# Limb conundrum



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Oh boy. You've mentioned Border in a thread...

Let me get the popcorn started.


----------



## John_K (Oct 30, 2011)

Three things:

- If a bow groups just as well as another set up to 50m, but then poorly past that, it's a tuning issue.
- W&W limbs do not have the same profile as Hoyt limbs, and they do okay last I looked 
- Sponsorship is a massive factor in determining bow choice for the majority of Olympic-level archers. 

I tell a lie, one more thing: if this thread takes off hopefully it will be polite and civil, without the sniping or trolling seen on the other forum.

In other words, I hope you don't need the popcorn, Jon


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

limbwalker said:


> Oh boy. You've mentioned Border in a thread...
> 
> Let me get the popcorn started.


unfortunatly there is more to this thread that it looks in my view!


----------



## Vittorio (Jul 17, 2003)

Frankly I can't imagin any relationship between limbs shape and grouping over 50 mt in recurve olympic archery. 
But my recent findings while stutdying Bare bow style of shooting I have found that string walking is much more critical with very curved limbs tha with traditional (earl Hoyt) shaped ones.


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~archer...als-of-the-Design-of-Olympic-Recurve-Bows.pdf

this might help

but with string walking, the more speed you have, the less the crawl. the smaller the crawl the less the impact.


----------



## Bigjono (Apr 21, 2009)

I don't like popcorn and am really just trying to ask a question to the people who know. A statement was made on another site but with no evidence to prove or disprove. It was really just about conventional vs unconventional being the best option for long range grouping.


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

BigJono.
You have to look at what all the bows that shoot well have in common.
Widows.
Bear
Hoyts.
and even your Blackbrook Good vertical stability, good speed, and good torsional stability. On the right riser, do you think your Blackbrook limbs would hold its own at long distance in the hands of these supreme Hootershooters?

All have good vertical stability, and good torsional resistance for the lever size.
meaning that the horizontal np and vertical Np paths are controlled.
if you have that, then its the archer that makes the difference.
Then you can go for momentum. 
the more speed, the more you can load up your arrow and get the arrow to the target.
50m is not a magic distance where things go weird for some unknown reason. at 50m, the arrow doesn't suddenly ask what manufacturer or recurve profile it was shot from.

if the final inch of travel while the nock is connected is controlled. and hauled into line by a stable design, then the launch will be controlled. and after that its down to the arrow to do its job.
The archer has a massive part to play in this, but as far as the bow is concerned, all bows that have featured in top competition, longbows included, have all had good turn of speed, Good vertical stability, and good resistance to torque for the lever size.
now that carbons can be used without high penalties in limb mass, to enhance the torsional stability of the limb. then the doors on design are open again. if you look at recurve size based on the natural stability of bow glass and wood core, you will find that Fred Bear, Earl Hoyt and the Wilson Brothers, all have a similar recurve size. all have the same construction...
With carbon fibers its a open door now. and Uukha have started to open the doors that we have been using for a while.

Its up to ever individual archer to choose their kit. ive been pushing for numbers on each attribute on bow design to be published to that people can take an educated view, i started this back in 2007 on AIUK. rather than the "who won the Olympics" If your struggling for speed due to low poundage, then looking at the top Oly archers is not going to be your solution as an example. With numbers on each attribute of a bow, you can choose what attribute YOU wish to pursue to solve your personal hiccups. without the data your plucking limbs out a bag hoping they will help you Working on a blind hope that they'll work.

Now, Ive been trying to show by example, what numbers can be drawn out of a bow. Smoothness, Energy, Torsional resistance, vertical stability can ALL be measured. its up to you what you take from this data. its upto you what priority you base on each attribute.
other than that... i cant say much more. The guys at the Olymipics. I am sure there is hardly a sole out there that doesnt get free gear!. 
Do you get free gear... because if you dont, why not choose based on education rather than the suck it and see approach?

My methodologies are out there, Criteque away... im trying to help. not hinder.


----------



## Bigjono (Apr 21, 2009)

I'm not critique ing Sid, just trying to learn. I include Dryad Blackbook etc in the deep hook class as well. This is not a Border don't get used for this question it's an advantages or non about a newish profile at a specific game.
Let me add that I used W&W Ex Prime limbs for BB part of last season and hated them. They didn't seem to suit stringwalking but I know they are used well in Oly shooting so this does track both ways too.
I think that without the tetchy ness of that other thread, this is a good question.


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

Valid point.


----------



## MAT (May 27, 2003)

Big hooks are faster (they store more energy) but isn't the issue torsional stability with the bigger leavers? Might have been a problem with wood and glass but there are many carbon limbs on the market, so the conventional limbs would be even stiffer.


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

mat. it is a question of ts and bigger levers. the question is how much ts is needed. its a case of deminishing returns the more you have does not always equate to more scores.. but not having enough is also punishing. so where is the compromise when you can quadruple what won the last oly games. so like earl hoyt and those bowyers before us managed to find a compromise between size of recurve for energy and the torsion that the lever gives. now if a big recurve flexes less then any of the models that have won the olympics over the past 30 years. including the 2012 olympics. doesnt that indicate that the ud glass and wood core bread and butter limbs geometry compromise (ts vs lever size)met their match with new materials?


----------



## atjurhs (Oct 19, 2011)

Borderbows said:


> http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~archer...als-of-the-Design-of-Olympic-Recurve-Bows.pdf
> 
> this might help
> 
> but with string walking, the more speed you have, the less the crawl. the smaller the crawl the less the impact.


Dennis Lieu knows his stuff!

Why do people look a gift horse in the mouth. We've been given the gift of Border Bows, take it for what they are, THE BEST limbs available! Wish I could afford a pair


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

Vittorio said:


> Frankly I can't imagin any relationship between limbs shape and grouping over 50 mt in recurve olympic archery.
> But my recent findings while stutdying Bare bow style of shooting I have found that string walking is much more critical with very curved limbs tha with traditional (earl Hoyt) shaped ones.


Vittorio,

Could you expound on that please. I'm not the best string-walker but I do ok. My experience has been the limb with the best vertical stability gives me the best results.

Thanks

Matt


----------



## Bigjono (Apr 21, 2009)

Matt_Potter said:


> Vittorio,
> 
> Could you expound on that please. I'm not the best string-walker but I do ok. My experience has been the limb with the best vertical stability gives me the best results.
> 
> ...


Now you see this is the kind of info and debate this issue needed. I look forward to reading Vittorios reply. I find deep hook limbs really solid and forgiving of a bad release IF I am not string walking, I find them twitchy on bad releases on lower crawls. The Ex Primes were very forgiving of a flubbed release but seemed inconsistent on low crawls.
It may well be that tuning can make both perform the same at all types of shot, I am sure that will turn out to be the case.


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

Jon,

Those were Uukha limbs you were shooting correct?

I haven't shot the Uuhka's but I have owned the Hex5 and now the Hex6 along with some conventional limbs. I'm not exactly a great stringwalker but I do know that the Hex limbs way outperform the conventional limbs for me. They maintain tune and speed over a much larger range of crawls, plus they seem to hold their line better with a bad release. 

-Grant


----------



## Bill Carlsen (Jul 18, 2007)

Isn't it true that the reason you don't see more bows other than the Hoyts, Win&Win, etc. is that the companies that make other bows that are probably just as good or better don't get on the shooting line because the sponsors of these shoots, including the Olympics, have no way to compete financially. So, the companies with all the $$$$$ can afford to send the best archers to the shooting line with their equipment even though the archer himself/herself may prefer another product?


----------



## >--gt--> (Jul 1, 2002)

No, that is not true, but it is the same old line always spouted by those whose equipment is never selected by the very best shooters at that level.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> So, the companies with all the $$$$$ can afford to send the best archers to the shooting line with their equipment even though the archer himself/herself may prefer another product?


Well, I must disagree with George on this one I'm afraid. More than one Olympic archer has told me "well, I gotta make a living you know..." when I've asked them about their switch to one of the major brands. Basically, right now, there are only two companies that are supporting archers at a level that will make them switch - W&W or Hoyt. I know one Olympic archer who has told me they preferred their old equipment, but couldn't shoot full time without their new sponsor's support, so they switched. 

Anyone that tells you otherwise is selling something.

At the elite level, for the top 10% - it's about contracts first, and performance second because frankly, all the top-end gear is so close in performance that the equipment is NOT what seperates the top archers. It's the archer's performance on any given day, and they know that. So with the equipment variable being essentially removed from the equasion, they then look at who can/will support them over the long haul.

IMO, Mathews blew a huge opportunity when they had both Vic and Brady shooting their bow. They had such a good bow they could have easily kept those two on their staff indefinitely. What a dissapointment.

Full time sponsored archers put themselves in a tough position when it comes to telling the truth about their equipment. 

John


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Another point I'll make is that you can't even get a well-sponsored archer to TRY a different product because if their sponsor finds out they are testing something else, they will risk getting dropped. 

I remember very well showing the new Nano Pro arrow to two high profile sponsored archers in Louisville. I won't name names, but they are VERY well known compound archers and have both been ranked at the top of the world archery rankings for quite some time. Suffice it to say the reception they gave that arrow was very cold. In fact, one of them laughed when I handed it to him. He said it would never compete with the X10. 

A few months later, both of those archers were beaten by Dietmar Trillus at the World Championships with that arrow. 

Today, BOTH of those archers shoot the Nano Pro, which always makes me laugh when I think about their comments in early 2007. But the thing to notice is that neither of them shoot for the same sponsor today, so they are able to shoot another arrow if they want...

You don't have to look very hard to connect the dots between major sponsors, their archers, and the products they use... There are few coincidences.

John


----------



## HikerDave (Jan 1, 2011)

Bigjono said:


> There is an interesting discussion on another forum about the suitability of deep hook Border style limbs for tight grouping over 50m. The argument is that the Hoyt/Sky type limb profile is better suited to this task hence the reason no top Oly shooters use that design.
> It is not my field of expertise but I know a lot of you guys play the long game and I am interested to hear informed opinion on this.


I'm not the world's greatest archery, but when I'm shooting well I can keep all of my arrows in the red at 70 meters for a few ends shooting HPX / Border 34# Hex6 BB2 and Carbon One arrows. I've kept score one time only at 70 meters in a tournament on a slightly breezy day -- 277. I do not blame my bow or arrows for any of the 83 'lost' points. If anything, the extra energy of the bow was a great advantage because I didn't have to worry about wind moving my arrows off of the target. (I didn't use a spotting scope.) With my previous bow, same weight on the fingers I couldn't even reach the target with the sight at full extension.

I'll report back here next time I shoot an old-man's FITA -- I expect to do much better and will upgrade my arrows once I find an extra ten or fifteen points.


----------



## pencarrow (Oct 3, 2003)

Popcorn is done seatbelt is on, and tight, hang on, here we go..............................
Cheers
Fritz


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

pencarrow said:


> Popcorn is done seatbelt is on, and tight, hang on, here we go..............................
> Cheers
> Fritz


I see you too, are experienced in this area.


----------



## Demmer (Dec 1, 2012)

Maybe someone can answer this. If the border limb design is better stability, grouping, forgiving, and shootability, has any other companies (ie hoyt, win win etc) tried this design out? If it was a better score performing limb wouldn't they be making them, since its all about getting better product out for their staff shooters and getting to end results of selling more product and making more money? Just thinking out loud.


----------



## Bigjono (Apr 21, 2009)

Demmer said:


> Maybe someone can answer this. If the border limb design is better stability, grouping, forgiving, and shootability, has any other companies (ie hoyt, win win etc) tried this design out? If it was a better score performing limb wouldn't they be making them, since its all about getting better product out for their staff shooters and getting to end results of selling more product and making more money? Just thinking out loud.


And there in lies the crux of this debate.


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

Demmer said:


> Maybe someone can answer this. If the border limb design is better stability, grouping, forgiving, and shootability, has any other companies (ie hoyt, win win etc) tried this design out? If it was a better score performing limb wouldn't they be making them, since its all about getting better product out for their staff shooters and getting to end results of selling more product and making more money? Just thinking out loud.


Supposed to be a question of having to change manufacturing techniques away from the large presses currently in use. Also the laminates in the current profiles appearently wouldn't have the stability for the really big curves.

What is the wheat and chaff in that I don't know. I do know this: I shoot Border Hex limbs better than any other limb I've tried.

-Grant


----------



## Demmer (Dec 1, 2012)

Simple testing can be done fairly cheap. Normal glass and wood can be tested with minimual cost. Heck I can make my own form out of lvl for less than twenty bucks. Im sure all there limbs were tested in a fairly cheap manner at first.


----------



## rsarns (Sep 23, 2008)

I'll shoot whatever limbs someone will pay me to shoot... or whatever my wife will let me buy,


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Bigjono said:


> And there in lies the crux of this debate.


It's actually not a debate. Earl Jr. developed the ideal recurve limb profile for competitive recurve target archery many years ago. Every time a company has deviated from that profile, they have eventually come back to it in order to survive.


----------



## crolla (Feb 3, 2011)

so the question is, will the big hooks ever be used by olympic archers? all sponsorship stuff aside, why not? is it because they have not been around long enough or that they simply do not perform as well as the hoyt profile?


----------



## toj (Aug 22, 2012)

Personally I think the "hooked" design is an increase in performance if you measure performance in speed.
I've owned the Hex5's and found them fast but they felt harsh to shoot and awkward to tune, the inno primes that replaced them lost a little sight mark but in terms of ease of use and shot feel the were head and shoulders above the borders.

The hooked design seems to be more popular in field and flight where speed gives more than just a good sight mark.

Most of the larger manufacturers have spent a lot of time and money in recent years to improve their limbs and I don't believe for a second they won't have looked in to this, most have probably even had a set of borders across the bench at some point.
I can't see any reason why these would be any harder to produce than any others once tooled up for the profile so I guess thats just a myth.

So In my opinion they suit a purpose, but it's not target archery. As an interesting side note Borders main area of interest is field and 3D and we're all influenced a little by our preferences.
No doubt I'll get flamed for having an opinion that differs from border and their seven fanboys but there you go.


----------



## John_K (Oct 30, 2011)

I'm not the world's best bow technician (probably in the bottom 10 percent as it goes), but I've never had a problem tuning any bow with more sharply recurved limbs. My current HEX6 limbs are tolerant of ACE 470s, 430s and 400s, shooting them all quietly and straight. I found much the same with my HEX5s, although with them it was a choice between 470s and 430s. The only difficulty, as it were, was in challenging my preconceptions. Firstly, the limbs are designed to work better at lower bracing heights. My 72in bow is nice and quiet at a 7 3/4in brace. Secondly, I just position the arrow only just outside the line of the string. After that it's just a matter of tweaking.

The Hoyt profile - Earl Hoyt came up with a brilliant compromise in terms of limb geometry using the best materials available to him. Materials technology changes. This is why W&W are able to use a sharper recurve profile yet retain stability, and their sponsored archers seem to be doing alright  Smaller manufacturers who don't employ limb presses can experiment with and put into production even more sharply recurved limbs.

Look at it this way - GT has already said in another thread that Hoyt is flat out making limbs at the moment. With their advertising and sponsorship campaigns, not to mention their no doubt dedicated engineers, Hoyt can exploit the benefits of their current bow geometry without having to retrain and re-equip for a completely new approach to producing limbs. Why would they? It makes no economic sense.


----------



## Vittorio (Jul 17, 2003)

This story of archers using what sponsors gives them without discussions is a little bit overrated. This is surely true at medium "elite" level, but not at top one. If you are not a real staff shooter, it means, a shooter with a monthly salary from a manufacturer, you are not really bound to one brand, and if you are good enough, you will change brand any time you want, as in any case money prizes for podium at major events are the same if you change from W&W to Hoyt or vice versa, but also other smaller brands can give you same money if you win something of significant.
From the other end, if you are a real staff shooter, you are in a position to discuss about your equipment performance with maker and to get the best products or even custom made from your sponsor. 
By definition, no top level shooter will ever accept to miss one single point because "forced" to use an equipmnt not good enough. If someone accepts so, it is not a real elite shooter. 
Don't forget also that the world of recurve archery is quite different outside USA. Elite archers get salary from Olympic Committees, Ministery of Sports, Ministery of defence, Federations, business teams (Korea), not by sponsors directly. This is why for instance Koreans shoot what they prefer, if they are not staff shooters of the major brands. Or Michele is presently shooting Sky TR7 riser and Fivics RX1 limbs, Nespoli still Best Mercury Riser and Kaya K5 limbs, and last week selection for Italian team for Shaghai has seen in third place Zagami with Smart Riser and Inno Pro W&W limbs. But during winter all of them (an others behind) have tested a lot of different solutions, believe me.


----------



## >--gt--> (Jul 1, 2002)

Vito,

An inconvient truth for advocates of eccentric designs who struggle to explain the non adoption of such designs by top archers.


----------



## John_K (Oct 30, 2011)

Excellent point, Vittorio. However, there are still plenty of examples of National team shooters who stick to one big brand or another, and I am also sure that individual elite shooters can in some cases negotiate deals with one company for limbs, another for risers, and so on.

We shouldn't forget that there are some small companies - Border being just one - who don't offer sponsorship to anyone. It's not economically viable for them to do so. While money isn't the only factor, my point is simply that it's a sufficiently influential factor to show the relatively narrow equipment selection choice we see in the world elite.

Also - and I fully appreciate this is hearsay, not hard evidence - I have been told by more than one full-time GB squad archer that they would happily mix and match limbs from different manufacturers if would adversely affect their sponsorship. To paraphrase one in particular: "I used to shoot [Small Brand] limbs when I was a junior. I'd love to shoot them again, but [Current sponsor] wouldn't allow it."

You only have to look to field archery - a part of the sport that attracts less sponsorship - to see a more diverse selection of equipment. As I recall, the gold and silver of the Gents FITA Field Barebow category last year were both using recurve limbs with a sharp profile (Uukha by the Gold medalist, Border by the silver medalist).

I must say, I'm rather glad to see this topic revisited, and in a relatively civilised way. It reminds me of the old days on the Sagi board, although things did get a bit fraught there at times 

Happy shooting all, whatever your choice of kit


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

Vittorio said:


> This story of archers using what sponsors gives them without discussions is a little bit overrated. This is surely true at medium "elite" level, but not at top one. If you are not a real staff shooter, it means, a shooter with a monthly salary from a manufacturer, you are not really bound to one brand, and if you are good enough, you will change brand any time you want, as in any case money prizes for podium at major events are the same if you change from W&W to Hoyt or vice versa, but also other smaller brands can give you same money if you win something of significant.
> From the other end, if you are a real staff shooter, you are in a position to discuss about your equipment performance with maker and to get the best products or even custom made from your sponsor.
> By definition, no top level shooter will ever accept to miss one single point because "forced" to use an equipmnt not good enough. If someone accepts so, it is not a real elite shooter.
> Don't forget also that the world of recurve archery is quite different outside USA. Elite archers get salary from Olympic Committees, Ministery of Sports, Ministery of defence, Federations, business teams (Korea), not by sponsors directly. This is why for instance Koreans shoot what they prefer, if they are not staff shooters of the major brands. Or Michele is presently shooting Sky TR7 riser and Fivics RX1 limbs, Nespoli still Best Mercury Riser and Kaya K5 limbs, and last week selection for Italian team for Shaghai has seen in third place Zagami with Smart Riser and Inno Pro W&W limbs. But during winter all of them (an others behind) have tested a lot of different solutions, believe me.


Vitorio. Most top (just under national level) are helped with cheap/free gear through deals with retailers. We are often approached with the cap in hand. "im regional champion and im looking for help. I currently get help through XXXXX dealer. but id like to try your limbs". we get about 8-10 applications each season.
I have shot up to now with Border limbs, I just took County records. and im looking for a backup set, can you sponser me by way of a second set".

our answer is universally no. We dont sponser since it does mess with the playing table. Why should mr random archer out there, be at a disadvantage over another guy.

Now, How much kit did Michele pay for outright in the last 4 years?

and to think that the funding stream is clear. Totally clear. Totally clean???
You are aware of Mr Jame L easton CV?
http://www.olympic.org/mr-james-l-easton
Big money sitting at the helm of the IOC, FITA, Hoyt and Easton.

and your telling me there is no influence over where the money goes.

NOW. The edinburgh WORLD CUP FITA FINAL.

the Governing body of archery. WORLD ARCHERY.. FITA.
Name the list of sponsers?
GO ON!
and tell me the ones with a bow making history.

even the Photographers have "EASTON" round the lens hoods.

So Bowtech, mathews, W&W, PSE... NOT a single advert! Hoyt YES. Easton YES. Formula YES. NOTHING ELSE.
oh and a small note for Danage Targets!

Not entirly a open sport if you look at it from this angle?


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

>--gt--> said:


> Vito,
> 
> An inconvient truth for advocates of eccentric designs who struggle to explain the non adoption of such designs by top archers.


we do a conventional design. We offered you a test a while back.


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

limbwalker said:


> Oh boy. You've mentioned Border in a thread...
> 
> Let me get the popcorn started.


Did your prediction tempt fate, or was it going this way anyway?


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Vittorio, your example may be true in other nations who, as you say, support their archers through ministries of sports, etc. However, here in the U.S., if an archer trains at the OTC, they have had a particular brand of bow put into their hands for many years now. Two of my own students were asked to switch bows after arriving there to train, and later asked me if they could switch back to what they used to get them there. It was pretty blatant. I do see a few brave souls deviate from this, but not the top shooters, yet. Believe me, it is about sponsor support here in the U.S., and very few of our top shooters EVER experiment with other brands. Which really is a shame.


----------



## toj (Aug 22, 2012)

I'm not sure what " way" this has gone.
As i said earlier i think you see different stuff at field shoots because speed is king when estimating distance but much less of a priority for target.


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

toj said:


> I'm not sure what " way" this has gone.
> As i said earlier i think you see different stuff at field shoots because speed is king when estimating distance but much less of a priority for target.


yes, but stability has not been compromised. infact there is less limb tip deflection when up under the same loads. the vertical stability is higher under a wider range of BH's/Bolt positions too.


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

limbwalker said:


> Vittorio, your example may be true in other nations who, as you say, support their archers through ministries of sports, etc. However, here in the U.S., if an archer trains at the OTC, they have had a particular brand of bow put into their hands for many years now. Two of my own students were asked to switch bows after arriving there to train, and later asked me if they could switch back to what they used to get them there. It was pretty blatant. I do see a few brave souls deviate from this, but not the top shooters, yet. Believe me, it is about sponsor support here in the U.S., and very few of our top shooters EVER experiment with other brands. Which really is a shame.


My point is, if the Governing body, help fund national bodies. then there is some allowance for pressure to be applied. This pressure, can come in positive ways, such as performance coaching units. (high speed filming centres) Arrows for the team. etc. It cosy up and show preference when that kind of help is floating about.

The top level under this national team level are open to free gear from outlets and proshops. This free gear can come subsidised from the manufacturer. but they have to be in a dealer in the first place.
The popularity of W&W here in Europe means that there are alot of W&W sponsered archers (indirectly). Retail outlets can even have magazine adverts part paid by manufacturers if thier product features in the advert. 
I can see Popularity of retail being a indicator of what brand the next tier down shoot. "you can have anything in the shop approach".

if your sponsered then your not at liberty to choose freely!


----------



## Bigjono (Apr 21, 2009)

Do the manufacturers drive what the top shooters use or do the top shooters drive what the manufacturers produce. For example if Brady really wanted to use a style of riser or limb his sponsors didn't make, would they develop one for him. Nike do that for Tiger.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Within reason. Depends on the manufacturer too. 

The problem with a company producing a custom product for a top shooter is that there is really no way to hide that from the consumer. And that's a problem because then the consumer wants to know what's "wrong" with the bow they just bought and why isn't the top shooter using it? 

It's no secret (or at least, shouldn't be) that pro golfers get equipment from the manufacturers that isn't available to the consumers. They can hide this very easily though. Same is true in Tennis. Many top pros use prototype racquets or custom racquets that have paint jobs like consumer racquets. 

Some of this is to protect the company, some if it's just marketing lies. By protect the company, I mean that they are testing a product through their pro staff and don't really know yet whether it is something they are going to mass produce. They are also testing the market to see what the feedback is from those consumers who are paying attention.

In a sport like archery, we're not limited to the views from the cheap seats, or only what the press photographers can catch. We can step up on the line within mere inches of a competitor's bow and actually SEE what they are using. So that makes it a lot tougher to hide. 

Archery companies have re-branded limbs and arrows in the past, but it's pretty tough to do that with a riser, grip, fletchings, etc. So there is less wiggle room for the manufacturers. There is a lot of testing that goes on behind closed doors too, before a product ever sees (if it does ever see) the light of day. For example, I have had stacks of arrow shafts and limbs and even a few risers that were never brought into production for one reason or another. Companies sent them to me to test with an expectation of confidential communications between them and me and other archers. That's how stuff gets worked out and hopefully, how the consumer avoids getting faulty products.

I can think of quite a few features we all use today that started out as prototypes or modifications by staff shooters. We all benefit from the input of the best athletes in ways we may never know.

John


----------



## HikerDave (Jan 1, 2011)

>--gt--> said:


> Vito,
> 
> An inconvient truth for advocates of eccentric designs who struggle to explain the non adoption of such designs by top archers.


The equipment that is suitable for top archers may not be suitable for those of out there spending real money for our bows. I bought Border limbs rather than Hoyt Formula to make it easier to reach 70 meters at a lower draw weight. I will use ACE arrows or McKinney II for my next arrow over X10s because the X10 arrows are heavy. Good for Brady. Bad for me.


----------



## AdAstraAirow (Aug 22, 2011)

Jon,

I believe I have a few informed insights garnered during my 12 years of working at the US Olympic Training Center and serving as the 1988 Head US Olympic Cycling Coach and the former Executive Director of US Badminton at the 1992 Barcelona Games, I can guarantee you that most of the the top Olympic archers are not shooting production limbs. They are one-off specials made to their specific needs and specifications that look externally exactly like the production items. This is standard practice for both competition and corporate marketing at that level.

Unfortunately because of the obvious shape differences of the Border, Uukha, Dryad, and Morrisson limbs they could not be disguised. If a dramatic curve form was proven definitively superior at 70+ meters, the corportations using the Hoty shape would not choose to follow suit, because the new design would not longer allow them the ability to mass produce limbs in the methods as they currently do. They would lose a huge profit margin per set of limbs if they were forced to hand-produce or re-tool the production of the limbs. Addtionally, these large corrporations sponsor teams and athletes to be able to use their "win on Sunday, sell on Monday" marketing philosophy. There would be no way they would win with a design they could not offer down the full length of their product line. They would not risk the potential loss of market share.

Olympic athletes, especially in non-western nations, are effectively professional athletes, with high national profiles, bound financially by the sponsorship system. The athletes receive a large portion, if not all their income, from personal sponsors, as well as the contractual sponsorship arrangements of their clubs, coaches, trade teams, and even their sport's National Governing Bodies. These sponsorships usually invove the largest and most successful corporations which can afford this. The athletes know where their bread is buttered, and the penalties for of stepping outside these sponsorship arrangements are too costly to ever consider. In international Badminton, one corporation, Yonex of Japan, and one man, Ben Yoniyama, effectively controls the entire sport at the elite level using his/their sponsorship money.

I do not know why this point is so repeatedly discussed as it really does not matter for the majority of archers. The exact equipment and designs utilized by the highly trained and refined skills of Olympic athletes is generally not effective when used by regular competitive participants in the same sport. In fact, most competitive participants, below the international level, would be much better off using equipment and components more designed to meet their actual abilities.

Mark


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

HikerDave said:


> The equipment that is suitable for top archers may not be suitable for those of out there spending real money for our bows. I bought Border limbs rather than Hoyt Formula to make it easier to reach 70 meters at a lower draw weight. I will use ACE arrows or McKinney II for my next arrow over X10s because the X10 arrows are heavy. Good for Brady. Bad for me.


Now that right there is reality folks! Yes, the equipment manufactured for the elites is NOT what the average recreational shooters should always be using. Most folks should just shoot lighter weight limbs AND arrows and enjoy themselves instead of working themselves to death.

Mark says the same thing as well, and it's advice that should be heeded by anyone that isn't shooting 1000 arrows/week.



> The athletes know where their bread is buttered, and the penalties for of stepping outside these sponsorship arrangements are too costly to ever consider.


Yup.


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

limbwalker said:


> Vittorio, your example may be true in other nations who, as you say, support their archers through ministries of sports, etc. However, here in the U.S., if an archer trains at the OTC, they have had a particular brand of bow put into their hands for many years now. Two of my own students were asked to switch bows after arriving there to train, and later asked me if they could switch back to what they used to get them there. It was pretty blatant. I do see a few brave souls deviate from this, but not the top shooters, yet. Believe me, it is about sponsor support here in the U.S., and very few of our top shooters EVER experiment with other brands. Which really is a shame.


we have heard this from France and the UK.
"You would progress better in the team if you didnt shoot the kit you did!"


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Right now, I know of exactly ONE resident athlete at our OTC who shoots a brand of bow not produced by the primary sponsor (a.k.a. "owner") of our training center. There may be more, but I can only think of one at the moment. Kudos to him.


----------



## MAT (May 27, 2003)

I would say who cares but I have to remember what forum I'm on! The big hook recurves have a huge potential market in hunting bows, which is the big seller in the USA. The manufactures have yet to really exploit this market, but the ones that do will make a killing. One bowyer has already dropped his conventional limb designs and only sells the big hooks. So they will have a life but how this relates to target shooters is a big question.


----------



## Vittorio (Jul 17, 2003)

Borderbows said:


> .....
> Now, How much kit did Michele pay for outright in the last 4 years?........


Michele is still in the category of archers that only have to ask to manufaturers, and usually manufacturers are happy to give him what he wants to try free of charge, in exchange of a couple of professional opinions and real testing results. 
He was W&W staff shooter from 2001 till end 2007, but since then he is free from any commitment with any manufacturer, and he shoots what he finds good for him.
I can't count the different limbs and risers brands he has tested and/or shot in competition since then. 
Just after London to now, he has shot Fivics riser+Fivics limbs at Italian target champs 2012, Best riser and W&W limbs in Las Vegas 2012, Sky riser and W&W limbs one week after in indoor competition in Italy and Sky riser and Fivics limbs at Italian trials (70 mt ) for Shanghai World Cup 2013 one week ago. 
From 2010 to 2012 he has used or tested several Kaya models of limbs, some different W&W limbs, MK limbs, Hoyt F4 limbs on RX riser, while for ILF risers since 2010 he has been back to the Zenit riser mainly. 
He ever tries what he wants, and uses what he feels to be good for him, since 1994 , and never paid a cent for equipments since then, apart from a single pair of hand made ILF limbs in 1999 (Codi limbs, made by Toni Codispoti, brother of the more famous coach Mario Codispoti that was coach of the Turkish team for many years).


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> Michele is still in the category of archers that only have to ask to manufaturers, and usually manufacturers are happy to give him what he wants to try free of charge, in exchange of a couple of professional opinions and real testing results.


It's good to be the talent... 

I've often said that if anyone is jealous of that sort of arrangement, all they need to do is shoot better. 

Nice thing about archery is that scores always tell the truth.

Vittorio, I know one manufacturer who's equipment we won't see Michele shooting. Objective testing by elite archers is not in the interest of everyone.


----------



## rsarns (Sep 23, 2008)

limbwalker said:


> It's good to be the talent...
> 
> I've often said that if anyone is jealous of that sort of arrangement, all they need to do is shoot better.
> 
> ...


And that manufacturer is?


----------



## Bigjono (Apr 21, 2009)

AdAstraAirow said:


> Jon,
> 
> I believe I have a few informed insights garnered during my 12 years of working at the US Olympic Training Center and serving as the 1988 Head US Olympic Cycling Coach and the former Executive Director of US Badminton at the 1992 Barcelona Games, I can guarantee you that most of the the top Olympic archers are not shooting production limbs. They are one-off specials made to their specific needs and specifications that look externally exactly like the production items. This is standard practice for both competition and corporate marketing at that level.
> 
> ...


Good post Mark.


----------



## toj (Aug 22, 2012)

Borderbows said:


> yes, but stability has not been compromised. infact there is less limb tip deflection when up under the same loads. the vertical stability is higher under a wider range of BH's/Bolt positions too.


How do you (or other manufactures) test or measure this and what exactly are you comparing them to?
ie less deflection than which other limbs etc?


----------



## ryan b. (Sep 1, 2005)

I'm guessing if border took over the archery world and Brady, along with everyone else, was forced to use hex6 limbs his scores would..
Drop?
Improve?
Or most likely stay about the same?


----------



## >--gt--> (Jul 1, 2002)

AdAstraAirow said:


> Jon,
> 
> I believe I have a few informed insights garnered during my 12 years of working at the US Olympic Training Center and serving as the 1988 Head US Olympic Cycling Coach and the former Executive Director of US Badminton at the 1992 Barcelona Games, I can guarantee you that most of the the top Olympic archers are not shooting production limbs. They are one-off specials made to their specific needs and specifications that look externally exactly like the production items. This is standard practice for both competition and corporate marketing at that level.


You might know something about badminton and cycling but you clearly have no clue about this aspect of Olympic archery. NOT ONE SINGLE SHOOTER IN LONDON used any limbs that you cannot purchase. Not one.


----------



## ryan b. (Sep 1, 2005)

Btw, I don't think you can even BEGIN to compare top archers with top golfers as far as equipment and endorsements go. The top 20 golfers are going to make more in one year than Brady will make in his lifetime, I'm guessing.


----------



## ryan b. (Sep 1, 2005)

Gt, 
Probably cause you can't buy points at that level, right? Brady would be on top if he were shooting agulla ultras and samick masters riser ( wait.. Bad example.. That's STILL a wicked riser limb combo today!)


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

ryan b. said:


> Btw, I don't think you can even BEGIN to compare top archers with top golfers as far as equipment and endorsements go. The top 20 golfers are going to make more in one year than Brady will make in his lifetime, I'm guessing.


Sure you can compare them. It's just a different scale, but the principles remain the same.

Mark, I have to agree with gt here. Archery is not Tennis or Golf. We're just bending springs here. Now arrows? That would be a better question to ask...


----------



## >--gt--> (Jul 1, 2002)

Allow me to expand on my comment so there is absolutely no room for doubt.

IOC archery-specific rules implemented in 2011 REQUIRED any archery products shot (specifically, limbs, risers, arrows) at the 2012 Olympic Games to be COMMERCIALLY AVAILABLE in the year of the Games, BEFORE the games began.

Using arrows, limbs or risers that were not commercially available during the year of the games before the ranking round would constitute a violation of IOC Games rules and grounds for stripping a medal. 

It is noteworthy that this is an IOC rule applying to the Olympic Games only. Not a WA rule.

All archers at the games were required to conform to this rule and somewhere in the athlete paperwork they signed to acknowledge this rule.

Any questions?


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

George, where can that rule be found?


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

George 

I have a question? Why didn't you just make the second post rather than telling Mark he was clueless - not very professional or polite. 

Matt


----------



## >--gt--> (Jul 1, 2002)

IOC Olympic Charter, manufacturer identification section. http://www.archery.org/UserFiles/Document/Olympic Games/2012_OG_London/0531_IOC_Guidelines-e.pdf

For arrows the rule is "commercially available 12 months before the games" and for bows, the year of the games.




> Originally Posted by Matt_Potter
> George
> 
> I have a question? Why didn't you just make the second post rather than telling Mark he was clueless - not very professional or polite.


Matt
You are correct, it was neither professional nor polite. I took umbrage at his stating a non-truth as fact and allowed my judgement to be overtaken by my sense of outrage. This forum is bad enough without people making outright false claims. But I should not have phrased it so bluntly.


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

Ok now I'm curious are the same constraints placed on skiers in the winter games or other equipment driven sports?

Matt


----------



## >--gt--> (Jul 1, 2002)

Each sport has different requirements, the Sochi rules have been recently published and can be found on the IOC website, www.olympics.org


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

Learn something new every day - thank you 

Matt


----------



## AdAstraAirow (Aug 22, 2011)

George,

The information you sited above does not specify any requirements for the actual arrows, riser or limbs to be commercially available for purchase. These restrictions simply limit the size and placement of the manufacturer's advertising to a specific size/location and they allow the advertising to be similar to the commercially available products prior to the Games. Cycling and Badminton have had the same restrictions since 1984, just so that sponsors and manufacturers do make their items into detracting garish billboards. Those advertising regulations certainly did not prohibit athletes I coached from using completely customized one-off equipment branded to cover sponsorship agreements and these IOC advertising limits. 

Mark


----------



## HikerDave (Jan 1, 2011)

>--gt--> said:


> IOC Olympic Charter, manufacturer identification section. http://www.archery.org/UserFiles/Document/Olympic Games/2012_OG_London/0531_IOC_Guidelines-e.pdf
> 
> For arrows the rule is "commercially available 12 months before the games" and for bows, the year of the games.
> 
> ...


The linked document would allow an archer to shoot a prototype as long as that prototype didn't carry the manufacturer's name or logo. But it is good to know that my HPX in the right hands is a potential winner at the Olympics.


----------



## straat (Jan 22, 2009)

> Arrow
> Arrows may carry the Identifications as generally used on products commercially available during the period of 12 months prior to the Games, with a maximum of two Identifications per item, and not be
> greater than 10% of the surface area of the item, to a maximum size of 60 cm2.
> 
> ...


It also allows for prototype equipment with manufacturer's identification if this identification is the same as commercially available product.

These rules are just about appearance, not about the technology used.


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

thats interesting


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

is it then possible for Brady to be shooting a full carbon high tech limb at the olympics. where his silence on reliability etc can be bought...AS AN EXAMPLE called a "F5"
and then for reliability everyone else gets sold the comercially available one which is a glass limb as its cheaper and easier to make, but it too is branded the "F5"


----------



## AdAstraAirow (Aug 22, 2011)

Every Olympic sport equipment manufacturer I have ever visited (well over 30) has had an on-going "skunk works" program in their research and development division where the latest and most innovative materials and designs are created for and tested by their sponsored teams and athletes. Those companies are quite proud of that contribution and want that product used, just as much as the elite athletes want and need that customized equipment. The manufacturers also make special efforts to keep those prototype specials hidden from both the public and their competitors by making them appear to be part of the current product line. 

I am quite sure that archery does not have a homologation rule (all equipment used must be available for public purchase) in place. I could not find such a rule in any WA or IOC document. Despite George's statement to the contrary, I find it unbelievable that at the 2012 London Games all the Korean and USA archers were using equipment that is the exact same as what you and I "buy off the rack". That would be absurd, especially as compared to the realities of other sports with a high need for technical equipment. 

In the end, that is fine with me, because that means archery is as progressive as the other Olympic sports and those technical advancements will eventually trickle down to the public. 

Mark


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

straat said:


> It also allows for prototype equipment with manufacturer's identification if this identification is the same as commercially available product.
> 
> These rules are just about appearance, not about the technology used.


George

This is exactly how I read this document - last night I didn't bother to read it I just took your post at face value. Do you have other documentation to back up your strong statement??

Matt


----------



## Bigjono (Apr 21, 2009)

This forum is bad enough without people making outright false claims. But I should not have phrased it so bluntly.[/QUOTE]

Perhaps you have forgotten that it is the people on this and similar forums who buy the products that keep you employed. Perhaps a little more respect for the views and a little less arrogance might go a long way.


----------



## toj (Aug 22, 2012)

Sid, how do you test and compare stability v's speed of limbs?
For that matter how do hoyt and win & win test and compare?


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Arrow

Arrows may carry the Identifications as generally used on products commercially available during the 
period of 12 months prior to the Games, with a maximum of two Identifications per item, and not be 
greater than 10% of the surface area of the item, to a maximum size of 60 cm2.

Bow
Grip
Stabiliser

Exception: Identification of the manufacturer identification may appear on both sides of the bow 
(riser and limbs), of the grip and of the stabiliser, as commercially available the year of the Olympic 
Games.

George if this is what you're referring to, it's not all that restrictive for anything but graphics...

Please show me/us where this is the case:


> Using arrows, limbs or risers that were not commercially available during the year of the games before the ranking round would constitute a violation of IOC Games rules and grounds for stripping a medal.


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

toj said:


> Sid, how do you test and compare stability v's speed of limbs?
> For that matter how do hoyt and win & win test and compare?


I have posted techneques, tooling required to make home jigs of your own testing, as many poeple have said, why trust a manufacturer and i FULLY understand why!. I have shown method. explained how to test these attributes. Hank on TT is going though his own tests as we speak. hes in the search for real answers of his own! Dr Lieu, i feel also understands the physics involved...

Its none of my concern how Hoyt and W&W test thier gear, or how they come up with thier conclusions. What we test is our privvy. our information and the more advanced techneques are ours.
What i can say is i have a box full of limbs pulled/cut/stretched till we knew what was in them and how they performed. and what we needed to do to improve.
Its this confidence that i was able to stand up with the knowledge that the TT BF extreme limb has a high tech glass layer back and belly. even in the face of some strong statements made by the manager of the brand. The owner of the establishment then corrected the missleading statements made by customers and the manager. and all credit to him. We all make mistakes. the BF limb is a formidable limb, as is the W&W inno line.
If its a limb, i feel i know the colour of the underware it used the day before i broke it...
I have shown people how to collect thier own data. its in my interest that people understand limb design and know how to look for preferential attributes. Im confident of ours... 
I hope you understand.


----------



## toj (Aug 22, 2012)

I'm just trying to get this straight in my own mind, the only testing I do is shooting and scoring so when I read that your 
design gains speed with no loss of stability i'm curious as to how these are measured but more importantly what they are measured against.

If i said my Mountain ash tree was 30ft high how would anybody know if it was tall or not without another figure or tree to compare it to.
You're not suggesting I purchase a number of different limbs and test them to desruction to find this out are you?

The question about other manufacturers was not aimed specifically at you but anyone who might know so I hope you aren't offended by it (your tone did suggest you might be) so I appologise if it appeared that way.


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

Sorry for my tone.
The deflection of the limb tips through a series of tests show us a smaller delfection than the mainstream limbs found on a shoting line.
The deflection of the NP due to grip pressure changes was least in a vertical stability check.
the testing we have done shows that vertical stability is a strong indicator of the bows ability to correct it self from a dragged finger or inconsistant vertical grip pressure, when looking at limb flap and NP travel.
none of these seem to be effected by recurve size when the design is corrected to suit the changes.



toj said:


> I'm just trying to get this straight in my own mind, the only testing I do is shooting and scoring so when I read that your
> design gains speed with no loss of stability i'm curious as to how these are measured but more importantly what they are measured against.
> 
> If i said my Mountain ash tree was 30ft high how would anybody know if it was tall or not without another figure or tree to compare it to.
> ...


----------



## TexARC (Mar 5, 2003)

I have long been interested in the Borders products, and wished there was some evaluation of same by archers/engineers that I knew of and could rely upon. 
I suspect the vast majority of archers at the Olys and Paras are using the most recent model year products (available to the public), with the occasional exception. A Matthews recurve riser comes to mind. 
It is amazing how dang nitpicky some folks can be up here, regardless, yet it's quite refreshing to not be at war over a bow. 
I may be somewhat naive to have an interest in handcraftsmanship but I also don't flinch at all at the notion of superb computer-driven machining.
I want the best of all worlds<G>...


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Ron, regarding the Border limbs, just ask me about them. 

And gt's comments are interesting in the light of Vic's and Brady's risers. Wonder how those were allowed then?


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

TexARC said:


> I have long been interested in the Borders products, and wished there was some evaluation of same by archers/engineers that I knew of and could rely upon.
> I suspect the vast majority of archers at the Olys and Paras are using the most recent model year products (available to the public), with the occasional exception. A Matthews recurve riser comes to mind.
> It is amazing how dang nitpicky some folks can be up here, regardless, yet it's quite refreshing to not be at war over a bow.
> I may be somewhat naive to have an interest in handcraftsmanship but I also don't flinch at all at the notion of superb computer-driven machining.
> I want the best of all worlds<G>...


Hank D Thoreau, a user on here and TT, also known as Amature Barbarian on AIUK has started collectiong data on limbs. looking at stored energy.
hes interetsed in limb design. Then you also have Dr Lieu's paper i posted a link to at the start of this thread, showing basically what we are up to.
So if your wanting data, we can supply. We also offer a 28 day money back, if your simply not happy with the limbs. (excludes postage, and this is to deter tyre kickers)
but it does mean your not stuck with a product you dont want. (not in either of our interest)
What i can assure you is the smoothest bow on the market, and most probably the fastest. and it has one of the smallest limb tip deflections of all the limbs on the market. (havent got actual Uukha numbers)
but we are here to answer any questions you have should you wish to ask.
We did have one lady shooting in the GB para team at the 2012 games.


----------



## Markliep (May 6, 2012)

Am a little late to this string but as there's no summary to all the responses would there be some modicum of agreement with the follwoing statement: for top level archers traditional limb architecture offers little real advantage in perfomance whereas for those of us that are mere mortals in the archery world, design modifications allow an easier shot sequence which may improve results? Thx - M


----------

