# What’s up with the Hoyt Xceed risers?



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

They look like a very robust riser but even I can’t get my head wrapped around the adjustable blocks for the limb pads...Is that what’s causing all of these almost immediate sales of these relatively new risers?


----------



## Z3R0 (Nov 6, 2014)

It's a new Hoyt, simple as that.

Sent from my SM-G950W using Tapatalk


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

It's just a way if slightly changing riser geometry. Interesting, and might be useful for balancing the draw for barebow, but unlikely to be a game changer for the average shooter.


----------



## calbowdude (Feb 13, 2005)

Some extra ability to tinker and tune. For the elites, probably helps in really getting shot feel dialed in. For the rest of us, overkill I suspect lol


----------



## ryan b. (Sep 1, 2005)

I think most of the people selling in the forums are barebow archers getting ready to purchase a 27” or 29” something or other. Love mine for full target setup.


----------



## Gregjlongbow (Jun 15, 2016)

I sold mine because it was a spare that I planned to setup as a lighter indoor bow and barebow, but ultimately decided not to use it this season. I still shoot my other Xceed because it’s a great riser. The STT is really neat and does allow you to change the feel without significantly changing the tune. They are very straight and the finish is gorgeous. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## txarcher1 (Aug 5, 2003)

*I will tell you this much. If Brady would have switched to an Exceed, you couldn't
have kept them on here for more than 5 min. I have had mine up for 9 days, and 
a few nibbles. If people tell you they don't care what the pro's shoot, and their going
to shoot whatever riser they want, their lying through their teeth. People do shoot
whatever the pros shoot because the pros are shooting it. Nuff said.*


----------



## equilibrium (Oct 31, 2006)

*Aren't two of the top BB archers shooting the Xceed? Vegas will be a bell weather. HPX vs Xceed...*


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

equilibrium said:


> *Aren't two of the top BB archers shooting the Xceed? Vegas will be a bell weather. HPX vs Xceed...*


Or not. Because the top shooters will always be the top shooters, regardless of what riser they use. Risers matter so little...


----------



## equilibrium (Oct 31, 2006)

limbwalker said:


> Or not. Because the top shooters will always be the top shooters, regardless of what riser they use. Risers matter so little...


*"I will tell you this much. If Brady would have switched to an Exceed, you couldn't
have kept them on here for more than 5 min. 
People do shoot
whatever the pros shoot because the pros are shooting it."
*
*Aren't two of the top BB archers shooting the Xceed?
*
*I know anytime I post on AT, I always get push back.
*


----------



## wesel (Sep 6, 2013)

limbwalker said:


> Or not. Because the top shooters will always be the top shooters, regardless of what riser they use. Risers matter so little...


Sjef somewhat prove this in a video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SLtTyh-5Xj8


----------



## target1 (Jan 16, 2007)

I know that everytime I post on AT, original Winact risers go through the roof.


----------



## ksarcher (May 22, 2002)

Casey Kaufhold is shooting the Exceed indoors this year. There is nothing wrong with the riser! OK for the tuning nuts but the average user will over think it and probably grow frustrated with all the configurations and weight options for the riser.

I like the Epic riser even with the crappy limb alignment...(washers)


----------



## theminoritydude (Feb 11, 2013)




----------



## ksarcher (May 22, 2002)

A tinker's dream!


----------



## Braveheart (Apr 1, 2017)

Agreed with what Limbwalker said.


----------



## Seattlepop (Dec 8, 2003)

ksarcher said:


> Casey Kaufhold is shooting the Exceed indoors this year. There is nothing wrong with the riser! OK for the tuning nuts but the average user will over think it and probably grow frustrated with all the configurations and weight options for the riser.
> 
> I like the *Epic riser even with the crappy limb alignment*...(washers)


I'm enjoying my Epik - I especially like the pro-dowel system since you don't have to unstring the bow to adjust the washers. All moot now since Hoyt now uses the side-screw alignment system.


----------



## tassie_devil (Aug 15, 2018)

wesel said:


> Sjef somewhat prove this in a video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SLtTyh-5Xj8


That is class. Sjef’s comments at the end are fair, but it really does reiterate that you can’t buy points. Also put in perspective how much time should be given to tuning.


----------



## rsarns (Sep 23, 2008)

equilibrium said:


> *Aren't two of the top BB archers shooting the Xceed? Vegas will be a bell weather. HPX vs Xceed...*


I didn’t know you were shooting an Xceed!


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

wesel said:


> Sjef somewhat prove this in a video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SLtTyh-5Xj8


Perfect!


----------



## equilibrium (Oct 31, 2006)

wesel said:


> Sjef somewhat prove this in a video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SLtTyh-5Xj8


*I do agree that a top archer is going to shoot well with sub-par equipment. But, to say that equipment doesn't matter is just a little over stating it.

To test out the hypothesis that the equipment doesn't make the archer, they needed to have two equally ranked archers, one with a top-notch bow and one with a basic bow, and see if they score the same. Even better -- a within subjects design, in which the same archer shoots both bows, so we can really see the effect of the equipment. To test the claim that the archer's skill is what matters, they needed to have the pro and the amateur both shoot the same exact bow. In other words, in a true experiment, you should only change one variable at time.*


----------



## equilibrium (Oct 31, 2006)

rsarns said:


> I didn’t know you were shooting an Xceed!


*I'm still just a Prodigy......*


----------



## Z3R0 (Nov 6, 2014)

equilibrium said:


> *I do agree that a top archer is going to shoot well with sub-par equipment. But, to say that equipment doesn't matter is just a little over stating it.
> 
> To test out the hypothesis that the equipment doesn't make the archer, they needed to have two equally ranked archers, one with a top-notch bow and one with a basic bow, and see if they score the same. Even better -- a within subjects design, in which the same archer shoots both bows, so we can really see the effect of the equipment. To test the claim that the archer's skill is what matters, they needed to have the pro and the amateur both shoot the same exact bow. In other words, in a true experiment, you should only change one variable at time.*


https://youtu.be/1T-DZuh4QQY

Sent from my SM-G950W using Tapatalk


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

equilibrium said:


> *I do agree that a top archer is going to shoot well with sub-par equipment. But, to say that equipment doesn't matter is just a little over stating it.
> 
> To test out the hypothesis that the equipment doesn't make the archer, they needed to have two equally ranked archers, one with a top-notch bow and one with a basic bow, and see if they score the same. Even better -- a within subjects design, in which the same archer shoots both bows, so we can really see the effect of the equipment. To test the claim that the archer's skill is what matters, they needed to have the pro and the amateur both shoot the same exact bow. In other words, in a true experiment, you should only change one variable at time.*


Sjef dropped 0 points in three sets with a $200 bow. There is no bow ever made that would have beaten that score. Test over. LOL

Any objective person is able to conclude that equipment in fact, does not make the archer. If we're talking recurve, all you have to do is look at scores from the 1990's compared to today. Statistically insignificant improvement in 25 years.


----------



## equilibrium (Oct 31, 2006)

*The test would be "over" if top archers shot sub-par equipment against their main competition. So, Sjef vs Ellison what does Sjef show up with? 

It's good people live their dreams but, nightmares are dreams too. Now that's funny. 

Again, I know that a top archer is going to be hard to beat but, equipment matters. Just look at what the top archers are shooting. Any objective person is able to conclude. Testing is never over...LOL.*


----------



## tassie_devil (Aug 15, 2018)

I thought Sjef shot two 9s, but either way. The opposition doesn’t matter if the score can’t be improved (or improved much) with better gear. To test the hypothesis of equipment/archer you don’t need opposition full stop. One archer, varied equipment. For generalisability obviously, you would do the same with multiple archers - but it is their scores with different equipment that are important, not versus each other. If more data helps, my scores didn’t change a scrap going from SF Axiom + limbs to Winact VTs. I fall into the VERY amateur category. My bow looks much cooler now though.

I would also add that having “tuned” arrows is more likely to improve his score than spending another $1500 on limbs and riser.

Regardless, it is probably a more salient point for those of us shooting ‘mid-range’ gear. Nothing to be gained by going top of the range.


----------



## TristanZSmith (Aug 29, 2017)

Take the original Earl Hoyt geometry, slap on W&W style dovetail limb adjustments, push the weight to the limb pockets (with the option of adding more weights) and you got yourself the first ILF riser worth switching to since the GMX :wink:

Same for the ATF-X. Pick your poison.

Though, I'm really not sold on the string tension technology. Just adding more moving parts, more stuff to come loose, more stuff to break. Not a big deal, either way. Imho. I'll test one before I try selling it to anyone.

It'll outshoot everyone lurking on this forum, anyways :darkbeer:


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

equilibrium said:


> *The test would be "over" if top archers shot sub-par equipment against their main competition. So, Sjef vs Ellison what does Sjef show up with?
> 
> It's good people live their dreams but, nightmares are dreams too. Now that's funny.
> 
> Again, I know that a top archer is going to be hard to beat but, equipment matters. Just look at what the top archers are shooting. Any objective person is able to conclude. Testing is never over...LOL.*


And that's exactly how equipment manufacturers stay in business. By convincing people there is always something better out there. LOL

Sjef and Ellison show up with whatever their sponsors want them to shoot. How do you think they make their living as professional archers? From prize money? LOL


----------



## moomooholycow (Sep 15, 2016)

I'm selling my only-used-for-about-200-shots Gillo GT b/c it just doesn't quite line up with me in terms of what I want a bow to feel like. My scores are just as good with it as my other risers so the riser isn't a "problem" in any way. So, it's posted here.. I'm just considering that I "rented" it and am now passing it on. I'm not sure if anyone else is doing this, but I do it fairly frequently. Maybe that's part of the XCeed postings we're seeing here.


----------



## caspian (Jan 13, 2009)

wesel said:


> Sjef somewhat prove this in a video


no, he broke the cabal by using W&W stabs! had the test used Easton stabs, the result would have been totally different.

:lalala:




TristanZSmith said:


> Though, I'm really not sold on the string tension technology. Just adding more moving parts, more stuff to come loose, more stuff to break.


and more importantly, more of your money in Hoyt's wallet. which you could largely replicate with a couple of different length strings.


----------



## lees (Feb 10, 2017)

limbwalker said:


> Sjef dropped 0 points in three sets with a $200 bow. There is no bow ever made that would have beaten that score. Test over. LOL
> 
> Any objective person is able to conclude that equipment in fact, does not make the archer. If we're talking recurve, all you have to do is look at scores from the 1990's compared to today. Statistically insignificant improvement in 25 years.


I know, right? Even when you give em a video with proof, not doctored in any way, they still argue with ya.... I should do a video of my shooting comparing my $150 bow from lancaster and my $750 inno cxt riser equipped bow. I'll do the same collapse/rip with each, and those shafts will go out in the woods to the right of the bale exactly the same each time. But if they won't believe a video with Sjef B in it, well, what can you do.....

This discussion also comes up constantly over on the compound forums. The situation there is basically the same thing, though nobody actually believes you when you tell them. And I say it over and over again: the only thing that really affects your scores is a) it fits you, b) it doesn't rip your arms and hands off and c) if stuff stays bolted onto the bow for the whole round. Everything else is creature comforts. Accuracy hasn't been an issue for at least 30 years if not all the way back to when the compound became commercially available at all.

This is reflected in the scores too. Over time what has happened is the scores among the intermediates and The Great Unwashed (which I'm a part of) have come up somewhat as a class. The scores at the very top haven't really changed significantly - maybe a little higher X counts indoors and maybe higher scores outdoors due to the improvements in compound arrow tech over the last 20 years. But the lion's share of what you got is just more of them shooting those scores.

The big change has been down here at the bottom, though. With the unathletic guys with no shooting talent like myself - mainly in the form of creature comforts like better cam profiles, less hand shock to reduce fatique and better arrow technology. And even those don't improve scores in and of themselves; what they do is little more than simply increase the chances that we'll actually make it all the way through the tournament period. And without having to go to the hospital at the end. Or have the rest or sight fall off in the middle of the round, nuking our progress for the duration after a miss or two. 

Don't ask me how I've gathered all that information. 

My current bow, for example, a supra focus xl, is one of the hottest new target bows on the market for this year. PSE can't make em fast enough. And I shoot mine well, with nice tight groups. But it's also a little fussy to tune (more of a mental thing for me) and kind of fatiguing to shoot. Everything stays bolted onto it, but the storm is starting to gather on the horizon, that indicates I might not have the endurance to shoot it competitively. It's got a lot of mass weight and a lot of shock on the shot, it just doesn't seem real thrilled with me behind the string shooting it for long periods of time. I've been shooting it a couple months now and still haven't been able to actually shoot a score yet with it... Again, probably the hottest target bow out there with the very upper crust shooting it now like Dave Cousins, Stephan Hanson, etc.....

If I continue with compound my next one may be a hunting bow with better creature comforts in the manner I've described. The task will be finding one with appropriately light limbs. And the focus may end up being sold.

Anyway, you get the idea: it's not the bow itself, the equation is always the bow + the shooter. On the compound at least, selecting the bow is not a matter of its accuracy and hasn't been for some time. It's will you shoot it accurately, does it hurt when you shoot it, will you make it through the tournament with it or not, do you like shooting it, and does anything break or fall off. and so on....

lee.


----------



## gligo01 (Mar 15, 2012)

lees said:


> I know, right? Even when you give em a video with proof, not doctored in any way, they still argue with ya.... I should do a video of my shooting comparing my $150 bow from lancaster and my $750 inno cxt riser equipped bow. I'll do the same collapse/rip with each, and those shafts will go out in the woods to the right of the bale exactly the same each time. But if they won't believe a video with Sjef B in it, well, what can you do.....
> 
> This discussion also comes up constantly over on the compound forums. The situation there is basically the same thing, though nobody actually believes you when you tell them. And I say it over and over again: the only thing that really affects your scores is a) it fits you, b) it doesn't rip your arms and hands off and c) if stuff stays bolted onto the bow for the whole round. Everything else is creature comforts. Accuracy hasn't been an issue for at least 30 years if not all the way back to when the compound became commercially available at all.
> 
> ...


Totally agree with all, my thoughts are the same. After owning top thier bows, most pleasure now is mid priced PSE Phenom with dc cams. Excellent post


----------



## lees (Feb 10, 2017)

equilibrium said:


> *I do agree that a top archer is going to shoot well with sub-par equipment. But, to say that equipment doesn't matter is just a little over stating it.
> 
> To test out the hypothesis that the equipment doesn't make the archer, they needed to have two equally ranked archers, one with a top-notch bow and one with a basic bow, and see if they score the same. Even better -- a within subjects design, in which the same archer shoots both bows, so we can really see the effect of the equipment. To test the claim that the archer's skill is what matters, they needed to have the pro and the amateur both shoot the same exact bow. In other words, in a true experiment, you should only change one variable at time.*


That's what you actually had in the video: the only change was the bow - the shooter on the left was still Sjef B. So ironically it starts off with a decent scientific basis, even though it was more an entertainment-value-only kind of setup...... 

The real test would have been if Sjef B still shot as good as himself, or not, with the two different bows. Dunno, maybe he'll follow up and cook that video up for us... 

And again, from the compound perspective, the situation is similar. The only big difference from the recurve is the significantly lower physical athleticism necessary to shoot the compound bow well. That has provided more fuel for improvements in other creature comforts (I call em) on the compound over the last 40 years and which actually has had an effect on scores for a certain shooting demographic (particularly The Great Unwashed group which I'm a part of). 

But strange but true: does this thing tear my arm off, have I had to call 911 or not after the 4th end, and can I still walk to the target to get my arrows at the end of the tournament - the most important elements to think about on the compound - are the last things on most new (and even seasoned) shooters' lists when it comes to bow selection. 

Just go to your local range and see all the freestyle guys out there trying to hit stuff with those bows that weigh 10 lbs and those 60lb limbs are cranked all the way down and secured at 20ft/lbs and you'll see what I mean. You'll see the most spectacular sky-draws and chicken-wings of all time. It's all the most current, top of the line stuff. Even Tungsten weights on the ends of those stabs. But they can't hit the side of a barn a lot of them.

So there is a rather large kernel of truth to the statement that equipment doesn't matter. It does, but not for the reasons most folks typically think about or wish for in their next bow....

lee.


----------



## lees (Feb 10, 2017)

gligo01 said:


> Totally agree with all, my thoughts are the same. After owning top thier bows, most pleasure now is mid priced PSE Phenom with dc cams. Excellent post


I'm considering a centrix LD among a few others if I end up deciding to throw in the towel on the focus. I'm giving it a little more time before I truly give up, but it's one of the bows near the top of the list. Main thing is if would be any better than what I already got, which is debatable...

I originally went with the focus xl because it's in my sweet spot in terms of fit ATA-wise. The centrix may be a little short for me.

If nothing else, it looks like it'd be a hell of a lot quicker to make strings for than the focus, tho....

lee.


----------



## gligo01 (Mar 15, 2012)

lees said:


> I'm considering a centrix LD among a few others if I end up deciding to throw in the towel on the focus. I'm giving it a little more time before I truly give up, but it's one of the bows near the top of the list. Main thing is if would be any better than what I already got, which is debatable...
> 
> I originally went with the focus xl because it's in my sweet spot in terms of fit ATA-wise. The centrix may be a little short for me.
> 
> ...


I'm following your posts a long time lees, you are in "best" years as I am (73). You have had a Supra with me cams, me too, but I couldn't find much love and pleasure with that bow. A little too aggressive for my strength. I am not following a new bow hype any more and need to have the best and newest also not. I've read your posts with great respect for your healthy understanding of archery and human nature and thinking.


----------



## ksarcher (May 22, 2002)

I stand corrected. Casey Kaufhold is now shooting the Formula Xi Riser.


----------



## Bigjono (Apr 21, 2009)

Having been up close and personal with one this weekend, nothing. They are an awesome riser.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## rsarns (Sep 23, 2008)

Bigjono said:


> Having been up close and personal with one this weekend, nothing. They are an awesome riser.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I have 2. They both are good risers, I also have 2 WFX 25’s. The Hoyt doesn’t feel as stiff on the shot, but the WFX in my humble opinion balances better with less added weights. Speaking BB wise anyway.


----------



## Bigjono (Apr 21, 2009)

rsarns said:


> I have 2. They both are good risers, I also have 2 WFX 25’s. The Hoyt doesn’t feel as stiff on the shot, but the WFX in my humble opinion balances better with less added weights. Speaking BB wise anyway.


I'd agree with that Ren, I've owned 3 WF risers and they are some of the stiffest I've shot. I like Spigs so the softer riser feel obviously suits me better Lol. I think the Exceed is somewhere between the 2. I'm actually looking for an Exceed now, tried a 27" GT and found I don't get on as well with 27" risers, though the GT is exceptional in every way.


----------



## equilibrium (Oct 31, 2006)

*If you go to minute 6:25 to 6:30, you will hear Sjef said, "if we increased the distance the results would be different".

In the BB community there isn't much money being passed around for archers, so if cheaper gear would give the same results then they (BB) archers would be using it. 
Saving the money for entry-fees, travel, hotel and rentals.

To make a generalized statement that top recurve archers are only shooting newer gear to sell equipment is, IMO, short sighted. Trying to give a simple answer to a complex question. Almost, like saying AT is using members with 1000 plus comments to sell and promote this discussion board.

I'm glad the archers I shoot with are much more open-minded and willing to talk about ideas and issues without a blanket, the science is settled attitude.*


----------

