# Wanted K6 vane reviews



## vlesiv (Oct 20, 2013)

Lancaster has just started shipping those on Monday. Ingot 2 packages coming on Thursday, will test them this week


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## eagle man (Jun 7, 2011)

Please give us your thoughts when you get them going. Thank you!


----------



## 10X Archer (Mar 7, 2016)

I got them early from Coach Lee. I have yet to shoot a scoring round with them as I didn't have time before state indoors, but I can give you all my impressions from installing them and shooting in the back yard.

The vanes look really cool and the colors are nice. They are curved to match the shaft so they tape on more securely then normal spin wings. The double sided tape has a nice pull tab which is nice. The Aero wraps are a better solution then regular wrapping tape in my opinion. I have used heat shrink on other spin wings before but the Aero wraps are more appropriately sized and give a cleaner look. The double sided tape has a very good bond and isn't very hard to remove if needed. There are plenty of extra vanes and aero wraps in the pack but I would have likes more double sided tape.

Overall K&K have definitely improved upon the installation process of regular spin wings. As of now, I think they are better than range-o-matic and spider vanes.

As for the forgiveness, I have to do some more testing, but I am shooting great ends with them so far.

Lastly, if you are planning to order some, it seems like Coach Lee favors the 2" model for most archers.


----------



## vlesiv (Oct 20, 2013)

10X Archer said:


> Lastly, if you are planning to order some, it seems like Coach Lee favors the 2" model for most archers.


Interesting - do you happen to know why? 

I ordered 1 3/4 inch ones, for outdoor 70meters, thought that the longer ones are for indoor or for shorter distances.... If 2” is what they recommend, will replace it with LAS probably... 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## JimDE (Aug 3, 2008)

I just this afternoon placed a arrow order and added the 1.75” K6 vanes in pink..... I currently shoot spider vanes and spinwings before these. It will be a while before I can truly test these but I will post when I try them out.


----------



## 10X Archer (Mar 7, 2016)

vlesiv said:


> Interesting - do you happen to know why?
> 
> I ordered 1 3/4 inch ones, for outdoor 70meters, thought that the longer ones are for indoor or for shorter distances.... If 2” is what they recommend, will replace it with LAS probably...
> 
> ...


Yeah, I'm not sure why, but he had both and sent me the 2" ones. My guess would be that more rotation would be better/more forgiving, similar to how Brady even went to 4 fletch and Jake puts tons of helical. 

Since you ordered two, maybe you could have one replaced and share your testing results with us?

Probably the 1 3/4" would be better for low poundage though.


----------



## 10X Archer (Mar 7, 2016)

JimDE said:


> I just this afternoon placed a arrow order and added the 1.75” K6 vanes in pink..... I currently shoot spider vanes and spinwings before these. It will be a while before I can truly test these but I will post when I try them out.


You guys mean *Jet6* right?


----------



## phallenthoul (Aug 21, 2016)

I guess K&K Archery Kisik Lee's Jet 6 in short would be K6 =)
Ordered some, will test when they arrive.


----------



## JimDE (Aug 3, 2008)

Yeah.... K&K Archery KSL Jet 6


----------



## vlesiv (Oct 20, 2013)

So, I talked with Jesse from K&K archery. They recommended to get 2'' vanes, not 1 3/4 for my poundage #44-46 and for X10. Will be replacing what I ordered with LAS to the 2" size


----------



## JimDE (Aug 3, 2008)

I really don't think it is just the extra 1/4" of length it has to be a difference in profile and height that would make a significant difference between the two. Without seeing either hard to say but I too have some 2" ones coming my way


----------



## eagle man (Jun 7, 2011)

Has anybody seen or read the directions for these? What is recommended for off set. I have my Elivanes (P 3's) at quite an off set. I shoot Carbon Express Nanos and I start the back of the vane on one line and end up with the front of the vane on the other line. Nice helical and the seem to fly very well especially at the longer distances. I might be a little older than some of you so I'm down to shooting 36# OTF. Any thoughts on what would be best 1.75" or 2"?


----------



## JimDE (Aug 3, 2008)

At 36 lbs I would not think you would want any additional drag on the back of the arrow by using a additional offset. Personally I would tri line the shafts and run the vanes along the those lines and let the vanes design alone handle the arrow rear stability with its vortex design.


----------



## eagle man (Jun 7, 2011)

Thanks for the advice. I don't need a tri liner the Carbon Express Nano's come with lines. Think I'm going to wait and see what kind of reviews a few of you have after shooting and experimenting with them.


----------



## Arsi (May 14, 2011)

I didn't like how the Spider Vanes, Eli Vane P3 and S3, and various XS wings performed. Always had success with the shorter 1 3/4" Spinnies and I am shooting 46#. So that's the size I ordered today even after reading everyones posts. Maybe I will pick up 2" but I doubt I would have much more success over the 1 3/4". Granted I will not even be shooting these vanes until maybe March. Unless they perform significantly better than my current indoor setup on my outdoor bow... And that HAS happened before...


----------



## SELABraveheart (Jun 20, 2017)

vlesiv said:


> So, I talked with Jesse from K&K archery. They recommended to get 2'' vanes, not 1 3/4 for my poundage #44-46 and for X10. Will be replacing what I ordered with LAS to the 2" size


I'm assuming that the 1 3/4's would be correct for my 35# one piece recurve bare bow. (And eventually for my SF FP with 36# SF EC Limbs) 

It will be awhile before the pro setup is up and running, as I'm having to purchase all the separate pieces as finances allow. Bought the Riser and Limbs, so that's out of the way. They're hibernating until all the other components are in the house. 

BTW, the purple KSL Jet 6 vanes will definitely look good with the yellow/gold VAP Target Elite V1's. (My school colors)............


----------



## JimDE (Aug 3, 2008)

viesiv, it would be interesting to me as well as others I am sure as to Jessie's reasons for this recommendation....if there is a parameter where the recommendation cutoff from 2" to 1.75" may occur as to poundage, draw length, arrow spec, or whatever?....Knowledge from those familiar with a new innovative product is of great value in the results one may achieve with them and I am sure K&K wants their customers to achieve the best performance they can with their products as it helps sell more of them...... My 2" vanes come today via USPS and this will be the first time I have ever seen a Jet6 vane.


----------



## JimDE (Aug 3, 2008)

Look what just came.......


----------



## JimDE (Aug 3, 2008)

These are lower profile and more rigid than say a 1.75 spinwing or a 1.8 spider vane and exactly 2" from front to rear. I will fletch some up today on some 700 vape v1 target shafts















You can definitely notice the vortex shaping close to the mounting base of the fletch and it does have slightly extended feet much like spider vanes to help the shrink tubing grab onto them.......


----------



## JimDE (Aug 3, 2008)

Side by side: 2" Jet6 (red) next to a spider vane 1.8" (gold)










The Jet6 is lower profile than the Spidervane essentially near the same length...Personally I see no reason to ever go shorter than a 2" as these are on VAP V1's the Jet6 on a 700 the Spidervane on a 600


----------



## whiz-Oz (Jul 19, 2007)

So, who is going to keep track of these vanes being introduced at the start of 2018 and instantly correlate this to an increase in scores around the world since, in years to come? 

None of you guys are aerodynamicists experienced in low reynolds numbers airflow, I take it?


----------



## vlesiv (Oct 20, 2013)

whiz-Oz said:


> None of you guys are aerodynamicists experienced in low reynolds numbers airflow, I take it?


So, what’s your opinion on this vanes?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Arsi (May 14, 2011)

JimDE said:


> Side by side: 2" Jet6 (red) next to a spider vane 1.8" (gold)
> 
> View attachment 6370039
> 
> ...


Yeah those definitely don't look like 2" next to a Spider Vane... Interesting. Maybe I will get the 2" HAHA! We will see what the 1 3/4" looks like. If it is slightly smaller than the 2", then I will be happy.


----------



## JimDE (Aug 3, 2008)

They measure exactly 2” but they are so low in profile they seem smaller than the spidervanes... not a big fan of the shrink tubing and even on these shafts a bit of a pia to position. I think I will opt for over wrap tape on the next batch. 

I have snow on the ground here so if I shoot it will be indoors this weekend which I don’t think will really test this fletching


----------



## whiz-Oz (Jul 19, 2007)

vlesiv said:


> So, what’s your opinion on this vanes?




Well, I will give you a hint. 

The aerospace industry spends billions of dollars modelling and refining airflow at high Reynolds numbers. 

Low reynolds numbers are much harder to deal with because of flow separation. 

There's no way in hell those fletches can make the air flow like the video claims it can, but because the average archery doesn't have the ability to disprove that, even if they know it's not correct, the rest will go along with what Coach Lee says. 

Confirmational bias will take care of the rest, because the average archer is not a statistician and wants to believe that any product short of dedicated training will make their score higher. 

That fact that people are emotionally motivated means that actual facts don't get in the way of anything. 

So just wait to see if scores dramatically go up once these fletches have worldwide availability. 

You'll find that they don't. 
Leading archery nations won't instantly all go to them. 

Everyone will conveniently forget that I've ever predicted this.


----------



## JimDE (Aug 3, 2008)

It may or may not actually make a aerodynamic difference I was not a aerodynamic engineer but never rule out the placebo effects that any new product may have in the minds of its users. I don’t think anyone in Archery any length of time thinks they can buy their way into the winners circle but sometimes a little change in hardware can cause a bit more focus or attention to detail or even confidence, thus increasing their performance. 

Time will tell and claims will be made but I would not bet against what a new innovation can cause within the 12” above the shoulders. Who really cares why it happens as long as their score card looks better. I’d buy a hundred of them if the end effect, placebo or real, was more enjoyment. 

Not saying anything as yet to this specific product as I will have to shoot them for awhile and see for myself but was referring to innovative new products as a whole.... a new limb design or a new shaped riser or even a $800 a dozen super duper arrow are they really better or just perceived better which makes the end results better?? I’m a results sort of guy not a engineer! If things work better for me then in my mind they are better whether the science supports it or not. Aerodynamically bumble bees should not be able to fly and we know they do... so much for science.


----------



## whiz-Oz (Jul 19, 2007)

JimDE said:


> It may or may not actually make a aerodynamic difference I was not a aerodynamic engineer but never rule out the placebo effects that any new product may have in the minds of its users. I don’t think anyone in Archery any length of time thinks they can buy their way into the winners circle but sometimes a little change in hardware can cause a bit more focus or attention to detail or even confidence, thus increasing their performance.


Well, you can waver if you like, but wishful thinking doesn't guide airflow. The placebo effect will be the only measurable thing for the first few days. Then it will be back to normal because that's how equipment placebo works. 



JimDE said:


> Aerodynamically bumble bees should not be able to fly and we know they do... so much for science.


Well, maybe you should keep up with science. Bumblebee flight was explained over 13 years ago. People who keep saying that quote are exactly the people who have demonstrated that they stopped learning when they left school.
https://www.livescience.com/33075-how-bees-fly.html


----------



## liquidator4711 (Aug 4, 2016)

whiz-Oz said:


> There's no way in hell those fletches can make the air flow like the video claims it can, but because the average archery doesn't have the ability to disprove that, even if they know it's not correct, the rest will go along with what Coach Lee says.
> ...
> Confirmational bias will take care of the rest, because the average archer is not a statistician and wants to believe that any product short of dedicated training will make their score higher.


I do believe you may well be right (and it is a complex subject that most of us average archers don't fully understand for sure) - but on the flip side of the coin, I think you would agree that there is some difference between various types of vanes?

As the Jet6 don't have exactly the same design as e.g. Spiders / normal Spinnies and seem to from a different material (as they seem to be stiffer), they would have somewhat different characteristics in reality (which may be better, or not - to be proven...) - even if not with the claimed airflows, there could be some difference in actual results...?

Another practical matter (to be seen too) is the claim that the double-adhesive tape cures over a 24-hour period and would be more resilient - combined with the shrink-tubing, it may give a more practical vane (even if aerodynamics would be the same) if easier to mount and being more robust than normal spinnies - that's something I would appreciate at least.


----------



## whiz-Oz (Jul 19, 2007)

Do you accept that we have equipment which has been able to shoot perfect scores for decades? 
It's been demonstrated pretty conclusively. Anyone with sufficient patience and a shooting machine can go and shoot continuous tens at 90 meters indoors. 

Given that this is easily possible if you remove humans from the equation, do you REALLY think that fletches are going to make any difference? How do dumb projectiles all of a sudden know which way to correct their flight to get to the target? 

Fletches are dumb objects. They have two purposes. Spin the arrow. Keep the arrow aligned with the relative airflow. That's it. 

Light weight is an advantage because weight at the string end of the arrow has the greatest effect on effective spine. This is why spinnies are so popular with recurve archers. They do respond less to a flubbed release. 

There are windtunnel tests which show that some mylar fletches have detached flow earlier than others. That is the ONLY actual proveable information regarding vane differences. 

This doesn't mean that they won't be accurate if the arrows are all consistent. The only fletches that have ever been aerodynamically designed were done by Professor Micheal Selig and they need some quite reasonable bow speeds to work correctly. 

https://www.firenock.com/aerovane/


----------



## JimDE (Aug 3, 2008)

So what your saying is it only took science 2005+ years to prove why they can fly, great job science!..... and the only thing quoting “the bees can’t fly” thing is that the person saying it really doesn’t care one way or the other. 

As far as product placebo only lasting a short time in a users mind I would like to see the science behind that statement because I know sporting clays shooters who change a brand of choke tube and continuously score better and will only shoot those choke’s no matter how much science shows they are just tapered tube’s like most every other companies tapered tubes. It’s much like a lucky shirt or lucky hat effect on the mind to some and no science will change these peoples minds or it’s placebo effects. Though we all know science can prove it’s no different than any other identical apparel and there is no such thing. 

If someone feels a product improves their performance then for them it does and they can measure the improvement with their scorecards whether the product or its effect on the user’s mind is the actual reason.


----------



## vlesiv (Oct 20, 2013)

Hi, all. My name is Viktor and I"m a placebo-holic  Not sure how to cure it, may be a deep hypnosis will help. However, I know that archery is about consistency, feelings and a great inner control. When i look at my arrows and my bow and other equipment - and everything is harmonic, thought thru properly, all colors I like are used properly, etc - It gives me a great sense of satisfaction and self-confidence, so, I concentrate on shooting sequence. And, if my arrows look pretty - I wanna pick them up and shoot them. If, for instance, my fletching is torn a bit - it is itching in my brain like (with Gollum voice) "fiiixx meeee, weee are your preeeeeeecious" )) and it takes my focus away. 

May be it is lack of self discipline, may be it is a beginning of a bigger mental problem )) But - I agree with whiz-Oz on "Anyone with sufficient patience and a shooting machine can go and shoot continuous tens at 90 meters" - can be achieved with any top-level equipment. And vanes are, indeed, dumb 

But, if the new vanes wont decrease my scores (which is doubtfully since I, by myself, damage it much more) - look cool, are attached easier, doublesided tape wont peel off, vanes wont come off, etc - they already have good advantage for me ))) And those pseudo-science K&K advertisement about those small vortexes wont bother me at all 

I got my two packs yesterday. I like what I see with my eyes already  They are light - 0.8 grains for 1 3/4 inches. And what I also like - is their a bit curved shape on the shaft's side that aligns them with the arrow's shaft better - so, they achieve better contact and, hopefully, wont peel off like others do. Will be refletching my arrows - half will stay with Spider vanes, half will go with new Jet6 - will see how they perform next week.


----------



## JimDE (Aug 3, 2008)

2005 was some 30 years after I got out of college and the only thing on my mind then was retiring and fishing and shooting the rest of my life after working management in a Fortune 500 top 50 high stress manufacturing industry. Bee’s were the last thing on my mind but I will say that science teachers and professors was the source all through school that made that statement to their students.


----------



## liquidator4711 (Aug 4, 2016)

whiz-Oz said:


> Do you accept that we have equipment which has been able to shoot perfect scores for decades?


Sure. Not commonly done though...



whiz-Oz said:


> It's been demonstrated pretty conclusively. Anyone with sufficient patience and a shooting machine can go and shoot continuous tens at 90 meters indoors.
> 
> Given that this is easily possible if you remove humans from the equation, do you REALLY think that fletches are going to make any difference?


Of course it makes a difference to have fletches (and obviously not all fletches will be the same, otherwise you can try a flu-flu arrow at 90m if you disagree), otherwise we would just shoot bareshafts. 

Anyone with sufficient patience and a shooting machine, could shoot a perfect score with a crooked bow and bareshafts - as the input is perfect each time (requiring a somewhat more careful arrow selection process though due to lack of spinning).

Now, I don't know how you shoot, but at least I am nowhere near as a consistent as a shooting machine, so I like to use fletches to help dampen out the (slightly different) errors I make for each shot.

I really dislike the old "all bows can shoot continuous tens with a shooting machine, so everything is on the archer" - it is just disingenuous, as obviously no archer is a perfect shooting machine (sure, some of the elite olympians are scarily close, but for the vast majority it is just not the case) and for sure some equipment have helped improve scores during the last few decades (like e.g. going from aluminium to AC / carbon arrows, as well as going from feathers to mylar vanes...).

That being said, of course it is the shooter and repeatable technique and form who makes the biggest difference, but to "remove humans from the equation" is not how reality works when competing for most of us.

Having fine tuned gear that helps smooth out our errors is a nice thing for us intermediate archers.

Also even elite archers spend some time selecting and evaluating the best possible gear, as it actually makes a noticeable difference.



whiz-Oz said:


> How do dumb projectiles all of a sudden know which way to correct their flight to get to the target?


I don't think they do - neither that anyone else claimed they did - if you would care to read just a little bit more carefully, I did not disagree with you, but rather said there are some additional things you are just disregarding (like the choice of material and convenience of how to mount them). Not sure why the aggressive argumentation.



whiz-Oz said:


> Fletches are dumb objects. They have two purposes. Spin the arrow. Keep the arrow aligned with the relative airflow. That's it.


And that's fine, but I think you can agree that they can succeed on different levels for those two tasks? And also the third one of having different amount of drag.

Do you really see no difference with different fletching options?



whiz-Oz said:


> There are windtunnel tests which show that some mylar fletches have detached flow earlier than others. That is the ONLY actual proveable information regarding vane differences.


And having such quantifiable information would be excellent of course. I would think the material choice, thickness, how the fletch is formed, how the ends are secured, or surface smoothness, could impact that.

Then of course, lacking such information, just trying out a bag of the vanes and see if they make any noticeable difference seems like a fairly inexpensive option - if they don't work, one can just continue to use with what has worked out best so far.

I don't believe there will be any massive differences personally, but if it is just on par with current mylar vanes in terms of performance but more robust / easy to mount, that would be reason enough to switch to them. And to find that out, an empirical test is worth more than sitting thinking too much about it...


----------



## JimDE (Aug 3, 2008)

vlesiv said:


> Hi, all. My name is Viktor and I"m a placebo-holic  Not sure how to cure it, may be a deep hypnosis will help. However, I know that archery is about consistency, feelings and a great inner control. When i look at my arrows and my bow and other equipment - and everything is harmonic, thought thru properly, all colors I like are used properly, etc - It gives me a great sense of satisfaction and self-confidence, so, I concentrate on shooting sequence. And, if my arrows look pretty - I wanna pick them up and shoot them. If, for instance, my fletching is torn a bit - it is itching in my brain like (with Gollum voice) "fiiixx meeee, weee are your preeeeeeecious" )) and it takes my focus away.
> 
> May be it is lack of self discipline, may be it is a beginning of a bigger mental problem )) But - I agree with whiz-Oz on "Anyone with sufficient patience and a shooting machine can go and shoot continuous tens at 90 meters" - can be achieved with any top-level equipment. And vanes are, indeed, dumb
> 
> ...


----------



## liquidator4711 (Aug 4, 2016)

vlesiv said:


> But, if the new vanes wont decrease my scores (which is doubtfully since I, by myself, damage it much more) - look cool, are attached easier, doublesided tape wont peel off, vanes wont come off, etc - they already have good advantage for me ))) And those pseudo-science K&K advertisement about those small vortexes wont bother me at all


+1



vlesiv said:


> I got my two packs yesterday. I like what I see with my eyes already  They are light - 0.8 grains for 1 3/4 inches. And what I also like - is their a bit curved shape on the shaft's side that aligns them with the arrow's shaft better - so, they achieve better contact and, hopefully, wont peel off like others do. Will be refletching my arrows - half will stay with Spider vanes, half will go with new Jet6 - will see how they perform next week.


Let us know how you find them! Will be interesting to hear if you find any difference whatsoever (both in performance (sight marks, grouping) but also in robustness).


----------



## eagle man (Jun 7, 2011)

Still wondering what the directions say about any off set? Or just straight?


----------



## vlesiv (Oct 20, 2013)

eagle man said:


> Still wondering what the directions say about any off set? Or just straight?


There is no detailed instruction on it. But, the vane blade itself is offset already. I would just apply it straight and wont overthink. Especially because if you apply a big offset angle - the vane's base wont probably follow the shaft's shape. They are a bit harder to bend/deform from the original shape.


----------



## teebat (Oct 28, 2013)

JimDE said:


> Side by side: 2" Jet6 (red) next to a spider vane 1.8" (gold)
> 
> View attachment 6370039
> 
> ...


They look like Eli vanes

Sent from my VS835 using Tapatalk


----------



## Arsi (May 14, 2011)

What whiz-Oz is trying to say is to be smart about vanes. I tried Spider Vanes just like everyone else out there. I have had years of plot data documented along with lighting and wind conditions. When I compared pure group size of good to bad shots, for my own shooting, the Spin Wing 1 3/4" was the better grouping vane for me instead of the Spider Vanes. What may work for one person doesn't work for others and always be cognizant that the BIGGEST factor to score/group size changes is going to be you, not the vanes.

Sometimes the best way to improve your score is to not change anything about your equipment.


----------



## ButchD (Nov 11, 2006)

Sometimes the best way to improve your score is to not change anything about your equipment.


----------



## JimDE (Aug 3, 2008)

I shot my Jet6 vanes today at 18meter's indoors mounted on Victory VAP V1 700 Target arrows so not a real test but the good thing is none fell off, no one on the line suffered from the added vortex aerodynamic's, and no sound barriers were broken ........ 


Seriously though they shot well, no interference issues, no sound issues, and the bare shafts were touching the fletched ones on every test I did. All in all I am happy with their performance so far and my tune is good to go. They seem to have more stability than their size would tend to normally exhibit compared to some other wings I have used but that is just a feeling and not scientifically plotted with hard data.


----------



## whiz-Oz (Jul 19, 2007)

JimDE said:


> So what your saying is it only took science 2005+ years to prove why they can fly, great job science!..... and the only thing quoting “the bees can’t fly” thing is that the person saying it really doesn’t care one way or the other.


No. That's what you're saying. 



JimDE said:


> As far as product placebo only lasting a short time in a users mind I would like to see the science behind that statement because I know sporting clays shooters who change a brand of choke tube and continuously score better and will only shoot those choke’s no matter how much science shows they are just tapered tube’s like most every other companies tapered tubes. It’s much like a lucky shirt or lucky hat effect on the mind to some and no science will change these peoples minds or it’s placebo effects. Though we all know science can prove it’s no different than any other identical apparel and there is no such thing.
> 
> If someone feels a product improves their performance then for them it does and they can measure the improvement with their scorecards whether the product or its effect on the user’s mind is the actual reason.


Hang on. Now you actually WANT to see science? You don't care about it with bee flight and you're happy to just trot that statement out, but now you're arguving in favour of it?

If you want to pull out personal observations of shotgunners, I can refer to the three day effect. 

You'll note that there are many studies of placebo based athletic performance that have been performed and there are some equipment based studies as well, looking at brand and percieved quality influences. Note that equipment studies are more often done with low skilled individuals whose performance increases are easy to quantify. 
Start googling. 
Read actual published peer reviewed papers. 

Search on 
equipment placebo effects

This will get you going. 
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3778695/

If you really want to see if equipment is superior, see what rises to the top in international competition. 
The current equipment being used at the World Cups and the Olympics shows which is the best performing. 

I am predicting that you won't see any dramatic changes in fletches any time soon. 

Whichever fletch manufacturer managed a clean sweep would be sure to make that knowledge known to all competitive archers.


----------



## JimDE (Aug 3, 2008)

Actually I really don’t care about the science involved in bee flight, placebos, or aerodynamics. Nor do I care what is used on the archery world stage or by who. I buy and try what interests me. If it gives me pleasure I stay with it: if it doesn’t I trash it and go back to what was giving me pleasure. 

At my age and stage of life I only aspire to make myself happy and my biggest competitive aspiration is to beat my last rounds score. I have no need to prove anything to anyone else anymore but me.


----------



## JimDE (Aug 3, 2008)

Day two I rattled more Jet6 fletched shafts at 18 meter's ...... I have no complaints so far and they seem very durable but I think the lower profile and rigidity along with the adhesive tape and shrink tubing help with this durability. At 18 meters I don't expect to see any major or minor flight differences between the Jet6, spider vanes, or spinwings and I can say I didn't notice any difference either. All bow and plunger settings stayed essentially the same for the same impact point. I did increase Beiter plunger tension one click over spider vane fletched shafts.


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

Hey, Whiz. Glad to see you're still kicking.

For readers of this thread, just for some perspective, here is what Rick McKinney (3 time world champion) and his real-world/top-of-the-world experience and observation had to say about curled mylar vanes (Spin Wings) .... http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=813260&p=1053510769#post1053510769


----------



## JimDE (Aug 3, 2008)

Here’s a bit of history on the introduction of Mylar spin wings that might be of interest to some when first released. They were 3” long and see through and vane mounting plates were created and used by PAA members that by today’s standards would be mounting them backwards as a two vanes directly opposed to each other and the folds faced each other. Initially these vanes had just two distinct 90degree bends and the outer edge has a slanted cut to them. These effectively stabilized aluminum x7 shafts out of Hoyt GM’s with just 6” of total fletching length which was evolutionary for that time. I remember my first set when they came out were red in color and were loud as they passed over the Hoyt pro flex rests on adjustable mounting plates.


----------



## liquidator4711 (Aug 4, 2016)

lksseven said:


> Hey, Whiz. Glad to see you're still kicking.
> 
> For readers of this thread, just for some perspective, here is what Rick McKinney (3 time world champion) and his real-world/top-of-the-world experience and observation had to say about curled mylar vanes (Spin Wings) .... http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=813260&p=1053510769#post1053510769


Many thanks, that was a great post summing up a lot of experience and a lot of good pointers on how to think on e.g. size and rigidity. 

Funnily enough, it always boils down to "you need to try various options and see what works best" 

One lesson to be learned is the value of careful documentation of equipment and results over time, so one can make as good comparisons as is possible with as much data as possible - now where is that auto-scoring-auto-arrowtracking-auto-distribution-analysis with a simple photo of the target app for my phone?


----------



## vlesiv (Oct 20, 2013)

Here is what was posted on alternatives website re Jet6 vanes, hopefully will help with vanes selection

General guide for size selection

1-3/4"in: Junior or female archers in recurve, or compound archers
2in: Male archers or who uses arrows over 28.5in
Note. This is just a general guide and does not fit to all. It is recommended to try both sizes to find best fit in individual applications.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## bruce_m (Jan 23, 2012)

I talked with some people about the Jet6 vanes while I was in vegas. I was told the RA's were testing the Jet6's and were consistently showing 2 FPS faster at the bale (70M).

I'll also be interested to hear more about how they behave.


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

bruce_m said:


> I talked with some people about the Jet6 vanes while I was in vegas. I was told the RA's were testing the Jet6's and were consistently showing 2 FPS faster at the bale (70M).
> 
> I'll also be interested to hear more about how they behave.


Not to bash at all on you Bruce, but so many times i read about faster 1 or 2 FPS from some product. I would have to ask, what does 2 FPS at the bale at 70 meters equate to in real life? 

an inch higher sight mark? no difference in sight mark? 1 micro of a second faster to target? 

Hoyt Stealth shots gave 1 FPS faster shot. No one could explain the benefit in that either. 

I can use less glue in my arrows and get 1 FPS faster time. 

I shoot about 40 lbs, what does 2 FPS faster get me in an advantage against a recurve archer shooting 54 lbs? This might be a benefit if everyone used the same poundage and used the same arrow. But its useless and meaningless in the multiple bow setups at a tournament. 

I have never understood why this is an advertised advantage by the companies. 

recurve speeds are 175-210. Thats what they are. As you go up in poundage and get faster, the arrow gets heavier and you get slower, so it equals out. 

I have shot from 36-54 pounds thru my career. My arrows always come in 195-205 FPS. regardless of poundage or point weight. 


Chris


----------



## bruce_m (Jan 23, 2012)

Chris, not taking it as bashing at all. 

Just curious to see what people experience, and interested in good discussion. I'm not selling anything either way just contributing to discussions.

I am definitely the type of person that believes that the archer has so much more to do with performance than the latest change in model of equipment.

I'm more interested with regards to the Jet6 in durability, ease of use etc... What i like initially with the Jet6 vs the spider vanes initially is the lower profile and size for a younger archer and light poundage user. The Spinnies are fragile if not careful, the eli vanes are durable and low profile etc...


----------



## tooold (Jul 26, 2015)

I've only shot a few arrows with them. Haven't tuned them yet, so its difficult to compare them to the spin wings, However, they are a dream to apply. The design from an application viewpoint is superb as the little footer section seems to be curved to fit the arrow beautifully. The double sided tape seems much stronger than spin wing tape and the vanes themselves seem much more sturdy. The little ring to secure the ends (applied using a hair dryer) is a great idea and gives a very nice, clean finish. The tape supplied with the spin wings was always lifting and was difficult to apply evenly (at least for me).

On the negative side, the colours aren't that great. There are currently only four colours and they are a bit dull. Also, the instructions don't say anything about where on the arrow they should be placed and at what angle. The spin wing instructions give much more detail. Is Mr Lee saying these things don't matter?

On the presumption that they perform no worse than spin wings, I think they're great. Are they worth twice the price of spin wings? IMHO - YES. If I happen to shoot a world record, as Ki Sik Lee said someone would, so much the better!

As an aside, I notice they are available from Alternative Sporting Services. To my recollection, they have never sold any "spin-wing" type vanes other than their own - wonder why they are selling these?


----------



## Arsi (May 14, 2011)

In testing on a single day, the 1 3/4" Jet6 performed better than Spider Vanes for me. No surprises there. I have never been able to get Spider Vanes to group well. I still need to run them against my 1 3/4" Spin Wings but I have a feeling they will not perform better than Spin Wings just based on what I am seeing. Ordinarily I would take like 6-8 months to test but I need to hammer down gear for AZ Cup soon.

Specs: 44-46# @ 28".

DISCLAIMER: Do your own testing for yourself. What works for one archer does not work for all archers. I am just sharing my experience.

DISCLAIMER 2: Yes I am aware that they "recommend" the 2" Jet6 at my specs. Just the same as they have "recommended" the longer XS Wing vane, of which I had no success with either. I will test the 2" Jet6 when I can. Most likely in April/May since I will have tournament downtime after AZ Cup.


----------



## bruce_m (Jan 23, 2012)

tooold said:


> I've only shot a few arrows with them. Haven't tuned them yet, so its difficult to compare them to the spin wings, However, they are a dream to apply. The design from an application viewpoint is superb as the little footer section seems to be curved to fit the arrow beautifully. The double sided tape seems much stronger than spin wing tape and the vanes themselves seem much more sturdy. The little ring to secure the ends (applied using a hair dryer) is a great idea and gives a very nice, clean finish. The tape supplied with the spin wings was always lifting and was difficult to apply evenly (at least for me).
> 
> On the negative side, the colours aren't that great. There are currently only four colours and they are a bit dull. Also, the instructions don't say anything about where on the arrow they should be placed and at what angle. The spin wing instructions give much more detail. Is Mr Lee saying these things don't matter?
> 
> ?


I’d agree.. very easy to apply. Tape appears to be stronger.

I had trouble with the shrink wrap ends on X10s. Not able to get them to shrink up. 

My preference for end tape in all vanes is 3M pinstriping tape from auto part store. Huge roll for @10-11.00. And very durable.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## whiz-Oz (Jul 19, 2007)

From the description by most archers, the biggest advantage that they have is the ease of constant installation. 
This feature alone would give them a significant advantage at achieving consistency across a full set of arrows. 

Anyone who is testing them should know exactly what the scientific method is, or they're completely wasting their time.


----------



## teebat (Oct 28, 2013)

whiz-Oz said:


> Well, I will give you a hint.
> 
> The aerospace industry spends billions of dollars modelling and refining airflow at high Reynolds numbers.
> 
> ...


Well I would be happy for something that just gives me better clearance, durability and ease of installation. Right now I'm using Ellie veins and they work pretty good but I'm always looking for something better so like a lot of people I'll give them a shot.

Sent from my VS835 using Tapatalk


----------



## Arsi (May 14, 2011)

whiz-Oz said:


> From the description by most archers, the biggest advantage that they have is the ease of constant installation.
> This feature alone would give them a significant advantage at achieving consistency across a full set of arrows.


While I agree that the curved bit on the vane and the double sided tape included are great, feel that that the difficulty and consistency of fletching is the same as any other curved vane out there. Maybe the XS Wings with metallic color are slightly more difficult since I had issues due to the material appearing to be significantly stiffer than any other vane.


----------



## tunedlow (Nov 7, 2012)

Arsi said:


> While I agree that the curved bit on the vane and the double sided tape included are great, feel that that the difficulty and consistency of fletching is the same as any other curved vane out there. Maybe the XS Wings with metallic color are slightly more difficult since I had issues due to the material appearing to be significantly stiffer than any other vane.


Arsi, have you tried the lighter version of the spider vanes? I want to compare the K6 with the lighter spider vanes outdoors and see which one groups better.

What tip weights are you running for your extremes?


----------



## Arsi (May 14, 2011)

tunedlow said:


> Arsi, have you tried the lighter version of the spider vanes? I want to compare the K6 with the lighter spider vanes outdoors and see which one groups better.
> 
> What tip weights are you running for your extremes?


I have not tried them but I have a pack. Probably will try after AZ Cup. I'm running the 120gr tool steel.


----------



## Ineras (Apr 24, 2015)

A buddy of mine just came back from the Salt Lake shoot with some new Jet6 prototypes. He had some packs of a 3" vane, designed for compound with very minimal curl, but being tested by recurvers with lots of success. He also had some packs of the original design in 2" and 1-3/4", but in a lighter and more flexible "ultra soft" version, kinda like the new Spider vanes. Should make it a bit more forgiving in wind and less prone to folding from arrow contact, which I've noticed a lot on the originals I'm currently using.


----------



## JimDE (Aug 3, 2008)

I went back to the Brady vanes.......... for no other reason than they Brady seems to group better for me. No science behind it other than my score sheet...... could be a number of reasons why tape, shrink tubing, whatever but I don't get that deep into this sort of stuff.


----------



## vlesiv (Oct 20, 2013)

Same here - went back to Spiders Ultra Soft


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------

