's reputations ride on using the best, who are neck-in-neck competeing with each other and will grab any and every advantage they can, using "inferior" products??????? Again, if that were the case, it makes no sense and defies logic. Can you explain?

Did Charon and/or Barney say anything about the comparison that isn't true? Or are they just taking stabs also?

Nahh...nothing at all to do with lack of facts or misrepresenting the truth. I'm just torn because someone likes a string...lol


----------



## QuietWyatt (May 20, 2010)

I have a friend who wants to invest in a laser spectroscope. They are pretty cool and basicly what almost all companies use to find out what the competitor is using so they can make their own version. Soo the answer is almost that simple. There are quite a few spectroscopes around now and good universities have them as well. There are several outfits that will run tests services. If we all pitch in about the price for a string we will have an answer once and for all and for all to see.

I for one am about to make the jump from B50, I have a couple bows that have phenolic tips and want to see what all the rage is about. I held off on all the FF and Dyna years ago, anyhow quieter and faster with less creep in a hot southern climate sounds appealing and I am certainly interested in which is what and which is better.


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

> Soo the answer is almost that simple.


Almost--there are patents and trademarks and such, but the Chinese are notorious for making cheap copies.



> ...anyhow quieter and faster with less creep in a hot southern climate sounds appealing and I am certainly interested in which is what and which is better.


Keep in mind how the string is made can make as much or more difference than what it's made from. A crappy string from the best material is still a crappy string.

That being said...in extreme heat, 452X, Trophy, or 450+ is going to be the most stable. For a 100% Dyneema material, 8190 is made from the highest quality available--SK90. Still, it may be affected some in extremely hot weather. How much will vary with how hot, how many strands, draw weight, etc.

I'll stop for a minute and apologize to anyone who may have taken my passion for strings as being anything else. I'm a string nerd, and I take a lot of pride in the trade. I know I get carried away sometimes, and come across the wrong way. Sorry about that.


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

JINKSTER said:


> Barney...you may wanna read through (my) the last post on page #2.


You made quite the effort!


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

BarneySlayer said:


> You made quite the effort!


Thanks...and i'm glad I currently think rhino is the best stuff since sliced bread cause I sure won't do it again....kinda blew my mind that I was just trying to show folks how much quieter my SK got with this particular string and 2 pages later?...i'm reading how...

*"I Rigged A Test"?*

I mean...seriously folks? :laugh:


----------



## QuietWyatt (May 20, 2010)

"I Rigged A Test"?

I mean...seriously folks? " 

I still shoot B50, maybe I will do my own little test. I have a studio and we can see which string has which frequency, resonance and decibel level. Hell I'll even make a song using samples from the strings run through at least 15 different effects processors. I'll call it "Ambient Sonata for bowstrings number 1" a Traditional edition and an Un-fletched edition


----------



## ozzypop (Sep 23, 2010)

This takes the cake. Jinks buddy enjoy your bow and new string which I am sure you will. It got me to thinking about a new string. Rick how does someone get a string from you.


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

ozzypop said:


> This takes the cake. Jinks buddy enjoy your bow and new string which I am sure you will. It got me to thinking about a new string. Rick how does someone get a string from you.


Thanks ozzy...and know this...the reduction in sound was just the icing on that cake (pun intended lol)...the other big benny?..."stability"...(if that's the correct word to describe it..lord knows i'm a tad gun shy at web speak here)...but what I mean is...once this stuff goes through the initial 25-50 shot stretch-in period?..around 100 arrows later you'll need to add a twist...then 200 arrows later?...add a twist...500 arrows later?...add a twist...and?..done....your there and the stuff don't budge and it'll be a rare occasion that you ever hafta "add a twist" from there....and with as much as I shoot?...that in itself is a Godsend as compared to many other strings I've used...except angel majesty...but that stuff was loud and not very durable at all...matter fact?...AM seemed the worst FF type string I've used yet for durability...Hope that helps and L8R, Bill.


----------



## ozzypop (Sep 23, 2010)

Thanks Bill. Thanks for not being afraid to try the new. And then sharing. I understand what you are saying but most on this thread I am lost.


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

Ohhh Chad, how much I could say, but I won't.
This isn't the place for this garbage, and I'm not going to allow you to drag me down to your juvenile level of behavior.

I'm done with it, and you. If you want to talk to me again it'll have to be that face to face I offered you once before.
You know how to contact me. 8^)

Rick


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

QuietWyatt said:


> "I Rigged A Test"?
> 
> I mean...seriously folks? "
> 
> I still shoot B50, maybe I will do my own little test. I have a studio and we can see which string has which frequency, resonance and decibel level. Hell I'll even make a song using samples from the strings run through at least 15 different effects processors. I'll call it "Ambient Sonata for bowstrings number 1" a Traditional edition and an Un-fletched edition


that sounds fantastic!


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

For Bill.

Your DF97 sound compared to the Rhino sound.









In case that is hard to see - the first 3 spikes are the DF97. The last 2 spikes are the Rhino.

Rick


----------



## 4nolz (Aug 17, 2011)

Lol you guys kill me.LBR kick Rick in his bad knee if you ever get Texas.


----------



## Charon (Apr 17, 2011)

Careful there LBR. If you don't shut up you're gonna get taken out back to the wood shed!


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

Hey Bill.

The guy I mentioned in an earlier post about putting a Rhino string on his 65# Brack.
He came over & shot with me this evening. We shot at least 100 shots, and probably more, and that string still hasn't moved but the initial 1/16" it did at the very beginning.

It is a 9 strand Rhino, with loops padded to 18 strands. By the way, it made his bow a lot quieter also, and he says it shoots more stable too. 8^)
The old string is a 14 strand DF97.

He's a believer. 8^)

Rick


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

Rick Barbee said:


> For Bill.
> 
> Your DF97 sound compared to the Rhino sound.
> 
> ...


Wow...that's so cool of you to do and confirm that for me Rick...and that "you can"!:thumbs_up



Rick Barbee said:


> Hey Bill.
> 
> The guy I mentioned in an earlier post about putting a Rhino string on his 65# Brack.
> He came over & shot with me this evening. We shot at least 100 shots, and probably more, and that string still hasn't moved but the initial 1/16" it did at the very beginning.
> ...


Yep...I can't imagine what a 9strander would be like on a bow of that weight and you probably already know this...but that vid above?..of me demo'ing the rhino?..if ya turn up the volume?...you can hear my victory S-nocks "tinking" onto the string when I nock'em up...and I love that sound far more than the dull thuddy sounding strings.


----------



## ozzypop (Sep 23, 2010)

Rick how can I get a string from you.


----------



## Charon (Apr 17, 2011)

Looking back at the 2 videos side by side noticed something interesting.

Ignoring the variables such as tab vs. glove, fletched arrows vs. unfletched arrows, distance from microphone etc etc, there is a distinct difference between the 2 strings.

With the D97 it certainly sounds as if the nock end of the arrow is striking the riser as it passes by. When we look at the audio analysis we can see two separate and distinct events here:









But when we look at the audio analysis of the Rhino here:









the second event is missing. The audio tracks seem to support the idea that the arrow is whacking the riser.

I have found that it is possible to affect state of tune by changing string material or strand count or string silencers, all of which Jinxster did change between the 2 videos. 

Now kinda hard to say for sure from here, but it would appear that yes the Rhino seemed to make the bow quieter. And one of the factors determining that is that Jinxster accidentally hit upon achieving a better state of tune. That would also go towards his perception that the bow has also picked up speed.

So, is the bow quieter due to the Rhino string? Is it quieter due to a better state of tune? Is a bow with D97 string untunable? Can a bow be be successfully tuned only so long as Rhino bowstring is used? How many licks does it take to get to the center of a Tootsie Pop?

The World may never know.


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

Charon, you're tickling my geek button...

Maybe we need some slow motion video  But I think we can only press Jinks so far... How much is this Rhino material?


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

> Careful there LBR. If you don't shut up you're gonna get taken out back to the wood shed!


Back? I don't remember a first trip?



> Ohhh Chad, how much I could say, but I won't.


Here's a novel idea. Try the truth. Try giving a straight answer.



> This isn't the place for this garbage, and I'm not going to allow you to drag me down to your juvenile level of behavior


.

ROTF! You say that, then follow with this:



> If you want to talk to me again it'll have to be that face to face I offered you once before.


That's the answer when there is no answer. I ask what I said that isn't true, push for what should be simple facts... I get a thinly veiled threat--nothing "juvenile" about that huh? Well, I guess that is true--most kids have outgrown that kind of stuff by the time they are considered to be juveniles. Dang...guess I'll have to sleep with the light on again--and why? Because I dare ask for honesty on a message board--nothing more. How silly of me.



> LBR kick Rick in his bad knee if you ever get Texas.


I'd probably get told on and have to sit in the corner if I did that....:set1_rolf2:


----------



## Brownell (May 2, 2011)

Hey Guys, this is Rob Smith and I am the General Sales Manager for Brownell. We finally got some username issues and passwords figured out here and I am excited to be on here to answer any questions you may have. Seems like a lot of people on here have some questions and I will do my best to answer any of them you guys have. I can tell you that I am new to Brownell (within the past year) however I am not new to the industry. I am an avid shooter and bowhunter and I will be happy to talk with any of you.

Our new Rhino material is a pretty versatile material and has been working really well in all aspects of the industry. Seems like compound guys , re-curve and crossbow shooters have really had good results with it. If you guys need anything or have question fire away, I am here to represent Brownell and we appreciate all of your business. Thanks guys!


----------



## Jim Casto Jr (Aug 20, 2002)

Well shoot... and I was enjoying this rhubarb too. Now we've got the horses mouth show up to settle everything--darn it!

Okay guys.... ask your questions, and get the staight poop.


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

Rob, if I may ask...what is Rhino made from?

Btw, welcome to the jungle.....


----------



## Big Country (Apr 25, 2003)

JINKSTER, you are my horse even if you NEVER win a race! :lol:

One little homemade video got you more replies than the Super Bowl!:shade:

BTW, all joking aside, thank you for the effort…..it has helped out more than one of us.


----------



## Charon (Apr 17, 2011)

I certainly don't have actual sales figures Rob, but Ultra Cam seemed VERY popular with both compound and Traditional shooters. Why was Ultra Cam discontinued?


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

Hi rob.

Question, your FAQ lists XS2 as the fastest, but the product descriptions call Astro Flight the fastest. Which is the fastestest, and what kind of differences are we talking about. Is rhino then, the toughestest, and when you claim no creep, is there some kind of guarantee to that?

Just wondering. If I'm potentially going to blow another $100 on a couple spools of string material to try it out, I'd really like to know what I'm trying to achieve. At the very least, I need to know what to tell people what they're supposed to be paying for 

Thanks Rob!

Oh, and all of that FF+ I've already bought, is that made of the same Dyneema that it was originally made from, is there a model number that goes with that, and how does the Dyneema that it uses compare with the previous Spectra material that became unavailable?

Did you know that your FF+ also works as Dental Floss in a pinch?


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

> "I Rigged A Test"?


I could be wrong, but I think you read way more into that than was intended. You weren't trying to put up an objective test, you just wanted to show proof of an opinion you had already formed--right? So, you set it up in a manner you thought would prove that opinion. You already knew your answer, so you set the demo up accordingly. I didn't think you were trying to do anything dishonest--it just didn't prove anything.

Barney, those are some outstanding questions--looking forward to the answers.


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

A time stretch of the sounds is very revealing.

The first sound instance in the screen grab is of the DF97 with the time slowed by 500 percent.
The second instance is of the Rhino slowed by 500 percent.









As you can see, the signatures are similar, but the DF97 has a much harder, and much longer duration of vibration.

The sound you hear is from the string hammering the limbs, and the DF97 is doing a whole lot more hammering than the Rhino.
The reason the DF97 is hammering more is due to the amount of stretch & instability it has under the force of the shot.
The reason the Rhino is hammering less is due to it having less stretch, and more stability, even at the lower strand count.

Here is an audio clip of the time stretched audio. The first sound instance is the first shot of the DF97. The second sound instance is of the first shot of the Rhino.

http://www.tradarcher.com/misc/string%20sounds/df97_rhino_compare_2.wav

Rick


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

Mornin Bill.

Thought I would post that up for you before I get to work.
Folks can argue with it till the world goes flat, but the results won't change any. 8^)

Enjoy.

Rick


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

> So, is the bow quieter due to the Rhino string? Is it quieter due to a better state of tune? Is a bow with D97 string untunable? Can a bow be be successfully tuned only so long as Rhino bowstring is used? How many licks does it take to get to the center of a Tootsie Pop?


Too complicated. Matthews, Bowtech, PSE, Hoyt, etc. don't have a clue. They don't have the proper equipment to test with, much less the knowledge. If they would just listen, they could dominate the industry.....:set1_rolf2:


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

Hey Jinks - while I'm thinking about it - would you please do a shooting session with each string where you're at the same spot, same distance, and same angle from the camera.

Shooting straight over the top of the camera with the mic facing you would be a good way to go.

3 arrows from each string should do it.

Yea, I'm a geek. I love this stuff. 8^)

Rick


----------



## Brownell (May 2, 2011)

LBR,

The Rhino material is made of SK 78 Dyneema / UHMWPE material and it is spun in a different manner than previously used. This is where you see the strength difference in the Rhino. We have chosen to honor the wishes of the distributors of Dyneema and not use the name on packaging since they are not our only supplier. From a supply chain point of view having only one one vendor is a preverbial "shot in the leg". 



LBR said:


> Rob, if I may ask...what is Rhino made from?
> 
> Btw, welcome to the jungle.....


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

Brownell said:


> LBR,
> 
> The Rhino material is made of SK 78 Dyneema / UHMWPE material and it is spun in a different manner than previously used. This is where you see the strength difference in the Rhino. We have chosen to honor the wishes of the distributors of Dyneema and not use the name on packaging since they are not our only supplier. From a supply chain point of view having only one one vendor is a preverbial "shot in the leg".


Thanks Rob. 8^)

Rick


----------



## Brownell (May 2, 2011)

Barney,

The website is under construction right now, we had a guy working on it and it was not going anywhere so we are in the process of fixing all the old information. The XS2 has the Rhino beat by a very small margin when it comes to speed tests. So that would make it our fastest / lightest material that we currently offer. As far as "toughest" the Rhino takes the cake, the break strength per strand is very high and it holds up to a beating. Not quite sure what you are looking for with the creep guarantee like we have always done with our products if you are not satisfied we can exchange for a material that suits you fancy. 

We have not changed the formula on the FF+, so you should be good to go. The original Fast Flight would just be labeled as Fast Flight, not the plus. Internally there are some part number differences but you would never see those on packaging. As far as dental floss, i have yet to try that out! However I have several spools here, I may just have to try that out!!
I can promise you that my goal it to straighten out any questions or misconceptions with Brownell and customer service is near and dear to me. I have worked for a major manufacturer as well as retail archery. I live and breathe this stuff and I love this industry. 





BarneySlayer said:


> Hi rob.
> 
> Question, your FAQ lists XS2 as the fastest, but the product descriptions call Astro Flight the fastest. Which is the fastestest, and what kind of differences are we talking about. Is rhino then, the toughestest, and when you claim no creep, is there some kind of guarantee to that?
> 
> ...


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

I'll give it a whirl when i get home from work Rick and thanks again...but have a couple questions...

Is it okay if i leave both strings as they are ?...also...the D97 is tuned with my beman X nocks while the Rhino is tuned with my GT S nocks...want me to get both tuned to the same arrow first? Bill.


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

> The Rhino material is made of SK 78 Dyneema / UHMWPE material and it is spun in a different manner than previously used. This is where you see the strength difference in the Rhino. We have chosen to honor the wishes of the distributors of Dyneema and not use the name on packaging since they are not our only supplier. From a supply chain point of view having only one one vendor is a preverbial "shot in the leg".


Sorry if I seem redundant--just trying to get some things straight here. There's been a lot of confusion, changing answers, no answers, etc.

As I understand it, Dyneema is a trademarked name for a brand of UHMWPE. UHMWPE is a generic term for all material of this type, which can vary considerably depending on the grade and manufacturer--am I correct?

Is Rhino actual SK78 Dyneema (brand name), a copy, a blend of Dyneema and other UHMWPE, or? 

I was under the impression that DSM required the label give them credit by using their trademarked name if a product contains their actual material(s), rather than vice-versa.

I appreciate your taking the time to answer.


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

LBR said:


> I was under the impression that DSM required the label give them credit by using their trademarked name if a product contains their actual material(s), rather than vice-versa.


Yes, LBR, that's the definition of a trademark  Sheesh! Companies also allow re-branding, too, though not the case here, and the man already answered the question as to why the named product is not listed per the distributor, not Brownell.


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

> I certainly don't have actual sales figures Rob, but Ultra Cam seemed VERY popular with both compound and Traditional shooters. Why was Ultra Cam discontinued?


Any insight into this? The "answer" we got was UC was too costly to produce, so it was replaced with a material that costs even more, and another material (X-cell) that costs more yet was left on the roster.

Obviously, left with just that, it makes no sense at all.

Glad you are here to straighten it out. When I try to get answers that make sense, I wind up getting thinly veiled threats as a final answer--happened twice so far. Really doesn't leave me with a good feeling towards your company.

sanford, if I am ever interested in your input, I'll be sure to let you know. Don't hold your breath.


----------



## Charon (Apr 17, 2011)

BarneySlayer said:


> Charon, you're tickling my geek button.


Hey now! Lets keep it clean here!:mg:


----------



## Charon (Apr 17, 2011)

Rick Barbee said:


> The sound you hear is from the string hammering the limbs, and the DF97 is doing a whole lot more hammering than the Rhino.
> The reason the DF97 is hammering more is due to the amount of stretch & instability it has under the force of the shot.
> The reason the Rhino is hammering less is due to it having less stretch, and more stability, even at the lower strand count.


So following that line of reasoning B-50 should "hammer" the limbs hardest of all?


----------



## Charon (Apr 17, 2011)

Brownell said:


> LBR,
> 
> We have chosen to honor the wishes of the distributors of Dyneema and not use the name on packaging since they are not our only supplier. .


Interesting in that other bowstring manufacturers that also use Dyneema, as well as other HMPE and LCP materials such as Vectran and Spectra, from multiple suppliers, seem to be under no obligation to not disclose what their products are actually made of.


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

Charon said:


> So following that line of reasoning B-50 should "hammer" the limbs hardest of all?


Yep. That's what my testing has shown.

B50 (all polyester) strings have wider strokes of oscillation/instability, and a longer duration of it, than do any of the fast flight variety of materials.

The less the string moves laterally, and the shorter the duration of the movement, the quieter it will be, the quieter the overall shot will be, and consequently the more stable the bow will be to shoot.

How the strings are constructed, and their weight comes into play there also, but lets just take one thing at a time.

Rick


----------



## Charon (Apr 17, 2011)

So then why is polyester considered to be to be "safer" for old bows without limb tip reinforcements if it hammers the bow harder?


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

Rick Barbee said:


> Hey Jinks - while I'm thinking about it - would you please do a shooting session with each string where you're at the same spot, same distance, and same angle from the camera.
> 
> Shooting straight over the top of the camera with the mic facing you would be a good way to go.
> 
> ...


hey experimental controls! superb! aside from a little interpersonal panty bunching, i really like this thread!


----------



## guyver (Jan 3, 2012)

BarneySlayer said:


> hey experimental controls! superb! aside from a little interpersonal panty bunching, i really like this thread!


'A little' wouldn't be this entertaining.

I think it's hard for some to let others have opinions about things they don't use/like/or agree with.

Who knew arguments about string could be so heated


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

Charon said:


> So then why is polyester *assumed* to be to be "safer" for old bows without limb tip reinforcements if it hammers the bow harder?


Fixed it for ya. There's no definitive proof one way or the other, and some folks think just the opposite of your statement.
I've seen as many bows fail with dacron on them as I have seen with fast flight. The jury is still out, and will likely remain out.

It's kind of off topic anyway, since were talking about performance & quietness.

Rick


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

Charon said:


> So then why is polyester considered to be to be "safer" for old bows without limb tip reinforcements if it hammers the bow harder?


if the string is more elastic, it allows the limbs to travel further. it might be more correct to say that a more rigid string allows the limbs to hammer themselves harder, or at least travel further forward beyond brace position, which often does make a bow louder, just as running the brace height lower can make a bow louder. it is interesting to note that it is the bow itself, not the string, that is louder in this regard. of course, the lack of elasticity means that the limb tips physically undergo more stress.

not that it applies to jinks, but i would point out that this particular benefit will depend on the setup, at least in my experience. my fiancee has a bear montana that is pretty darn close to silent, far quieter, to my ears, than flicking a Bic, with a 12 strand b-50 string, no silencers at all, shooting ten grains per pound. when we went to a fast flight plus string, the harmonics of the string itself (because it was stiffer, less damped, with a somewhat metallic character) prompted us to put on beaver balls, which then solved that issue.

i think the bottom line is that the rhino string that rick made, with the bit of silencers installed works better for jinks than the factory d-97 string that he had before. the properties of the rhino may have something to do with it. rick's strand choice and string co struction might be a contributing factor as well. the presence and or positioning of the silencers will have an effect. acoustically, it's a single string harp with a not so uniform string that has weights and absorbers on it, also firing a projectile. so, the sound it makes is a complicated result of interactions. 

would that combination work well on another bow? i'd venture to say that it depends on the bow, but it very well could. could similar results be had with another material, i would guess so, with some experimentation, but i am not in a position to be placing bets...


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

JINKSTER said:


> I'll give it a whirl when i get home from work Rick and thanks again...but have a couple questions...
> 
> Is it okay if i leave both strings as they are ?...also...the D97 is tuned with my beman X nocks while the Rhino is tuned with my GT S nocks...want me to get both tuned to the same arrow first? Bill.


you were using different arrows? kind of new to experimental methods, huh? glad you brought this up. don't know if it will change much, but if you're game, yes, please


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

If I'm correct Rick did not makes Jinks string his bow maker made them. 

I'm confused if B 50 is harder on bows than why if you string up an old non FF bow with FF do the limb tips break off


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

JParanee said:


> If I'm correct Rick did not makes Jinks string his bow maker made them.
> 
> I'm confused if B 50 is harder on bows than why if you string up an old non FF bow with FF do the limb tips break off


i think it is a matter of stressing the limb tips versus allowing more forward travel, and possibly greater vibration in the limbs as a whole. you can stop a truck from the bumper, which may keep it from hitting the wall, but if you stop it too fast, you'll just tear off the bumper


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

JParanee said:


> If I'm correct Rick did not makes Jinks string his bow maker made them.
> 
> I'm confused if B 50 is harder on bows than why if you string up an old non FF bow with FF do the limb tips break off


One more reply, and then I've got to get back to work.

J, no one is saying it is harder on the bow. I used the word *hammering*, and it was taken out of context for what I meant.
Maybe I should have said buzzing the limbs more, BUT it does come into contact with more force, because due to the stretch it has more forward travel at the apex of the shot.

As I said in an above post -


> There's no definitive proof one way or the other, and some folks think just the opposite of your statement.
> I've seen as many bows fail with dacron on them as I have seen with fast flight. The jury is still out, and will likely remain out.


Rick


----------



## Larry Yien (Jul 8, 2004)

Rick Barbee said:


> One more reply, and then I've got to get back to work.
> 
> J, no one is saying it is harder on the bow. I used the word *hammering*, and it was taken out of context for what I meant.
> Maybe I should have said buzzing the limbs more, BUT it does come into contact with more force, because due to the stretch it has more forward travel at the apex of the shot.
> ...


I really like making my own strings both flemish and continuous. I like to keep up on materials and have appreciated gathering some information on materials on this thread. But Rick you are losing me "quick-like", I can understand you back pedaling on the "hammering" issue vs. buzzing. Two completely different words btw. But are you trying to say that the jury is still out in regards to using dacron vs fastflight on old bows not built for fastflight? Furthermore are you saying that fastflight is kinder to an old bow and dacron b50 is harder on it?

Whoa, from my experiences and discussing the issue with various bowyers I've found that dacron b50 and b500 are easier on bows, limbs, nocks, especially the vintage bows.


----------



## Brownell (May 2, 2011)

No problem at all. DSM requires you to use them as their soul supplier for UHMWPE products to use the Dyneema name. Trust me, it would be much easier for us to clear up any confusion if we could use the Dyneema name. Would solve a lot of headaches for sure! The Rhino is SK 78 and we do get it from them, (its not blended with anything else), we just cant use the name because we have other distributors for the UHMWPE as well. Hope that answers it!




LBR said:


> Sorry if I seem redundant--just trying to get some things straight here. There's been a lot of confusion, changing answers, no answers, etc.
> 
> As I understand it, Dyneema is a trademarked name for a brand of UHMWPE. UHMWPE is a generic term for all material of this type, which can vary considerably depending on the grade and manufacturer--am I correct?
> 
> ...


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

That is much clearer--thanks!

Larry, a question for you. Have you noticed a bow gaining/loosing a significant amount of draw weight just from changing material?


----------



## Brownell (May 2, 2011)

yes, the move away from Ultra cam was before I was hired. From what I was told, and after looking at sales numbers it was cancelled out because of lack of sales numbers overall for the last few years of its existence. We do have a few customers that loved the Ultra Cam, but overall it did not make sense to buy the large bulk raw material orders for the amount we were selling. Seems to me like there are a select few guys that loved it, and its definitely a good product for sure. I think the people before me had looked at all sales, as well as how many SKU's are too many, and decided Ultra Cam was going to but voted off the island. I am always open to your guys feedback, and we can still produce Ultra Cam i would just need to see numbers that I could justify making it again. 





LBR said:


> Any insight into this? The "answer" we got was UC was too costly to produce, so it was replaced with a material that costs even more, and another material (X-cell) that costs more yet was left on the roster.
> 
> Obviously, left with just that, it makes no sense at all.
> 
> ...


----------



## Brownell (May 2, 2011)

I have the same question! All i know is that a few years back, DSM made it very clear that the rules were set and we haven't questioned it yet. I don't know if it was because they want more of our business, or because BCY uses such a bigger volume from them they are giving us a run around. I'm not sure, and at this point all I have is speculation.




Charon said:


> Interesting in that other bowstring manufacturers that also use Dyneema, as well as other HMPE and LCP materials such as Vectran and Spectra, from multiple suppliers, seem to be under no obligation to not disclose what their products are actually made of.


----------



## Larry Yien (Jul 8, 2004)

LBR said:


> That is much clearer--thanks!
> 
> Larry, a question for you. Have you noticed a bow gaining/loosing a significant amount of draw weight just from changing material?


No I have not.


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

Me either--just curious about that.


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

BarneySlayer said:


> hey experimental controls! superb! aside from a little interpersonal panty bunching, i really like this thread!





BarneySlayer said:


> you were using different arrows? kind of new to experimental methods, huh? glad you brought this up. don't know if it will change much, but if you're game, yes, please


Barney...this never started out as "A TEST"...this was just me screwing up big time by stating in this forum how I tried one of my rhino strings...continued..



JParanee said:


> If I'm correct Rick did not makes Jinks string his bow maker made them.
> 
> I'm confused if B 50 is harder on bows than why if you string up an old non FF bow with FF do the limb tips break off


originally made for my bushmen longbow by Steve Jewett the bowyer who owns/operates Bushmen Longbows....and I was so thrilled how the first one exhibited all the fine qualities Steve said it would (quiet/durable/"STABIL"..holding brace like a rock)..I had the 2nd of two laying here and decided to try it on my Super Kodiak and?..flipped out at how quiet the 12strand Rhino String made my Super Kodiak VS the 16Strand D97 Factory string that was on it..and I never meant to conduct "A TEST" but just let folks have a looksey and listen to how quiet it became with the 12strand Rhino...and the vids with everything different?..tab instead of glove..different arrows...yada, yad, yada?...again was not "A TEST"...it was just me trying to show folks how quiet the SK became by comparing two strings in a decent state of tune one vid old one new...but now?..."The Test" is coming...with everything the same...with both "well tuned" strings shot in one continuous vid...I shoud have it up and posted in about an hour...L8R, Bill. :cool2:


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

> From what I was told, and after looking at sales numbers it was cancelled out because of lack of sales numbers overall for the last few years of its existence. We do have a few customers that loved the Ultra Cam, but overall it did not make sense to buy the large bulk raw material orders for the amount we were selling.


That makes sense--totally different than what was said earlier in this thread. Thanks!


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

LBR said:


> Larry, a question for you. Have you noticed a bow gaining/loosing a significant amount of draw weight just from changing material?


I know you asked Larry, but I'll answer also.

Yes, I have. 8^)

As much as 4# of draw weight, but it changes from bow to bow. Generally the highest I see is 2#

Rick


----------



## Charon (Apr 17, 2011)

Don't think I took anything out of context. Certainly not intentionally. Mea Culpa. 

The word "hammering" certainly does imply hitting something harder than than the word "buzzing" does. So that was why I was wondering about potential damage. You see, given my own experiences, I gotta go with Mr. Yien. I do know that some folks successfully run HMPE strings on old bows with no tip reinforcements. But then again they use/build strings with extra thick "padded" loops. I myself don't do that so I can't be certain, but apparently the theory is that the additional material in the string loop helps to cushion and absorb the shock transferred to the limb by the less elastic string material.

Yes it is one particular detail, somewhat off topic, but as Barney Slayer is apparently getting at, these individual details of the physical characteristics of string material all act cumulatively to affect both performance and noise. 

BTW, there generally is no need to "fix" anything I post unless it is a spelling or grammar problem. I say what I mean, and mean what I say. Shall I begin providing the same corrective services for you Mr. Barbee?


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

> As much as 4# of draw weight, but it changes from bow to bow. Generally the highest I see is 2#


How is that? 65# of draw is 65# of draw. A 14 strand Dynaflight '97 string won't change it's properties just by moving it from one bow to the next.

What kind of draw weight difference have you seen with polyester strings vs. HMPE? I know on my stretching jig, a half-inch is about max with some materials, even with 200+ lbs of tension...but I can easily get 3+ inches from polyester. If you get 2-4# difference from one HMPE material to another, it would seem to me you should see a difference of 10-24# with polyester, seeing how it will stretch at least 5 times the distance (conservatively).


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

LBR said:


> How is that? 65# of draw is 65# of draw. A 14 strand Dynaflight '97 string won't change it's properties just by moving it from one bow to the next.
> 
> What kind of draw weight difference have you seen with polyester strings vs. HMPE? I know on my stretching jig, a half-inch is about max with some materials, even with 200+ lbs of tension...but I can easily get 3+ inches from polyester. If you get 2-4# difference from one HMPE material to another, it would seem to me you should see a difference of 10-24# with polyester, seeing how it will stretch at least 5 times the distance (conservatively).


LOL Chad - You can't get past the stretch thing, and think about rate of contraction. The string tension actually does go down as the bow is drawn.
That's the last I have to say about it unless to someone else.

I tried to explain it to you once before. You didn't understand it then, so I have no reason to believe you will understand it now.

I took you off of ignore to see what you had in response to Rob's explanations.
Click - back on ignore. 8^)

Rick


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

Charon said:


> Don't think I took anything out of context. Certainly not intentionally. Mea Culpa.
> 
> The word "hammering" certainly does imply hitting something harder than than the word "buzzing" does. So that was why I was wondering about potential damage. You see, given my own experiences, I gotta go with Mr. Yien. I do know that some folks successfully run HMPE strings on old bows with no tip reinforcements. But then again they use/build strings with extra thick "padded" loops. I myself don't do that so I can't be certain, but apparently the theory is that the additional material in the string loop helps to cushion and absorb the shock transferred to the limb by the less elastic string material.
> 
> ...


Look Brother. All I was doing was making a point that it is an assumption, because there is ZERO definitive proof one way or the other.
Sorry the way I did it offended you.

Rick


----------



## Easykeeper (Jan 2, 2003)

Rick Barbee said:


> *The string tension actually does go down as the bow is drawn.*


How does that work?


----------



## bowcycle (Aug 26, 2011)

I'm no expert here so this may be WAAAY off base.

From my study, the difference between polyester vs HMPE strings on old bows is about 2 things: laminate glue and bow nocks.
If you pad the loops on HMPE strings, then they're supposedly okay to use on older bows because they won't cut into the un-reinforced nocks. That takes care of the big problem everyone talks about.
The second issue is laminate glue. HMPE strings have less flex than polyester. That's why they "buzz" less. But not letting the limbs flex (the sudden stop rather than "waving" stop at return) can cause delamination because of the glues used in older bows.

If that is correct, then both of these reasons for not using HMPE on older bows are cautionary and have absolutely nothing to do with the primary issue being discussed on this thread.

That being said, it now appears that LBR like SK78 from BYC and Jinks likes SK78 from Brownell. I would say that everything else involved here is string construction and bow tune (like many people have said).
So are we all finished?


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

Easykeeper said:


> How does that work?


Easy, it's a very detailed geometry extrapolation, but basically, the "force" at the fingers is equal to the opposing force of the bow, but the string tension at full draw is almost halved from its tension at brace.

Here, I found an article using a bow as an example: http://dev5.mhhe.cm/tbern/public_html/0073404470/pdf/ch04_07.pdf


----------



## Easykeeper (Jan 2, 2003)

Sanford said:


> Easy, it's a very detailed geometry explanation, but basically, the "force" at the fingers is equal to the opposing force of the bow, but the string tension at full draw is almost halved from its tension at brace.
> 
> Here, I found an article using a bow as an example: http://dev5.mhhe.com/tbern/public_html/0073404470/pdf/ch04_07.pdf


Thanks Sanford. I found this on a search...http://www.perrisarchery.co.uk/string_tension.htm

I appreciate the geometry in your link. It's one of the many things in physics (statics in this case) that goes against first instinct.


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

> How does that work?


Majick--and if you don't like that, well then you just come to see me on your dime and I'll dare you to say it to my face! And if that doesn't work, I'm telling my mom! :set1_rolf2:




> I tried to explain it to you once before.


No, just like this time you ran off. Dang. 

Here's my take on the draw weight change. Amazingly, I've yet to find another archer or bowyer who sees it differently than I do, and I've asked. Can't make it happen on my bows either.

2-4# of draw weight equals approximately an inch or more of draw length on a typical bow.

For a bow to gain/loose 2-4# of draw weight, at the exact same draw length, it would mean the string would have to stretch or contract enough to affect the bend of the limbs the same as approximately 1" of draw length.

That simply does not happen. If it did, can you imagine the implications for the compound industry? The holding weight on those is so very low, and the time held at full draw comparably so long, that if this magical contraction were to occur at the same rate on them it would have a HUGE effect...but somehow we've never heard of if, and the material that is supposedly so inferior has been one of the most popular for years? Wow...how in the world could we have missed THAT???

The "explanation" is based on a material's elasticity. Fine. Polyester is much more elastic than any of the HMPE materials, so it should show a huge difference. Again, like last time, when I brought this up is when it went down the crapper, because it simply doesn't add up.


----------



## Charon (Apr 17, 2011)

Now yes, I admit that this is off topic.

OK looked at Sanford's link. A mathematical analysis of what is going on such that as the bowstring is drawn, actual tension on the string goes down. To simplify we can just look at a graph of string tension during the draw as seen here:









Black shows tension during the draw, green shows tension after release. 

As weird as it seems, its true. It can be verified by just making 2 short strings and hook up a scale in the middle, then draw the whole contraption like you're drawing a normal bowstring.

But here's the fun part. Mr. Barbee contends that since the string tension drops off, a string that demonstrates any stretch will contract, become shorter, due to the decreasing tension. So, by the time final draw length is reached, the bow's draw weight is higher than if a string with no stretch is used. The higher draw weight comes from the string having become shorter, even if both the stretchy and non-stretchy strings were originally built to be of equal lengths when not under tension.

LBR's question remains valid. If a stretchy string raises final draw weight due to this effect, then should not B-50, the stretchiest of the synthetic string materials in common use, raise final draw weight even more? 

I myself would like to add to the question. If the theory is correct, what would happen if we used rubber bands as bowstrings? Wouldn't final draw weight go through the roof as the rubber bands contracted due to decreasing tension?

Unfortunately I can no longer find the write ups on your website Mr. Barbee, but just a few years ago didn't you successfully demonstrate that a low stretch string actually pulled the limb tips of a bow closer together than a string of higher stretch material? I do hope that you have upgraded your test equipment during the intervening years. A tape measure and a fish scale graduated in whole pounds would surely have a large built in lack of precision.


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

> If a stretchy string raises final draw weight due to this effect, then should not B-50, the stretchiest of the synthetic string materials in common use, raise final draw weight even more?


That's what I've asked, a few times. Still waiting for an answer.

Charon, what are your thoughts on the compound bow example? I have no idea what your experience is with compound bows, but you seem to be pretty well versed in archery.

Of course I'd welcome informed input from anyone on this topic. I find it fascinating. Rob, how about you?


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

JINKSTER said:


> Barney...this never started out as "A TEST"......"The Test" is coming...with everything the same...with both "well tuned" strings shot in one continuous vid...I shoud have it up and posted in about an hour...L8R, Bill. :cool2:


Dude, you're a trooper! THanks for entertaining us!


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

BarneySlayer said:


> Dude, you're a trooper! THanks for entertaining us!



Ain't he though !!!!!

Keep up the good work Bill. 8^)

Very much looking forward to the new video.

Rick


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

> Dude, you're a trooper! THanks for entertaining us!


AT definately has a high entertainment value, especially this board.


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

Charon said:


> Now yes, I admit that this is off topic.
> 
> OK looked at Sanford's link. A mathematical analysis of what is going on such that as the bowstring is drawn, actual tension on the string goes down. To simplify we can just look at a graph of string tension during the draw as seen here:
> 
> ...


All true, except for one thing you have misunderstood in my explanation.

The string that has the fastest rate of contraction *under load* (which will almost always be the stronger string) will be the one that adds weight.
It adds the weight by quickly retracting it's length as you draw the bow, and actually winds up being shorter at draw than it's weaker counterpart.
The difference in length at draw is where the draw weight difference comes from. You are simply bending the limbs farther with one string than you are with the other.
Consequently, that is one of the factors that allow the low stretch materials to enhance bow performance/speed. Not only do they stretch less, but they contract much quicker under load.

I conducted a similar test sometime later which found that the weaker string materials would eventually catch up to (or should I say draw down to) the length of the stronger string.
The thing is, it took them anywhere from 30 to 40 seconds to catch up. I don't think anyone wants to hold at full draw that long.

Yes, I did a show & tell on the test quite some time ago, but due to the skepticism of the tools I used, especially my homemade tools, I decided to pull the webpage down until I have the time & cash to repeat the test with tools which will be acceptable to all.
Even though I know the scale is accurate, the test I conducted could be construed as being inaccurate as to actual draw weights of the bow with each string due to the possibility of inaccuracy of the cheap Field&Stream hand held scale, so like I said - I will conduct the test again someday with more acceptable equipment.

Rick

EDIT:

P.S
I have built strings for two different bowyers who expressed concerns to me that their bows were coming in over draw weight fairly regularly when they started using them.


----------



## Easykeeper (Jan 2, 2003)

LBR said:


> AT definately has a high entertainment value, especially this board.


Spend some time up on the Bowhunting forum, especially over the summer as hunting season approaches...:doh:...:chortle:


----------



## dwagoner (Sep 27, 2007)

YEAH i think we all know that Brownell does NOT use DSM Dyneema products, theres a reason why and its Trademarked, so thats why BCY post it like that and brownell cant, they say everything is HMPE. They may compare it but it is not the same materials. Brownell uses overseas versions of dyneema (japanese company) and that link to brownells past is from 2005 and since then they cant say the word dyneema even. They like to keep secrets, kinda like astro and xs2 and how its some super proprietery process to take the exact same material and just make it thinner and WHAM now its better??? Rhino is the same materail as astro, xs2 its just their 3rd version of strand size...

Thats just to set the record straight about what material it is and what they use, and not to say anything about how you like the material or whatever, ive personally tried it and did not like the longevitiy of the material myself. never understand why they like to call everything HMPE and not tell any secrets, BCY personell came from brownell so they do know alot about each other as companies.. so why not just tell people what their stuff is??? who knows


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

Okay...took some doing but I got it done! :laugh:

First?...

*THE STRINGS: "16Strand D97" VS "12Strand Rhino"*

Both set-up exactly the same...no yarn wraps on either...(1) strips worth of cat whiskers on both...1/2 the strip 12"s down from the top loop and 1/2 the strip 12" up from the bottom loop on each string.

Both set-up with a brass crimp-on up top and a tie-on below....with both set at 1/2" above the shelf.

Both Strings were preset and adjusted to register an 8 3/8ths Brace Height.










And for your viewing pleasure?...I weighed the strings on a 3Rivers Digital Grain Scale...

First?...the oh so light, strong and silent type...the 12 Strand Rhino...










And now?...the whale of a rope 16 Strand D97...










Next?...

*"THE ARROWS":* (6) 30" Long GT 3555 (.500 spine) XT Hunters (+/-.003" straightness) with 250gr screw-in points and (3) 4" Full Helix LW Shield Cut Feathers...Total Arrow weight of Each Ranges 512grs-515grs shooting Appox. 13.5GPP off my 64" Bear Super Kodiak Holding 38#s @ 28 1/2"s....Note: The only difference in these arrows is the nocks...I used (3) Orange Bohning S-Nocks (properly fit to the 16 strand D97 string) and (3) White Victory S-Nocks (properly fit to the 12 strand Rhino String). 










Also Please NOTE: The bares haft version of these very arrows?..fly spot-on with the D97 and just a touch weak with the 12strand rhino.

Now here's the vid you've all been waiting for...and as requested?...I shot the whole sequence in one sitting without moving the camera or my shooting position so please excuse the 2 minute intermission while I swapped strings...I braced up the 16strand D97 and shot it first while I had the 12 Strand Rhino waiting behind me spread between two bare shafts and already preset for the proper 8 3/8ths BH...cause I wouldn't want anyone to think this test was...uhem..."Rigged"...in any way! :laugh:

Oh and...btw....Chad?...those last 3 silent but deadly whistlers?...they're for you Bud! :laugh: 

Cause I'm call'in it TUNED! Love Bill. 






And hey Mr. Rick...do I at least get a free string outta this? :laugh: Just teas'in!...it was my pleasure! Bill.


----------



## Brownell (May 2, 2011)

Dwagoner, read some of my previous posts and it will clear a few things up. Also, we do buy some materials from DSM. Thank you sir!




dwagoner said:


> YEAH i think we all know that Brownell does NOT use DSM Dyneema products, theres a reason why and its Trademarked, so thats why BCY post it like that and brownell cant, they say everything is HMPE. They may compare it but it is not the same materials. Brownell uses overseas versions of dyneema (japanese company) and that link to brownells past is from 2005 and since then they cant say the word dyneema even. They like to keep secrets, kinda like astro and xs2 and how its some super proprietery process to take the exact same material and just make it thinner and WHAM now its better??? Rhino is the same materail as astro, xs2 its just their 3rd version of strand size...
> 
> Thats just to set the record straight about what material it is and what they use, and not to say anything about how you like the material or whatever, ive personally tried it and did not like the longevitiy of the material myself. never understand why they like to call everything HMPE and not tell any secrets, BCY personell came from brownell so they do know alot about each other as companies.. so why not just tell people what their stuff is??? who knows


----------



## Bytesback (Apr 8, 2013)

Jinks- I declare this latest video rigged. I notice on the three shots done with the first string, the leaves in the trees behind you are far more active, obviously adding to the noise level versus the second string......  Just kidding!!!. In all seriousness, I actually have found this thread extremely informative for a newbie like me, as far as understanding some of the principles behind string choice and preference. I think it was really awesome of you to go through the trouble of doing all this, simply because others asked, when you stated you preferred one string over another. It was also very interesting to see all the different viewpoints and their reasoning


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

Bytesback said:


> Jinks- I declare this latest video rigged. I notice on the three shots done with the first string, the leaves in the trees behind you are far more active, obviously adding to the noise level versus the second string......  Just kidding!!!. In all seriousness, I actually have found this thread extremely informative for a newbie like me, as far as understanding some of the principles behind string choice and preference. I think it was really awesome of you to go through the trouble of doing all this, simply because others asked, when you stated you preferred one string over another. It was also very interesting to see all the different viewpoints and their reasoning


Thanks BB...and everyone else who complimented me on my efforts here...but the way I see it?...any forum anywhere is only as good as it members..(just like I've learned that any bow is only as good as the string that's on it)...so if folks don't post up and participate?...all's ya got is a black hole in cyberspace. :laugh:

That said?...I just got off the phone with Mr. Barbee...and he was giggling like a younger brother who just found out his mean older sister is preggers! LOL!...telling me he was right in the middle of doing the sound analysis of that vid and that he doesn't know why cause ya don't need one as just the sound of the arrow singing by with the 12strand rhino?..pretty much overwhelmed the quiet note of the bow..and then told me?..that both he and Rob (Brownell) appreciated the effort I put into this so much that he's making me up a free string!...I accepted and told'im Cool!...and that after I fit it up and check it out?..i'll pay for the 2nd one!...(as I always like to have a back-up set-up and ready to go)...and very nice of him as well for all the effort he's put into posting up sound analysis charts off the vids I posted up..and I gotta admit...he didn't hafta do a thing for me...as I had a blast doing this. 

Now...sure has gotten quiet in here all of a sudden like..maybe cause everybody is out shooting skinny rhino strings? :laugh:

Thanks again all (Especially you Mr. Barbee!) and L8R, Bill. :cool2:


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

Well Bill, No Sir - Thank You !!!!!!!!!!
You did all the work, and it has been a real eye opener, or should I say ear opener. 8^)

The difference is so obvious, that it really doesn't need an analysis, but I can't let your work go unappreciated, so here ya go.









Here is a link to a sound clip with just the 3 shots from each string.
First 3 are the DF97. Second 3 are the Rhino.

http://www.tradarcher.com/misc/string sounds/df97_rhino_compare_3.wav

You will notice that you can hear the arrows singing in the Rhino shots, but the noise from the DF97 shots drown out the arrow sound.

Rick


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

Rick Barbee said:


> Well Bill, No Sir - Thank You !!!!!!!!!!
> You did all the work, and it has been a real eye opener, or should I say ear opener. 8^)
> 
> The difference is so obvious, that it really doesn't need an analysis, but I can't let your work go unappreciated, so here ya go.
> ...


Wow Rick!...that "SoundByte" file was COOL! :laugh:

*MY RHINO EQUIPPED BEAR SUPER KODIAK SOUNDS AWESOME!* :banana:

and according to that chart?...

looks like I wasn't that far off the mark claiming my bows sound level got chopped in 1/2 with the rhino string! 

man...now I need quieter feathers. 

not really....I LOVE that sound! 

Thanks again! Bill. :cool2:


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

Bill congrats on having a very quiet Bow  

I noticed the change from D 97 to 8190


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

JParanee said:


> Bill congrats on having a very quiet Bow
> 
> I noticed the change from D 97 to 8190


Thanks Joe!...and just think...I haven't even gotten around to the "limbsavers" thing yet!


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

Man...this thread was rockin all day...I finally post "The Test Vid" and it's like...where'd everybody go?


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

Like I said Bill, glad you like it. I haven't watched/listened yet--I'll try to get around to it. As I said earlier, I'd be shocked if the rhino string wasn't quieter than the "factory" D97. Doesn't change anything I said before.

Since he said he has me on "ignore", you can pass on to rick that I had an interesting conversation with Jim N. Just confirmed what I already knew.


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

JINKSTER said:


> Thanks Joe!...and just think...I haven't even gotten around to the "limbsavers" thing yet!


Truly impressive in the sound department buddy and I have enjoyed the thread  

As for BCY vs Brownell I have a suggestion 

I know Chad is a string maker par excellence and I am sure Rick is also sooooooo lets say Chad makes me a string out of BCY 8190 in the format he suggests and Rick makes me one from Brownells Rhino in his suggested build. Of course I will pay for them . I have a Chrono and a sound meter and ya can pick any bow I have . I'd suggest my new F7 Buffalo because I need a string for it anyway.  

Sound like fun ....... Sure does to me 

I'm sure a lot of folks out there want to know which prouducet performs better


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

Now that would be interesting! Is that the string I have the specs for JP? Still don't know when I could do it, but that gives me more incentive to try and get one done.

Down-side is I'm not looking for more orders--just the opposite. Oh well...we'll see.


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

Yes my friend it is


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

LBR said:


> Like I said Bill, glad you like it. I haven't watched/listened yet--I'll try to get around to it. As I said earlier, I'd be shocked if the rhino string wasn't quieter than the "factory" D97. Doesn't change anything I said before.
> 
> Since he said he has me on "ignore", *you can pass on to rick that I had an interesting conversation with Jim N. Just confirmed what* I already knew.


*Nah*...I'll pass Chad...don't wanna get wrapped up in the mud sling'in (let alone "he said/she said") stuff and?..I really have no dog in the Chad VS Rick or even BCY VS Brownell dealio going on here..I just thought it was cool that I tried the 2nd longbow string (Steve Jewett Made for my Bushmen Longbow) of 12 strand rhino on my SK and was floored by how much quieter it became....that's all.

You guys wanna have a string build-off?...have at it...looks like it would be slightly biased to me even though I think both string builders and manufacturers are first class at what they do...but then?...i'm the kinda guy that claims he loves Fords cause they keep the cost of my Chevys down! :laugh:

Have Fun...already proved all the proving I need to prove and L8R, Bill. :cool2:


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

It's so nice when everything comes together with such loving compassion. High fives all around !  I'd offer to build an 8190, as I've got some, but I know nothing about the whole padding thing.


----------



## Mo0se (Sep 24, 2002)

The string I have from Pierre is the best string Ive had period..padded 8 strand D-10 SK78 Dyneema If I get a rain day tomorrow I will do a little video for y'uns  Good stuff Bill.


----------



## Charon (Apr 17, 2011)

I'm with you on the "rate of contraction" Mr. Barbee. I do get it. For example one stretched rubber band snaps back into shape in a fraction of a second. Another of a different
material takes several seconds to finally crawl back into shape. 

How did you measure the rate of contraction of the different strings in order to make the correlation between it and higher draw weight for the different strings?

If your theory is correct, then what about what I would call "yo-yo"? Refer back to the graph I posted. As we near final draw length tension begins to climb again. As tension goes back up, the string would begin to stretch again. But as it stretches it quits pulling the limb tips and tension would go back down, and contraction would begin again, which would start tension climbing back up, etc etc etc. Just as if the string were a spring. This yo-yo effect is quite real and a consideration when doing heavy rigging. 

Now I gotta admit the last part is really hilarious. I thought I had heard all possible excuses for a bowyer's failure. "Flemish twist voids the warranty." "Endless loop voids the warranty." "Flemish twist will twist the bow limbs." Yada yada yada. So now we have, "I missed draw weight because of the string." 

So we can talk about other details of the theory. However I honestly just simply flat out refuse to accept the idea that a couple of bowyers couldn't hit draw weight as support for the theory. Just not buyin' it. Its just too absurd.

Oh and watched Jinxster's new vid. I'm sure that somebody could find some sort of variable to nit pick over, but over all it does a much better job of substantiating the claim of the quieter Rhino string.


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

Charon, did you see what I said concerning compound bows? 

Admittedly I don't know much about compounds, but if you have this rubber band effect (on materials marketed for their lack of stretch), seems to me it would be magnified greatly on a compound bow where the let-off means you are holding so little, and the time at full draw is generally MUCH longer than the typical traditional shooter.

How much would one of these rubber bands have to stretch/contract to make a 4# difference? Still haven't seen a reasonable explanation as to why the most elastic of string materials don't make a giant difference, and companies like BCY and Brownell have spent countless dollars developing materials that are less elastic?

On the bowyers...that is hilarious. Most promise a draw weight +/- a couple of pounds. He said most of the string variance he's seen is only that much...except the ones that are thrown off so much that it's a cause for concern? 

Okey dokey....it is what it is, until who cares what it is. UC was taken off the market because of a lack of sales...which is the exact same thing as saying it was too expensive to produce for the consumer...except it cost considerably less than some other materials...and, and, and....

Anybody confused yet?


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

No problem Bill--I understand.


----------



## Charon (Apr 17, 2011)

Oh, yes LBR I did see that. Spaced it. 

I do have a couple of compound bows. Haven't picked one up in over 10 years. Except maybe to move to some other obscure corner of the shop. I'm sorry, but I just don't have the time or inclination to rig up a special string so I can measure string tension on a compound. But yes, given the high let off, if the phenomena were to truly exist, then it should become VERY apparent on a compound. Ye,t oddly enough, we hear nothing about it from other sources. Such as string or bow manufacturers.


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

Charon said:


> Oh, yes LBR I did see that. Spaced it.
> 
> I do have a couple of compound bows. Haven't picked one up in over 10 years. Except maybe to move to some other obscure corner of the shop. I'm sorry, but I just don't have the time or inclination to rig up a special string so I can measure string tension on a compound. But yes, given the high let off, if the phenomena were to truly exist, then it should become VERY apparent on a compound. Ye,t oddly enough, we hear nothing about it from other sources. Such as string or bow manufacturers.


Don't know about how this effect is related to traditional bows, but with a compound, the draw weight has more to do with cam rotation than draw. If the string contracted, it might change the draw length for a given stop with respective cam rotation, but I don't think it would change the draw weight very much. I'm going to file this particular item under "hmmmmm..." and see what comes of other tests. I'd offer to try it myself, between a B-50 and 8190, but my bow scale is a cheap unit that's only good for a rough idea...


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

> If the string contracted, it might change the draw length for a given stop with respective cam rotation, but I don't think it would change the draw weight very much.


Maybe not, but if a string contracted enough to make a change of 4# on a recurve, then surely someone would notice it on a compound. I would think more tension on the string at brace (not sure), heavier draw weight than most traditional shooters, a LOT less holding weight, and hold at full draw a lot longer. Seems to me it's the perfect storm for a string to contract...if such a phenomenon were to occur to any degree. Some of the compound guys are as bad as we are about trying different things. The manufacturers definitely try out different strings and materials. 



> ...given the high let off, if the phenomena were to truly exist, then it should become VERY apparent on a compound. Yet oddly enough, we hear nothing about it from other sources. Such as string or bow manufacturers.


My thoughts exactly. Roy, if you are keeping up with this one, what are your thoughts? I know what I've heard..."elsewhere", but would like to hear from Brownell on the matter.


----------



## Easykeeper (Jan 2, 2003)

Great thread Jinkster...:thumbs_up 

It's threads like this that make me able to say I learn something new everyday on Archery Talk.


----------



## 4nolz (Aug 17, 2011)

maybe people are sick of it?





JINKSTER said:


> Man...this thread was rockin all day...I finally post "The Test Vid" and it's like...where'd everybody go?


----------



## fotoguy (Jul 30, 2007)

ukey:ukey:


4nolz said:


> maybe people are sick of it?


Couldn't agree more!


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

My thinking about the change in string length and compounds is this...

Regardless of whether or not a string does change length substantially, if it does, the actual 'string' side of it on a compound, with the let off, comes to full draw when the cams hit their stops. The cams will stop in the same position no matter what. if the string shortens, the draw length will shorten, and if it lengthens, the draw length will lengthen. The limbs aren't going to move one way or another at all. At least in the scenario of the string itself. This is much different than a recurve, where the draw length will depend on the person, and the resulting limb flex will depend on the draw length and the string length.

Now, if the control or bus cables change length, that's an entirely different story, because between them and the cam stop, you determine the axle to axle length of the bow (and the resulting limb bend). However, the control cables are holding maximum tension at full draw, because the cams transfer the load over to them to achieve the let off. What is more, most compound bows have the cables under much higher tension under any circumstance, in which case the degree of travel due to elasticity is going to be far less, and the moving range of the limbs (and the variation of weight as a result of that movement), will also be far less. What's more, control cables are usually relatively short, which means that any stretch due to elasticity will scale with the shorter cable length, and any effect will scale down as well...

Theoretically, anyway. I can't say that I really know. If anybody's got a setup that would allow it, it would be really interesting to do a draw force curve plot with different strings, starting with identical brace height, on a given bow...


----------



## Charon (Apr 17, 2011)

So Barney Slayer, if I understand you correctly, and given a piece that I recently read on compound bow cam design, (and if I understand IT correctly) due to th etransfer of load to the cable a compound may NOT show the effects of string stretch and contraction as dramatically as we might think? 
Hmmmmm......


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

Charon said:


> So Barney Slayer, if I understand you correctly, and given a piece that I recently read on compound bow cam design, (and if I understand IT correctly) due to th etransfer of load to the cable a compound may NOT show the effects of string stretch and contraction as dramatically as we might think?
> Hmmmmm......


I should be careful how I say this, and should qualify that this is based entirely on my understanding of theory, I haven't actually tested anything, but...

A traditional bow's string directly affects bend of the limbs. A compound bow does it through the cams, which in modern compound bows have a stop. 

With a traditional bow, if you shorten or lengthen the string, at full draw, the limbs 'see' a different draw length, given a fixed draw length by the archer. As such, if the string shortens, in a static sense, the brace height will go up, the pre-load increases, and the limbs will bend more at full draw (which is a fixed draw length), and as a result, the holding weight will increase.

The phenomena we're talking about is the string length changing, so that you theoretically have the string shorten at full draw, but not at brace. But, the scenario at full draw is the same. Shorter string, more load on the limbs, because the limbs are being bent father.

On a compound bow, the draw length that the limbs 'see' is entirely dependent upon cam rotation. IF there wasn't a stop, a shorter string would cause more cam rotation with a fixed draw length. What would then happen would depend entirely upon the cam, but you would hit the end shape of the draw force curve sooner. If it was a simple compound bow with plain old wheels, the draw weight might go up a little. If it was a modern compound with a flat draw force curve and no let off, it wouldn't change much at all. You might, though, get a little more energy storage, because more cam rotation means more movement of the limbs, more work put into the system.. However, how efficiently you get that energy back begs the question of if the string gets stretched out again as the bow is fired, does the energy get lost in the string itself? I have no idea. Kind of reaching here.

However, with let off, you have a stop, and the stop determines the end of cam rotation, and the draw length that the limbs 'see'. Now, that's not to say that a shorter or longer string won't have any effect. The longer or shorter string at full draw will affect the actual draw length that the shooter is holding. 

If you simply shorten the string on a compound bow, in a static sense, you change the initial cam rotation, don't change the brace height much, if at all, slightly increase the draw weight, but also shorten the draw length. You get higher weight because the _starting_ preload is increased. But, if it is shortened after you get to full draw, it just shortens the draw, because the cam rotation can't go any farther, so the archer has to give, and anchor shorter.

AM I making any sense? I think I might be on the verge of confusing myself


----------



## fotoguy (Jul 30, 2007)

Man, this thread was a lot shorter and easier to read on Tradtalk!


----------



## Charon (Apr 17, 2011)

BarneySlayer said:


> But, if it is shortened after you get to full draw, it just shortens the draw, because the cam rotation can't go any farther, so the archer has to give, and anchor shorter.


Uhhhhhh.......

I liked my explanation better.

No, I get it. What clarifies is it that last sentence of yours that I quoted above.


----------



## Hank (Jul 5, 2003)

I like 450+ and have quite a few spools that I have acquired for various reasons at a very reasonable cost. If I didn't have so much I would definitely like to try the Rhino. I use the 3 things in my strings LBR hates the most (besides Brownell Products) -- 1: 450+ a material that according to LBR can blow at anytime, although I have never had a 450+ string go yet and I have been using it for years and have strings that are years old still in use (some look really ratty) 2: Nylon endloop servings, LBR says they are much better more durable materials out there, but if your string grooves are smooth without any sharp edges, where does the durability factor come in? (marketing?) 3: monofilament center servings, again can blow at any moment, however, for some strange reason, mine never do.

I do believe Brownell #4 nylon used in endloops is quieter regarding limb slap (for a hunting bow) and it has been my experience that Brownell #4 Nylon is substantially more durable than BCY's Nylon serving.

Rob/Brownell -- can I get a spool of Rhino to test?


----------



## benofthehood (May 18, 2011)

fotoguy said:


> Man, this thread was a lot shorter and easier to read on Tradtalk!


Yep .......


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

Ahh, another "fan" who can't begin to get their story straight. Like a few other chronic embellishers, hank never bothers to ask what I think--he much rather tell me. Makes his stories seem almost legitimate that way.



> I use the 3 things in my strings LBR hates the most (besides Brownell Products) --


When have I EVER said I hate Brownell products? (lie #1)



> 1: 450+ a material that according to LBR can blow at anytime,...


When did I say that? I've had customers report that they had some very low strand count strings that were made from 450+ break, and I have heard the same from a different, very well known and respected string maker (obviously the terms "well known" and "respected" omit hank). I would never use a product that I thought could "blow at any time"--that would be idiotic. (lie #2)



> 2: Nylon endloop servings, LBR says they are much better more durable materials out there,...


Actually that is the truth, but I never said I hate nylon serving. I keep it and use it by request. (lie #3)




> 3: monofilament center servings, again can blow at any moment, however, for some strange reason, mine never do.


Mono serving can break without showing a lot of wear, although I've never said it could "blow without warning". Does Brownell offer nylon serving material anymore? I don't see it on their site. BCY doesn't. That's why you have to use fishing line for serving if you want mono--nobody makes it anymore. Reckon why that is, since it's so great? (lie#4)

Hey--maybe you guys could get together and start a club? Your mascot could be a baboon with it's butt glowing red (spanked), your flag could be a big 'ol pair of granny panties tied in a knot, and your motto could be "Facts? We don't need no stinking facts!" Your club "ring" could be a big 'ol passifier. Your secret password could be "WAHHHHH"


----------



## Hank (Jul 5, 2003)

Chad, I quit listening to you and your opinion on strings along time ago and these continuous diatribes are probably turning people away from BCY products. You are pretty entertaining though.


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

I'm guessing this is where I'm supposed to be insulted? Bothers me about like a few others who can't handle the truth saying they "ignore" me too (but they somehow find out what I say). If you don't care what I think, why do you feel the need to announce it to me? You post a laundry list of fallicies about me, then act like I'm supposed to care what you think of my opinions???? :der: 


I really don't think folks will be turned against anything by my pressing for facts and exposing liars. My presentation may not be pretty, but the only people who will be turned away by my "diatribe" are those who would prefer a pretty lie over plain truth. I can live with that.


----------



## Hank (Jul 5, 2003)

"Hey--maybe you guys could get together and start a club? Your mascot could be a baboon with it's butt glowing red (spanked), your flag could be a big 'ol pair of granny panties tied in a knot, and your motto could be "Facts? We don't need no stinking facts!" Your club "ring" could be a big 'ol passifier. Your secret password could be "WAHHHHH" 

One of the most professional responses I have read online, BCY must be so proud to have you as a representative.


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

Oh well--you know what they say about people that can't take a joke...

You and yours remind me of the "reality" television show "Caught Red Handed". These security guys set up cameras and catch shoplifters in the act. When they get caught and are confronted, the crooks act like they are the victims!

You come on here out of the blue, post a list of lies about me, then act like I'm the bad guy for defending myself and exposing your lies. Not sure if I should laugh at you or pity you. Think I'll laugh. :set1_rolf2:


----------



## Hank (Jul 5, 2003)

"You and yours remind me of the "reality" television show "Caught Red Handed". These security guys set up cameras and catch shoplifters in the act. When they get caught and are confronted, the crooks act like they are the victims!

You come on here out of the blue, post a list of lies about me, then act like I'm the bad guy for defending myself and exposing your lies. Not sure if I should laugh at you or pity you. Think I'll laugh."

Another professional response you would expect from the representative of a company.


----------



## Hank (Jul 5, 2003)

LBR talked me into it, I am going to get some Rhino


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

Hank said:


> LBR talked me into it, I am going to get some Rhino


Good for you Hank!...and I guess since I'm admittedly no where's near what one might term as a "String Guru"?...I suppose it "might be" out of place for me to say something like..

"I KNOW You'll Be Impressed"

But in the past two years?...here is a listing of one string bows I've owned and shot with strings made of...

*My Old Bob Lee:*

B50
B55
FF+

*My Bushmen R/D Longbow:*

AstroFlight
Angel Majesty (*Endless Loop)
Rhino

*21st Century Edge Carbon Longbow:*

450+

*Toelke Whip Longbow:*

Dyneema 02

*Falco Trophy Carbon Longbow:*

Spectra
AstroFlight

*Bear Super Kodiak:*

D97
Rhino

But I think I can safely say this..

"You Definitely WON'T BE DISAPPOINTED With The Rhino"

and of them all?...the two top strings "That Held Brace The Best" were the Angel Majesty (*Endless Loop) and the Rhino Flem Twist...but that AM was no where's near as quiet nor anywhere near as durable as the Rhino has already proven itself to be to me.

So imnsho?...you most definitely wouldn't be wasting a dime by adding a spool of Rhino to your shelves...matter fact?...once you try it?..I bet it flies off that shelf.

That said?...

*The Angel Majesty: Is only recommended for "Endless Loop" construction...as it is a FF based material with some sort of "resin binder" that activates upon "burnishing the string" after being suitable shot in and properly braced so I imagine it's somewhat loud vocal quality was greatly in part to the very tightly wound halo serving on those endless loops whacking the limb...but that has little to do with how quickly this "Advised/Required No Waxing" string fuzzed out.

Another aspect I have noted during the course of this?:

I by far prefer strings of a "Triple Bundle Construction"...as the continuity of the string loop ends on a triple bundle construction are far more consistent and seamless in shape as those braids transition into the string itself...matter fact?..this 16strand D97 factory string that came stock with my Bear SK?..is of a double bundle construction and while it seems to be very tight and well made?...I believe that most of the decibles this string registered came from it's hard as a rock, and huge up top, somewhat offset appearing..double bundle braids whacking their way into the limbs string grooves....that said?...the rhino strings Steve Jewett made up here (originally for my bushmen longbow) are of a 12 strand double bundle construction with no padding on the loops and are in fact...quiet as a church mouse when tried on my Bear SK Recurve. 

Rick Barbee is currently making me up "a gratis string" for my efforts here...9 strand triple bundle made of (white/hunter green/brown) Rhino with 18 strand padded loops for my SK...and in a few minutes here?...i'm going to call him up and ask him to send me a paypal request for a 2nd one as I always like to have "2 Strings" set-up and ready for each bow I intend to keep..of which both the Bushmen and Bear Super Kodiak are.

BTW...I had to giggle when I read the convo between yourself and LBR regarding "Mono Center Serving"...my experiences with it over several decades were that it was extremely consistent, fast and did hold up great...the downside?...it can compress and flatten slightly with no apparent harm but...get just one little micro-nick in that stuff and it'll blow off the string without warning...which is probably why I've had mono center servings last either 3 years or 3 days. :laugh:

Hope you found that helpful and L8R, Bill. :cool2:


----------



## Hank (Jul 5, 2003)

I have never bought any monofilament center serving from any string company and have always used fishing line mono for many reasons. The guy who told me to try it used fishing line himself. The newer Fishing lines have been formulated to be even more abrasion and uv resistant, not sure on standard serving mono. You can get big spools of it cheap and comes in many diameters.

I think a lot of the mono breakage issues has to do with the serving tool used, which maybe scraping or nicking the mono as it is being served. My server bases are nylon and that's the only thing the mono touches.

Brownell #4 nylon also makes a good center serving and wears decent, I have tried the BCY Nylon, it is a lot duller and very poor durability. I gave all my BCY Nylon and B500 to a friend to make kid's strings.

Rick, that ignore button works great


----------



## Hank (Jul 5, 2003)

Any guys out there using Brownell string material having any issues with color bleed? I have had issues with BCY.


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

Hank said:


> Any guys out there using Brownell string material having any issues with color bleed? I have had issues with BCY.


Hank, it depends on the material, but Rhino has given me ZERO problems in that area. The colors are very stable in it.

Rick


----------



## Brownell (May 2, 2011)

Hank, some times colors can be tricky. We do all our color treating in house, so if we see an issue we can fix it immediately. Red, for some reason is stereotypically the one color that gives all string manufacturers headaches from time to time. 



Hank said:


> Any guys out there using Brownell string material having any issues with color bleed? I have had issues with BCY.


----------



## Brownell (May 2, 2011)

Alright guys, there has been so much interest on Rhino that i have decided to do a product give away! I have three sample packs of Rhino that I will give away to the first three people that PM me. We appreciate all you guys and i think this will be a good way for more of you to try it.


----------



## Brownell (May 2, 2011)

Just you so you know, the sample pack colors are one tube of Black and one of Grey


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

Charon said:


> Uhhhhhh.......
> 
> I liked my explanation better.
> 
> No, I get it. What clarifies is it that last sentence of yours that I quoted above.


Sorry. I've always needed an editor


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

JINKSTER said:


> I by far prefer strings of a "Triple Bundle Construction"...as the continuity of the string loop ends on a triple bundle construction are far more consistent and seamless in shape as those braids transition into the string itself.


The bundles on a triple bundle are smaller. If you like that, that's fine, though honestly, I haven't seen what you're talking about.

2 Bundle....(Sorry if the lighting wasn't so great, I just ran outside instead of setting up the flash gizmo)









3 Bundle... 









Aside from the bundles being smaller, I don't really see a difference. Are we talking about something different?


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

Hank said:


> Any guys out there using Brownell string material having any issues with color bleed? I have had issues with BCY.


With Red and Cocobola, it's pretty bad. Doesn't mean you can't do it, but you either have to accept it, or take preventative measures... Not so bad with Endless loop, actually, no much problem at all so long as you was the string (or it has a good layer of wax to begin with) before you twist it up and burnish) but you've got so much rubbing the bundles together when you're twisting up a Flemish, it's almost impossible not to get color contamination. If you keep your colors together in combinations that you'd do laundry, it's not too bad (like red and black), or totally irrelevant.

I did B-50 with a red/white/blue and the red got into the white so much as to make the white look transluscent, showing through to the red, but in fact, the red was just all over the white. Reminds me of a candy cane that's partially done.... I think it still looked nice.

View attachment 1679327


I think if you 'floss' the area afterwards with some B-50 in white, it will clean up a lot of the color that stayed on the surface wax, but you've got to make sure that you keep flossing with a clean area, or else you just grind it into the fibers. I've been playing with this method, and it seems to help with the end product aesthetic.


----------



## Hank (Jul 5, 2003)

With 2/3 color endless I have put the the problem color on the jig first, wipe it down real good, then put the other colors on the jig.


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

Hank said:


> With 2/3 color endless I have put the the problem color on the jig first, wipe it down real good, then put the other colors on the jig.


That would be worth trying. It isn't so much the color that's actually in the string, but rather the color that has gotten into the wax on the string... I will consider that!


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

BarneySlayer said:


> The bundles on a triple bundle are smaller. If you like that, that's fine, though honestly, I haven't seen what you're talking about.
> 
> 2 Bundle....(Sorry if the lighting wasn't so great, I just ran outside instead of setting up the flash gizmo)
> 
> ...


Barney...I must be sicker than I thought cause i'm home sick from work stumbling around to try an find that D97 string and can't...don't know if I left it in the yard and it's part of a birds nest now or what but...your pix are kinda deceptive in that the are of which I speak?...is where the string actually engages the limbs string groove...where the larger, bulkier braids are....and I just gotta ask...that black & red 3 bundle in your pic there?...is the black one type of strand material and the red another?


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

JINKSTER said:


> Barney...I must be sicker than I thought cause i'm home sick from work stumbling around to try an find that D97 string and can't...don't know if I left it in the yard and it's part of a birds nest now or what but...your pix are kinda deceptive in that the are of which I speak?...is where the string actually engages the limbs string groove...where the larger, bulkier braids are....and I just gotta ask...that black & red 3 bundle in your pic there?...is the black one type of strand material and the red another?


No. Curious as to why you'd ask. All Fast Flight Plus. Certain colors will change the fiber thickness a little, plus, brighter colors will pop and look like they take up more of the string anyway. What's more, since the fibers are flat, even though I take care to make sure that no color gets buried, (more of a potential issue with multi-color bundles) depending on how the fibers lay, they may get more or less surface area on the outside than another color at any given part of the string..

So, you're talking about bundle size. 3 bundles means more bundles, which means smaller bundles for given strand count, which means finer bundle 'texture' in the area that is twisted. 

If you like it, you like it, and that's just plain groovy. I thought you were talking about the area where it just transitions into not being twisted.

Same two bundle at the tips....









The larger double helix bundles don't look as refined as smaller triple helix bundles, but so far as I can tell, it's entirely a preference thing. If somebody wants 3 bundles, that's what they should get


----------



## Hank (Jul 5, 2003)

The trouble I had with BCY material is they waxed the string before they put the color in and the color was sitting on top of the wax, very messy. They did resolve the issue more than fair.


----------



## Brownell (May 2, 2011)

Okay guys, Barney Slayer, Lil Okie and Jim Castro Jr. were the three guys with the fastest fingers. Sample packs will be mailed Monday.


----------



## 4nolz (Aug 17, 2011)

Casto-hes a little touchy about his heritage.


----------



## Lil Okie (Mar 25, 2008)

Thank you! :thumbs_up


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

Brownell said:


> Okay guys, Barney Slayer, Lil Okie and Jim Castro Jr. were the three guys with the fastest fingers. Sample packs will be mailed Monday.


yay!


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

Awesome !!!!!

Congrats guys !!!! You'll love it I'm sure.

Good on ya Rob. 8^)

Rick


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

Hey--a happy ending! A generous move for sure!

When one (or all) of you three get your material, could you send a string to J Parenee for his testing? I'll be happy to supply an 8190 for a comparison. 

Seems that someone conveniently "overlooked" the opportunity to have an independent tester give them a look.


----------



## Jim Casto Jr (Aug 20, 2002)

Brownell said:


> Okay guys, Barney Slayer, Lil Okie and Jim Castro Jr. were the three guys with the fastest fingers. Sample packs will be mailed Monday.



That's right nolz... it's CastO, not ro. Oh well... :shade:


Thanks Brownell,

Now a question. I don't know about the diameter of the material. I've got my D97 formula's down pretty well. I make 10 strand and 14 strand strings with it. So...... how many strands of Rhino will get me to the same diameter?

Thanks again.


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

11 pages about strings???? 😱😱😱😱


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

Matt_Potter said:


> 11 pages about strings???? &#55357;&#56881;&#55357;&#56881;&#55357;&#56881;&#55357;&#56881;


and you still have questions? :laugh:


----------



## Lil Okie (Mar 25, 2008)

Wow Jinks..LOL...Did you have have any idea???..Lmao


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

It's like someone crossed the Energizer bunny with a zombie...it just won't die!



> 11 pages about strings????


Yeah, but if you take out everything that isn't fact, you only have maybe 1/2 a page.


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

Lil Okie said:


> Wow Jinks..LOL...Did you have have any idea???..Lmao


:laugh: not a clue...and remember...this all started out with my extremely scientific methodology of comparing my rhino equipped SK too..me Flicking My Bic! :laugh:

next thing I know?..

1. A pro string maker jumps in..

2. I'm making a vid for "sound analysis"

3. A major manufacturer of string materials signs on with us and as a board supporter 

4. I wind up getting a new custom string for my SK made for free for my efforts

and?..

5. Brownell hosts a "Sample Pack Give-Away" of Rhino string material to several of our members!

God I Love Classic Archery!


----------



## Brownell (May 2, 2011)

Well, this gave me a good laugh. Sorry about the typo Casto!!!!! Im not sure of the diameter difference between rhino and D97...... maybe someone can help us here, or i can research the diameter of D97 later



Jim Casto Jr said:


> That's right nolz... it's CastO, not ro. Oh well... :shade:
> 
> 
> Thanks Brownell,
> ...


----------



## Lil Okie (Mar 25, 2008)

JINKSTER said:


> :laugh: not a clue...and remember...this all started out with my extremely scientific methodology of comparing my rhino equipped SK too..me Flicking My Bic! :laugh:
> 
> next thing I know?..
> 
> ...


I won one of the sample packs..thanks again Brownell

Jinks..I bet you watch where you flick your bic from now on..LOL


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

Lil Okie said:


> I won one of the sample packs..thanks again Brownell
> 
> Jinks..I bet you watch where you flick your bic from now on..LOL


Shoot...I'm on a roll...matter fact?...I'm gonna ride my Hayabusa to the beach tomorrow and flick it all day long! :laugh:


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

LBR said:


> Hey--a happy ending! A generous move for sure!
> 
> When one (or all) of you three get your material, could you send a string to J Parenee for his testing? I'll be happy to supply an 8190 for a comparison.
> 
> Seems that someone conveniently "overlooked" the opportunity to have an independent tester give them a look.


Well, I'd be happy to, though in the area of string construction, I'm not sure how mine would compare, and I haven't done any padded loops or center serving. If you can either give me some tips, or point me to a good video, I can make one to attempt to match what you're doing, though my confidence level after only having done maybe a couple hundred or so compared to thousands.... Heck. Is that kind of thing in your DVD? If so, how do I.buy one? 

Now, I could make one for him in 8190 also, just the way I do normally, so you could do a lemon to lemon comparison


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

If you will make both, I'll ensure you have a video to explain padded loops (it's simple) AND some 8190.

I don't do padded servings--there are better ways to get a good nock fit. My favorite is don't make a tiny string to begin with, but you can also double-serve, use dental floss to build up the nock point, etc.


----------



## Hank (Jul 5, 2003)

I would love to see a Rick Barbee Rhino string vs LBR 8190 string test, if/when the results are made public, when you look up the word "excuse" in the dictionary, it will have a whole new meaning 

Why hasn't someone made a how fantastic my new 8190 string is video or thread? Why does LBR have to come over here and try and put down another manufacture's string material?


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

LBR said:


> If you will make both, I'll ensure you have a video to explain padded loops (it's simple) AND some 8190.
> 
> I don't do padded servings--there are better ways to get a good nock fit. My favorite is don't make a tiny string to begin with, but you can also double-serve, use dental floss to build up the nock point, etc.


I'd be happy to make two strings for JP if he wouldn't mind testing them. I've got 8190 as well. Gray, black, 'bronze' (which I contend is more of a copper peach ), and mountain berry  Maybe keep it gray and black to control for color?


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

LBR said:


> If you will make both, I'll ensure you have a video to explain padded loops (it's simple) AND some 8190.
> 
> I don't do padded servings--there are better ways to get a good nock fit. My favorite is don't make a tiny string to begin with, but you can also double-serve, use dental floss to build up the nock point, etc.





BarneySlayer said:


> I'd be happy to make two strings for JP if he wouldn't mind testing them. I've got 8190 as well. Gray, black, 'bronze' (which I contend is more of a copper peach ), and mountain berry  Maybe keep it gray and black to control for color?


Has it occurred to anyone else here that such a test whereby...

JP's and his normal string maker/supplier LBR have BOTH leaped forward with this idea of having JP test string material from both BCY (who they both seem to like and JP has already done accolade threads on) with JP doing the comparo against Brownells Rhino ...(who LBR seems to absolutely loathe)...and?...

expect anyone to receive the results of such as......

a completely unbiased "Test/Report"? :set1_rolf2: 

Then add in the fact that it's being suggested that this "Test" be conducted with one of the very three "Sample Packs" that Brownell/Rob was so kind to offer up to the first 3 members here to email him?...I dunno folks...besides the fact that I myself would have no choice but to find it extremely hard to believe such a test result to be "unbiased"?....

There's something that just doesn't sit well with me about taking a shot at someone with ammo they just went out of their way to..

"Give You".

But you know what?...I say "GO FOR IT!!" :laugh:

Why?....easy....cause no matter what the results of "that particular" test?...

1. Mr. Barbee PM'ed me last night thanking me again and letting me know my custom string is made and on it's way and that one of his 3 daughters...(who keeps herself employed making his "Poly Puff" string silencers) made me some custom Poly Puffs to color match the "white/hunter green/brown" rhino string he made me which color matches my Super Kodiak and that?...it seems he's had a recent spike in "rhino string orders".

2. Which tells me?...there's a whole slew of "Other Archers" out there that in short order?..are about to become REAL HAPPY with their new Rhino strings as well and?...

3. "Most Importantly"?.....there's not a doubt in my mind that they will be!..which in turn?..will in fact...."dwarf the results"...whatever they may be...of the intended LBR/JP string comparo.

I might also add that...

Ya know?...truth is?...this entire matter of "string material" has taken me by surprise as I had NO CLUE that....the "BCY VS Brownell" thing was on the level of "Ford VS Chevy" or?..."Honda VS Toyota"...or?...."Miller VS Bud"...but?...apparently it is...and right about now?..

I feel like the village idiot rat that stumbled into a lab and thought I found heaven! :laugh:

As when I mounted up a Rhino String originally intended and made as a back-up for my longbow by Steve Jewett (the bowyer of said longbow and isn't even a member here at AT as he only has time to keep up with so may forums?) and just for shiggles strung it up on my Super Kodiak recurve only to accidently discover and find that...

1. The rhino string was every bit as stable as Angel Majesty (the loudest, least durable, but most stable "brace holding" string material I have ever encountered) 

and that?...

2. UNLIKE the Angel Majesty?...was the quietest string I ever mounted up on any recurve bar none.

and?...

3. After well over a thousand shots off my longbow?...The Rhino seems to be proving itself the most durable string material I've encountered yet as I haven't even waxed it yet and it has yet to display the first stray fiber poking out..(promising myself that I'll give it it's first waxing when I do notice such...and thus far?...that hasn't happened yet)

If I still drank (as I'm coming up on 3 years clean & sober  )and I didn't own a Nissan Titan?..You could call me...

a Chevy Driving, Bud Drinking, Rhino Shooting Archer who's wife ironically does in fact own a Honda Minivan! :laugh:

So I say...*"LET THE GAMES BEGIN!"* s I have little doubt and THAT MUCH FAITH...in Rhino! 

Have a great weekend folks and Happy Shooting! Bill. :cool2:


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

> ...(who LBR seems to absolutely loathe


Bill, please--lay off the kool-aid. I never said or implied any such. The ones who have said that about me also made other false statements.



> 1. The rhino string was every bit as stable as Angel Majesty (the loudest, least durable, but most stable "brace holding" string material I have ever encountered)


Let's see...SK65 Dyneema apparantly doing pretty well at holding it's own against SK78? Speaks well of AM--which, btw, isn't a BCY product. It's made in Japan, BCY is just their U.S. distributor.



> 2. UNLIKE the Angel Majesty?...was the quietest string I ever mounted up on any recurve bar none.


AM is marketed as a target bow string--period. Targets don't care about noise. Not to mention when it's endless vs flemish, flemish practically always wins when it comes to less noise.

My entire point, as usual when I post, was getting the facts straight. I was evidently wrong about the yarn used for Rhino, and I apologize for that. It's never been a "Ford vs. Chevy" thing for me. BCY and Brownell can hold their own--the traditional market is barely a flea on an elephants butt in the over-all market. I care about the sport, period. I care about getting the facts straight, especially when it comes to strings.

Calling JP's honesty into question is a low blow. Has he shot my strings before, and liked them? Yes he has. Does that mean he's now dishonest for that? Well, guess you should apply the same line of thinking to yourself. You have posted pages of accolades for rhino and negative commentas on AM, therefore using your own logic you can in no way be trusted to be giving us the straight truth.

Just to be clear, I'm not insinuating you aren't honest because you like one over another. Just pointing out how flawed your line of thinking is here. I think JP, or Barney (who got free stuff from Brownell, but I trust him to be honest anyway) can give their unbiased opinion, give accurate readings from a scale and tape measure, and when they do state opinions like "this one is quieter" they will state them as such--opinion, not fact.

I'm not the least bit afraid to have them do a comparison. I'm confident in my work, and the material I work with.


----------



## Hank (Jul 5, 2003)

Both Brownell and BCY make quality string material and different archers like different string materials. LBR just can't stand it when someone really likes Brownell products and is so insecure about it he has come onto Brownell threads and try and derail them with his usual lengthy diatribes. He even followed me onto another message board and gave me crap over there.

Rick, the ignore feature is really sweet


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

One more point--I haven't sent, or even offered, J Paranee a free string. I think BCY supplied Barney with some 8190? I can't keep up--have to ask him.

As usual, hank embellishes in an attempt to give his posts a semblance of legitimacy. I've been an active member of that "other site" practically since it's inception--I didn't "follow" him anhywhere, and my post had nothing to do with strings or string material. Obviously he feels people aren't smart enough to notice when and where he joined this thread, or his post count here.

Talk about insecure...a sure sign of insecurity is when you put someone on "ignore" because you can't honestly, logically, or intelligently debate a fact or topic with them...


----------



## Hank (Jul 5, 2003)

*(as I'm coming up on 3 years clean & sober )*

Haven't had a drink or a cigarette in 30 years, keep at it Jinkster, it's worth it!


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

couple more imprprieties that need fixed.



> JP's and his normal string maker/supplier LBR have BOTH leaped forward with this idea


I'vd only made JP...one or two strings, I think? And I didn't "leap" at anything--JP offered, I agreed.



> Then add in the fact that it's being suggested that this "Test" be conducted with one of the very three "Sample Packs" that Brownell/Rob was so kind to offer up to the first 3 members here to email him?...


Barney Slayer, one of the recipients of the free Rhino, volunteered. Again, I just agreed to it. Barney is going to make his own strings. I only offered to send him a video so he's be familiar with padding out the loops. If you can suggest a good one on-line, just to keep it "unbiased", go for it. It's not like he'd use the info. in the video just on the 8190 string--padding the loops is padding the loops.

Again, I'm all for either one or both.


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

LBR said:


> Bill, please--lay off the kool-aid. I never said or implied any such. The ones who have said that about me also made other false statements.


LBR...your Kool-Aid comment is un-necessary...



LBR said:


> Let's see...SK65 Dyneema apparantly doing pretty well at holding it's own against SK78? Speaks well of AM--which, btw, isn't a BCY product. It's made in Japan, BCY is just their U.S. distributor.
> 
> AM is marketed as a target bow string--period. Targets don't care about noise. Not to mention when it's endless vs flemish, flemish practically always wins when it comes to less noise.
> 
> My entire point, as usual when I post, was getting the facts straight. I was evidently wrong about the yarn used for Rhino, and I apologize for that. It's never been a "Ford vs. Chevy" thing for me. BCY and Brownell can hold their own--the traditional market is barely a flea on an elephants butt in the over-all market. I care about the sport, period. I care about getting the facts straight, especially when it comes to strings.


Chad...first off?..before you (or I) proceed any further with this?..i think it very important that you (and everyone else here) know that...

I've previously had nothing but respect for you...I mean after all?...you sir were the string maker who made me those very Angel Majesty strings of which I speak..and not once...but twice...where the second set of two were insistently made and sent to me free of charge by you cause I apparently botched the first measurement given by measuring the string that came with that bow and not in a manor consistent with yours...and in speaking with you over the phone?...I found you to be a great person as much dedicated to his string making and customer base as he is to trad archery...which I found to be a refreshing pleasure as compared to the earthlings I encounter in the real world..my hat?...was off to you.



LBR said:


> Calling JP's honesty into question is a low blow. Has he shot my strings before, and liked them? Yes he has. Does that mean he's now dishonest for that? Well, guess you should apply the same line of thinking to yourself. You have posted pages of accolades for rhino and negative commentas on AM, therefore using your own logic you can in no way be trusted to be giving us the straight truth.


until now...as it seems your apparent obsession with this matter has driven you to a level that would pit not only manufacturer against manufacturer but also AT member against AT member as I would certainly hope and pray that JP understands that..

That comment was based on the fact that I myself would encounter "Honesty VS Loyalty" issues conducting such "a test"....and to be honest here?...and maybe I'm under-estimating others by unfairly comparing them to my lowly self and way of thinking but I myself would most definitely be torn making decisions and comments concerning "Coin Toss Aspects/Results" of products made by two fine companies and assembled by two fine people..and that sir is whatcha call "TRUTH"....but maybe Joe does have the capacity to exact such un-biased conclusions...and imho?..He certainly would be the better man of the two of us if he does...that said?..I apologize Joe...I should've never brought that aspect up and I certainly hope you don't take it as the insult it's been presented to be here...my bad.



LBR said:


> Just to be clear, I'm not insinuating you aren't honest because you like one over another. Just pointing out how flawed your line of thinking is here. I think JP, or Barney (who got free stuff from Brownell, but I trust him to be honest anyway) can give their unbiased opinion, give accurate readings from a scale and tape measure, and when they do state opinions like "this one is quieter" they will state them as such--opinion, not fact.
> 
> I'm not the least bit afraid to have them do a comparison. I'm confident in my work, and the material I work with.


Chad...I know first hand you are a highly dedicated (if not overly so) string maker who does great work with impeccably tight servings and *goes to extremes* to ensure his customers satisfaction...

But you may wanna consider not being "so extreme" at times...this being one of those times...as I don't think it's doing you any good whatsoever...and Chad?...

_"I'm just saying what everyone else is thinking."_

sound familiar?....L8R, Bill. :cool2:


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

> LBR...your Kool-Aid comment is un-necessary...


It's a common metaphor used when someone chooses to believe heresay over the facts of the matter. I never said or implied any such about Rhino or Brownell, I was only (falsely) accused of it by others. I have stated the contrary, on either this or the other thread, or both. It offends me that you would put more faith in their false accusations than you own eyes. 



> until now...as it seems your apparent obsession with this matter has driven you to a level that would pit not only manufacturer against manufacturer but also AT member against AT member as I would certainly hope and pray that JP understands that..


I've been "obsessed" with strings and string materials for almost 2 decades, and have been very passionate about it most of that time. I've been obsessed with truth and honesty my entire life--that's how I was raised. I have only pointed out fallicies, primarily those directed at me and about strings--but I'm the one trying to start something? By pressing for honesty?

If JP were a longtime customer of mine, then your point would be valid. If JP and/or Barney had a "beef" with rick, as hank does with me, your point would be valid. If I were offering JP any kind of bribe or compensation for his opinions, your point would be valid. None of that is the case.



> But you may wanna consider not being "so extreme" at times...this being one of those times...as I don't think it's doing you any good whatsoever


I understand. I know it aggravates some people, even turns them away from me. I can live with that. For me, it's not a popularity contest, it's not about being everyone's friend, or getting the most advertising I can without becoming a sponsor. Again, I cut off orders some time ago, so I'm not shilling for business in the least. I do what I do for the good of the sport, not personal gain. That's the difference.




> ...and Chad?...
> 
> "I'm just saying what everyone else is thinking."
> 
> sound familiar?


Lol--that would be a good one, if not for the private messages and e-mails of encouragement and thanks I recieve. Some folks I know, others I don't. I respect their wishes to not get caught up in the mud slinging, so I won't call names. If not for your comment, I wouldn't even have mentioned it. 

I do appreciate you having the courage and moral fortitude to address me directly, rather than put me on "ignore" and take pot shots from there. I don't have any hard feelings towards you Bill--not at all. I think you are a bit misguided in ways, but that doesn't make you dishonest. I also appreciate you telling both sides of the story, and mentioning that I took care of a problem. I'd forgotten it to tell the truth--I don't keep up with it--I just do what I know is right.


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

I am going to take this opportunity to *Apologize* for any comments I have made that were out of line, or could be construed as being out of line.

I do my best to stay on track of the subjects at hand, and to avoid conflict even if it means *I have to take a few lumps at times*. 
Sometimes I fail in that attempt, but I do try.

While I will stand by my decisions without wavering, I will not ever try to belittle someone for disagreeing with them.
Life is full of choices, and I for one believe that is a wonderful thing.

As far as Brownell & BCY are concerned - I have never said one bad word against either of them.
I actually use products from both, and am very satisfied with those products I use.

Both suppliers have materials that I do not use, because those material do not meet my needs, and expectations.
Let me emphasize that - *"My Needs, and My Expectations."*
That does not mean those materials are faulty, and it does not mean they won't work well for you.

My string material supplier of choice is Brownell, and that is for two reasons, with heavy emphasis on #2.
Reason One - They are the only ones that have a string material that meets my needs. See above paragraph.
Reason Two - I have a very good relationship with them, and know I can depend on not only their help, but their kind understanding when I need it.
I've been using their fast flight string materials since 1986.

I have never dealt with BCY on the personal basis I have with Brownell, but I am sure I would be treated the same by them.


Rick


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

Rick, your actions have always backed your current words, and actions will always speak louder than words!!!


----------



## Mo0se (Sep 24, 2002)

I'm bored i'm going fishing!


----------



## Easykeeper (Jan 2, 2003)

Mo0se said:


> I'm bored i'm going fishing!


I'll bet there's a lot of discussion and debate over fishing line on the fishing forums...:wink:


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

LBR said:


> It's a common metaphor used when someone chooses to believe heresay over the facts of the matter. I never said or implied any such about Rhino or Brownell, I was only (falsely) accused of it by others. I have stated the contrary, on either this or the other thread, or both. It offends me that you would put more faith in their false accusations than you own eyes.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Well Chad?...can't seem to stop myself here...and couldn't live with myself if I didn't just gotta say it...

credit where credits due...

"Well Played Sir!" :thumbs_up

I'm writing this whole event off as..

"When one extremely passionate OCD kind of archer meets another." :laugh:

Furthermore?...at this point?...I sincerely do, and with all my heart, hope you guys do manage to figure out how to pull this test off...and will also add....

This is probably the one and only time I'll ever get to honestly say this here so there ain't no way I'm passing it up as...

"This Is One Time In My Miserable Life That I'm Dang Happy My Name Ain't Joe!" :laugh:

as I don't envy at all the task he's about to undertake...cause according to Mr. Barbee?...there's going to be quite a few new rhino string owners out there shortly...and it would kind of blow for "the tester" if?..."they wind up the only one who claims the opposite"..of what dozens of others experience in a first hand unbiased fashion with no horse in this race.

and might I just suggest this here Chad?....as I believe it might be in every ones best interests?...how about this?..

I don't believe that pitting one string makers skills against another here would yield a true and accurate representation...(which is the very thing you claim you seek)...of pointing out the attributes, deficiencies and overall quality of the actual string materials themselves as your comparing two different string materials constructed by two different string makers..which to my way of thinking?...adds an intrinsic level of variance whereby it would be difficult (if not impossible) to determine whether any elongation of the material itself was due to "material stretch"....or?..."construction creep"...as both strings would most definitely be subject to..

1. Variance in Construction Methods (i.e. who used how much tension and/or methodology of construction/wax scraping and all that goes into string making)

and a possible if not probable?..

2. Slight Variance in Skill Levels

so might I propose?...(And again...in Joe..."The Testers"...best Interests)...as well as everyone else concerned?....

That both strings of the varying materials in question here be built by the same unbiased string maker?

or?...am I exhibiting yet another one of my "misguided ways"? :laugh:

It's all good Chad...and I for one would certainly tend to honor Joe's conclusions if in fact...they are in keeping with the masses and?...both strings are made by the same unbiased string maker and in the same fashion...sound like a plan?

Cause now alls we'd need to do is "find that unbiased string maker".....then?...imho?...

we would in fact have effected an "independent study" who's results are above reproach.

and if the Rhino doesn't turn out to be everything I myself have previously claimed?...well?...

Crow with Humble Pie for desert hasn't been an uncommon meal in my house! :laugh:

L8R and Have a Great Weekend Chad! Bill. :cool2:


----------



## Mo0se (Sep 24, 2002)

Easykeeper said:


> I'll bet there's a lot of discussion and debate over fishing line on the fishing forums...:wink:


Nah we just prefer to fish instead of talking about line


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

> and it would kind of blow for "the tester" if?..."they wind up the only one who claims the opposite"..of what dozens of others experience in a first hand unbiased fashion with no horse in this race.


I imagine Joe has taken that into consideration. You can ask rick how it feels--seriously. Of the thousands of archers I've spoken with, and dozens of bowyers and string makers, there's only been one to claim that a bow can gain a significant amount of weight at full draw just by changing the string...or claim that a string will contract more at full draw than when off the bow. That isn't a "jab", it's just one of those ugly facts.

As far as the results being that skewed? I'm not the least bit worried about it. 



> I don't believe that pitting one string makers skills against another here would yield a true and accurate representation


Well, I don't have any "proprietary" or secret techniqes, but I'm willing to risk it. Besides, Barney said he would make a string from both materials, so they should be fairly equal in construction.

I never said that Rhino wasn't a good material. To the contrary, I'm sure it is, being SK78 Dyneema. That's a small step above the SK75 that Dynaflight '97 is made from. I just don't believe it's as good as 8190 (SK90 Dyneema), much less better. I figure the difference won't be big. I sure don't believe that you will pick up 2-4# of draw weight (string contract at least 1/2" at full draw). And, for some reason, I don't think I'll ever get a staight answer to the questions I asked or an apology for the false accusations. No biggie.


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

> Nah we just prefer to fish instead of talking about line


That's just weird.


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

Mo0se said:


> Nah we just prefer to fish instead of talking about line


Could probably string up my bow with some good fishing line, be none the worse off for points on the target, and make it the quietest bow in the range, if so inclined


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

This is ridiculous and Bill for you to insinuate that I would lie or cheat over a 20 dollar string I find incredible insulting 

I know you said bias but nothing on this earth would make me alter my opinion and say something other than the truth 

I want nothing to do with this 

Yes I like Chad but I would not know him if we where standing next to each other. He has been good to me and has provided me with three strings thus far. I like his work and will continue to buy from him 

Rick has only been a gentleman to me and I have only heard great things about his work and when I offered to do a little comparison between the two materials it is because some people including myself want to know what performs best compared to other materials and manufacturers 

But earlier on you mentioned biased and now you really mention it. I have been testing hunting gear and high performance knives for 20 years and am currently in Atlanta working the largest cutlery show in the world 

They fly , house and pay me as much as 1500 dollars a day to give my opinion because my opinion can not be bought and it is respected 



This thread is a joke and I'm out 


Barney I just saw your gracious offer and thank you but with stupid things being said already I would not want o waste your time and work


----------



## sawtoothscream (Apr 19, 2008)

JParanee said:


> This is ridiculous and Bill for you to insinuate that I would lie or cheat over a 20 dollar string I find incredible insulting
> 
> I know you said bias but nothing on this earth would make me alter my opinion and say something other than the truth
> 
> ...


Was looking foward to your review. Cant blame you for not wanting to do the comparison though. Have fun at the show and post up some pics if yoj find the time. Love looking at knives I can't afford lol


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

JParanee said:


> Barney I just saw your gracious offer and thank you but with stupid things being said already I would not want o waste your time and work


Understood. All things considered, and with all due (and significant) respect to all parties, perhaps we should just cool off for a bit. I have no doubt that all involved are trustworthy, sincere, and decent people, but sometimes things get a little out of hand. I like making strings, and am interested in learning about materials and methods, but I don't want to get in the middle of something ugly.

Let's shelve the idea for the immediate future (I don't have material yet anyway), and if we want to revisit it at a later time, under cordial circumstances, fine with me.

Enjoy the rest of your weekend guys. Hope you get the most of it!


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

JParanee said:


> This is ridiculous and Bill for you to insinuate that I would lie or cheat over a 20 dollar string I find incredible insulting
> 
> I know you said bias but nothing on this earth would make me alter my opinion and say something other than the truth
> 
> ...


You're Welcome Joe...what I did was to create an easy out for you...cause that's what a friend would do in this somewhat sticky situation (I so subtly brought your attention to)...and I find it unfortunate that it apparently just cost us that friendship but...sacrifice is never fun...however sometimes?...it's what friends do.

Look man..here's some factoids...

1. You just recently patronized Chad by being a very recent, and apparently?...very happy customer as...

2. You then recently posted up some rather glowing reports of his products.

and I recently did the very same regarding the Rhino String product....so to me?...at this point?..neither one of us would make for a..

"Great Tester"

cause honestly speaking?...I myself would tend to suffer from a phrase I've encountered several times in life that phrase being..

3. "A Conflict Of Interests": A term which I'm certain any man who makes $1,500 a day for his opinion is very familiar with.

And Joe?...my words were not spoke on the basis of "Judging You"....they were spoke on the basis of "Knowing Me"...and how torn I might be as in my "not so professional opinion"?...I might liken having you doing this comparison to someone sending me a comparable string made of BCY 8190 and having me judge it against Brownell Rhino..and how unbiased I myself could be and/or?...how much would it really mean to the readers of such a test report with them knowing that I just recently reported Rhino as being the best I've ever tried?...one might presume...not much. :laugh:

I dunno Joe...I think I came real close to almost begging you to please not take offense...even explained the "Honesty VS Loyalty" issues I myself feel I might encounter in a similar position...which is why...

4. The world came up with the term "Independent Study"...to combat the term.."Conflict Of Interests".

5. I'll be 55 years old in July...and throughout my life?...I've very slowly learned to become very leary of any information given that starts out with the words..."In my professional opinion..."

anyways...I'm certainly sorry you feel that way Joe....have a great life and L8R, Bill.


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

Wow...just wow. I guess someone is letting out a sigh of relief--but he never accepted any of the challenges anyway. I'll still do what I said I would do, and if anyone is so inclined I would love to hear your honest opinions--don't sugar coat it for me (as if you would--lol). I will keep your findings private, if you so desire.


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

Hey Bill.
Just so you know.

Joe & I have discussed the matter.
He knows my position, and understands it fully.
Absolutely ZERO conflict here.

We had a very good conversation, which will eventually lead to him taking measurements for a string from me when he gets around to it.

Rick


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

Rick Barbee said:


> Hey Bill.
> Just so you know.
> 
> Joe & I have discussed the matter.
> ...


That's cool Rick and I'm actually happy to hear that...at this point?...this morning?...after reading JP's response?..I don't know what I found more disturbing...his response or?..my own personal behavior and way of thinking...and as I often times find?...and as per usual?...I've come to the conclusion that...

"It's me again."

And the beast that is "my way of thinking"....developed over many years of rubbing shoulders with less than savory types of folks...a dark place where scams, getting over and back stabbings are the order of the day and?..where "trust in others" is a somewhat rare commodity that only the foolish and dead dare use...that's where I came from just under 3 years ago.

and as soon as that thought crossed my mind as I tried to figure out "What the heck just happened here?"...and taking into account that during the past 2 years JP has been nothing but extremely helpful and supportive to me and many others here?...I thought...he's right and who the heck am I to judge others based on my ill conceived thoughts of myself and my way of thinking? 

And right after that thought processed itself in my somewhat screwed up mind?...I grabbed a large tumbler of diet tea..slipped on my sandels and was only about 10 minutes late for the 9:30 Narcotics Anonymous meeting at Jensen Beach...saw some friends...and then took a long walk on the beach thinking how foolish this all is and how life is just to short for such negative nonsense....and over what?...freaking bow strings? 

I remember a time when I was first back in the rooms and still going through opiate withdraw (relapsing on pain killers after having 17 teeth pulled in one sitting) with my hand shaking so bad I had to focus on the cup of coffee in it to keep from spilling it when...right after someone said something stupid?...this huge 300+# cat jumped up and bellowed out these words... 

"You People Just Don't Get It!...This Is An OCD Based Disease We Have!...That Can Kill Us!....and when we find something we like?...

WE DON'T STOP UNTIL WE DROP AND OUR BUTTS ARE TORE OUT THE FRAME!"

Stopping the use of drugs was tough for me...but was only about 10% of the real challenge...cause that other 90%?..is learning how to change the way I think and live...and that's the real tough part oh so many fail at...that said?..

Joe?.....Chad?...Mr. Barbee?...and anyone else who may have taken offense at anything I said, thought or posted in this thread?...

please accept my most profuse apologies...and I'll do my utmost best to ensure it doesn't happen again...cause we have another clich'e in the rooms when it comes to stressful topics, issues and matters in our lives which we really have no control over..that being?..

"Let Go Or Be Drug!....and the choice is always yours to make."

Think I'll choose "Let-Go" on this one here and now and wish you fine gentlefolks nothing but the best on your continued efforts to ascertain which in fact is...The Worlds Best Bow String".

and right now?...if you'll excuse me?...I'm gonna go ahead and stick these stupid limb savers on my SK and go take a few shots and?...

NO!...I MOST DEFINITELY WON'T....be posting up any opinions or results about'em...so you can all breath easy! :laugh:

Have a Great Day...God Be with You..and L8R, Bill. :cool2:


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

Jinks I'm not mad at you. I just want to make it clear I am objective I do not suffer your self admited bias nature towards products I have driven Fords ,Chevys ,dodges I buy what I feel is a better product 

I shoot Trad Tech and I shoot Border Limbs and I just bought some Hoyt's . I do not care if it is made here or over seas again I buy what I feel works best 

I would think that this would of been something I could not have been biased about 

A sound meter and a chronograph and a video camera are hard to be biased with  

But again I want nothing to do with this 

Chad will send on my string when he gets to it and I'm just fine .


----------



## 4nolz (Aug 17, 2011)

Hey JP-important question:what truck do you drive?


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

4nolz said:


> Hey JP-important question:what truck do you drive?



Right now a Ford F350 Dually King Ranch &. An Am General H1 Hummer which is a General Motors product 

But they all diesels. In fact right know I have 4 diesels , the other 2 are German


----------



## Big Country (Apr 25, 2003)

JParanee said:


> Right now a Ford F350 Dually King Ranch &. An Am General H1 Hummer which is a General Motors product
> 
> *But they all diesels*. In fact right know I have 4 diesels , the other 2 are German



Pickup trucks come without diesels????:mg:


----------



## sawtoothscream (Apr 19, 2008)

JParanee said:


> Right now a Ford F350 Dually King Ranch &. An Am General H1 Hummer which is a General Motors product
> 
> But they all diesels. In fact right know I have 4 diesels , the other 2 are German


We need a jp house and toy thread. Bound to be a ton of cool things to look at.


----------



## Jim Casto Jr (Aug 20, 2002)

Brownell said:


> Alright guys, there has been so much interest on Rhino that i have decided to do a product give away! I have three sample packs of Rhino that I will give away to the first three people that PM me. We appreciate all you guys and i think this will be a good way for more of you to try it.


My sample of Rhino arrived today (even though it was addressed to the wrong person). :^) 

Just wanted to say, thank you, to Brownell. I look forward to making and trying some new strings soon.


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

Jim Casto Jr said:


> My sample of Rhino arrived today (even though it was addressed to the wrong person). :^)
> 
> Just wanted to say, thank you, to Brownell. I look forward to making and trying some new strings soon.


I know it doesn't mean much to you coming from me but fwiw?...

I think you're going to love it Mr. Casto....primarily "the stability"...I have 3 strings made of rhino now..from two different string makers...two 12 standers for my longbow made by the bowyer and one 18/9strander made by Rick Barbee...and all 3 have proven to be super stable with great durability and surprisingly quiet...but the quality I appreciate the most?...is the "stability"....once they do the initial stretch?...they rarely budge from there and if so?...only by a little and with long shooting sessions in between and the less I have to un-brace and twist stretching/creeping strings?..the more I love'em.

That said?...I only have the one D97 16strander that came with my SK to compare...but it seemed to be an extremely well made string for factory oem however...stability wise?...the D97 is no comparison to the rhino....not even in the same league...that was my experience anyways..twist'em tight...good luck and L8R, Bill. :cool2:


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

Jim Casto Jr said:


> My sample of Rhino arrived today (even though it was addressed to the wrong person). :^)
> 
> Just wanted to say, thank you, to Brownell. I look forward to making and trying some new strings soon.


Got my sample pack too. Made an endless loop yesterday. 14 strands seemed to be the magic number that gave me the same nock fit with .025 #62 Serving Haven't had a chance to serve the center and test it yet, but from the pre-stetch process, it would seem like it's a pretty stiff material with a short shoot in time. Pretty similar to the 8190, with my non'scientific comparison. Had an initial give, about 1/4", and then seemed like it just stopped. I also like the finish after the burnish. With some clear bees wax it has a nice polished shine .


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

You guys will like the Rhino real well. 8^)

Rick


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

Rick Barbee said:


> You guys will like the Rhino real well. 8^)
> 
> Rick


 You are not the boss of me!:angry::angry:


:dancing::dancing::dancing::dancing::dancing::dancing::dancing:


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

BarneySlayer said:


> You are not the boss of me!:angry::angry:
> 
> 
> :dancing::dancing::dancing::dancing::dancing::dancing::dancing:


Ha Haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa !!! 8^)


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

BarneySlayer said:


> You are not the boss of me!:angry::angry:


You WILL "LOVE the Rhino"!

You Will "RESPECT the Rhino"!

or you shall suffer the wrath of...





















well?...lesser string materials. :laugh:


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

LBR said:


> "Rino" is just a lower quality copy of a BCY material...452X, I think. I'll have to check to be sure.


NOT EVEN CLOSE..... 100% different material.


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

If I'm wrong, my apologies. What is it made from? Unless there's been some kind of radical change very recently, we have 3 types of bowstring material on the market:

Polyester, aka "dacron", such as B-55 and B-50

100% HMPE, such as Dynaflight '97, 8125, and 8190

HMPE/Vectran blends, such as 450+, 452X, and Trophy.

Of course there are varying grades and brands of HMPE, the absolute highest quality being SK90 Dyneema. There are different HMPE/Vectran blends, with some materials having more or less Vectran incorporated. Some materials also have a tiny amount of GORE fiber in them, but it's just there as a sort of internal lubricant--doesn't really affect the performance.

What is Rhino, if it doesn't fit into one of those three categories? I wish Brownell would just put it on their site like BCY does--it would clear up some confusion.


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

Ray knight said:


> Quote Originally Posted by LBR View Post
> "Rino" is just a lower quality copy of a BCY material...452X, I think. I'll have to check to be sure.


Had to post the above, so my post would be relevant to the following



Ray knight said:


> NOT EVEN CLOSE..... 100% different material.


Rhino is a 100% UHMWPE. 
Same thing as HMPE grade SK78. From what I understand, but the name was changed in order to honor contract specifications,

*BUT*

There is a difference in how the Rhino is manufactured compared to other similar element materials. *Not going into that*.

I know this - I've tested & built strings from every material available, and my torture rack will stretch them all with ease up to 12 strings at a time. 
It stretches the earlier 100% SK78 Dyneema blends like DF97, D10, Astroflight, etc like hot rubber. Almost as easily as it stretches polyester materials such as B50, B55, etc.

It also stretches the 100% SK90 materials such as XS2, and 8190 easily at max string count.

The materials with percentages of vectran, such as Ultra Cam, 452X, Excell, etc place a little more stress at varying levels on the rack,
but it still stretches them with ease at max string count.

The Rhino strings were bending the rack hooks. Had to install bigger hooks. 8^)
8 Rhino strings all at once on the rack collapsed the rack. Had to build a stronger rack. 8^)

Nothing compares to it. The Rhino that is. 8^)

Rick


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

> Rhino is a 100% UHMWPE.
> Same thing as HMPE grade SK78.


Ok, if that's the case then it isn't "100% different". There are different brands of HMPE/UHMWPE, Dyneema being the best and most expensive. If Rhino is SK78 Dyneema, then it's similar to Force 10.



> It stretches the earlier 100% SK78 Dyneema *blends* like DF97, D10, Astroflight, etc like hot rubber. Almost as easily as it stretches polyester materials such as B50, B55, etc.


The only other SK78 Dyneema product offered by BCY is Dynaflight '10/Force 10 (basically the same material, different name). I don't know what brand or grade Brownell has used in their products. I'd be curious to know though. BCY will tell you what they use. 

Also, to set the record straight, Dynaflight '97, Dynaflight '10/Force 10 are *NOT* blends. They are 100% Dyneema. Dynaflight '97 is SK75 Dyneema.

Like hot rubber? Almost like polyester?? Okey-dokey. 




> It also stretches the 100% SK90 materials such as XS2, and 8190 easily at max string count.
> 
> The materials with percentages of vectran, such as Ultra Cam, 452X, Excell, etc place a little more stress at varying levels on the rack,
> but it still stretches them with ease at max string count.
> ...


Outstanding! Reckon when all the major manufacturers are going to swap? It's only in their best interests to use the best. What are they using now?

Can't wait for the 2014 ATA show...:RockOn:


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

LBR what type of Dyneema is Angel Majesty?


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

Not sure that Angel uses the Dyneema brand. I think it's SK65, but I'd have to check to be sure. Wish the other two manufacturers would take a page from BCY's book and make that info. available for those of us wanting to know. It's not like we're going to spin up our own.


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

Just looked at the ASB Majesty site again as a refresher. They talk about HMPE generically, which leads me to think they aren't using DSM's "Dyneema" brand. As I understand it, if you use a DSM product they WANT you to mention it SPECIFICALLY in your description. That only makes sense from a business standpoint.


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

LBR said:


> They talk about HMPE generically, which leads me to think they aren't using DSM's "Dyneema" brand. As I understand it, if you use a DSM product they WANT you to mention it SPECIFICALLY in your description. That only makes sense from a business standpoint.


BCY lists it in their lineup as 100% Dyneema.


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

I stand corrected. ASM does use the Dyneema brand--a plus for them.


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

Who says it has to be "DSM" Dyneema to be the best? What if there is a similar material that is better but not made by DSM?


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

I suppose anything is possible--independant lab studies could be wrong.

If such a material were to exist, who makes it, and where?

Is it of your opinion that Rhino is 100% SK78 HMPE/UHMWPE? 

FWIW, for it to be "Dyneema" it has to be DSM--that's a trademarked product label. 

http://www.dyneema.com/americas/explore-dyneema/the-dyneema-brand.aspx


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

LBR said:


> If I'm wrong, my apologies. What is it made from? Unless there's been some kind of radical change very recently, we have 3 types of bowstring material on the market:
> 
> Polyester, aka "dacron", such as B-55 and B-50
> 
> ...


452x and Rhino. Thats what i said are totally different. Rhino is great for recurves. A little big strand size for my liking in compounds though. Its crazy strong stuff.


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

ray knight said:


> who says it has to be "dsm" dyneema to be the best? What if there is a similar material that is better but not made by dsm?


x 2


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

I dunno much about strings, but I had heard that the most used string by Olympians was Angel Majesty - I tried it and liked it a lot - and am still using it - it is quiet, never needs wax, and is as fast as anything else I have tried - and I k now that the Angel Majesty serving lasts longer than any serving I have ever tried.


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

452X is HMPE--67% SK75 Dyneema--blended with 33% Vectran. Rhino seems to be 100% HMPE? I wouldn't call that 100% different, but that's just me.

All of these materials are crazy strong. Forgive me if I don't believe everything I hear (read), especially if it goes against my own personal experiences and those of people I know and trust (not referring to anything you have said).

My friends call me a "string nerd". I'm always digging for more information on different materials. One thing I really like about BCY is their willingness to answer questions. You can look in a flyer and find out just what is used in their materials. Why all the secrecy with Brownell? Like I said, it's not like we are going to spin up our own.

Really curious to know the name of the factory that makes UHWMPE fibers that are superior to DSM. I'd bet DSM would like to know too--lol.


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

sharpbroadhead said:


> I dunno much about strings, but I had heard that the most used string by Olympians was Angel Majesty - I tried it and liked it a lot - and am still using it - it is quiet, never needs wax, and is as fast as anything else I have tried - and I k now that the Angel Majesty serving lasts longer than any serving I have ever tried.


Ken, I've got some AM serving on the way to try out on my strings. If I like it I will be switching over to it.
As far as the AM string material is concerned - I have tried it, and for my purposes there are better materials. It's good stuff, but like I said, not for my purposes.
I've also built a large number of strings for an OLY training facility. They haven't requested AM strings as of yet.

Rick


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

I am surprised by that - the first string that Hoyt Recommends is Angel Majesty: http://www.hoytrecurve.com/customer_service/hoyt_frequently_asked_questions.php?c=Recurves


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

> I dunno much about strings...


Unless you want to devote years and years and build over ten thousand strings, there's a simple way to get questions aswered. Contact BCY. You won't get a "because I said so" answer. They have an independant lab do a lot of testing for them. There's a reason they dominate the industry, and it has nothing to do with smoke and mirrors or hype. And they never stand still or rest on their laurels--they are always working towards something better.

An even simpler (less technical) way is to take a look at what the monsters of the industry are using on their top-of-the-line equipment. Our side of the sport is very fortunate to be able to reap the rewards of the investments into r&d the compound manufacturers make. That business is never standing still--super competitive, everyone looking to get an edge over the other guy. Guess what they are using? Nearly everything that benefits those guys also benefits us. Stability, durability, consistency is even more critical for them than 99% of us.

It's not rocket science, at least on our end. Plain old common sense and a little dab of homework will do the trick.


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

Based on sales percentages, I only know of a very few people shooting AM strings.


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

I should add--hopefully to avoid confusion--AM is a good material. It serves a purpose, and fills a niche'. It is unique with that rosin coating--the only one of it's kind. It's not the most durable or strongest though.


----------



## wseward (Mar 7, 2013)

Gubber string builder here...however material is material and how that material is put together is another thing all together. Check out the vid here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3EMMd6X9zLA&list=PLWO8hWaPuxmqaT4B1W9JGIc3vFkfj-6jc&index=4

Is the string material all unidirectional or does it have some angle to the weave?


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

After owning and shooting a Barbee made 12strand triple bundle flem twist rhino string (with padded loops) on my 64"/37# Bear SuperK for several months now?...I can say that it is hands down the best string material I've experienced...the thing I like most about the rhino is how well it holds brace...(a pet-peeve of mine with many other string materials I've used)...for instance?...Mr. Barbee's string was not my first experience with rhino string material...as I also have a custom R/D Hybrid longbow made by a local bowyer "Steve Jewett"...it's a 64"/37# Bushmen "American Native"...the bow originally came with an astroflight material string Steve made...and I would need to re-brace that string about every 200-300 shots....but when I took my longbow back for some poundage reductuion and custom fitting/tuning tweaks?...Steve was ranting and raving to me about this new rhino material he was trying out and boasting that it had an extremely low stretch factor and was very stabile...so I had him make me up two for the longbow and?....wow....talk about low stretch?...bow was holding brace for like 500 shots in between re-bracing...and here's how I roll with that...

My Bushmen RD Longbow?...initially get's braced at 7 1/2"s....to the back of the string...and when the front of the string hits 7 1/4"s?...it gets a few twists back too 7 1/2....the Bear SuperK?...same deal except add and inch....and I get about 400-500 shots out of that as well before re-bracing.

That said?....I might also note that *"Just On The Bear SuperK Recurve"*....sometimes?....brace can be re-established in 3-4 twists....but other times?...it may take 5-6 twists to get back to high brace again...but I think the reason this variance exists is because of the way the braids rest in the string groove and their rotational position...as I've had times when I'd add just 2 or 3 twists and get no movement at all...then hafta add a couple more to "get there".

But the longbow?...it seems I get my 1/4" back in 3 twists everytime...because there aren't any braids laying in string grooves.

Now I've not had the honor of trying BCY 8190 yet so?...I can't comment....but with the performance I'm getting from the rhino?...I'd have a hard time straying too far from it...and while I don't know squat about the scientific aspects of the various string materials out there?...I do know this...Steve told me he bought these spools of rhino because the local X-Bow guys were ranting and raving about how strong, stabile and fast it is...and we're both glad he did. L8R, Bill.


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

> ...however material is material...


Uhm...no.


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

400-500 shots on sub-40# bows and the brace drops 1/4"? Just want to be sure I read that correctly.

Hey, if you like it, roll with it.


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

LBR said:


> 400-500 shots on sub-40# bows and the brace drops 1/4"? Just want to be sure I read that correctly.
> 
> Hey, if you like it, roll with it.


No...not 1/4"....that was brain glitch...more like about .150"...the back and front of the string are kept within a 1/4" span but...you're right Chad...I didn't really keep count or anything...just guessing...so lets do this....let's just call it a metaphor for....

*"The Rhino Lets Me Get In About Twice As Much Shooting Before Having To Re-Brace"*

than any other string materials I've tried.


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

My brace never drops after I make a string - not a even an 1/16". I make the string and then stretch it for about an hour - twist it to brace - burnish it and that is it - the string is good till I replace it a year or so later.


----------



## wseward (Mar 7, 2013)

OK CORRECTION: "...however material is material... " -> "...however materials being the same or equal..." was what was implied. Then how the material is assembled is what makes the difference. 2x4 construction is nothing until you brace it with a 2x4 at 45 degrees for example.

What matters is is the consumer...me...happy with the product. I imagine I would be happy with Rhino as a product. More thinner strands to make a possibly more stable string, sounds good to me.


----------



## CAPTJJ (Dec 24, 2007)

After 1000 plus shots the D-97 strings Chad made for me haven't changed brace.


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

> materials being the same or equal..." was what was implied. Then how the material is assembled is what makes the difference. 2x4 construction is nothing until you brace it with a 2x4 at 45 degrees for example.



That makes more sense--thanks for the clarification.


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

When I bought flemish D 97 strings from Black Widow they would stretch a bit during the first week or so of shooting - but then after that they would stabalize and never stretch again - I assumed that they were not pre-stretched and that some of it may have been shooting out the excess wax from making the string.

But since I started making my own strings out of Angel Majesty and prestretching them - i have never had the brace move at all during the entire life of the string.


----------



## Charon (Apr 17, 2011)

Rick Barbee said:


> The Rhino strings were bending the rack hooks. Had to install bigger hooks. 8^)
> 8 Rhino strings all at once on the rack collapsed the rack. Had to build a stronger rack. 8^)
> 
> Nothing compares to it. The Rhino that is. 8^)
> ...


Rick,this caught my eye.

You know its not the strings that broke the string stretching rack. It was the load applied. 

I guess the rack was doing fine under the loads you had been applying before. Why did you overload your rack? Bet ya a dollar that the rack would have broken with that same load had you been using any of the HMPE string materials.

Or do you shoot for forcing a certain linear distance of stretch and permanent creep regardless of what load may be required to achieve it?

From what I have seen, in the compound world 300# seems to have become a de facto load standard for prestretching strings. Do you look to prestretch at 300#?

So for 8 strings are loading up something on the of 2400# on your rack? I'm curious, how are doing it? Dead weight? Jack screw? Hydraulic ram? Using a screw can be somewhat problematic for figuring actual load applied unless some sort of scale or load cell for direct reading is used. There are always friction losses to deal with if you figure the load just by doing the math. A hydraulic ram may be kinda cool though. You can use a gauge to measure internal ram pressure and then do the math on the area of the piston.

Anyway I'm just not sure that claiming that the Rhino collapsed your rack is really a conclusive indicator of anything.


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

Charon, I was stretching strings of every other type of material under the racks max string capacity of 12 strings with no problem.
The Rhino is just that much stronger. I noticed immediately on the first string I built with it, that it was much harder to stretch.

Describing my rack, or how I stretch the strings is getting a little to personal, so I'll refrain from answering that one. 
I'll just say - I've found there is a lot more involved, and much better ways to stretch a string, than just loading it to length. 8^)

Believe me - I test (including torture testing) every material I consider using, and the rack is used for the testing as well as the construction of the strings.
Lots of materials don't even make it through the first phase my testing.

Rick


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

can't comment on the way you stretch, because I don't know.... but I think what Charon is pointing out is that the fact that the rack broke doesn't _necessarily_ mean that the Rhino is stronger, just perhaps that it is less elastic.

I can vouch, from the samples I've played with, that the material is really, really stiff. It just doesn't give. I also like how the strands lay up to give a nice slick finish.

That said, I don't know if any of that means, necessarily, that it is a better material as a bow string for a particular setup, or in general. Obviously, many people are happy with it. It seems like a very nice material. I, though, wouldn't feel confident to say what is better or worse for anybody else.


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

Hey Barney.

Yep, I get that.

The point to my input was - 8 Rhino strings placed more load on my rack than 12 strings of any other materials at the same strand counts.

My approach to, and processes of stretching & conditioning strings are quite a bit outside the box from norm, and I have to babysit & constantly monitor them while it is being done.

Rick


----------



## George D. Stout (May 11, 2005)

Well....that was refreshing. How about those Pittsburgh Pirates??? 8^)


----------



## ozzypop (Sep 23, 2010)

George I guess old folks like us don't mind pulling out the bow square and adding a twist.


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

ozzypop said:


> George I guess old folks like us don't mind pulling out the bow square and adding a twist.


Now I find "THAT" sir to be a very interesting comment...so?...let's analyze it cause the breakdown for me is a simple one...as I might suspect (based on your comment) that yourself and Mr. Stout (whom btw I have the utmost respect for)...are casual, old school, hunter based archers...where adding a twist here and there every now and then is no big deal and that's cool but...

I might also suspect that the discriminating competition shooter?...wouldn't appreciate it none to much if his bow started out the tournament at 8 1/2" BH but finished off at 8 3/8ths...as I could see where that might be a tad disconcerting for those seeking a position on the podium. :laugh:


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

I get what you're saying Rick, the Rhino stuff is STIFF. From what I've seen from my own pre-stretch procedures (that sound far less elaborate than yours), I'd agree.



JINKSTER said:


> I might also suspect that the discriminating competition shooter?...wouldn't appreciate it none to much if his bow started out the tournament at 8 1/2" BH but finished off at 8 3/8ths...as I could see where that might be a tad disconcerting for those seeking a position on the podium. :laugh:


Even non-discriminating competition shooters, like myself, find a shift in brace height over the day annoying. I don't want to have to worry about it, or carry around a stringer.

It happened to me at a shoot with FF+ string material, an endless loop, and it was a cold day too.Dropped approximately 1/4". 

8190, 3 days of hot, bow kept strung, stayed put. I wouldn't say that there is NO creep, but not over the course of a shoot in my experience. Leave is strung and shoot it, might need a twist once in awhile. Hasn't moved a lot recently, but I wouldn't say that it won't. BCY doesn't claim that either. But it is stable, at least a whole lot more stable, so that if a bow that has been strung for awhile is at brace when I begin the day, it'll be there at the end.

Brownell claims NO creep for Rhino, as well as XS2. So does BCY for 452x. Definitely a nice property . Interestingly, while both Rhino and XS2 promise no creep, the Rhino is a WHOLE lot stiffer than the XS2, perhaps showing that creep isn't necessarily related to elasticity, and that stiff doesn't translate to speed, as both the XS2 and 8190, with my hardware and testing, were a little bit faster.

To be honest, it's fun to talk about, but in terms of real use, it seems that most of the higher end string materials are pretty darn good, and more like each other than not. What's more, the whole generalizing string performance may not be too productive. I've read of people who claim that 452x works faster for them with their setup than 8125g, even though the opposite _should_ be true, in theory.


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

> ...perhaps showing that creep isn't necessarily related to elasticity,...


Correct--they are two different properties.



> ...and that stiff doesn't translate to speed,...


Two for two. Not that it matters for us, but stiff is undesireable in material used for compound bows, because it's slower.



> To be honest, it's fun to talk about, but in terms of real use, it seems that most of the higher end string materials are pretty darn good, and more like each other than not.


I agree--especially on traditional bows. Making the material can be high-tech, but assembling a string isn't.

There's a rare occassion when, for reasons I couldn't explain, one bow will "like" a particular material more than another. It will feel better, sound better (quieter), whatever. I haven't experienced it myself, but I have heard of it a very few times. One time was from someone I know and trust, and I know he knows what he is doing both with bows and with strings. He found a difference between two bows he owns that, if anyone else would have told me what he did, I wouldn't have believed it.


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

I'm a bit slow--got way too many other, much more important things occupying my brain lately. Anyhow, I just remembered something....

How does a material that has no stretch retract enough at full draw to add 2-4# of draw weight???????? Correct me if I'm wrong, but in order for a material to contract, first it must stretch. For it to add 2-4# of draw weight, it must contract a bunch.

Can someone fill me in on the missing link here?


----------



## Charon (Apr 17, 2011)

The strings didn't apply any load. They carried the load YOU applied. Or do they really weigh THAT much?!?!?!?

Honestly there is no doubt that the result would have been the same with ANY HMPE strings of the same strand count with the same load. And doesn't matter WHO made sting material, Brownell or BCY.


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

LOL, maybe I should have said - the resistance from the strings to the load being applied to the rack by me is more with 8 strings of Rhino, than it is with 12 string of the same stand count of other materials.

That resistance is what broke the rack. Better?

In any case, I know what, and why. No need to argue about it. 8^)

Rick


----------



## Charon (Apr 17, 2011)

OK, so load X applied to 8 Rhino strings caused the hooks in your rack to deform, or collapse, right? And the same load X applied 12 strings of other material did not cause any problems, right? And the fact that that same load was being carried by 4 additional hooks such that the individual hooks each saw a lesser load does does not factor into it?

Or is this another "Believe it because I say so!"


----------



## BigPapaGuss (Aug 24, 2013)

LBR said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong, but in order for a material to contract, first it must stretch.
> 
> Can someone fill me in on the missing link here?


Metals, and natural fibers contract without being stretched. for metal, introduce it to a colder environment. for the natural fibers, introduce heat. the ability to expand and contract can be a product of many different factors. something does not have to be stretched in order to contract, scientifically speaking.


----------



## ozzypop (Sep 23, 2010)

Just teasing jinks. I am going to,get one of Rick's soon.


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

BPG, I appreciate the effort, and I understand the contraction you are talking about, but it's not in the same ballpark--not even close.

The rate of contraction you speak of is minuscule, and requires an extreme environment change. What was referred to with the string didn't require any extreme, supposedly happened every time the string was drawn to anchor, and was at a rate great enough to affect draw weight 2-4# on a 60-something lb. bow. We're talking rubber band contraction here, on a material that now won't stretch at all.

FWIW, I have put enough force on some of these materials to break them. I won't claim that I've "tried them all"--I haven't. I have put 8125, Dynaflight '97, and 450+ to the test, one string at a time. None of them "stretch like hot rubber", none of them have a rate of stretch anywhere close to polyester ("Dacron"). Under enough force, and with few enough strands, I can get a small amount of stretch (recoverable elongation). After that, if enough force is applied, they break.


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

BigPapaGuss said:


> Metals, and natural fibers contract without being stretched. for metal, introduce it to a colder environment. for the natural fibers, introduce heat. the ability to expand and contract can be a product of many different factors. something does not have to be stretched in order to contract, scientifically speaking.



BigPapaGuss, I assume someone mentioned some testing I had done in the past, and that is why you posted this.

Here are some picture of said testing, and in this particular case the result was the same after multiple draws, and the draw weight was 4# different. Every Time.























Like I said, this was without fail on multiple tests. 
This particular test was the highest draw weight increase I've seen.
My theory is - as the inline stress on the string decreases during the draw, the ultra cam is contracting more than the DF97.

I would love to hear your input

Rick


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

How much would a string have to contract to make a 4# difference? Off the top of my head I'd say at least an inch. Why haven't compounds with 80% let off experienced this
? Why doesn't this phenomenon happen with polyester, which is much, much more elastic? Why are people afraid to ask common sense questions like those?


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

Chad, I took you off of ignore, because I was very curious to see what your response would be to my last post & pictures.

First off - My ability to read a bow square, a weight scale, and a tape measure are as good as anyone's. Rest assured, the test was legit/accurate.
I only bring this up, because you have questioned my abilities quite often. Just wanted to clear that up first.

My question to you, or anyone else who may know is - How much lateral movement in the limbs does is take to bring the limb tips closer together by 3/16 of an inch?
I would imagine that would depended on two things. (1) the type/style/geometry of the bow, and (2) where through the draw cycle you took & compared the two measurements.

Rick


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

JINKSTER said:


> Now I find "THAT" sir to be a very interesting comment...so?...let's analyze it cause the breakdown for me is a simple one...as I might suspect (based on your comment) that yourself and Mr. Stout (whom btw I have the utmost respect for)...are casual, old school, hunter based archers...where adding a twist here and there every now and then is no big deal and that's cool but...
> 
> I might also suspect that the discriminating competition shooter?...wouldn't appreciate it none to much if his bow started out the tournament at 8 1/2" BH but finished off at 8 3/8ths...as I could see where that might be a tad disconcerting for those seeking a position on the podium. :laugh:


Yea cause a bowhunter like myself would love to have his brace height change in the field so that his bow becomes loud and untuned when he launches his broadhead tipped arrow at the buck of a lifetime - man some of the comments in here are amazing!


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

And this stuff about "old timers"... give me a break - There was a time when "old timers" didn't think that the bow and arrow was an efficient hunting weapon = till guys like Pope, Young, Hill, and Bear proved them wrong. I have met "old timers" that were against treestands and thought true hunters did deer drives, etc... - just because something is old does not make it right.


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

Rick Barbee said:


> BigPapaGuss, I assume someone mentioned some testing I had done in the past, and that is why you posted this.
> 
> Here are some picture of said testing, and in this particular case the result was the same after multiple draws, and the draw weight was 4# different. Every Time.
> 
> ...


How about my input Rick?....cause as an unbiased casual observer who finally got to see the pictures of which it is you speak?....and now fully understand why you speak it?...I'm seeing things from a slightly different angle...and actually?...the exact opposite of "contraction"...what I'm seeing there is this...

The D97 has more "elasticity" than the ultra-cam...and is stretching more under tension....thereby not putting as much bend in the limbs as the "less elastic" ultra-cam.

If I'm pulling a 4 wheeler out of a mud bog?...it doesn't matter if I pull in a straight line or bend the rope around a tree at an angle...the rope does one thing when I pull...it stretches....but doesn't contract until the 4 wheeler pops out and tension is relieved.

In the above pics?...I deduce that the D97 has more "stretch factor' than the UC....which is why the D97 didn't put as much bend in the limbs as the UC did at the same DL...but I can definitely understand why the UC would increase poundage over the D97....and now feel as though I know exactly why it was so glaringly apparent that I needed to increase arrow spine value with the rhino over the stock D97 string on my Bear SuperK.

I also believe this explains to me why the rhino is quieter than the D97....far less "BOING" factor...and more static tension.

Now even though I've used strings made of astro-flight and angel majesty?...and at the moment I'm self-admittedly a huge rhino fanboy...and have it on 3 of my 4 primary bows including a 9strand padded loop flem twist on my PSE Zone 25" oly type risered bow...and they are all seem snotty fast for what they are and very quiet...however I've never tried 8190...but the X-bow guys down my way all rant and rave about the rhino...boasting not just about it's seemingly inherent speed and stability but also it's durability...they love it.

Now I'm tempted to say that I would love to try a string made of 8190 but...I suspect that several of these top shelf selections are all extremely similar in overall performance...hence?...I can see where all would have well established fan bases...with a few demonstrating a particularly high level of loyalty to their chosen primary suppliers...and understandably so for obvious reasons...cause I think it's a marketing thing...but I certainly hope that the popularity of 8190 doesn't work it's way too far south here...cause I sure would hate to feel like the odd man out cause I'm shooting Rhino! :laugh: 

L8R, Bill.


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

sharpbroadhead said:


> Yea cause a bowhunter like myself would love to have his brace height change in the field so that his bow becomes loud and untuned when he launches his broadhead tipped arrow at the buck of a lifetime - man some of the comments in here are amazing!





sharpbroadhead said:


> And this stuff about "old timers"... give me a break - There was a time when "old timers" didn't think that the bow and arrow was an efficient hunting weapon = till guys like Pope, Young, Hill, and Bear proved them wrong. I have met "old timers" that were against treestands and thought true hunters did deer drives, etc... - just because something is old does not make it right.


Ken...could you either stop shooting or speak up please?...I'm having trouble hearing you over that loud ILF of yours! :laugh:

Maybe it's that angel majesty string you're using...I found that stuff to be very loud! 

BTW...these two comments of yours is like times #88 and #89 that you've broken this A.T. "Sticky Rule #1" on "just" me...and that's "just" since you've "been back"...

I'll post a link here for your convenience...

http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=1886097

you're welcome.


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

Hey Bill. 
I won't dispute what you're saying, because it very well could be.

My theory is based on how the string tension is actually reduced through the draw cycle. Something else I have tested using a cable tensiometer.
The theory is - since the tension is reducing, the string is contracting, and the ultra cam not only stretches less under full load at brace, 
but contracts much faster as the tension is relieved through the draw cycle, thus winds up being a bit shorter than the df97 when draw is achieved.

Something I just thought of, and probably should add - the draw length being measured in this test was almost at center line of the riser.
Measured at 28" there actually indicates a draw of 1.5 inches more, so there may have been some stacking going on to produce the 4# increase.

Rick


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

Oh - so a guy can post that everything you say is wrong in his opinion - and you cannot respond - great - I will remember that


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

Dynaflight may or may not be "more elastic" than rhino...but " boing factor"??? Lol-that's a new one. Makes it sound like DF'97 is a rubber band, which is blatantly false.

Obviously those questions I asked will go unanswered again. Oh well. No answer is its own answer.


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

LBR said:


> Obviously those questions I asked will go unanswered again. Oh well. No answer is its own answer.


Chad, I'm trying to meet you half way here.

I have done the tests, and I have absolutely found draw weight changes from one string to another.
My test results are accurate, and I have stated that I am *theorizing* as to why the results.

Why don't you pose your questions again, and we'll go from there.
Could be we might all learn something from a discussion conducted like adults with open minds.

Rick


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

Rick Barbee said:


> Hey Bill.
> I won't dispute what you're saying, because it very well could be.
> 
> My theory is based on how the string tension is actually reduced through the draw cycle. Something else I have tested using a cable tensiometer.
> ...


Rick...first?...thanks for the open minded understanding and civil debate level....And while I can understand your "Tension Reduction/Contracting String" theory?...and substantiated by tension-meter test results?...your "against the tide" diatribe is all starting to make extremely clear sense to me...and here's why...

*The Bow String "At Static":* is under "Uni-Lateral Tension" for the entire length....which focuses the tension on a singular axis plane.

but once we grasp that string inducing a 3rd point of contact/support at a mid-point and begin pulling?...the string is then segregated into TWO Angular Axis's...as it begins a radically changing tension angle...then factor in the ever changing leverage point of well tilled limbs being drawn back....which is in fact the somewhat mechanical "stored energy" advantage as it pertains to stick bows?...with the string enjoying a 3rd point of support via our fingers grasp?...and viola..."contraction"...via less tension....due to the string coming ever more inline with an increasingly advantageous "angle of attack" unto the shape yielding limbs.

Interesting...but as far as the stacking goes?...I see you're using a widow. :boink: :laugh:


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

Rick Barbee said:


> Could be we might all learn something from a discussion conducted like adults with open minds.
> 
> Rick


Now there's a novel idea!...and get this....check it out...I have the utmost respect for both of you guys...and have been privileged enough to experience first hand the superior products and customer service you both afford your respective consumer bases...which in turn speaks volumes that you are both "Passion Driven"...which is why I believe you both wind up bumping heads so hard and so often...like two mountain goats...one with a Brownells banner painted on it's side and the other BCY! :laugh:

and there's not a doubt in my mind that...if you two ever got together?...there's not a string manufacturer on earth that could compete. 

But as long as y'all keep those Brownells and BCY flags flying in your respective camps?...

It's "Hammer Time!" 

Now if you'll excuse me?...I gotta :bolt:

cause my dog needs walking...

:dog1:

L8R, Bill. :laugh:


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

I'll give it some thought. Hard to type on a phone, which is all I have access to at the moment. I'm sure you understand my apprehension after your past "offer". If you recall, I tried quite hard to have an adult conversation before the offer and ignore came into play.

Regardless of past differences, my questions are pertinent and sincere--something doesn't add up, and everyone I've spoken with--people who make their living with strings and archery-agree. I also spoke with s certain bowyer who you implied had dissparraging remarks about my strings. He denied saying such.

I also know that those materials don't stretch like "hoy rubber".


----------



## Hank (Jul 5, 2003)

Why was it that on the thread that someone said they really liked 8190, none of the guys that like Rhino/Brownell stuff never came on there and asked stupid questions, or tried to promote Brownell over BCY?.... yet when any other thread comes up where someone likes another string material LBR is all over the thread like stink on a twinkie? every single time!


----------



## uabdave (Mar 12, 2007)

Oh boy here we go with the incredible shrinking string bullcrap. Rick I have never heard such in all my life. In the other thread where you spouted this utter nonsense, and were frankly made a fool of by a little sophomore college physics... I explained why ''in-line tension" decreases, but the stress on the entire system increases steadily equivalent to the force draw curve of any bow on the planet except for a compound with a let-off. Your continued argument stating that a string on a recurve or longbow will shrink with more weight put on it through a draw is absolute crap. You are just too stuck on yourself and your amazing shrinking strings to let it go. I dont care what kind of string material you are talking about, it will NEVER friggin shrink when you draw a bow. Jinks actually pointed out the only thing that will make a string act shorter, and I emphasize... act shorter, not actually shrink... and that is the fact that you are using 3 fingers to draw the bow, not a single point of contact that is very small, like a release. 

Bud you can test all you want, you are still full of it bc your entire premise and terminology is wrong.

Dave


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

Hi there Dave.
Thanks for your well worded, kind, and gracious input. :thumbs_up

The only problem with it is - you obviously didn't read all of my post/posts. You simply chose to see what you wanted,

AND

you did not offer any theory you might have, that explains why the draw weight increase.
To that end, I would love to hear what you have to say.
Until then, I am no more "full of it", than you are. :teeth:

Rick


----------



## Charon (Apr 17, 2011)

Hank, I honestly don't think LBR has a problem with which string company is better or anything. His beef seems to be more about the stupid stuff that people say, which they then expect us all to just blindly accept as if we're a bunch of mental deficients or something.

Say, Rick weren't you going to retest your shrinking string hypothesis with something a little more sophisticated than a used fish scale and an old tape measure? But I see you have the same old "data" with the same old pics.

I'm still not buying the 4# increase, especially with the latest admission that the bow may have been drawn into stack. But you think, maybe, just maybe, any draw weight increase, IF it even exists, could just be due to less stretch under load so the limbs get drawn just that little bit farther? But with even a "skinny" string being actually effectively "overbuilt" the possible difference must be infinitesimally small.


----------



## uabdave (Mar 12, 2007)

Hey there Rick, you just dont get it. The D97 is obviously more elastic than the UC which is why you get the extra 3/16" of powerstroke there, but that is ONLY if you measured right... the way you're going I question the whole shebang, you, your ability to measure, your methods, etc... But 3/16" extra draw may give you 4 oz of extra pull but no way in hell will it give you 4lb. I suggest you find a good eye doc and learn how to read a bow scale. heck you prolly read 4oz not 4lb. Either that or you are outright not being truthful in order to back up your other nonsense. 

Oh btw, the "I know you are but what am I" argument will surely win over the doubtful and sell more strings. 

Dave


----------



## uabdave (Mar 12, 2007)

Charon said:


> Hank, I honestly don't think LBR has a problem with which string company is better or anything. His beef seems to be more about the stupid stuff that people say, which they then expect us all to just blindly accept as if we're a bunch of mental deficients or something.
> 
> Say, Rick weren't you going to retest your shrinking string hypothesis with something a little more sophisticated than a used fish scale and an old tape measure? But I see you have the same old "data" with the same old pics.
> 
> I'm still not buying the 4# increase, especially with the latest admission that the bow may have been drawn into stack. But you think, maybe, just maybe, any draw weight increase, IF it even exists, could just be due to less stretch under load so the limbs get drawn just that little bit farther? But with even a "skinny" string being actually effectively "overbuilt" the possible difference must be infinitesimally small.


Totally agree with you here bro.


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

Still nothing, except argumentative name calling, and belittling.

No useful input. What a pitty.
I had such high hopes. 

Yea, I'm hung up on myself -

Hung up so much, that I am constantly trying to learn new things & improve. 
To learn not just for myself, but so I might be able to pass it on to others when I have the opportunity to do so. 

Hung up so much, that I am willing to put myself out there in full recognition in that effort to learn, and not hide behind the safety of anonymity to take cheap shots at folks.

I'm not here trying to sell strings partner.
I come here to try to learn new things, and to share when I can.

:teeth:

Carry on.

Rick


----------



## ozzypop (Sep 23, 2010)

Right on Rick.


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

ozzypop said:


> Right on Rick.


X's 2...and for some reason?...this quote comes to mind....

*“It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.” *

L8R, Bill. :cool2:


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

JINKSTER said:


> X's 2...and for some reason?...this quote comes to mind....
> 
> *“It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.” *
> 
> L8R, Bill. :cool2:


Bill, that is one of my favorite all time quotes. 8^)

Another favorite quote of mine is - *"If you're not moving forward, you're backing up."*
Short & simple compared to the first, yet delivers just as much meaning & impact.

Rick


----------



## uabdave (Mar 12, 2007)

Yawn, Rick I offered vast evidence toward my point in the last thread. It is basic physics, stuff I aced in college in my sophomore year. I told a mechanical engineer buddy of mine about your incredible shrinking strings a while back and he got a good belly laugh out of it. This guy has a mechanical engineering degree and a masters in civil engineering and probably one of the smartest, most studious folks I know. If you were really into learning and being innovative you'd actually study a bit before using words and terms you dont understand incorrectly. But I guess you are too far gone down your hole to back out now. Just keep digging, it's kinda sad really. 

Dave


----------



## CAPTJJ (Dec 24, 2007)

Intuitively speaking, I am still having trouble understanding how any material, whether it is bowstring, rope, wire cable, etc., will contract when under tension? It doesn't make sense according to my knowledge of physics. Having studied biology, I know that muscle fibers are capable of this phenomenon, but they require energy(in the form of ATP) to do so and the process is quite complex.


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

Rick - if what you say is correct - why not just film your testing so that everyone can see how you tested and see the results. I personally find it nearly impossible to believe that a string can give a bow 4 more pounds of draw - but hey - film it and show us all.

I find it odd that you are the only one who makes such a claim - and then when called on it - you don't do anything to back it up but claim that you are being picked on. Film it and post the video - then we can all see exactly how you tested this and we can try it at home and see if we get the same results.

You claim to make strings for the US Olympic Training Center - well - why aren't they talking about your theories - why aren't they using these amazing strings that give them 4 more pounds of draw? Why do they, according to you, practice with Flemish strings that you make - but when they compete they use endless loop strings? That makes no sense to me - why practice with a string that you are not going to use when you compete?

Lots of stuff here that does not make sense - perhaps you can clear it all up - a video - and an explanation would go a long way and a lot further than "I am being picked on".


----------



## uabdave (Mar 12, 2007)

CAPTJJ said:


> Intuitively speaking, I am still having trouble understanding how any material, whether it is bowstring, rope, wire cable, etc., will contract when under tension? It doesn't make sense according to my knowledge of physics. Having studied biology, I know that muscle fibers are capable of this phenomenon, but they require energy(in the form of ATP) to do so and the process is quite complex.


Bingo, CaptJJ! That is exactly the case. inline tension has nothing to do with the load on a bow of any sort except for when the bow is at brace. After that it is of no consequence during the draw cycle and does not explain in any way the forces acting on a bow. 

Dave


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

CAPTJJ said:


> Intuitively speaking, I am still having trouble understanding how any material, whether it is bowstring, rope, wire cable, etc., will contract when under tension? It doesn't make sense according to my knowledge of physics. Having studied biology, I know that muscle fibers are capable of this phenomenon, but they require energy(in the form of ATP) to do so and the process is quite complex.


Cap..I can't definitely say for sure but in my quest to gain a deeper understanding of what Rick is describing?...my minds eye can see this happening....

The bow at static...with the string being drawn taunt in a straight line for it's entire length...lots of unilateral tension going on there...especially with the bow at it's low static brace and the limbs as close to unstrung home as they'll ever be when strung and trying real hard to get there..to it's natural unstrung position...like trying to hold a very slight bend in a piece of PVC pipe VS a full arc high yield point bend?...that last inch or so is ever difficult to hold from snapping home to static.

Now with the above in mind?...picture this...from the moment your fingers begin to draw that unilaterally tensioned string?...you've just turned that unilateral tension into two opposing angles....and by affecting a 3rd point of tension and support at the string mid-point?...you've just turned that full length string into two 1/2 length string...drawing at an ever increasing leverage advantage against the yielding limbs at two far more advantageous angles of tension.

Now I'm not siding with Rick nor am I stating his claims are true or false...but I do give him kudos for stepping out of the box in a very open minded way and in my mind?...I can see where his theory might just hold some water...as there just may be less stretch in two shorter strings as opposed to one long one...and I can also see where dynamic tension may in fact decrease as the string gains a better leverage angle pulling against the ever yielding limbs....the mans working with a tensiometer and while I don't quite understand how they work?...(which is why I too would love to see Rick post a vid)...I can think of a more practical test that would in fact either prove or dis-prove his theory as follows...

1. Measure the string of a strung bow at static.

2. Now put it on a draw board and draw the bow.

and finally?...

3. Now measure from nock to center-point of both opposing string angles and add the two together.

and there's your answer to..."did the string contract at full draw?"

We don't need no stinking tensiometers!...whatever they are! :laugh:

but I don't care if it does or doesn't...cause despite the outcome?...I still love the rhino material and what it does for my bows.


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

Ken, I'm looking for an explanation as to why the increase on draw weight.
I offered the contraction of the string as a theory. If that isn't possible then fine, but what I'm really trying to find out here is - what caused the increase in draw weight?

As far as the Olympic trainer strings is concerned - that's the second time you've called me a liar about it.
I could show you my latest order from them, but I won't. I'd rather keep you guessing.
You see, it really doesn't matter to me whether you believe me or not.

As far as the being picked on comment is concerned. You haven't witnessed me saying any such thing.
If I have to take some lumps from the super intellect folks, and wade through that to find the answers, them I'm cool with it.
I can do that without getting concerned, distraught, nor feel the need to retaliate.

As far as repeating the test is concerned - I plan to, but only when I have the equipment to use that won't be called into question as it was before.

Rick


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

Rick Barbee said:


> Ken, I'm looking for an explanation as to why the increase on draw weight.
> I offered the contraction of the string as a theory. If that isn't possible then fine, but what I'm really trying to find out here is - what caused the increase in draw weight?
> 
> Rick


Rick...I'm leaning towards...

a less elastic string material would in fact stretch less under tension....thereby affecting slightly more bend in the limbs (hence inducing a slightly higher poundage recording) at an equal draw length of a more elastic string material of equal length.


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

Polyester, the most elastic of modern string materials, won't give anywhere close to a 4# variance. That was one of my original points, right before I was ridiculed, got an insulting sig line directed at me, received a thinly veiled threat, was put on ignore, etc. Oh yeah--that was also after I politely suggested there must have been an oversight in the test method. Nice to see I was the only one worthy of such.


----------



## CAPTJJ (Dec 24, 2007)

For some reason Talking Heads lyrics keeping popping into my head.:shade:



> You start a conversation you can't even finish it.
> You're talkin' a lot, but you're not sayin' anything.
> When I have nothing to say, my lips are sealed.
> Say something once, why say it again?


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

I did not call you anything - I am simply waiting for an explanation of why the US Olympic Training facility would buy flemish strings from you for Olympic archers to train with - but when it comes to the actual competitons they use endless loop - that does not make any sense at all to me - so I am just trying to learn and understand what reason there would be to train with a type of string that you would not be using in competition. All I am asking for is an explanation so that I can understand the logic of it.


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

uabdave said:


> Bingo, CaptJJ! That is exactly the case. inline tension has nothing to do with the load on a bow of any sort except for when the bow is at brace. After that it is of no consequence during the draw cycle and does not explain in any way the forces acting on a bow.
> 
> Dave


Well, playing a Barbee advocate, the string tension does not necessarily have to be proportional to the force acting to flex the limb. Remember vector analysis? As the string pulls away from the limb, the pulling angle changes, and more and more of that tension moves towards lateral force, relative to the limb, as opposed to parallel force (which would simply compress the limb where it can't significantly move). Of course, the limbs are curved, or recurved, so it's always going to be doing a little of both, but on the whole, I'm sure you get the idea. But, given that, the idea that the string tension could decrease, and an elastic string shrink, as the bow is drawn, even though the force vector on the limbs (and the total draw weight) is increasing, isn't that stupid. I don't know if it actually happens, and if it does, to what degree, but it's not a silly idea.

What doesn't make sense to me is that if this was happening, we would think that a stiffer material would contract less, and the draw weight would be lower, at least in the limited scope of what I think I understand. If I'm wrong, please correct me.

I don't know an easy way to measure tension at brace, aside form building up a string/scale combination with a turnbuckle, spinning the turnbuckle to get a given brace height, and then seeing what the scale reads. Once you have that, if you had a draw board and a bow scale, you could use vector analysis to calculate string tension at different draw lengths based on the string angles, and connect the data points. You could also measure string length to see what changes, as well as more saliently, measure the draw weight of one string at an equal draw, given the same starting brace height.

That being said, when I was testing Rhino, with endless loop construction, I didn't personally notice the bow feeling any heavier than any other material, including 8190, XS2, 8125g, and FF+. I liked the feel of it, to be sure, but didn't notice any more holding weight. Granted, it's only my subjective impression, however, if it was actually heavier at holding, I would expect it also to stack faster toward the end, as well as speed up the arrow. At about 8 gpp (based on roughly 54# holding weight which I've verified with both FF+ and 8190), the Rhino was more or less in line (within a couple %) of the other string materials.

To be fair, testing wasn't with a Flemish Twist, let alone a skinny string made by Rick, so I hold out the possibility that there may be something going on that involves the construction method. Namely, a flemish twist will likely be more elastic through the loop splices, as the string is highly twisted, and as such (as explained by vector analysis), the fibers in that area would be under more strain (and pressure, by design) than the linear tension in the direction of the string itself.

If anybody really cares, I can put that string back on, and test draw weight with a set brace height, though my bow scale isn't the most precise. It's one of those feather whatever spring thingies, so you kind of have to wiggle it to make sure the internal friction isn't holding back the dial/spring indicator. Not likely to detect small differences. I like the form factor, don't like the actual mechanism, so ahead of the results, I'm telling you not to take them too seriously


----------



## uabdave (Mar 12, 2007)

Barney the point is "in line tension" is the terminology used by Rick to describe his bogus hypothesis. Inline tension does decrease, but inline tension does not = force. Force applied by the limbs on the draw is the only applicable term here. That does not decrease and a string will only stretch if anything when more force is applied. It stretches until the elastic properties of the material in question are at their limit, then it stops stretching... Never contracts. CaptiJJ is right only biological materials like living muscle will contract under a load expending energy to do so. 

Dave


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

Ken, the strings for olympic training facilities has nothing to do with this topic.
It is simply an attempt by you to get me to say who, and that isn't going to happen.

Barney, I haven't tested the Rhino material to see if a draw weight increase occurs.
The testing I did was with the Ultra Cam & DF97, but I definitively look forward to seeing your results, and more input.

Dave, please humor me, and let's just focus on the draw weight increase. 
I submitted in theory, that it was contraction of the string. You've submitted that is not possible,
so how did it happen? 

Rick


----------



## uabdave (Mar 12, 2007)

It didnt Rick, you used bad experiment setup, misread data, your scale is a piece of crap or worse, you lied. Take your pick. What I have found over my 35 years on this earth is that pride causes folks to do all sorts of things, including fabricate data or intentionally read it wrong to save face. 

Dave


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

A better question in my mind at least, that I've asked numerous times, is if it wasn't a flawed test and it had anything to do with elasticity, why don't other much more elastic materials do the same thing?? 

Since none of us were there the only thing we can do as to why you got the results you did is speculate. As I noted, I got treated just lovely for doing that. Its not a reasonable request anyway--its like demanding us to explain why you think you can fly when we know better.


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

uabdave said:


> It didnt Rick, you used bad experiment setup, misread data, your scale is a piece of crap or worse, you lied. Take your pick. What I have found over my 35 years on this earth is that pride causes folks to do all sorts of things, including fabricate data or intentionally read it wrong to save face.
> 
> Dave


And there ya have it folks. According to Dave, I am either hopelessly incompetent, or a liar.
I guess I can assume it is safe to say, I won't be getting any input other than ridicule & defamation from him.

Thanks for clearing that up for me Dave. :teeth:

Rick


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

As a side note, I want to thank you folks that are schooled in physics and shared your education. I won't claim to understand it all 100%--I'd make a fool of myself if I tried.


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

Dave answered the question, and he did include that you may have just misread the data. I'm still waiting on an answer, even after I repeated the question as requested.


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

Chad, I appreciate the same things.

The draw weight difference did occur.

The scale I used is a cheap one, but has always read real accurate.
What the two different actual draw weights were make no difference. 
It's the incremental difference that is of concern.

I presented my theory based on my understanding of inline stress decreasing on the string,
and the idea that as the stress decreased the strings contract, and one may have contracted more than the other.
That theory may not hold water, but the fact remains - there was a 4# incremental difference between the two.
I want to know why.

I've also stated before, the 4# difference only happened with one particular bow. Other times I looked for this with other bows, 
the difference was slight (no more than 2#, and usually less) when it occurred at all. Go back to that bow, and wham 4# difference.
I also noted that I was likely drawing the bow into stack, but that really doesn't matter, because a difference is a difference, 
but the stack may have contributed to it being 4# instead of just 1#.

I don't have that bow anymore. I have one just like it except it is about 15# lighter draw weight.
Haven't test the lighter bow yet, but I will. I'm just waiting until I can gather the equipment, that will be acceptable by all.
I also tested this on a bow I have that is 98# @ 29". Two different strings of any type on that bow made zero difference.

Rick


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

Chad, the data was readings from a tape measure & a bow draw weight scale.
Now granted, I can see the chance of reading it/looking at it wrong, thus getting the data wrong, 
but not every time, and it was the same every time.


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

I have been using Rhino on compound cables and its crazy strong stuff! Works really well.


----------



## hcorrigall (Apr 1, 2009)

*Tests??*

You obviously have have verified tests that were done to prove this?? No thumb sucks now??






Thin Man said:


> The serving on an endless is hard and tightly wound, presenting lots of contact area to hit the limb with. Flemish feels soft and the braids are hill and valley-like, perhaps allowing for a more gymnastic-like tumble against the limb, with the valley portions of the braid not even making contact.
> 
> Half the surface area contact coupled with roundish braids ... maybe less noise.
> 
> Don't know. Don't use endless. Maybe one day. Just not today. Nor yesterday. The day after tomorrow would be an option if I build a jig tomorrow. I'll sleep on that ... tonight.


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

hcorrigall said:


> You obviously have have verified tests that were done to prove this?? No thumb sucks now??


My endless loop string is pretty quiet, though it's got little pieces of velcro where the string leaves the limb (recurve). It lifts the rest of the string away from the limb. As a result, it creates jut a little space, such that the string does not slap against the limb after the shot. This quieted down the bow significantly

Similarly, there is some sense to the rounded braids making things possibly quieter. If the last braid that touches does not move significantly after the shot, and prevents the rest of the string from slapping, it could conceivably be quieter.

But, you make a good point. Try and see, try and see, and in the end, you'll probably find out, it depends, on a lot of other things


----------

