# Carbon Tech McKinney II Review



## RecordKeeper (May 9, 2003)

So on Day 1 in Louisville I'm shooting on the line with limbwalker and he points out to me Rick McKinney's arrows and their speed. So I watch Rick shoot a few shots. And the arrows are just screaming fast. 

Now I know Rick doesn't shoot the poundage that limbwalker does, so I ask Rick how fast his arrows are shooting. He explained that he is shooting his new Carbon Tech McKinney IIs that he had shown me at the ATA show, and he was getting 235 fps at 41 pounds.   Then he showed me his sight setting for 90 meters with the extension bar all the way out, and he had a good two inches of clearance between his pin and his arrow.   

So I decide that I have to try these arrows, and bought two dozen while in Louisville. They use Easton A/C/E components, so it was no trouble to go to the Lancaster trailor and pick up nocks and points.

Now I had to go straight from Louisville to Dallas to work, so I didn't get to test these arrows until yesterday   

First, I rolled them on glass and test on the straightner. All are within .001" front to back, and all 24 weigh exactly 146 grains. Next, I install nocks and points and shoot a few through the chronograph. My 315 grain x10s travel at 190 fps, and these 255 grain McKinney IIs travel through at 214 fps. "Excellent speed," I think to myself, "but what about stability?"

So I shoot some bare shafts at 20 yards, tweak my sight and plunger, and soon have five bare shafts shooting straight and holding the white on a five spot target at 20 yards. I fletch a dozen, and the bare shafts and the fletched all hold white easily. These are the easiest arrows to tune that I have ever dealt with....and at 20 yards anyway, stability is not an issue.

It is 28 degrees and windy today, so no outdoor testing as yet. I'll be shooting 40, 50, and 60 yards next weekend preparing for Pittsburgh, and I'll post more when I know how these arrows perform at distance....but for now, I am very excited about the speed and performance of these arrows!

Well done Rick....thanks!:thumb:


----------



## Guest (Apr 8, 2007)

We got a dozen for FiFi and at 26.5" fully fletched with FF187 and 80gr point with pin nocks the total weight is 228g and at 43lbs does 262fps and at 48lbs does 274fps this kind of speed she has never seen from round wheel bow ( Barnsdale Classic X). Hoping for some nice weather to try them outside.


----------



## RecordKeeper (May 9, 2003)

Just shot 296/32x on an indoor NFAA target. So much for stability concerns!

Note to self....use a five spot instead of a single when using spin wing elite vanes....time to refletch already :embara:


----------



## Dado (Aug 1, 2004)

Does CT make Mc.IIs in stronger spine than 450?


----------



## Sky Warrior (Dec 12, 2004)

*I'm eager try mine at distance*

RK,

I also have some MK II and looking forward to trying that at distance. Can you let me know when you plan to shoot?

Thanks

Bryan


----------



## calbowdude (Feb 13, 2005)

Thanks to RK, Limbwalker and Sean for your findings on the McKinney's and/or Nano's. 

RK, I did find the same thing with Rick's Hippos as far as tuning goes. Yup, Rick's setup is rocketship fast. I suspect that Rick's apelike drawlength (and by inclusion the area under the curve) has something to do with his speed. I believe Dakota Sinclair is shooting even faster than that, but I'm not sure of his draw weight. At least the last time I saw both Rick and Dakota on the same line together, Dakota's shots were hitting a touch quicker @ 18 meters. 230+ though, that's moving along...


----------



## Guest (Apr 8, 2007)

Thanks guys.....that sold me.

Recordkeeper.....296 with skinny arrows is hepum good shootin.....glad our native brothers didn't shoot like that or we would all be speakin' Arapaho or sumptin other than english. Nice write up.

My Hippo's were easy to tune also.

Art


----------



## st8arrow (Apr 25, 2005)

RK, I had a similar experience over the weekend. 

I went to my local shop and Chrono. tested 4 sets of 36 # limbs and my MK II's vs. my X-10's. Only 4 fps differance between slowest limbs and fastest. (Winex) But there was 21 fps differance between my MK II's and my x-10's. I got 211 out of my 36 # Winex. X10's were 190. Plus they group great ! 

Of course my MK II's are 2 sizes lighter than my X-10's.

I'm taking them outside this week, and am excited to see what this years sight marks look like, along side last years marks.

I don't want to sound like a speed demon. I shoot a heavier string because it is more stable and quiet, and my set-up is geared for accuracy over speed, but these MK II's seem make both possible.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

I should have some 450 MKII's to play with soon. Can't wait to see what I get out of them. At 32.25" and 48#, I get 206 fps. out of my X10's and Nano's right now. The MKII's should be a full 30 grains lighter, so I'm expecting something in the 220 fps+ range.

But the proof is always on the target face, not the chrono readout... 

John.


----------



## G33k (Jul 16, 2003)

Price point on these arrows? I assume these are too compete with the top end arrows, correct?


----------



## Dado (Aug 1, 2004)

G33k said:


> Price point on these arrows? I assume these are too compete with the top end arrows, correct?


They are supposed to be a bit cheaper than ACEs, at least from what I've heard/read here on AT...


----------



## G33k (Jul 16, 2003)

ohhhh but in terms of quality, are they meant to be on par with ACE? better ? worse?


----------



## st8arrow (Apr 25, 2005)

Supposed to be better.


----------



## G33k (Jul 16, 2003)

Like on par with X10s? Is that the theory?


----------



## st8arrow (Apr 25, 2005)

Yes, both McKinnys and Nano's are designed to compete with the X-10's quality wise, but performance concepts are a bit different.


----------



## ksarcher (May 22, 2002)

I have been shooting the McKinney II's since October and have had to change out many nocks and a few pins with NO damage to the arrow shaft. I never had the same luck with ACE's. I have found them to be very tough and on occasion when I shot tight group  there is no damage found on the point end.

The Mck II shaft is a perfect fit for those of us that want to reduce draw weight an still make the long distance. I spoke with Rick in Loo-uh-vull last week about the lack of noticeable change with bare shaft and fletched at 70 mtr. He said that the II's need very little point weight. He has 80 gr points in his setup.

I have some nanos to try but they will need to be much better for me to change from the McKinney II's.

Stan


----------



## [email protected] (Oct 17, 2003)

*Price on Carbon Tech McKinney II Arrows*

Hi RecordKeeper and those interested;
Price for a complete dozen of McKinney II Fletched Arrows is $294.99 complete with AAE/Norway vanes, G Nocks & Points. The Pin Nock option will run about $20 more..(recommended) 

We have the McKinney II shafts in stock for $269.99 and you can use the ACE Points($9.99/dz.60-80 or 100-120gr. Breakoffs), G Nocks or Pin Nocks and Pins for ACE. 

The McKinney II from Carbon Tech is an excellent arrow that is great for anyone shooting FITA with a recurve or even compound archers wanting a very light, fast and small diameter target arrow for outdoor shooting. More and more serious NFAA Field Archers are using arrows in this class than ever before and seeing huge results! The McK II is the lightest choice available among a great group of arrows that includes the McKinney II by Carbon Tech, NANO-XR from Carbon Express, Triple Aluminum/Carbon from Cartel and Easton's ACE. The all-Carbon McK II and NANO have been great to work with and we've had 100% positive feedback on both from archer's who've bought and are shooting them. The ACE needs no introduction and the Cartel Triple has the best price($175) with similar accuracy and world-class specs as the others, all at $269...

We are thrilled to be able to offer all of these great choices in truly world-class arrows for you to choose from. 

Yours in Archery,
Rob


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

I got a couple dozen 600's when they first came out and look forward to shooting them at 90M soon. didn't get around t setting them up this this winter thought, I put two piece ACE points in them spin wings and pin nocks. I cut them at 29" and they are about perfect spine for my 44 pound draw with a fairly heavy set up in the two piece point.

I just ordered 650 with the idea of going slightly shorter (I think I will try a helix in field rather than my matrix and the way the helix works I need slightly shorter arrows) and with lighter points for FITA Field.

I got Liz a couple dozen 725-we will need them to be a bit longer than her navigators but they still should have a better POA for her barebow


----------



## st8arrow (Apr 25, 2005)

Rob forgot to mention one more nock option for the McKinny's. (he's the one that told me about them too)

Meta Nocks--Carbon Express makes thier metal nocks in A/C/E size which works great in the McKinney's. I'm shooting them in mine, and like them.


----------



## Dado (Aug 1, 2004)

st8arrow said:


> Rob forgot to mention one more nock option for the McKinny's. (he's the one that told me about them too)
> 
> Meta Nocks--Carbon Express makes thier metal nocks in A/C/E size which works great in the McKinney's. I'm shooting them in mine, and like them.


This then means that you can use ACE components with CX Nanos, right?


----------



## st8arrow (Apr 25, 2005)

I don't think so--CX makes a meta nock in a special model that fits an ACE/McKinney, but I believe NANO's take a different size hardware than ACE.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

st8arrow said:


> I don't think so--CX makes a meta nock in a special model that fits an ACE/McKinney, but I believe NANO's take a different size hardware than ACE.



yep, I believe Rob K of Lancaster said that. look at his recent posts-at first he misstated that ACE points fit the nano and then he corrected that

John (LImbwalker) had some of those at Louisville and ROb showed me the nanos and how they already have a line on them for putting on the spinvanes.


----------



## Blackfletch (Dec 2, 2006)

Jim C said:


> yep, I believe Rob K of Lancaster said that. look at his recent posts-at first he misstated that ACE points fit the nano and then he corrected that
> 
> John (LImbwalker) had some of those at Louisville and ROb showed me the nanos and how they already have a line on them for putting on the spinvanes.


Do the Mckinney II's also have spinvane lines?


----------



## hkim823 (Oct 6, 2004)

I like my X10 Beiter In/Outs, can I use the A/C/E equivalent Beiter In/Out knock? They only talk about the Beiter 12 Insert knock. 

I'm hearing people shooting only 80 grains in the point which makes me skeptical since I've always though the more up front the merrier. I'm thinking of using the insert / point A/C/E components but where I should start? Which insert / point combination would work for the lighter spined shafts (going with the 725 to start with)?


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> This then means that you can use ACE components with CX Nanos, right?


NO!

The Nano has a smaller inside diameter and thicker wall than the ACE. Size is close to an X10 component, but not exactly. There are two I.D.'s for Nano's. One for the larger shafts, and another for the smaller shafts.

On McKinney II's, you should be able to use the same Beiter insert nock as the ACE's. But I doubt the IN/OUT Beiter will fit.

John.


----------



## st8arrow (Apr 25, 2005)

John is correct--I tried the Beiter ACE in/outs on my McKinney's but they were just a bit loose. Teflon tape might have worked, but I went on to pin nocks, and they worked fine. I just recently pulled them and am trying the ACE Meta-nocks.


----------



## Dado (Aug 1, 2004)

Okies. On LAS page it says that when using NANO pin-nock adapters any pin nocks can be used with them? True?


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Yes, that's true. I'm using Gold Tip pin nocks on both Nano and X10 pins at the moment.

John.


----------



## Dado (Aug 1, 2004)

Well to get back on topic, it's a shame CarbonTech don't make MkIIs in at least one stiffer spine than 450... 400/410 would be great for us with DL over 29'' and DW over #55...


----------



## hkim823 (Oct 6, 2004)

st8arrow said:


> John is correct--I tried the Beiter ACE in/outs on my McKinney's but they were just a bit loose. Teflon tape might have worked, but I went on to pin nocks, and they worked fine. I just recently pulled them and am trying the ACE Meta-nocks.


In the spirit of trying to keep things as light as possible, I'm skeptical of moving to pins because of the extra weight it would create in the back as well as moving the FOC backwards. It's too bad the in/outs don't fit right, you'd think they would though since it's all the same spec.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Dado,

I just got my 450 MKII's, and they tune every bit as stiff as a 400 ACE. 

These MKII's should be just the arrow for anyone having trouble reaching long distances with their current setup.

The total shaft length is 31", so I didn't even have to use an arrow saw... very handy! ha, ha. Just installed the Beiter nocks and some 120 grain Cartel Xpert stainless points I had laying 'round (these are the same O.D. as the Navigator points in case anyone is interested...). Went out to see how they tuned and bingo! Right on the money without touching a thing. Shot a quarter sized group at 20 yards (bare shafts), then another nice group at 30 meters, and another nice group at 50 meters, all right in the middle of the butt. In other words, the 450 MKII's with 120 grain points tune EXACTLY like my 490 Nano's with 110 grain points. This will be very handy for testing.

The MKII's are 44 grains lighter than my Nano's, but with 120 grain points instead of 110's, they come out 34 grains lighter in a finished arrow. Even with vanes, I get over 15% FOC with the MKII's. This should more than satisfy the high FOC freaks out there. Better than even an ACE.

Speaking of ACE's, I can't see why these MKII's won't replace them in a lot of folk's quivers. They are lighter, and slightly smaller in diameter (in the center, slightly larger at the ends). If you're looking for a light arrow with high FOC, I can't see how you could do any better than these. 

So, in my book, there really isn't a reason to use ACE's anymore - unless you just want to. I mean, my Nano's are smaller in diameter than an ACE, and nearly as light, and the MKII's are much lighter, and about the same overall diameter. And based on bare shaft testing, both the Nano's and MKII's seem to be more consistent through the batch than ACE's (I always seemed to get one or two fliers in my ACE's). No fliers in the Nano's or MKII's at all.

Not that I ever had much trouble tuning ACE's or X10's, but I have to admit that these Nanos and MKII's are remarkably easy to tune. 

John.


----------



## Dado (Aug 1, 2004)

limbwalker said:


> Dado,
> 
> I just got my 450 MKII's, and they tune every bit as stiff as a 400 ACE.
> 
> ...


Cool, thanks for the input! So it's like I initially thought it would be for my decision: Protours, vs Nanos vs MkIIs. Considering the price, it seems that it will end up between Nanos and MkIIs. At this point I'd probably go for Nanos, as I kinda prefer a touch heavier shaft (got no probs reaching the 90m with a compound with around #57 and 8'' BH) and I think a 11.7% FOC, that's with meta nocks, is ok.
But I'm in no hurry - kinda waiting for more feedback about the Nanos...


----------



## Targetbutt (Jan 19, 2006)

I wonder how many here shoots at a wall of phonebooks as backstop. I remember with the MKI's, I had quite a few snap in half when it hits a phonebook that is angled upward.


----------



## moxie-mike (Sep 14, 2004)

What spine would you suggest for someone with a 36# bow and 25" draw. Is there a McKinney II soft enough?


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Mike, there is a spine selection chart on the Carbon Tech website for the new MKII's.

John.


----------



## spangler (Feb 2, 2007)

moxie-mike said:


> What spine would you suggest for someone with a 36# bow and 25" draw. Is there a McKinney II soft enough?


According to the chart the 725 looks like it would fit the bill.

I have no practical experience with these arrows however, and the website does note that the 725 has a "very limited supply".

-Andrew


----------



## Guest (Apr 14, 2007)

*Phone books*

Targetbutt.....I would suggest not to shoot at phone books in that case. Hitting a phone book is about like hitting a concret wall. You might consider buying a cheaper arrow, then use one of the phone books to look up a place that sells real archery targets, use the money you saved on the cheaper arrows and buy a real target "butt". Now there's an idea:wink: 

Art


----------



## calbowdude (Feb 13, 2005)

Yeah, those phone books are real hell on arrows. I would avoid them if possible. Anything to slow those arrows down, even those cheapo Hipps ethafoam targets that are 3" thick. Get a couple of bent aluminum arrows, carefully stick them through the foam and stick the target onto that phonebook wall. They'll slow the arrows down enough to keep them from impacting solid paper at full speed.


----------



## bownut-tl. (Sep 21, 2003)

Actually, shooting into phone books isn't bad depending upon how they are used. If you went to Woodley Park in Los Angeles, they have an outdoor 20 yard range that uses phone books as the back stop. they lay them flat and just stack them up. The weight of the books provides the compression they want. I don't know how many layers deep it is but it is at least two. I've shot there many times and have seen folks using all types of arrows and bows and bow poundages with no problem. The only time I had an issue is when the arrow hit the spine in the book and you pulled out a layer of glue on the arrow shaft. They do not shoot them face on which is what I believe Art was getting at.

Terry


----------



## WormBurner (Oct 19, 2006)

[email protected] said:


> Hi RecordKeeper and those interested;
> Price for a complete dozen of McKinney II Fletched Arrows is $294.99 complete with AAE/Norway vanes, G Nocks & Points. The Pin Nock option will run about $20 more..(recommended)
> 
> We have the McKinney II shafts in stock for $269.99 and you can use the ACE Points($9.99/dz.60-80 or 100-120gr. Breakoffs), G Nocks or Pin Nocks and Pins for ACE.
> ...



Rob - I cannot find the McKinney IIs on the L.A.S. website?


----------



## Guest (Apr 14, 2007)

*Phone books*

Yes I've shot into them when they were compressed on edge also. No problems even with aluminums. The ones we used we cut the spin end off and them used long bolts with a board across all the books and tightened them down.

On end they will stop a bullet. I used them this way also. Sheaded they also make great rat cage mulch too. Handy things those telephone books.

Art


----------



## I BOW 2 (May 22, 2002)

What kind of durability do the MK11s have compared to the ACE's? The last time Sally shot ACE's in an Outdoor Nationals she came home with 9 good arrows out of 2 dozen. Gets just a tad bit expensive. She is shooting X-10s now and has not damaged a single arrow yet, but they are a lot heavier. Ken


----------



## engtee (Oct 2, 2003)

I wonder about the ability of the MKII's to hold in the wind with light point weights (like Rick's 80gr). I was using ACE 670's with 86 gr. The total weight of the arrows was in the 250 gr. area. I have to assume that I would get similar speed with a similarly set-up and weighted MKII. Well, I stopped using those ACEs because the wind was blowing them all over the place. I would be very interested in hearing how those utilizing a similar set-up are coping with cross winds.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Engtee, Rick's 80 grain points were for his field setup. He recommends 100 grain points.

I don't want to speak for Rick, but I think the theory is that the arrow will get there faster, and thereby spend less time in the wind.

McKinney II's are considerably lighter than even an ACE. So the FOC will be better (over 15% on my 450's with 120 grain points and vanes!) than an ACE.

My tests show that the 450 McKinney II's are 45 grains lighter than my 490 Nano's, and 35 grains lighter than the 400 ACE's. FOC is off the chart. I get 207 fps. with my Nano's and 214 fps. with my McKinney II's. That's worth about 3/8" of sight mark at 90 meters.

John.


----------



## X traordanaire (Apr 10, 2004)

*Mk2*

me and my wife both shot these for outdoors last year. i was shooting a 600 spine out of a barnsdale, almost 260fps. i tried the pins for the first couple of weeks and lost a few arrows, the pin would shove 2" down the shaft. so we both went to bieters, i only lost one more through the rest of the season and that was at a clean 50 yarder (thanks Pleaton) but the hit it took would have wrecked any arrow. i shot in the 540s the whole season, about 20 points higher than the year before with navigators. i shot them with 100 in the front. shaft was cut at 28", with the bieter 2X2 in/outs. i loved the arrows but would not recomend the pin system, at least for the lesser spines with the thinner walls, a 450 may be alright but the 600s just didnt have the wall to support the pin.

Jon


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

I have set up a set of 600, a set of 650s as well. The 600s I cut 29" with the pin system and the long two part ACE point system at 100 grains. spin wings. Tunes slightly stiff for a 28.75 inch draw holding about 43 pounds

Set up the 650s-pins, 100 grain break off ACE points (the older nickel-steel 100-90-80. cut 28.5 with K spinners. tunes correctly with the same above bow

note a 570 ACE with 90 grain points and a beiter I/O nock tunes slightly WEAKER than the 650. I suspect the pin system creates a stiffer acting arrow than the beiters. I tried 90 Grain in the MII's (i used low temp hot melt for tuning-rick's glue for the final installation but I was getting a BS 6" left of the group and the grouping was not as good

the MII's weigh about 20 grains less than the ACE 570 (and the MII have a ten grain heavier point). the Beiter I/O nocks fit the 600 fine BTW. I am getting several FPS gain in speed but the stability seems to be the same

There is no doubt that these arrows require a higher spine compared to the Easton.


----------



## Targetbutt (Jan 19, 2006)

Art V,

I shoot at Rancho Park, we have a similar setup as Woodley. Problem is when the book gets old, usually the center section of the wall begin to expand and you get a big bulge. I've shot ACE's and X10's into the top part of the bulge and have had no problems with them. Some MKI's, on the other hand snapped when it hits the top part of the bulge. From what I'm reading here, seems like the MKII is tougher than ACE's when it comes to being hit by other arrows. I wonder if it will run into the same problem as the MKI's when it's shot into an angled backstop.


----------



## Rob Dr (Jan 3, 2007)

Has anyone tried to fit Beiter out nocks to Nano shafts? I have heard that Beiter isnt coming out with a nock to fit Nano because of the changing thicknes of the shaft but it should be possible to find good fitting X10 out nock?


----------



## RecordKeeper (May 9, 2003)

*Update.....*

I put the McKinney II's through their first test this past weekend in Pittsburgh, and I am very pleased with the performance.

They were very accurate, forgiving and consistent, and survived several hard impacts from other arrows...and survived the maximum abuse the airline could dish out the day after as well:wink: :wink: :wink:


----------



## Guest (Apr 26, 2007)

would they be good to shoot off compound bow for 3-D

How are they priced compared to ace's////


----------



## X traordanaire (Apr 10, 2004)

*mckinney 2*

got some new 450 McKinneys for the hoyt, shoot great, grooping in the 20yd spot at 50, about 85% at 80yds. im shooting in the low 270s for speed out of 55.45 lbs. 28" draw. i am shooting the pins, the wall on these are alot thicker than the 600s, i have lost a dozzen nocks but havent hurt any arrows. great arrow, highly recommended for the short draw archer, especially if you want to shoot 3ds with the same rig as you shoot spots with, as far as cost goes, the cheepest place i have found is stringworks.net. i believe $289 a dozzen.


----------



## hkim823 (Oct 6, 2004)

I'll chime in with my review. 

I like the shafts, they're fast, they're super light, they're a little thicker than I'd thought they'd be but otherwise a very good carbon shaft.

That being said, the 725 I bought cut to 25.5" with 80 grain screw in points were way WAY too stiff for my #41 on the fingers recurve setup. One full target, gold to gold on bare shafts compared to fletched group at 70m (there's a bit of room but we're talking around 5 feet from fletched group compared to bare shafts), and at my indoor range, at 18m, same idea (around 2 feet difference). So for those who truly are short drawed, these arrows might not work either. I'm not sure that going to 120 grains would help, I did the foolish thing and epoxied (using the CarbonTech glue) in the insert so I can't get more than 90 grains into the shaft anyway. 

I think with 120 grains I might be able to get them to tune, but at that weight I don't think I'd reach 90 meters with my short draw length and short eye to chin distance without turning my sight inside out, which is what I wanted to avoid in the first place.


----------



## Vittorio (Jul 17, 2003)

hkim823 said:


> ...
> That being said, the 725 I bought cut to 25.5" with 80 grain screw in points were way WAY too stiff for my #41 on the fingers recurve setup


My daughter Carla is using 725 size at 26" with 110 gr Tungsten point and 41# Winex limbs, and they tune exactly like her 620 ACE with same lenght and point (but, her sight is 1/2" better at 70 mt. than with ACE).
So, no way to get 725 tuning with your setup, even with 120 gr ss point, but now CT has 850 size available, and it seems other weeker sizes are coming....

For the chronicles, one of the men of the Recurve Russian team winning gold in Antalya World cup was shooting McKinney II arrows. During finals, as you know, there is a speed indicator close to targets that gives the speed of each shot. People attending was reading around 210 Km/hr for all shots but suddenly one men was at 230 km/hr, and everybody was asking what was happening ...:wink:


----------



## jmvargas (Oct 21, 2004)

if my calculations are correct 210km/hr=abt 191 ft/sec...230km/hr=abt 209 ft/sec.....for those who want to know.....


----------



## hkim823 (Oct 6, 2004)

Vittorio said:


> So, no way to get 725 tuning with your setup, even with 120 gr ss point, but now CT has 850 size available, and it seems other weeker sizes are coming....


I do wonder if if I go up to #45 and go to 90 grains if it'll tune out. I've put away the shafts and given up on outdoor season this summer to concentrate on low weight form indoors anyway but next summer I'll hopefully get my bow weight up.


----------



## Vittorio (Jul 17, 2003)

jmvargas said:


> if my calculations are correct 210km/hr=abt 191 ft/sec...230km/hr=abt 209 ft/sec.....for those who want to know.....


Forgot to mention that speed displaied on the World Cup Finals fields is measured close to the target at 70 mt, and is not the usual launchig speed that everybody refers to.


----------



## jmvargas (Oct 21, 2004)

Vittorio said:


> Forgot to mention that speed displaied on the World Cup Finals fields is measured close to the target at 70 mt, and is not the usual launchig speed that everybody refers to.


this would indicate that the speed referred to is more like the downrange velocity of the arrow which would make the launching speed much faster....


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

jmvargas said:


> this would indicate that the speed referred to is more like the downrange velocity of the arrow which would make the launching speed much faster....


Indeed. Given that these are light arrows with minimum flech area a quick thumbnail calculation leads me to believe that they could be bleeding off around 25-30fps at 70m.


----------



## calbowdude (Feb 13, 2005)

What I find compelling is the fact that the McKinney II's velocity advantage continues to hold up @ 70 meters. 

This past weekend I shot next to several recurve shooters using the MK II's, and they sure get downrange in a hurry, even at 90 meters. There is indeed something to giving up weight for speed.


----------



## giemme (Jan 28, 2004)

*McK II for compounds*

Anybody using them for compound? I'd like to know about spine selection, point weight, etc

Thanks


----------



## X traordanaire (Apr 10, 2004)

*coumpound*

i use them for a compound, my setup is: 
07 hoyt ultraelite, C2 cams
28" amo draw
55.45 lbs
450 mkII's cut at 28" carbon to carbon W/ 100 gr points, ace pins and mckinney nocks. 

they are a 450 shaft so you can spine them like the 450 X10s or spine them as the old McKinney which were labled mcKinney 215 in tap or AA


----------



## giemme (Jan 28, 2004)

X traordanaire said:


> i use them for a compound, my setup is:
> 07 hoyt ultraelite, C2 cams
> 28" amo draw
> 55.45 lbs
> ...


How about ACEs? I was wondering if I should select them 2 spine higher than my ACEs, as it seems the way to go for the recurve but may not necessarily apply for compunds.


----------



## X traordanaire (Apr 10, 2004)

*ace*

i dont believe that you can get an ace in a 450 spine, i think it is 430 to 470,
a 450 spine is a 450 no matter if it is carbon tech, easton, carbon express etc. i used the X10 because i know that there is a 450 spine in those shafts. i set them up right on according to Archers Advantage


----------



## giemme (Jan 28, 2004)

X traordanaire said:


> i dont believe that you can get an ace in a 450 spine, i think it is 430 to 470,
> a 450 spine is a 450 no matter if it is carbon tech, easton, carbon express etc. i used the X10 because i know that there is a 450 spine in those shafts. i set them up right on according to Archers Advantage


Yes, in fact I'm shooting ACE470. What I mean is that, reading the previous posts on this thread, it seems that you're not supposed to select the same static spine as ACEs or X10 when choosing the McKs II, because they dinamically react much stiffer. Since the posts are almost all related to recurve shooting, I was wondering if the same concept applies to compound.


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

giemme said:


> Yes, in fact I'm shooting ACE470. What I mean is that, reading the previous posts on this thread, it seems that you're not supposed to select the same static spine as ACEs or X10 when choosing the McKs II, because they dinamically react much stiffer. Since the posts are almost all related to recurve shooting, I was wondering if the same concept applies to compound.


I am going to order some next week and was wondering the samething.


----------



## Twiztd1 (Oct 17, 2002)

BH or any of the compound shooters waht would I be looking at for an UltraElite, 57lbs, C2 cams, 29" DL?


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

Twiztd1 said:


> BH or any of the compound shooters waht would I be looking at for an UltraElite, 57lbs, C2 cams, 29" DL?


I don't know :noidea:...that's what I am trying to figure out.

I am trying to decide between the 450's and 500's.


----------



## Twiztd1 (Oct 17, 2002)

Are these for your S4 mag? My shop owners S4 likes a stiffer arrow out of his. I'm going to give CT a call and see what they say.


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

Yep it's for my S4 with Mag and Furious cams. But I am going to be switching to Nitrous cams in July....

I have heard that they really like stiff arrows....but....they also like my ACC's that are a little stiffer then what I shot in previous years. But not much more. Most bows now adays like arrows that are stiffer then what you would have shot 4-5 years ago at the same draw and poundage.


----------



## X traordanaire (Apr 10, 2004)

*spine*

you can spine out with the old mcKinneys on AA, the read the same, a 450 is a 215 shaft in the old mckinney. but it is just a touch different than the reading for the X10 maybee a pound (i think it was stiffer) than the X10


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

Well I have been doing some research and I have been told by several people that like the Nanos you need to go up 2 sizes with the Mckinney II's. My buddy just ordered some and they should be here today. SO I will let have an update later in the week.


----------



## X traordanaire (Apr 10, 2004)

*spine*

why would you spine an all carbon arrow 2 sizes different than the lable? why would a 600 spine shoot like a 500 spine, wouldnt carbon tech just lable the arrow a 500 spine? looking at the old mckinney 2s and sportsters on both TAP and AA they spine out really close to any ac arrow of equal spine? so why the 2 size weeker thing, if this was the case i would be shooting about 290fps w/ MK2 and be way under 5 grains per pound at 55 lbs. i believe that you should spine these arrows for what they are. walk back tuning and through paper mine acually show up allittle week. and there 450's


----------



## Duss (May 23, 2006)

X traordanaire said:


> why would you spine an all carbon arrow 2 sizes different than the lable? why would a 600 spine shoot like a 500 spine, wouldnt carbon tech just lable the arrow a 500 spine? looking at the old mckinney 2s and sportsters on both TAP and AA they spine out really close to any ac arrow of equal spine? so why the 2 size weeker thing, if this was the case i would be shooting about 290fps w/ MK2 and be way under 5 grains per pound at 55 lbs. i believe that you should spine these arrows for what they are. walk back tuning and through paper mine acually show up allittle week. and there 450's


There is the STATIC spine and the DYNAMIC spine. The label refers to the STATIC spine

Dynamic spine has to do with the behaviour of the arrow while being launched by the bow


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

X traordanaire said:


> why would you spine an all carbon arrow 2 sizes different than the lable? why would a 600 spine shoot like a 500 spine, wouldnt carbon tech just lable the arrow a 500 spine? looking at the old mckinney 2s and sportsters on both TAP and AA they spine out really close to any ac arrow of equal spine? so why the 2 size weeker thing, if this was the case i would be shooting about 290fps w/ MK2 and be way under 5 grains per pound at 55 lbs. i believe that you should spine these arrows for what they are. walk back tuning and through paper mine acually show up allittle week. and there 450's


I don't know but that is one reason that I didn't buy any Nanos. I couldn't really figure out what spine I need. My buddy built a couple of his 500's last night they shoot from his C4 fine but they are too weak for his A7....my sources AND who ever he spoke to at LAS that told him to go with that size were wrong. He is going to shoot them outside today and if they don't work great then I will be shooting them:wink: I can cut 1 1/2" off of them so they will work for me.:thumbs_up


----------



## iceman77_7 (May 5, 2005)

Brown Hornet said:


> I don't know but that is one reason that I didn't buy any Nanos. I couldn't really figure out what spine I need. My buddy built a couple of his 500's last night they shoot from his C4 fine but they are too weak for his A7....my sources AND who ever he spoke to at LAS that told him to go with that size were wrong. He is going to shoot them outside today and if they don't work great then I will be shooting them:wink: I can cut 1 1/2" off of them so they will work for me.:thumbs_up


The best thing to do, and what I did when I got my MKIIs, is to contact Rick directly, tell him your specs and see what he recommmends. I shoot 43#, 30" arrow and he recommended the 550. It tunes perfectly.


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

iceman77_7 said:


> The best thing to do, and what I did when I got my MKIIs, is to contact Rick directly, tell him your specs and see what he recommmends. I shoot 43#, 30" arrow and he recommended the 550. It tunes perfectly.


That's an idea.:wink: I reall wanted to shoot Cheetahs or Whitetails this year for field (not much FITA around here) but the 400's I have are off the chart stiff, they shoot great but to stiff for my liking. The 500's I can get to work but my FOC will be low and I can't shoot the weight I want. I really wish they made a 450 spine. But if I don't go with the McKinneys I will just go with Navigators.


----------



## Twiztd1 (Oct 17, 2002)

Just got off the phone with Rick. On my setup he says a 500 spine arrow would be perfect. So my UltraElite 57 lbs, 29 Dl, Xt3000, C2cams. With a 29" shaft, spinwings and a 90 grn point, pin nocks is the way to go according to him. Hope this helps.


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

Twiztd1 said:


> Just got off the phone with Rick. On my setup he says a 500 spine arrow would be perfect. So my UltraElite 57 lbs, 29 Dl, Xt3000, C2cams. With a 29" shaft, spinwings and a 90 grn point, pin nocks is the way to go according to him. Hope this helps.


You are border line IMHO just from talking to my buddy that just got his. He has the same draw as you but shoots a little less poundage. His C4 is fine with the 500's and and 100 grain points with 187 FF and 1/2 a wrap....which will make the arrow a little stiffer. But his A7 at 55-56 lbs doesn't like them at all.....and is shaft is only 27 3/4".

Your bow like his A7 has a more agressive cam on it. I don't see the 500's working for you....even more so if you are going to shoot 29" arrows which isn't needed IMHO at your draw.:wink:


----------



## Twiztd1 (Oct 17, 2002)

BH, Was just using the 29" as a baseline. Figuring cut a 1/2 " off for tuning purposes. I was thinking the 450's to begin with also but Rick is adimant about the 500's working. Now I'm really confused.


----------



## X traordanaire (Apr 10, 2004)

*spine*

so what exactly is the purpose of a spine selector program? im packing about 80% in at 80yds so i think im leaving mine. pluse its hard to make an arrow longer. i would rather be stiff than week. twisted watch your speed im doing 270 right now at 56 lbs witha 28" draw arrow weight of 316. you will be in the 280's i bet. and probably under 5 grains per pound.


----------



## X traordanaire (Apr 10, 2004)

*chart*

look at the chart on carbon tech web sight, the c2 is clssified as a hard cam i believe, this would put you at a 450 twisted. looking closer at your arrow weight with the 500s it will be close, might have to up the point weight aliitle.


----------



## maitre91 (May 12, 2003)

Hello 

I did also test some MK II arrows: 

I am very pleased with them 
in short 
I find all the old Beman ease of tune capabilities plus speed 
also theses arrows are durables. 
The groups are as good as expected 

my tuning: 
size 550 
lenght 29" 
95 grains viking point 
vanes X vanes from bohning small size 
nock G nock 

fired from a Martin Scepter III 
fury X cams 
32" DL and 52# 

I did not noticed that a so light arrow is more affected by side wind 
in théory it should be more affected than an X10 ie 
for me it is about the same than x10 and a bit less than ACE 

Rick McKinney bet on the speed rather the weight. 
At the begining, I had concern about that, but the fact is for me it is good. 
May be because of the speed, the arrow flies a little lower thus take less wind as wind speed increase from the ground and up. The diameter is about 5.5mm just same size than others, so no more side force made by the wind. And it flies less time so !!!! 

did anyone made comparisons about wind drift ? 

Thanks
Philippe


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

Twiztd1 said:


> BH, Was just using the 29" as a baseline. Figuring cut a 1/2 " off for tuning purposes. I was thinking the 450's to begin with also but Rick is adimant about the 500's working. Now I'm really confused.


Well if they don't work call him back and tell him they didn't work.....then tell him you need to trade for the right spine.:wink:

I don't know if it will work or not....but really I think you will be okay with the 500's because of your lower draw weight.


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

Twiztd1 said:


> BH or any of the compound shooters waht would I be looking at for an UltraElite, 57lbs, C2 cams, 29" DL?


I don't think the 500's will work for you.....

The reason being is that Nino got a set of 500's to shoot from his A7 at 55lbs with the same draw as you. They wouldn't work for him....they worked in his C4 which is much softer. But I am now shooting them:wink: and I am shooting 56-57 lbs but I am shooting in the 27.5-27.75" draw range (I haven't measured to get an exact #)....but my shafts are cut down to 26 1/8" . 

But I will say that these shafts shoot great and I am VERY pleased with them. I forgot to take my bag of extra blades with me so I was shooting the one that I shot with my 3-39's which are about 70 grains heavier. My tear was about 1.5" nock high and it wouldn't come down because of the blade but the shafts still performed great. I was still pulling 3 of my 4 shots from the target at once most of the time. 

When I got home today I changed to the proper blade and my tear is PERFECT. :wink: I can't wait to get everything tuned up this week and shoot a full field round this weekend.


----------



## Twiztd1 (Oct 17, 2002)

BH, I don't think they will either. I e-mailed Rick again with more questions and still haven't heard back from him. I got some x-10's on a smokin deal so these will work for this year. Will talk to Rick somemore and see what he says. 

Thanks for the info. Good luck with them. Let me know how they are in a good cross wind.


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

Twiztd1 said:


> BH, I don't think they will either. I e-mailed Rick again with more questions and still haven't heard back from him. I got some x-10's on a smokin deal so these will work for this year. Will talk to Rick somemore and see what he says.
> 
> Thanks for the info. Good luck with them. Let me know how they are in a good cross wind.


Nothing wrong with a great deal on a great shaft:thumbs_up

As for the wind....I don't know when I will get a chance to really shoot them in a stiff wind as I don't really have any place to shoot them at a long distance (over 60 yds) in the wind. All of my field courses are pretty sheltered. I did shoot today in a decent wind at 60 yds and the wind blew my bow more then it did the arrow that's for sure. But the majority of my shots that broke while I was on the spot when the wind was blowing good still hit good. I didn't have any drift at 60 that took me out of the spot maybe out of the X but I wouldn't have lost any points from the wind.....but the wind wasn't howling or anything and there is a lot more wind coming across the shooting line then there is down range where I was shooting so I can't really say that I can give you an honest opinion on drift.:wink:


----------



## redman (Feb 22, 2003)

how would mk 2 arrows work with a scepter 4 mag at 45 lbs for field shooting
all the shooting i do is nfaa field shooting outdoors


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

Although I shoot them on more lbs, 57 during the summer with Furious cams but 53 lbs with Nitours cams now. They are wonderful. They group and shoot better then any other shaft I have used for field. The shafts ae fairly durable as I have not lost one to impacts and they got beat up fairly good this year. I just wish that Beiter had made their new nock for it.

I will be shooting them next year again.


----------

