# Limb Mix and Match Warning



## Joe T (Apr 5, 2003)

The Alternative warning as been up for years.

Issue is illustrated in a recent AT post









The compression mark level with the detente is the later Hoyt ILF variation. The compression mark with the added arrow is the "traditional" ILF. With my (traditional ILF) Samick Masters the compression mark lies between the two positions in the photo (my tiller bolts are not screwed out at far as the ones in the photo).


----------



## TheAncientOne (Feb 14, 2007)

Joe T said:


> The Alternative warning as been up for years.


I never noticed it before, I have to read the fine print more often.

TAO


----------



## Seattlepop (Dec 8, 2003)

TheAncientOne said:


> I just noticed this on the Alternative Archery website:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The Alternative warning is anti-Hoyt BS and I refuse to shop there as a result.

Let’s look at what it is, exactly, they are saying. With the introduction of the dowel system, the detent limb bushing is raised slightly above the limb pocket floor. On other systems (I don’t have one, maybe someone else can provide a pic?) the détente bushing presumably allowed the limb to lie flatter against the limb pocket floor. 

This would mean that in non-Hoyt systems the limb would be in contact with the pocket edge throughout most of the weight adjustment range. This is what Alternative is saying “…pivot point on most other bows is the leading edge of the pocket.” 

With the dowel raised slightly above the pocket floor, you can see that as the limb is cranked down, the pocket edge will begin to lose contact with the limb. I just tested mine and the limb loses contact around three turns in from max out. So, technically, my Matrix is just like “other bows” for the first three turns in. After that, the limb pivot point moves in “B” on the photo. Since this forms the basis for Alternative’s claim, the real question is “so what?” 

ILF: “…this is no longer the case…” Alternative is claiming that the change in distance “B” has single-highhandedly caused the loss of ILF fitting limbs in non-Formula bows. Did they miss that we have been mixing non-Hoyt limbs with Hoyt risers for years and the only complaints are due to the limb, not the riser, usually because a little too much clear-coat in some cases has to be sanded down for proper fitting? Again, a limb problem, not the riser. Oh, don't tell Alternative that Galiazzo won 2004 gold with a Matrix and non-Hoyt limbs. Wow, real mix and match problem. Alternative: FAIL

Alternative is also claiming possible “…non-alignment of limbs”. Has Alternative redefined “alignment”? The change in distant “B” has absolutely no affect whatsoever on limb alignment. Alternative: FAIL 

In fact, applying their logic, if less distance in “A” means less alignment, does more distance mean more aligned? If so, Alternative wants you to buy the new Formula series since it increases distance “A”. A more aligned, aligned limb. Who’d a thunk it. The clowns at Alternative, obviously. 

The most serious of their claims is the possible limb breakage using the “current” system. They weasel a qualification by saying in “extreme” cases. Extreme compared to what? Distance “A” is distance “A”. Are some distant “A”s more or less than other distance “A”s? Did they also invent a distance “C”? Or are they suggesting we don’t use limbs made of cardboard? Ok, that would be “extreme”. 

Please show me where the ½” change in pivot point has caused so much stress in the thickest, most reinforced part of the limb that it broke? Based on the number in use over the years, I say one would be a freak, a dozen might get my attention. While we’re waiting, I have to go with another Alternative: FAIL	

Sorry, that’s three FAILs. Inning, game, over. 

You know, thinking back to one of Viper’s posts, IIRC he shoots with the dowel system, he stated that he prefers the limbs cranked down. He also says he gets some kind of mysterious, unexpected increase in power that way. Let’s see…moving the pivot point back ½” would increase the working part of the limb… Hmmmmm.

Alternative Archery should remove their unscrupulous and deceitfully false warning. All it takes is a little integrity. 

All of the above is IMHO, of course. 
____________________________
Visual aid: My well-loved Matrix:


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

i thought that disclaimer was for the forumla risers which are not ILF and need the formula limbs. I didnt know it pertained to any other risers/limbs. I have shot Hoyt, Samick and now MK Korea ILF limbs on my Aerotec with no problems from ill fitting. 

Chris


----------



## caspian (Jan 13, 2009)

just arse covering. mix and match at will, you might have to experiment with string length to find the ideal brace height though.


----------



## TheAncientOne (Feb 14, 2007)

On face value it seems to make sense since the dowel puts pressure on the area where the limb is drilled for the ILF hardware. Since that is also the most robust portion of the limb I can't see it being an issue unless you dry fire the limb repeatedly. Having owned both an Aerotec and a Helix I've never had a problem, I was just wondering if anyone has.



> You know, thinking back to one of Viper’s posts, IIRC he shoots with the dowel system, he stated that he prefers the limbs cranked down. He also says he gets some kind of mysterious, unexpected increase in power that way. Let’s see…moving the pivot point back ½” would increase the working part of the limb… Hmmmmm.


Cranking down the bolts increases the pre-tension on the limb raising the effective weight. I'm assuming that's what Viper1 meant.

And yes Viper1 uses non-Hoyt limbs on his Aerotec. So do I for that matter since I was disappointed in my G3's. (Any Winex limbs out there for sale?)

TAO


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

i also shoot non Hoyt limbs on my Aerotec and i always have the limbs cranked down. 


Chris


----------



## eagle man (Jun 7, 2011)

I shoot a Hoyt Helix riser and Win Win Inno Power limbs cranked down. I shoot a lot of arrows every week. I have not had a bit of problem.


----------



## Seattlepop (Dec 8, 2003)

TheAncientOne said:


> On face value it seems to make sense since the dowel puts pressure on the area where the limb is drilled for the ILF hardware. Since that is also the most robust portion of the limb I can't see it being an issue unless you dry fire the limb repeatedly. Having owned both an Aerotec and a Helix I've never had a problem, I was just wondering if anyone has.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I have to laugh because that is exactly the response I gave to V1 in a post and he corrected me. I think he is suggesting the parts are greater than the sum in this case. 

V1: "Actually, no - that's not what I'm saying. Going to full reflex (bolts full in) will yield more arrow speed than the modest increase in weight would suggest.

Unless you can't get the bow to tune that way, usually due to arrow choices, anything less is basically giving up free horsepower."


----------



## toj (Aug 22, 2012)

There is also an issue with some carbon risers as these are designed to have the limbs contact shims in the pocket to ensure good alignment.
Win & win carbon risers are designed like this and as such hoyt (and some others) contact the painted carbon area of the pocket and not the shims.

There can also be a slight difference in dove tail sizes and the u on the limb bottom which is why you can buy different size dovetails and sometimes have to remove a little laquer from the limb butt when new.
Each manufacturer has there own tollerances and not all are the same so some will and some won't fit.
For example my win & win limbs fit my cxt riser perfectly but they won't fit on the limb bolts in my eclipse riser (either set), I could remove a little laquer or even force them on a couple of times but then the fit on the cxt will be compromised slightly.

I think that ILF is less of a standard now than say 7 or 8 years ago and it'll probably dissapear completely in the future.


----------



## barking mad (Oct 17, 2006)

caspian said:


> just arse covering. mix and match at will, you might have to experiment with string length to find the ideal brace height though.


Exactly. 

Having mixed several sets of Hoyt and non-Hoyt limbs and risers over the years, have never had a problem.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

chrstphr said:


> i thought that disclaimer was for the forumla risers which are not ILF and need the formula limbs. I didnt know it pertained to any other risers/limbs. I have shot Hoyt, Samick and now MK Korea ILF limbs on my Aerotec with no problems from ill fitting.
> 
> Chris


IIRC the warning is about how newer Hoyt "ILF" risers have the deepest part of the grip closer to the archer in relationship to the limb pockets, resulting in more limb deflection at the same draw length. Hoyt is mucking with defacto standards, but since ILF is not an actual standard there isn't much one can do other than complain.


----------



## caspian (Jan 13, 2009)

Warbow said:


> Hoyt is mucking with defacto standards, but since ILF is not an actual standard there isn't much one can do other than complain.


Hoyt is more having a hissy fit due to their inability to exert worldwide control over ILF, and so they invented a new form factor which is the equivalent of taking their bat and ball and going home. (I will disregard arguments claiming that the new pocket is 0.000002746% better due to some theoretical point of flex being moved blah blah blah.)

ILF might not be a standard defined on paper, but that doesn't mean it's not perfectly well understood by everyone not protecting their cheese. or so we'd like to think.

look at the concept of draw weight for recurve limbs. it would be nice to think that rated DW was always done at 28" with the limb bolts at halfway through the recommended range, but someone apparently forgot to tell Korea that. or forgot to tell them that DL is to the deepest part of the grip + 1-3/4", not to the plunger. the advice I have from someone who works in the industry is to allow +3 to 5lb over rating for Korean limbs because of this.

standards? what standards? I see no standards.

given you're probably ultimately going to tune your rig by altering draw weight to your shafts for your draw length anyway, as long as you can hit the ballpark for desirable DW, I don't think a pound or two one way or the other matter much anyway.


----------



## Seattlepop (Dec 8, 2003)

Warbow said:


> IIRC the warning is about how newer Hoyt "ILF" risers have the deepest part of the grip closer to the archer in relationship to the limb pockets, resulting in more limb deflection at the same draw length. Hoyt is mucking with defacto standards, but since ILF is not an actual standard there isn't much one can do other than complain.


I think the reference to pivot point in the Alternative warning is about the limb pocket, not the grip and reflex/deflex. Remember that the Alternative warning pre-dates anything "newer" by several years.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

I agree with Seatlepop completely. I own dozens of risers and even more limbs. I mix and match stuff constantly for my students. Elans, Matrixes, aerotechs, Helix, Nexus and GMX. Limbs: Martin Auroras, Merlin marked borders, Hoyts, Samicks, WW, PSE Marked WW, and tons of SKY Jacks. every once in while we will get one set of limbs that doesn't work well on say an old hoyt or Merlin riser. its often the dovetail hardware on the limbs.

but I shot WINEX limbs for a couple years on my Helix as an indoor bow and it worked fine


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

Seattlepop said:


> I think the reference to pivot point in the Alternative warning is about the limb pocket, not the grip and reflex/deflex. Remember that the Alternative warning pre-dates anything "newer" by several years.


SP, I can't think of any reason why any mention the PP makes sense except to note that the limbs will be more deflected with some hoyt risers. They are pretty specific:


> A particular case in point is the current range of Hoyt risers where the * pivot point has now been moved back *in line with the dovetail location. This pivot point on most other bows is on the leading edge of the pocket. This has resulted in some cases of poor fitting and non-alignment of limbs and in extreme cases even breakage due to the increased strain on the limbs.


I'm not saying they are right about the incompatibility but that they are specifically noting that the relative position of the PP to the limb pockets has changed in some Hoyt risers a while ago.


----------



## Seattlepop (Dec 8, 2003)

Warbow said:


> SP, I can't think of any reason why any mention the PP makes sense except to note that the limbs will be more deflected with some hoyt risers. They are pretty specific:
> 
> 
> I'm not saying they are right about the incompatibility but that they are specifically noting that the relative position of the PP to the limb pockets has changed in some Hoyt risers a while ago.


Keep at it and I think it will come to you. I think you need to read the warning and thread more carefully. 

If you took a moment to look at any bow you have, you would see that there couldn't be any line drawn from either point through the grip pivot point. We are simply not conditioned to think of a pivot point as anything other than the grip. But, these are the Brits...I think they're still PO'd at us. 

Focus on this statement: "...the pivot point has now been moved back in line with the dovetail location. *This pivot point on most other bows is on the leading edge of the pocket*." How can the grip PP be on the leading edge of a riser? The subject is ILF, not grip or reflex/deflex. 

Its not a lever system, but just for a visual aid, picture the "line" like a fulcrum under the limb which forms the pivot point over which the limb bends. That "line" across the limb pivot point will move from the riser edge to the limb dove-tail/detente bushing, or dowel, see my photo pls. 

However, it seems to me that limbs are ultimately supported by the dove-tail bushing. If the full weight was held, or pivoted, by the sharp edge of the limb pocket it would eventually cut through. So, if all risers/limbs of the ILF style really pivot on the dove-tail bushing, there never was a change in pivot point. If this is the case the Alternative claim is not only BS, its laughable. 

Alternative is insulting us with one hand while selling to us with the other. No thanks.


----------



## Biggsy (Dec 8, 2012)

I think AS are wise to mention this as it amounts to a disclaimer for liabillity if some dumb ass wants sue them.


----------



## Joe T (Apr 5, 2003)

Seattlepop said:


> Focus on this statement: "...the pivot point has now been moved back in line with the dovetail location. *This pivot point on most other bows is on the leading edge of the pocket*." How can the grip PP be on the leading edge of a riser? The subject is ILF, not grip or reflex/deflex.


Can't believe this one is still running. The statement in blue is correct. Hoyt moved the point where the limb loads onto the limb pocket back to the dowel (dovetail location). The statement in red is misleading. With the traditional ILF the limb loaded onto the floor of the limb pocket somewhere between the dovetail location and the edge of the limb pocket. The limb surface was curved so that at the point of loading the floor pocket was tangential to the limb curve. What is possible (have seen one case) is where you put a limb designed to load at the dovetail in an older riser designed to load on the limb floor, if you wind the tiller bolts out far enough the riser can load over the edge of the limb pocket. If the limb pocket has a sharp edge it can cut into the limb. The bit about failure due to increased strain I don't get. Seems very unlikely/


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

Seattlepop said:


> Keep at it and I think it will come to you. I think you need to read the warning and thread more carefully.
> 
> If you took a moment to look at any bow you have, you would see that there couldn't be any line drawn from either point through the grip pivot point. We are simply not conditioned to think of a pivot point as anything other than the grip. But, these are the Brits...I think they're still PO'd at us.
> 
> ...


I suppose I could be wrong. Been known to happen once in a while. Equivocation on "pivot point." :embara:


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Seattle, how do you see the "warning" by Alt. Services to be "anti-Hoyt?" I just see it as a typical CYA move by them, that's all.

And it's true, that sometimes one brand's limbs will get stuck in another brand's risers, and vice-versa. But I've not seen any combination that couldn't be worked out with a proper limb bolt adjustment, bow string wax or a touch of sanding in the fork. Limbs aren't punched out of plate steel or CNC'd to .00001" tolerances - they are laid up by hand and painted and coated one at a time. So there's always going to be a few that don't fit perfectly, no matter who the manufacturer is. 

And while we love to talk about the ILF as some kind of "standard" - It's really just a guideline. So, people should know this ahead of time.

John


----------



## Seattlepop (Dec 8, 2003)

limbwalker said:


> Seattle, how do you see the "warning" by Alt. Services to be "anti-Hoyt?" I just see it as a typical CYA move by them, that's all.
> 
> And it's true, that sometimes one brand's limbs will get stuck in another brand's risers, and vice-versa. But I've not seen any combination that couldn't be worked out with a proper limb bolt adjustment, bow string wax or a touch of sanding in the fork. Limbs aren't punched out of plate steel or CNC'd to .00001" tolerances - they are laid up by hand and painted and coated one at a time. So there's always going to be a few that don't fit perfectly, no matter who the manufacturer is.
> 
> ...


I think their claims are too specific to be simple CYA. What guarantee does Alternative provide for which they must CYA? I'm sure Lancaster would like to know. 

The issues you describe have been discussed and are universal. They are also not part of the Alternative warning. The warning says (pre-Formula) Hoyt risers are not ILF fitting: "...this is no longer the case". It says if you try to attached non-Hoyt limbs to a Hoyt riser they may be mis-aligned and may even break. If nothing else, this thread has shown that not one of these three claims is true and are in fact, blatantly false. 

Has Alternative made blatantly false claims against any other manufacturer?


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

My bad. I didn't read the whole warning then, or else they've changed it since I saw it last. However, did you know that Hoyt ILF limbs are not generally the same dimensions as most other ILF limbs? The differences are subtle, but they are enough to cause the problems mentioned. But that's true for any manufacturer that doesn't follow the "standard" closely, so they shouldn't have singled Hoyt out in that case, but rather have said simply that there is variation in the ILF standard from one manufacturer to the next, and buyer beware if they mix and match.

John


----------



## Chinese Tea (Mar 17, 2010)

Just my 2 cents.

Hoyt has done 3 things with the introduction of the hardlock dowel system:
1: change the pivot point of the limbs closer inline to the dovetail
2: move the actual limb farther away from the limb bolt (look at the point of contact of the dovetail to the riser of a matrix riser with old vs new dovetails)
3: changed to aluminum limb bolts vs stainless steel

I hear that there were issues with the aluminum bolt heads breaking off, which to me substantiates Alternative's claims. Since then Hoyt has supposedly made the aluminum bolts thicker to compensate for this and indeed, haven't heard of any recent stories of bolts breaking.

This may potentially be related to different positions of contact of the limb fork on the bolt head, exacerbated by #2 and changing standards.
i.e. the farther the contact of the fork is from the center of the bolt, the more leverage it has in snapping it off.

*Has anyone observed a difference in the distance between the edge of the dovetail and the limb fork in Hoyt vs non-Hoyt limbs?*
*Does any other manufacturer of ILF risers use aluminum instead of steel limb bolts?*


----------



## Seattlepop (Dec 8, 2003)

Chinese Tea said:


> Just my 2 cents.
> 
> Hoyt has done 3 things with the introduction of the hardlock dowel system:
> 1: change the pivot point of the limbs closer inline to the dovetail


So what? If you have read the entire thread, please explain where this has been shown to a problem. 



Chinese Tea said:


> 2: move the actual limb farther away from the limb bolt (look at the point of contact of the dovetail to the riser of a matrix riser with old vs new dovetails)


Totally irrelevant to the false claims made by Alternative, and worse...you are doing as they did, taking a design mod and inventing a problem. Shame on you.



Chinese Tea said:


> 3: changed to aluminum limb bolts vs stainless steel
> 
> I hear that there were issues with the aluminum bolt heads breaking off, which to me substantiates Alternative's claims. Since then Hoyt has supposedly made the aluminum bolts thicker to compensate for this and indeed, haven't heard of any recent stories of bolts breaking.


Substantiates in what way? There is nothing in Alternatives claims that even remotely addresses any issues with limb bolts. There are no claims by Alternative that would be resolved by changing to steel from aluminum bolts even if their claims were true which they are not. Their claims are blatantly false, and you are defending Alternative with a total non-sequiter. "My car pulls to the left"..."Oh, you should try premium gas". 



Chinese Tea said:


> This may potentially be related to different positions of contact of the limb fork on the bolt head, exacerbated by #2 and changing standards.
> i.e. the farther the contact of the fork is from the center of the bolt, the more leverage it has in snapping it off.


Snapping off? I'm sorry, I missed that report. Are you claiming there is an actual problem with limbs "...snapping" off? Like Alternative, you are guilty of pure invention. 



Chinese Tea said:


> Has anyone observed a difference in the distance between the edge of the dovetail and the limb fork in Hoyt vs non-Hoyt limbs?[/B]


And your point is....?

I can see the change between early dowels and the newer (2004?) dowels. That means there was about 2 or 3 mm change in Hoyt risers. To make a valid point, you would have to show how this matters not only to Hoyt risers, but also by comparison to all risers by measuring all risers to see if there are any fluctuations in that distance. Are all ILF risers exactly the same in this regard? And if there were 2 or 3 mm difference in this measurement can you explain how this would validate or invalidate Alternatives claims? 

Most importantly, you do understand that the limb cut out "U" at the end of the limb does not need to make "contact" against the bolt by the bottom of the "U"? In fact, if I'm not mistaken, there must be some space there in order to move up and down the limb bolt. In other words, there can be a difference in that particular measurement, within limits of course, and still be perfectly compatible with the ILF style limb. 



Chinese Tea said:


> *Does any other manufacturer of ILF risers use aluminum instead of steel limb bolts?*


Hoyt doesn't. I can't speak for other brands. 

Ok, I'm done with this. 

a. Thank you to AT for providing me with a soap box 
b. You can have my Hoyt riser when you pry it from my c.....
c. Alternative needs to address the use of blatantly false claims against Hoyt ILF risers. 
d. So there.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> You can have my Hoyt riser when you pry it from my c.....


I have felt the same way about my Axis in the past. But I will have to say that blind brand loyalty is the sign of a closed mind.


----------



## Biggsy (Dec 8, 2012)

Hoyt doesn't. I can't speak for other brands. 

Ok, I'm done with this. 

a. Thank you to AT for providing me with a soap box 
b. You can have my Hoyt riser when you pry it from my c.....
c. Alternative needs to address the use of blatantly false claims against Hoyt ILF risers. 
d. So there. [/QUOTE]

Do you work for Hoyt?


----------



## toj (Aug 22, 2012)

Seattlepop said:


> So what? If you have read the entire thread, please explain where this has been shown to a problem.


This is a problem when using hoyt limbs in a win & win carbon riser, the limb contacts the pockets of the riser and not the shims and soon wears through the paint and starts digging into the carbon causing the bow alignment to change.
Not a big issue but an issue non the less and though I can't see why anyone would use hoyt limbs in a win & win riser I'm sure someone has at some point.


----------



## Boltsmyth (Nov 16, 2002)

Well when I wanted to work on my form I borrowed a set of lighter Samick limbs from my buddy. I put them in my Aerotec riser and fired off a shot. The arrow hit gold but the limbs hit the floor. I returned them to him with profuse apologies.


----------



## Velvetme (Apr 12, 2012)

toj said:


> This is a problem when using hoyt limbs in a win & win carbon riser, the limb contacts the pockets of the riser and not the shims and soon wears through the paint and starts digging into the carbon causing the bow alignment to change.
> .


I've been trying to follow this post since I too have a brand new horizon pro, with the new Grand Prix limbs, but they are also horribly mangled at this pivot point. The paint and dent are indeed clearly visible. My old SF cheap limbs did not get these marks on the original horizon riser and hardly even on the new "pro". Jury appears out as to how damaging this is, but my 400$ purchase is now very cosmetically damaged, I am less than happy and it seems apparent that even with new limbs I will suffer this unappealing side effect. They are 32 lbs and let out several turns, not ready to crank them down but hopefully nothing catastrophic happens


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

How does the bow look when it's strung? 

Who cares what the parts look like when they are disassembled.


----------



## Seattlepop (Dec 8, 2003)

limbwalker said:


> I have felt the same way about my Axis in the past. But I will have to say that blind brand loyalty is the sign of a closed mind.


Agree totally. My "fingers" comment was meant tongue in cheek. My PSE Expressions are a great match for my Matrix. Personally, it would be a hard choice for me right now between the GMX and the PSE X-Appeal. Seemingly equal in quality and performance, the choice would come down to dowel/washer system vs. micro adjustable lateral screws.



toj said:


> This is a problem *when using hoyt limbs in a win & win carbon riser*, the limb contacts the pockets of the riser and not the shims and soon wears through the paint and starts digging into the carbon causing the bow alignment to change.
> Not a big issue but an issue non the less and though I can't see why anyone would use hoyt limbs in a win & win riser I'm sure someone has at some point.


Not sure if your problem is W&W riser or Hoyt limbs. I don't know enough about W&W carbon risers to understand how the limb could showing wear other than from the two pivot points discussed in this thread. Maybe you could educate us (well me anyway) on their carbon risers? 



Boltsmyth said:


> Well when I wanted to work on my form I borrowed a set of lighter Samick limbs from my buddy. I put them in my Aerotec riser and fired off a shot. The arrow hit gold but the limbs hit the floor. I returned them to him with profuse apologies.


I had to change the detente spring in my Samicks to hold them in place, but only when snapping the limbs into the pocket. The stock spring was too weak. They were fine after that. I've never had a problem when they are strung. 



Velvetme said:


> I've been trying to follow this post since I too have a brand new horizon pro, with the new Grand Prix limbs, but they are also horribly mangled at this pivot point. The paint and dent are indeed clearly visible. My old SF cheap limbs did not get these marks on the original horizon riser and hardly even on the new "pro". Jury appears out as to how damaging this is, but my 400$ purchase is now very cosmetically damaged, I am less than happy and it seems apparent that even with new limbs I will suffer this unappealing side effect. They are 32 lbs and let out several turns, not ready to crank them down but hopefully nothing catastrophic happens


So you are saying that mixing brands was actually better? Hmmmm. Send a note to Alternative. 

My G3's had the most noticeable indentation from the sharp pocket edge, but others not so much. I attribute it to excess clear coat or they were shaped differently. Once settled in, which took just a few sessions, they were great.

^Like John says...


----------



## Seattlepop (Dec 8, 2003)

The new Sky riser...anyone care to guess where the pivot point is? Seems to be half way between the dove-tail bushing and the limb pocket edge. Note also the radical pocket slope would prevent the limb from ever touching/pivoting on the pocket edge. Just shows there are many ways to approach this without need for panic. 

http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=1591410&d=1360518707&thumb=1


----------



## toj (Aug 22, 2012)

This photo (shamelessly stolen from another site, sorry) shows where the dove tail is and where the shims are








The shims were introduced following an alignment problem where early risers would twist during the cooling process. There are photos around where a substantial amount of paint & material is missing from the area around the red line when non win & win limbs have been used. Your bow could function fine like this but it may not.
At the very least I doubt it would do your warranty any favours.

You could say it's win & wins fault you could say it was hoyts, personally I don't care for the who's and why's but it is important people know there is a potential issue there.


----------



## Joe T (Apr 5, 2003)

Seattlepop said:


> The new Sky riser...anyone care to guess where the pivot point is? Seems to be half way between the dove-tail bushing and the limb pocket edge. Note also the radical pocket slope would prevent the limb from ever touching/pivoting on the pocket edge. Just shows there are many ways to approach this without need for panic.


Quite an elegant design and look to the limb pocket. The pocket "slope" is hardly radical. My 10 year old Samick master has the same arrangement, though not so long!


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

seattle / Joe, we had to design in that sloped limb pocket to accomodate a full release of the limb bolt because the earlier versions of the riser (Vic's, Rod's, Brady's and my prototypes) had a pinch point at the end of the limb pocket that I didn't find out about until it caused my limbs to fail at the 2nd leg of the trials. Talk about finding out the hard way... UGH. And then Brady told me about it - a day too late - and mentioned how he had taken a file to his limb pockets to prevent that very issue. So we just solved the problem by beveling the limb pocket. However, there may be some fine tweaking still to go on that feature. A more gentle slope would slow down the wear, I think. Lots of ways to go with it, as you can see from the W&W riser above. None are deal breakers, except for the old prototype geometry that caused my limbs to fail. Glad we caught that when we did though.

John


----------



## KINDRED (Jun 21, 2012)

Having such a hard time tracking down some xt4000 limbs for my 06 ultratec...what other limbs would you recommend?


----------

