# Hey Nuts & Bolts? Please explain the No Cam System.



## Hidden Danger (Mar 13, 2008)

Will you please give me your take on the No Cam? I know you can explain the system to me so I will have a better understanding of it. If you're not to busy that is.

Thanks. HD


----------



## goodoleboy11 (Apr 23, 2013)

This thread is probably going to get trolled hard. But I would definitely be interested to see what he thinks about it.


----------



## Hidden Danger (Mar 13, 2008)

goodoleboy11 said:


> This thread is probably going to get trolled hard. But I would definitely be interested to see what he thinks about it.


Trolls will be .............................................................................well trolls.


----------



## goodoleboy11 (Apr 23, 2013)

hidden danger said:


> Trolls will be .............................................................................well trolls.


Damn right!


----------



## KimberTac1911 (Feb 27, 2012)

Curiosity killed the cat. Tagged


----------



## Simpleiowaguy (Jan 10, 2011)

tagged


----------



## Alpha Burnt (Sep 12, 2005)

I'm not Nuts and Bolts, but, from what I can see it looks like the AVS with round string side vs the typical Monster, MR, Chill style cam. In essence, a Elite GTO without the lean in my opinion.


----------



## nuts&bolts (Mar 25, 2005)

hidden danger said:


> Will you please give me your take on the No Cam? I know you can explain the system to me so I will have a better understanding of it. If you're not to busy that is.
> 
> Thanks. HD


the cables are in a X-configuration.
You have a double pulley, on each axle.
Pulley on the left side of the cams is for the TRAPPED end loop...with the sleeve.
Pulley on the right side of the cams, same diameter, is for the PEG END of the control cables (#1 and #2).

So,
with a criss-cross arrangement for the cables, you have a balanced load on the ends of the axles...(should be little to zero cam lean at full draw).

Pulleys appear to be exactly 1/3rd the diameter of the cams
so at rest,
the axle is positioned at the 2/3rds point....from the axle to the 3-o'clock position of the cam.


----------



## BMWrider (Sep 26, 2014)

Would also like to hear his take, but hope Nuts&Bolts is staying focused on his DVD. Lots of us are very anxious to see it released.


----------



## nuts&bolts (Mar 25, 2005)

Alpha Burnt said:


> I'm not Nuts and Bolts, but, from what I can see it looks like the AVS with round string side vs the typical Monster, MR, Chill style cam. In essence, a Elite GTO without the lean in my opinion.


Correct,
the NO Cam is an evolution of the AVS system.

Mathews added the *criss cross for the two control cables*, to balance out the axles, for close to ZERO cam lean (depends if the cable guard is a flex system or not).
The criss cross is VERY smart.

HOWEVER,
with a criss-cross arrangement for the two control cables,
then,
the HEAVY SLEEVES had to be added,
cuz the cable guard PULLS the criss cross cables SIDEWAYS,
and this is why the SLEEVE on the end servings.

The Ratio of the pulley diameter versus NO CAM diameter (large diameter) controls the letoff percentage.

The pulleys for the cables appears to be exactly 1/3rd the diameter of the NO CAM diameter.

So,
the engineering is SIMPLE on the surface, just round wheels inside round wheels,
but,
the offset axle for the pulley/bearing 
WHERE you drill the axle is the secret to the engineering....how far away the hole for the axle....the amount of offset, from the CENTER of the bearing,
controls the letoff.


----------



## nuts&bolts (Mar 25, 2005)

BMWrider said:


> Would also like to hear his take, but hope Nuts&Bolts is staying focused on his DVD. Lots of us are very anxious to see it released.


Working on Chapter 27, Target Panic.

Modding a spring with some silicone rubber, to stiffen the spring,
so waiting for the air curing rubber to finish curing.

If this doesn't work, I have heavier springs ordered and in the mail, from McMaster CARR.


----------



## Hidden Danger (Mar 13, 2008)

nuts&bolts said:


> Correct,
> the NO Cam is an evolution of the AVS system.
> 
> Mathews added the criss cross for the two control cables, to balance out the axles, for close to ZERO cam lean (depends if the cable guard is a flex system or not).
> ...


What are the benefits of such a system?


----------



## Hidden Danger (Mar 13, 2008)

People have stated that it's basically 30 year old tech. Is this true? Does this system suggest perfect level nock travel?


----------



## nuts&bolts (Mar 25, 2005)

hidden danger said:


> What are the benefits of such a system?


Round wheels,
offset drilled center bearing (AVS system)
criss cross cables...(combined with a pulley on the left of the cam, and a pulley on the right of the cam) SHOULD give you ZERO cam lean...

but,
criss cross cables will have the cables in the way of your arrow,
so you need the cable guard (some type of cable guard system)
to pull the cables, the criss-cross intersection OUT of the way of your arrow.

So,
when you pull the CRISS cross cables SIDEWAYS to get out of the way of your arrow,
the END servings of the control cables are gonna RUB on the edge of the cams,
soooo that's why you see the HEAVY sleeves. Lots of LOW friction plastics, to make the SLEEVES super slippery.

So,
even with the cable guard system,
the criss cross system allows you to dial in a ZERO or VERY NEAR ZERO cam lean, at full draw.

You can think of the criss cross cables as a SUPER DUPER long YOKE leg system,
where INSTEAD of putting the end loops on the VERY VERY ENDS of the axles...

you now attach the SUPER DUPER long yoke legs (two control cables) to the MIDDLE thirds of the axle,
PULLEY on the LEFT and PULLEY on the RIGHT of the top axle

PULLEY on the LEFT and PULLEY on the RIGHT of the bottom axle.


----------



## nuts&bolts (Mar 25, 2005)

hidden danger said:


> People have stated that it's basically 30 year old tech. Is this true? Does this system suggest perfect level nock travel?


Far from it.

The engineering LOOKS simple,
cuz we have what LOOKS like a WHEEL bow.

Well,
WHEEL bows 30 years ago
were NOT using a criss cross control cable system.

DIFFERENCE #1.

The WHEEL bows,
or even the FOUR cam bows....

you had FOUR cams
and pigtail cables (metal wire cables).

So,
this is not a 4 cam system,
and
this is TECHNICALLY not a wheel bow either,
cuz...

of the 2nd GEN AVS system...the OFF-center drilled bearing.


----------



## goodoleboy11 (Apr 23, 2013)

Haha wow, hopefully the idiots spewing all their bs read this thread. This is probably the most accurate bow I've shot. Just can't get used to the draw. Thanks for your info again Alan


----------



## nuts&bolts (Mar 25, 2005)

hidden danger said:


> People have stated that it's basically 30 year old tech. Is this true? Does this system suggest perfect level nock travel?


From a cam designer perspective,
a CLASSIC single cam bow.....is a compromise,
cuz you have the OBLONG CAM on the bottom (FIXED draw length single cams)
and
you have ONE SIZE of idler wheel.

THIS IS a HUGE technical problem,
from an ENGINEER's perspective.

For TRULY level nock travel,
you need a CUSTOM idler wheel for EACH FIXED draw length cam size.

Soooo,
what REALLY happens,
is you get ONE SIZE of idler wheel
for ALL SIZES of the FIXED draw length single cam
and then...

you COMPENSATE with tiller and moving the d-loop HIGHER or LOWER on the bowstring,
to balance the loads on the UPPER and LOWER limbs...to get as CLOSE as you can to LEVEL nock travel..
the HIGHER you move a d-loop on a bowstring,
for ANY bow...single cam, hybrid cam, binary cam, overdrive cam, AVS cam.....

the HIGHER you move the d-loop up a bowstring,
the HARDER you pull on the top axle, top limb.

So,
as you go from the SHORTEST FIXED draw length single cam, to the LONGEST FIXED draw length single cam....

if the IDLER wheel is the SAME diameter for ALL fixed draw length SINGLE cams (Mathews Apex 7)...

then,
you have a compromised design, for LEVEL nock travel.


----------



## nuts&bolts (Mar 25, 2005)

hidden danger said:


> People have stated that it's basically 30 year old tech. Is this true? Does this system suggest perfect level nock travel?


YES,
perfectly level nock travel SHOULD be possible with this design,
cuz of the perfect symmetry.



Berger holes are dead center,
so
if you put the d-loop DEAD LEVEL (not nock end high)

and adjust the stabilizer system to what WORKS for you

dead level nock travel should be pretty easy to tune.


----------



## kanga (Dec 8, 2009)

Excellent explanation N & B's. I add a smear of Scorpion Venom Cross Bow Rail Lube to the edge of the cams and guard for extra slip. Works well and lasts a long time. Have you shot the bow yet? Iv'e been shooting bows for over 30 years, many, many brands and many, many bows and the 'No Cam' is the best to date.


----------



## BuckshutrJR (Feb 21, 2011)

Tagged


----------



## aarowbuster (May 25, 2014)

Reading this has practically sold me on it. Will be trying one this weekend.


----------



## Crapshot (Oct 18, 2013)

So Alan, whats your thoughts on this bow? Do you feel this is the way forward for bows, very innovative, and effective?


----------



## Hidden Danger (Mar 13, 2008)

nuts&bolts said:


> YES,
> perfectly level nock travel SHOULD be possible with this design,
> cuz of the perfect symmetry.
> 
> ...


Thanks for taking the time to explain this Mr. Alan. Your response puts to rest the incorrect info that some are willing to post about this design so that they may proceed with their own agendas. I'm pretty sure there were/are a few misinformed archers out there that have been led to believe that this was not new tech or that it was strictly a marketing ploy. I may just have to get one.


----------



## DMAX-HD (Jan 30, 2005)

nuts&bolts said:


> Round wheels,
> offset drilled center bearing (AVS system)
> criss cross cables...(combined with a pulley on the left of the cam, and a pulley on the right of the cam) SHOULD give you ZERO cam lean...
> 
> ...


The one I shot today did have chafing on the lower sleeve so there must be contact?


----------



## Arrowflingr (Sep 16, 2014)

Like it or not, they need to figure out how to get more speed out of it for it to catch on to the masses. Speed sells!! Especially if they're charging $1200 for it!


----------



## Beastmaster (Jan 20, 2009)

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=10154732550085411


----------



## nuts&bolts (Mar 25, 2005)

kanga said:


> Excellent explanation N & B's. I add a smear of Scorpion Venom Cross Bow Rail Lube to the edge of the cams and guard for extra slip. Works well and lasts a long time. Have you shot the bow yet? Iv'e been shooting bows for over 30 years, many, many brands and many, many bows and the 'No Cam' is the best to date.


The ENGINEERING behind this design caught my eye.

Since I borrowed a 70 lb OverDrive cam bow for the DVD
and was only able to drop it to 65 lbs.....

I seriously TWEAKED my release shoulder...(it's been months)
so

very tempting to test drive it.


----------



## nuts&bolts (Mar 25, 2005)

Crapshot said:


> So Alan, whats your thoughts on this bow? Do you feel this is the way forward for bows, very innovative, and effective?


VERY innovative.
VERY interesting.

Some serious engineering thinking...out of the box thinking
went into this bow.


----------



## nuts&bolts (Mar 25, 2005)

DMAX-HD said:


> The one I shot today did have chafing on the lower sleeve so there must be contact?


I'm guessing you can play with cable lengths (by the half twist)
and try and center up the cams in between the space of the criss cross cables
to minimize contact.

Kanga says in Post #19
to add some Scorpion Venom lube to the sleeves to minimize any friction.


----------



## ohio.bow.addict (Mar 25, 2013)

Arrowflingr said:


> Like it or not, they need to figure out how to get more speed out of it for it to catch on to the masses. Speed sells!! Especially if they're charging $1200 for it!


They are not. Nearly everyone that has bought one on here and the shops local to me are selling them right with the price of every other flagship bow. Maybe some shops are selling it for more but if people are paying that they should shop a little more.


----------



## vince71969 (Apr 17, 2004)

nuts&bolts said:


> I'm guessing you can play with cable lengths (by the half twist)
> and try and center up the cams in between the space of the criss cross cables
> to minimize contact.


String track lean is adjusted by bushings that the axles ride on.


----------



## LeEarl (Jun 1, 2002)

BUT, there is still an issue with this system just like all 2 cam bows.


----------



## Boubou (May 15, 2010)

Arrowflingr said:


> Like it or not, they need to figure out how to get more speed out of it for it to catch on to the masses. Speed sells!! Especially if they're charging $1200 for it!


So YOU say


----------



## nuts&bolts (Mar 25, 2005)

vince71969 said:


> String track lean is adjusted by bushings that the axles ride on.


The design is very interesting to me.

These bushings....how many sizes to choose from?

thin, medium, wide?
or are you adding shims (spacers) at the thousandths level?


----------



## vince71969 (Apr 17, 2004)

Arrowflingr said:


> Like it or not, they need to figure out how to get more speed out of it for it to catch on to the masses. Speed sells!! Especially if they're charging $1200 for it!


The HTR was designed for comfortable shooting. This technology could easily be used to build speed bows as well.


----------



## Hidden Danger (Mar 13, 2008)

nuts&bolts said:


> VERY innovative.
> VERY interesting.
> 
> Some serious engineering thinking...out of the box thinking
> went into this bow.


.
I know I have never seen anything quite like it before. Vince posted a graph of the draw force curve and I don't see how it could be anything but smooth.


----------



## nuts&bolts (Mar 25, 2005)

LeEarl said:


> BUT, there is still an issue with this system just like all 2 cam bows.


"Center pull-ish" design.
Pivot point of the grip has been moved below center.

MOST other 2 cam bows (mirror images) have the berger holes above center.

CENTER pull design (put the berger holes in the physical middle point of the bow ATA
takes care of LOTS of "2 cam issues"
and
also introduces a different set of challenges due to COG (center of gravity).


----------



## whack n stack (Dec 23, 2007)

hidden danger said:


> .
> I know I have never seen anything quite like before. Vince posted a graph of the draw force curve and I don't see how it could be anything but smooth.


I agree. The dfc looked great.


----------



## WCH (Aug 1, 2006)

That's why I think Nuts & Bolts is one of (if not the best) to learn from on this website. Great information as always.


----------



## Hidden Danger (Mar 13, 2008)

LeEarl said:


> BUT, there is still an issue with this system just like all 2 cam bows.


????


----------



## Andrew99 (Dec 18, 2010)

Always enjoy nuts and bolts knowledge. Thanks for your contribution to this site.


----------



## stehawk (Aug 28, 2004)

nuts&bolts said:


> "Center pull-ish" design.
> center.
> 
> CENTER pull design (put the berger holes in the physical middle point of the bow ATA
> ...


What are the different challenges you speak of? Thanks in advance:darkbeer:


----------



## Hidden Danger (Mar 13, 2008)

nuts&bolts said:


> VERY innovative.
> VERY interesting.
> 
> Some serious engineering thinking...out of the box thinking
> went into this bow.


Is this a type of binary system? It does have cams doesn't it?


----------



## vince71969 (Apr 17, 2004)

hidden danger said:


> Is this a type of binary system? It does have cams doesn't it?


A binary system synchronizes by wrapping/unwrapping a cable. This system synchronizes by using force vectors.


----------



## Arrowflingr (Sep 16, 2014)

vince71969 said:


> The HTR was designed for comfortable shooting. This technology could easily be used to build speed bows as well.


Then I wouldn't be surprised to see them do this next year. The first thing all the guys I know, who are not on AT by the way, asked me when I bought my new bow was "how fast does it shoot"? I'll bet if archery shops did a poll asking what is the first spec you look at on a bow....IBO speed would be #1


----------



## Hidden Danger (Mar 13, 2008)

vince71969 said:


> A binary system synchronizes by wrapping/unwrapping a cable. The AVS system synchronizes by using force vectors.


So it's not a binary system. I sure am glad to know there are guys out there like Alan and yourself who are more than willing to help us understand what's really going on. Too many Lay-Z-Boy tuners these days to get a real honest answer most of the time. Thank you.


----------



## whack n stack (Dec 23, 2007)

hidden danger said:


> So it's not a binary system. I sure am glad to know there are guys out there like Alan and yourself who are more than willing to help us understand what's really going on. Too many Lay-Z-Boy tuners these days to get a real honest answer most of the time. Thank you.


In essence, its like the dyad avs cousins. Its not a binary. Bowtech OD cams are not binary by definition either. Vary similar when you look closely at both systems.

The HTR/TRG cams don't pay out and take up cables as say an Elite 2 track. The cables orbit on the bearings to produce the levered cam action.


----------



## Hidden Danger (Mar 13, 2008)

Mr.On said:


> In essence, its like the dyad avs cousins. Its not a binary. Bowtech OD cams are not binary by definition either. Vary similar when you look closely at both systems.
> 
> The HTR/TRG cams don't pay out and take up cables as say an Elite 2 track. The cables orbit on the bearings to produce the levered cam action.


I understand.


----------



## nuts&bolts (Mar 25, 2005)

NOT exactly 1/3 symmetry.
Probably to fine tune the letoff percentage.


----------



## ArcherXXX300 (Apr 22, 2013)

Very interesting....


----------



## nuts&bolts (Mar 25, 2005)

hidden danger said:


> Is this a type of binary system? It does have cams doesn't it?


The round wheels with the offset drilled bearing
does what a traditional center drilled bearing cam does...(the usual shape for traditional cams).


----------



## fletched (May 10, 2006)

hidden danger said:


> Is this a type of binary system? It does have cams doesn't it?


It is a binary cam system. The cables go from cam to cam, cam to cam and are locked into a figure 8 configuration. The no-cam is a nice looking system that is designed well. It addresses cam lean and is a new approach that others haven't used.


----------



## Whaack (Apr 2, 2006)

Excellent read. Thx Alan for your contributions


----------



## jewalker7842 (Aug 15, 2011)

Thanks for the write up and explanation Alan. It really clears stuff up on this bow. Thanks again!


----------



## Sagittarius (May 22, 2002)

Thanks from me too, Alan. :thumbs_up
Your knowledge is supreme here on AT !


----------



## IRISH_11 (Mar 13, 2004)

Arrowflingr said:


> Like it or not, they need to figure out how to get more speed out of it for it to catch on to the masses. Speed sells!! Especially if they're charging $1200 for it!


Sad but true. Speed does sell and yes the masses want speed. This is what is so unfortunate about archery. The masses just don't know a darn thing when it comes to shooting a bow. The top archers in the world have made their money shooting 290 fps or less. Speed is something the manufacturers conjured up and brain washed everyone into thinking it would help them shoot better. The simpletons in archery don't realize that physics will never be denied. To get speed you have to compromise something. Rather you compromise brace height or force draw curve you are sacrificing something.

Nuts and bolts please explain to the feable minds of AT about transfer of energy from the bow to the arrow and that just because a particular arrow is shooting faster out of the bow at point blank range that there is loss off energy dependent on the mass of the arrow. The same arrow that shot 330 at point blank may be down to 270 at 40 yards where as a different bow with a different arrow shooting 310 at point blank may still be 280 at 40yards. Don't hold me to these numbers they are just for examples. But I digress to having shot hundreds if not thousands of arrows through chronographs at 40 and 50 yards. And yes my chronograph has the arrow holes to prove it. Lol. I know that just because one bow is faster at point blank does not mean that a bow that chronos slower at point blank is not faster down range or should I say decelerates at a slower rate than the one that was faster.


----------



## aebennett (Sep 28, 2011)

Interesting thread. Thanks for the explanation guys.


----------



## Hidden Danger (Mar 13, 2008)

IRISH_11 said:


> Sad but true. Speed does sell and yes the masses want speed. This is what is so unfortunate about archery. The masses just don't know a darn thing when it comes to shooting a bow. The top archers in the world have made their money shooting 290 fps or less. Speed is something the manufacturers conjured up and brain washed everyone into thinking it would help them shoot better. The simpletons in archery don't realize that physics will never be denied. To get speed you have to compromise something. Rather you compromise brace height or force draw curve you are sacrificing something.
> 
> Nuts and bolts please explain to the feable minds of AT about transfer of energy from the bow to the arrow and that just because a particular arrow is shooting faster out of the bow at point blank range that there is loss off energy dependent on the mass of the arrow. The same arrow that shot 330 at point blank may be down to 270 at 40 yards where as a different bow with a different arrow shooting 310 at point blank may still be 280 at 40yards. Don't hold me to these numbers they are just for examples. But I digress to having shot hundreds if not thousands of arrows through chronographs at 40 and 50 yards. And yes my chronograph has the arrow holes to prove it. Lol. I know that just because one bow is faster at point blank does not mean that a bow that chronos slower at point blank is not faster down range or should I say decelerates at a slower rate than the one that was faster.


But you're not comparing apples to apples. A 400 gr arrow will always be faster down range out of 330 ibo bow vs a 310 ibo bow at the same draw length. Once the arrow leaves the bow the only thing to affect the arrow's speed is drag and momentum.


----------



## Hidden Danger (Mar 13, 2008)

Most of the guys I know are not trying to shoot as fast as possible. Speed bows gives us the ability to shoot heavier arrows faster than bows whose ibo is much less.


----------



## fletched (May 10, 2006)

IRISH_11 said:


> Sad but true. Speed does sell and yes the masses want speed. This is what is so unfortunate about archery. The masses just don't know a darn thing when it comes to shooting a bow. The top archers in the world have made their money shooting 290 fps or less. Speed is something the manufacturers conjured up and brain washed everyone into thinking it would help them shoot better. The simpletons in archery don't realize that physics will never be denied. To get speed you have to compromise something. Rather you compromise brace height or force draw curve you are sacrificing something.
> 
> Nuts and bolts please explain to the feable minds of AT about transfer of energy from the bow to the arrow and that just because a particular arrow is shooting faster out of the bow at point blank range that there is loss off energy dependent on the mass of the arrow. The same arrow that shot 330 at point blank may be down to 270 at 40 yards where as a different bow with a different arrow shooting 310 at point blank may still be 280 at 40yards. Don't hold me to these numbers they are just for examples. But I digress to having shot hundreds if not thousands of arrows through chronographs at 40 and 50 yards. And yes my chronograph has the arrow holes to prove it. Lol. I know that just because one bow is faster at point blank does not mean that a bow that chronos slower at point blank is not faster down range or should I say decelerates at a slower rate than the one that was faster.


Heavier arrows retain more momentum and loose less down range speed.

The htr speed isn't a problem with me but the brace height is lower than what I like. If they could have gotten the same speed with a 7+ brace height, it would be more appealing to me.


----------



## IRISH_11 (Mar 13, 2004)

hidden danger said:


> But you're not comparing apples to apples. A 400 gr arrow will always be faster down range out of 330 ibo bow vs a 310 ibo bow at the same draw length. Once the arrow leaves the bow the only thing to affect the arrow's speed is drag and momentum.



Cmon HD don't complicate things. Lol......in a perfect world you are correct. BUT two identical 330 bows shot side by side with the same 400 grain arrow will not necessarily chrono the same at 40 yds. 

BUT, BUT....

only if both bows are tuned identical, and fired identical would you see the same results. A bow that is tuned so the power stroke is directly in line with the shaft and has good nock travel in all axis will always transfer energy more efficiently than one that is not tuned to such a degree. This is why the No Cam IS the most sought after bow in late 2014 and 2015 bar none.


----------



## kanga (Dec 8, 2009)

nuts&bolts said:


> The ENGINEERING behind this design caught my eye.
> 
> Since I borrowed a 70 lb OverDrive cam bow for the DVD
> and was only able to drop it to 65 lbs.....
> ...


Sorry to hear about the shoulder Alan. I have partial rotator cuff tears (old injuries) on both shoulders, however the draw cycle on the No-Cam is the easiest I've felt to date. Of course the feel of a draw cycle on any given bow, can be hell to some and heaven to others. I do recommend giving it a go Alan and I would love to hear your take on it and I don't think I'm alone on that request LOL!


----------



## IRISH_11 (Mar 13, 2004)

Have you shot one yet?





fletched said:


> Heavier arrows retain more momentum and loose less down range speed.
> 
> The htr speed isn't a problem with me but the brace height is lower than what I like. If they could have gotten the same speed with a 7+ brace height, it would be more appealing to me.


----------



## TheTracker (Sep 11, 2009)

Arrowflingr said:


> Then I wouldn't be surprised to see them do this next year. The first thing all the guys I know, who are not on AT by the way, asked me when I bought my new bow was "how fast does it shoot"? I'll bet if archery shops did a poll asking what is the first spec you look at on a bow....IBO speed would be #1


Not around me it wouldnt, maybe 5-10% of the shooters at all the 3d shoots i attended had speed bows. And their bowhunters for the most part.


----------



## nuts&bolts (Mar 25, 2005)

IRISH_11 said:


> Sad but true. Speed does sell and yes the masses want speed. This is what is so unfortunate about archery. The masses just don't know a darn thing when it comes to shooting a bow. The top archers in the world have made their money shooting 290 fps or less. Speed is something the manufacturers conjured up and brain washed everyone into thinking it would help them shoot better. The simpletons in archery don't realize that physics will never be denied. To get speed you have to compromise something. Rather you compromise brace height or force draw curve you are sacrificing something.
> 
> Nuts and bolts please explain to the feable minds of AT about transfer of energy from the bow to the arrow and that just because a particular arrow is shooting faster out of the bow at point blank range that there is loss off energy dependent on the mass of the arrow. The same arrow that shot 330 at point blank may be down to 270 at 40 yards where as a different bow with a different arrow shooting 310 at point blank may still be 280 at 40yards. Don't hold me to these numbers they are just for examples. But I digress to having shot hundreds if not thousands of arrows through chronographs at 40 and 50 yards. And yes my chronograph has the arrow holes to prove it. Lol. I know that just because one bow is faster at point blank does not mean that a bow that chronos slower at point blank is not faster down range or should I say decelerates at a slower rate than the one that was faster.


Aerodynamics
turbulent flow
laminar flow
trailing vortices

Starting speed is interesting
but
you have losses due to the aerodynamics

some things fly through the air more easily
some things fly through the air less easily

so,
the terminal velocity downrange...(longer distances) may not be what you expect.


----------



## nuts&bolts (Mar 25, 2005)

IRISH_11 said:


> Cmon HD don't complicate things. Lol......in a perfect world you are correct. BUT two identical 330 bows shot side by side with the same 400 grain arrow will not necessarily chrono the same at 40 yds.
> 
> BUT, BUT....
> 
> only if both bows are tuned identical, and fired identical would you see the same results. A bow that is tuned so the power stroke is directly in line with the shaft and has good nock travel in all axis will always transfer energy more efficiently than one that is not tuned to such a degree. This is why the No Cam IS the most sought after bow in late 2014 and 2015 bar none.


My DVD might help a little with that.

hehehehehehehe.


----------



## 573mms (Jan 23, 2014)

I don't usually shoot a speed bow at a 3d shoot but you can bet when I go hunting I will be and shooting a heavy arrow. If I'm looking for a bow for 3d shoots its going to be longer with more brace height!


----------



## fletched (May 10, 2006)

IRISH_11 said:


> Have you shot one yet?


I am a lefty. Shooting one won't be an option for a while. But the brace height is still lower than I like for a hunting bow. The reason I would shoot a sub 7 brace height is to gain more performance. I typically stay above 7 inches. I have a near 30 inch draw so I don't suffer in performance. I would be interested in how I would get along with the lower grip design as well.


----------



## weekender21 (Jan 27, 2012)

Excellent review, thanks for your perspective on the new bow Alan. Lots of misinformation going on about this bow for some reason. I've shot a demo No Cam HTR twice and can't wait to get one of my own!


----------



## salmon killer (Jun 19, 2011)

Thanks Nuts and bolts!


----------



## IRISH_11 (Mar 13, 2004)

fletched said:


> I am a lefty. Shooting one won't be an option for a while. But the brace height is still lower than I like for a hunting bow. The reason I would shoot a sub 7 brace height is to gain more performance. I typically stay above 7 inches. I have a near 30 inch draw so I don't suffer in performance. I would be interested in how I would get along with the lower grip design as well.


Lower grip position is a non issue due to the geometry of the riser design. Do you honestly believe that the folks at Mathews didn't consider every off the cuff concern you mentioned. Mathews has been perfecting this for the last five years and every option was heavily considered. Is this the bow for you? Only you can answer that. I am curious as to why you consider a sub 7" brace height as a negative thing? I believe Jesse Broadwater won some big world target shoot this year shooting a Hoyt pro comp elite fx which has a 6.5" brace height. Trust me the pros who are fortunate enough to have had an opportunity to put this bow to the test have had nothing but great things to say. How the bow aims and how forgiving it is were the two most commented on characteristics of this bow.


----------



## goodoleboy11 (Apr 23, 2013)

weekender21 said:


> Excellent review, thanks for your perspective on the new bow Alan. Lots of misinformation going on about this bow for some reason. I've shot a demo No Cam HTR twice and can't wait to get one of my own!


It's for a reason lol. Majority of members on this site have some kind of strong, hateful vendetta against mathews. They've actually came out with the only game changing bow out of everyone this year and the haters/fanboys are rabid over it. Well they are rabid over every mathews release but especially this one lol


----------



## OHIOARCHER36 (Oct 12, 2010)

See where this one goes .


----------



## Core Archery (Jun 26, 2011)

Ill just chime in every month or so and say I told you so to the guys who say its just a wheel bow and 1980 wants their bow back. Its anything but, just as I have said from the day it was released.


----------



## fletched (May 10, 2006)

IRISH_11 said:


> Lower grip position is a non issue due to the geometry of the riser design. Do you honestly believe that the folks at Mathews didn't consider every off the cuff concern you mentioned. Mathews has been perfecting this for the last five years and every option was heavily considered. Is this the bow for you? Only you can answer that. I am curious as to why you consider a sub 7" brace height as a negative thing? I believe Jesse Broadwater won some big world target shoot this year shooting a Hoyt pro comp elite fx which has a 6.5" brace height. Trust me the pros who are fortunate enough to have had an opportunity to put this bow to the test have had nothing but great things to say. How the bow aims and how forgiving it is were the two most commented on characteristics of this bow.


As I stated, I have a near 30"draw length and do not need a lower brace height bow. I prefer a 7+ brace height bow and a longer ata bow. I have owned many different bows and found what works best for me. I don't view low brace height bows as a negative, just not a necessity. If I shot a lower brace height bow, it would be for the performance it offers. If it doesn't offer above average performance, I see no advantages in shooting it. 
As for the lower grip design, it has been done before. Most bows are designed to split the difference between the grip and the arrow for a reason, they feel better. The fact that it took Mathews 5 years to perfect the design shows that having a low grip can be a tough obstacle to overcome. I haven't shot the no-cam yet so I can't really say if I would like the geometry or not. I do like the cam design and think Mathews will do well with it. I have never been a fan of the Mathews grip but the no-cam grip might feel better.


----------



## IRISH_11 (Mar 13, 2004)

fletched said:


> As I stated, I have a near 30"draw length and do not need a lower brace height bow. I prefer a 7+ brace height bow and a longer ata bow. I have owned many different bows and found what works best for me. I don't view low brace height bows as a negative, just not a necessity. If I shot a lower brace height bow, it would be for the performance it offers. If it doesn't offer above average performance, I see no advantages in shooting it.
> As for the lower grip design, it has been done before. Most bows are designed to split the difference between the grip and the arrow for a reason, they feel better. The fact that it took Mathews 5 years to perfect the design shows that having a low grip can be a tough obstacle to overcome. I haven't shot the no-cam yet so I can't really say if I would like the geometry or not. I do like the cam design and think Mathews will do well with it. I have never been a fan of the Mathews grip but the no-cam grip might feel better.


Just go all in and order a TRG 7


----------



## fletched (May 10, 2006)

IRISH_11 said:


> Just go all in and order a TRG 7


I will stick with my specialist. It has better specs. Plus I live in the hills. If I laid the round wheel bow down, it might roll down to the bottom of the hill. lol


----------



## IRISH_11 (Mar 13, 2004)

fletched said:


> I will stick with my specialist. It has better specs. Plus I live in the hills. If I laid the round wheel bow down, it might roll down to the bottom of the hill. lol


Specialist is a sweet rig that many a bow were designed around.


----------



## whack n stack (Dec 23, 2007)

fletched said:


> It is a binary cam system. The cables go from cam to cam, cam to cam and are locked into a figure 8 configuration. The no-cam is a nice looking system that is designed well. It addresses cam lean and is a new approach that others haven't used.


If it's a binary, then so is a Mathews monster, chill or Bowtech OD cam bow.

It's a modified dual can!!!!!


----------



## sneak1413 (Aug 15, 2007)

So Alan I have not read but only the first page on this thread, but how much different as far as setup, tuning, and shooting is this system compared to the bowtech admiral and captain? Both have crisscrossing cables on either side of cam, both have very near round string track, both have no yokes. The take up cable track is bigger(takes up more string) due to the let out side of the cable letting out more than the avs system does. Am I correct in seeing two very similar cam systems with one being slightly modified for looks of a no cam and slight modification of the cable tracks to accommodate a different limb angle, deflection and preload?


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

The module controls letoff (by setting the distance from the cable to the axle at full draw as in all other systems). The AVS contribution is in "slaving". 

This is effectively an evolution of the AVS MR type cams (binary). I think they could've done better on providing clearance to prevent cable rubbing on the cam and the need for the protective sleeves that call the system into question. They did do a good job eliminating the load transition from string-to-cable track that causes cam lean in virtually all other systems...but it is no more tunable for horizontal nock travel conditions than any other (and there will be cases of it).


----------



## stehawk (Aug 28, 2004)

tmorelli said:


> The module controls letoff (by setting the distance from the cable to the axle at full draw as in all other systems). The AVS contribution is in "slaving".
> 
> This is effectively an evolution of the AVS MR type cams (binary). I think they could've done better on providing clearance to prevent cable rubbing on the cam and the need for the protective sleeves that call the system into question. They did do a good job eliminating the load transition from string-to-cable track that causes cam lean in virtually all other systems...but it is no more tunable for horizontal nock travel conditions than any other (and there will be cases of it).


Hummm, I really wanta see where this takes us.


----------



## griffwar (Nov 15, 2012)

tmorelli said:


> The module controls letoff (by setting the distance from the cable to the axle at full draw as in all other systems). The AVS contribution is in "slaving".
> 
> This is effectively an evolution of the AVS MR type cams (binary). I think they could've done better on providing clearance to prevent cable rubbing on the cam and the need for the protective sleeves that call the system into question. They did do a good job eliminating the load transition from string-to-cable track that causes cam lean in virtually all other systems...but it is no more tunable for horizontal nock travel conditions than any other (and there will be cases of it).


I have not seen any cable rubbing yet.


----------



## Whaack (Apr 2, 2006)

griffwar said:


> I have not seen any cable rubbing yet.


All of the HTR's I have seen and mine personally have a minimum of 1/8" clearance. I have shot mine about 50x and there is no rubbing or wear. I think the sleeve is purely extra protection. If you take the sleave off there is close to 3/16-1/4" clearance on mine.


----------



## jim p (Oct 29, 2003)

It looks like you need to pull the cams to replace the cables. I guess that you adjust the cables from the end that is not split. It looks like the cable stops allow just a little give which I like.

How do you change draw lengths?


----------



## bigracklover (Feb 1, 2008)

Very good explanation of the system.


----------



## nuts&bolts (Mar 25, 2005)

sneak1413 said:


> So Alan I have not read but only the first page on this thread, but how much different as far as setup, tuning, and shooting is this system compared to the bowtech admiral and captain? Both have crisscrossing cables on either side of cam, both have very near round string track, both have no yokes. The take up cable track is bigger(takes up more string) due to the let out side of the cable letting out more than the avs system does. Am I correct in seeing two very similar cam systems with one being slightly modified for looks of a no cam and slight modification of the cable tracks to accommodate a different limb angle, deflection and preload?




Any cam system is about the sizes of the METAL thingies
any cam system is about the cable angles

LOOK closely at the cable angles...this is out of the box thinking. Nearly all OTHER cam systems, involve the BIG pulley (for the bowstring)
and then a TINY pulley for the cables (on one cam) and then a PEG on the outside perimeter of the other cam. I added colored lines so you can see the TYPICAL BEND
in the cables for nearly ALL other cam systems.

The NO CAM system is out of the box engineering thinking
and the cable angles are near VERTICAL (see colored lines).

With near VERTICAL cable angles, you have near ZERO letoff
but
when you combine the near VERTICAL cable angles with the offset drilled BEARING,
NOW you have something that has never been done before.

The shapes LOOK simple
the symmetry is fairly OBVIOUS...round circle inside a round circle....

but offset drilling the bearing is GENIUS...

and the little details in the SIZE of the bearing, versus the SIZE of the main pulley...and WHERE you position the offset drilled bearing....

THESE percentages....



I have COLOR coded the offsets...this is where a GREAT DEAL of engineering was performed...(LOTS of math on a computer)
and/or LOTS and LOTS of prototype work.

When I was in medical devices, working on experimental artificial discs...for the human neck,
SIMILAR types of questions and research and design are going on...albeit at a machine shop rated for medical grade sterilization methods, etc...

but,
LOTS of computer time,
LOTS of what if THIS...LOTS of what if THAT

sketches by hand on a white board,
then, computer sketches in 2D, then in 3D

what if we use THIS size and shape
what if we use THAT size and shape

then,
somebody SMART asks why do we ALWAYS drill the bearing in the MIDDLE...

someone else says, cuz IT HAS ALWAYS Been DONE THAT WAY....

so, somebody says WHAT HAPPENS IF......

The BEST engineering designs,
are the ones that LOOK simple, have the LEAST number of parts, to get the JOB done.

Mathews.
Well done.


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

griffwar said:


> I have not seen any cable rubbing yet.


I have. And there were several other reports of the same thing.


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

The AVS "ring" has been offset in all the MR cams has it not? Maybe I'm wrong here but I don't think this is the "new" part of this system. 

...wait, here is an image from a google search.










So...... again, the AVS is slaving in the same way as the orbital path of the yoke terminations on an Overdrive Binary. Not determining letoff. The module does that. I don't see any earth shattering developments in this cam. It is an evolution of the Monster/MR/Chill cams is all.... and I'm not saying that to be critical or a "hater". They did a great thing by putting relatively equal loads on both sides of the string track. They made it so that you don't have to pull the cams to change the cables. I still say they could've pretty easily created some more cable clearance off the cam.


----------



## ron w (Jan 5, 2013)

as i said earlier, it's simply a bow that derives it's compound advantage from only the cable side of the energy transfer. those big round wheels smooth out the draw cycle because you don't "feel" the hump when it is only coming from the cable profile.


----------



## Norwegian Woods (Apr 23, 2006)

The big and only interesting question for me is if people really will notice a difference in accuracy and shoot better with this than any other high end bows with higher IBO/ATA from the other bow makers?


----------



## bigbear123456 (Apr 8, 2011)

tagged


----------



## BowhunterCliffy (Feb 19, 2007)

Norwegian Woods said:


> The big and only interesting question for me is if people really will notice a difference in accuracy and shoot better with this than any other high end bows with higher IBO/ATA from the other bow makers?


I'm with you. My exact question as well. Time will tell.


----------



## weekender21 (Jan 27, 2012)

Norwegian Woods said:


> The big and only interesting question for me is if people really will notice a difference in accuracy and shoot better with this than any other high end bows with higher IBO/ATA from the other bow makers?


I'm sure the No Cam cable/string/"no cam" engineering will aid in accuracy but Mathews has other accuracy enhancing features on this bow. The near vertical riser is one of the most overlooked features IMO. That feature will make this bow more shootable for the average archer.


----------



## kanga (Dec 8, 2009)

Norwegian Woods said:


> The big and only interesting question for me is if people really will notice a difference in accuracy and shoot better with this than any other high end bows with higher IBO/ATA from the other bow makers?


I most definitely have, but the predominant aspect of placing the arrow where the archer wants it to go, is HOW the archer performs! All I can say, is go and try one. For anyone with shoulder issues, the draw cycle is sensational. IMO, and I've read several reviews where people hated the draw cycle, it would only be a problem for those who are over bowed.


----------



## bghunter7777 (Aug 14, 2014)

Great post thanks for the information and kudos to Mathews for stepping up to the plate with a next generation bow.


----------



## rohpenguins (Dec 2, 2012)

I have shot one and it felt similar to any other bow but with no noticeable hump. I get the round wheel concept but offset drilling the cams makes it draw off the center of the axis. So there can't be zero travel because at some point during the draw cycle the cams are off center. I really don't see this a big difference from a lobed AVS system just with the lob of the cam built into the offset of the axel. Either way I''ll pass just like I did on the solo cam and order a chill X just wish they had a 38 inch ATA.


----------



## Ault (Mar 29, 2011)

Well this is the best no cam thread yet. Defiantly makes me like that design more


----------



## griffwar (Nov 15, 2012)

tmorelli said:


> I have. And there were several other reports of the same thing.


Well I haven't and there is several other report's of it not rubbing, one on this page and a lot more elsewhere.


----------



## Norwegian Woods (Apr 23, 2006)

weekender21 said:


> I'm sure the No Cam cable/string/"no cam" engineering will aid in accuracy but Mathews has other accuracy enhancing features on this bow. The near vertical riser is one of the most overlooked features IMO. That feature will make this bow more shootable for the average archer.


I always have a patient mind when it comes to "new" innovations and let others try out the totally new thing and let them spend their money on that.
Then if it really is the best ever, I might consider to buy one next year 
I feel the same with the new Prodigy with the Powershift. 
Looks like a great idea, but only time will tell for sure.

The only thing I really don't like about the "No Cam" is the protective sleeves on the cables.
Maybe it will not be an issue, but I am not convinced.
There must be a better solution than having a sleeve rubbing against the cams.

For now I have ordered a Nitrum LD, but I am not ruling out the No Cam or the Powershift when I am buying my next bow, but I will see how they will do this next year


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

griffwar said:


> Well I haven't and there is several other report's of it not rubbing, one on this page and a lot more elsewhere.


Ok. I didn't mean to give you the impression that I really cared. I tried to give them props on what I see as the positives of the design and point out what I see as a negative.


----------



## Norwegian Woods (Apr 23, 2006)

griffwar said:


> Well I haven't and there is several other report's of it not rubbing, one on this page and a lot more elsewhere.


There clearly are a rather large number of bows where the sleeve is rubbing against the cam and there are a large number of bows where it is not.
I am not good enough about bows to know why it rubs on some and not on others.
There clearly is a difference between the bows.
Maybe *nuts&bolts* can explain this.


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

....varying degrees of cam lean. Adjust/tune via limb deflections, shimming or cable lengths... like most other bows (at least non-BT bottom cams on split limbs).


----------



## Whaack (Apr 2, 2006)

I can say this, if during my time with the bow I noticed the cables rubbing on the cam I would not have bought the bow. That wold annoy me. Every bow at the shop I bought mine had plenty of clearance and all three that were set up to demo had plenty of clearance. I know, I checked them all.


----------



## sneak1413 (Aug 15, 2007)

weekender21 said:


> I'm sure the No Cam cable/string/"no cam" engineering will aid in accuracy but Mathews has other accuracy enhancing features on this bow. The near vertical riser is one of the most overlooked features IMO. That feature will make this bow more shootable for the average archer.


Bingo! If you ever shot an older PSE with same limb and riser geometry you would know that they are stupid forgiving. And on top of all of this the no cam system still functions the same as the original center pivot bows. Symmetrical cams top and bottom, cables that route on either side of the cam/string and letoff that comes from the cable track. Letoff does not come from the offset bearing/pulley. If that was the case 30" draw length would have substantially more letoff than a 26" draw length due to the avs portion not rotating completely over yielding the letoff.


----------



## Norwegian Woods (Apr 23, 2006)

tmorelli said:


> ....varying degrees of cam lean. Adjust/tune via limb deflections, shimming or cable lengths... like most other bows (at least non-BT bottom cams on split limbs).


I thought this bow didn't have any form of cam lean 
Isn't that the whole point of the system?


----------



## sneak1413 (Aug 15, 2007)

kanga said:


> I most definitely have, but the predominant aspect of placing the arrow where the archer wants it to go, is HOW the archer performs! All I can say, is go and try one. For anyone with shoulder issues, the draw cycle is sensational. IMO, and I've read several reviews where people hated the draw cycle, it would only be a problem for those who are over bowed.


This can be said for every single bow on the market.


----------



## vince71969 (Apr 17, 2004)

jim p said:


> It looks like you need to pull the cams to replace the cables. I guess that you adjust the cables from the end that is not split. It looks like the cable stops allow just a little give which I like.
> 
> How do you change draw lengths?


You do not have to remove the string tracks to replace anything.


----------



## vince71969 (Apr 17, 2004)

tmorelli said:


> ....varying degrees of cam lean. Adjust/tune via limb deflections, shimming or cable lengths... like most other bows (at least non-BT bottom cams on split limbs).


Incorrect. None of what you mentioned is how you adjust string track lean on these bows.


----------



## sneak1413 (Aug 15, 2007)

vince71969 said:


> Incorrect. None of what you mentioned is how you adjust string track lean on these bows.


Please eighteen us. How do you adjust cam lean/horizontal nock travel on these bows?


----------



## vince71969 (Apr 17, 2004)

FYI.......

There are some people on this thread and others (not going to single anyone out) that are pointing out both positive and negative attributes of this system and what they entail. Just about all of them are dead wrong in what they're saying. That's to be expected with a system people aren't familiar with but the problem is people are reading these threads and taking them as gospel.

Alan is doing a fine job explaining what he can.


----------



## vince71969 (Apr 17, 2004)

sneak1413 said:


> Please eighteen us. How do you adjust cam lean/horizontal nock travel on these bows?


The axles ride on bushings of varying sizes that fit into the limbs. This is how you adjust string track lean. 

I would imagine that anyone who saw a demo bow with a string track rubbing had these removed from the dealer and incorrectly reinstalled.


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

vince71969 said:


> The axles ride on bushings of varying sizes that fit into the limbs. This is how you adjust string track lean.
> 
> I would imagine that anyone who saw a demo bow with a string track rubbing had these removed from the dealer and incorrectly reinstalled.


Your Bushings....my shims...what do you think they do exactly? Reposition the load, or reload the limb...either way.

...limb deflections...cable lengths...they are also options. 

This bow is nothing new. It isn't magical. 
Come back at me with some general understanding Vince and watch who you're saying doesn't understand. 

FYI, the bow I saw rubbing, I saw unboxed on arrival.


----------



## frog gigger (May 4, 2007)

vince71969 said:


> The axles ride on bushings of varying sizes that fit into the limbs. This is how you adjust string track lean.
> 
> I would imagine that anyone who saw a demo bow with a string track rubbing had these removed from the dealer and incorrectly reinstalled.


Now why would a dealer take these out??


----------



## frog gigger (May 4, 2007)

tmorelli said:


> Your Bushings....my shims....limb deflections...cable lengths.
> 
> This bow is nothing new. It isn't magical.
> Come back at me with some general understanding Vince and watch who you're saying doesn't understand.
> ...


Careful morelli, that's blasphemy worthy of the basher label. :wink:


----------



## vince71969 (Apr 17, 2004)

frog gigger said:


> Now why would a dealer take these out??


There have been some that are tinkering with it because it's new without looking at the tech sheets. Nothing wrong with curiosity. I just recently helped a dealer in my area with this same scenario.


----------



## sneak1413 (Aug 15, 2007)

vince71969 said:


> The axles ride on bushings of varying sizes that fit into the limbs. This is how you adjust string track lean.
> 
> I would imagine that anyone who saw a demo bow with a string track rubbing had these removed from the dealer and incorrectly reinstalled.


The axle rides on bushings? Like plastic bushings that are known to wear out on old bows? If you use a smaller bushing does that mean there is slop in the axle/limb? Not quite understanding you here. Spacers of varying widths that you can swap from left to right is normal, but the axle does not ride on these nor do they fit into the limbs...at least on almost every other bow made in the last many years.


----------



## vince71969 (Apr 17, 2004)

tmorelli said:


> Your Bushings....my shims...what do you think they do exactly? Reposition the load, or reload the limb...either way.
> .


The shifting of the string track loads the limb. 

You're right. It's nothing magical. But it's also not old technology rehashed.


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

Norwegian Woods said:


> I thought this bow didn't have any form of cam lean
> Isn't that the whole point of the system?


It isn't a knock against the bow. It is a fact of life. The reveered OK Archery bows are going to have some cam lean if they aren't tuned not to. 

The limbs aren't all perfect. There is at least some tolerance. 
The limb pockets aren't all perfect.
The rocker pads aren't all perfect.
The assembly line.....etc, etc, etc.

This system applies load to both sides of the axle very well (~equally) and throughout the draw cycle. This stops or at least manages the transition (the change) we see from brace to full draw. But, it doesn't tune itself. We need to be able to compensate for all those tiny differences whether they be from the factory, the component or the shooter or........? That is where this system clearly doesn't out-do others.


----------



## frog gigger (May 4, 2007)

vince71969 said:


> There have been some that are tinkering with it because it's new without looking at the tech sheets. Nothing wrong with curiosity. I just recently helped a dealer in my area with this same scenario.


Can we see the tech sheet?


----------



## vince71969 (Apr 17, 2004)

sneak1413 said:


> The axle rides on bushings? Like plastic bushings that are known to wear out on old bows? If you use a smaller bushing does that mean there is slop in the axle/limb? Not quite understanding you here. Spacers of varying widths that you can swap from left to right is normal, but the axle does not ride on these nor do they fit into the limbs...at least on almost every other bow made in the last many years.


No. And no slop. Any deviation from one is taken up from another. In the end the specs always remain constant.


----------



## NoDeerInIowa (Mar 5, 2012)

vince71969 said:


> No. And no slop. Any deviation from one is taken up from another. In the end the specs always remain constant.


Unless the wrong size is used.


----------



## vince71969 (Apr 17, 2004)

NoDeerInIowa said:


> Unless the wrong size is used.


Yes. Human error can always come into play.


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

vince71969 said:


> No. And no slop. Any deviation from one is taken up from another. In the end the specs always remain constant.


The axles do not "ride on" bushings. The axles ride inside the limb as do most others. The cams are positioned via shims...and can be adjusted via those same shims.

I'm not sure that you "understand" the system. Maybe you just better let N&B's keep schooling us.


----------



## vince71969 (Apr 17, 2004)

tmorelli said:


> The axles do not "ride on" bushings. The axles ride inside the limb as do most others. The cams are positioned via shims...and can be adjusted via those same shims.
> 
> I'm not sure that you "understand" the system. Maybe you just better let N&B's keep schooling us.


They ride on four of them. 2 inner and 2 outer. 

Alan is more than capable of running things here. If anyone has any questions they can PM me.


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

vince71969 said:


> They ride on four of them. 2 inner and 2 outer.


I'm sorry, but no, they don't. To say they "ride ON" would imply that the shims (aka bushings) are load bearing when they simply serve as a spacers to position the cams between the limbs.





vince71969 said:


> Incorrect. None of what you mentioned is how you adjust string track lean on these bows.


It is how you adjust/manage cam lean on ANY bow that doesn't have yokes. The No-cam is no-different.




vince71969 said:


> FYI.......
> 
> There are some people on this thread and others (not going to single anyone out) that are pointing out both positive and negative attributes of this system and what they entail. Just about all of them are dead wrong in what they're saying. That's to be expected with a system people aren't familiar with but the problem is people are reading these threads and taking them as gospel.


How is that crow today?


----------



## vince71969 (Apr 17, 2004)

tmorelli said:


> I'm sorry, but no, they don't. To say they "ride ON" would imply that the shims (aka bushings) are load bearing when they simply serve as a spacers to position the cams between the limbs.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


They are in fact load bearing.


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

vince71969 said:


> They are in fact load bearing.


Then you are talking about something different because the shims that locate the cam between the axles are doing only that. So, show me.


----------



## griffwar (Nov 15, 2012)

tmorelli said:


> I'm sorry, but no, they don't. To say they "ride ON" would imply that the shims (aka bushings) are load bearing when they simply serve as a spacers to position the cams between the limbs.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Just wondering do you have this bow? have you took it apart and put it back together? where are you getting all this info? are you just getting all this just from looking at the bow?


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

griffwar said:


> Just wondering do you have this bow? have you took it apart and put it back together? where are you getting all this info? are you just getting all this just from looking at the bow?


The shop I shoot in....where I've played with the bows several times. 

Here's a better picture. Can someone show me the load bearing bushings that are used to manipulate cam lean?


----------



## frog gigger (May 4, 2007)

^^^Not unless the shim has a male end protruding into the axle hole.


----------



## griffwar (Nov 15, 2012)

tmorelli said:


> The shop I shoot in....where I've played with the bows several times.
> 
> Here's a better picture. Can someone show me the load bearing bushings that are used to manipulate cam lean?


You've played with them did you work on them?? tore them down? to see how they actually worked? are just playing and looking and then tell people how you think they work?


----------



## ex-wolverine (Dec 31, 2004)

griffwar said:


> Just wondering do you have this bow? have you took it apart and put it back together? where are you getting all this info? are you just getting all this just from looking at the bow?


Hell 
Nuts and bolts was asked to assess the bow and give his theory without ever shooting it , seeing it, measuring it , touching it 

And no one ever questioned his theory on the bow and how it works ..

Just saying


----------



## frog gigger (May 4, 2007)

Park-N-Sons Archery said:


> Hell
> Nuts and bolts was asked to assess the bow and give his theory without ever shooting it , seeing it, measuring it , touching it
> 
> And no one ever questioned his theory on the bow and how it works ..
> ...


It's routine for him to ask those questions. Shop name and phone number will be next.


----------



## rattlinman (Dec 30, 2004)

Good Lord!

As others have already stated, thank you Nuts and Bolts for giving a thorough explanation of this new cam system. For many, including me, it is truly appreciated. :thumbs_up

As far as the DVD, you do know eventually you will have to stop adding stuff and proclaim it as complete....right? I want my DVD :wink:


----------



## nuts&bolts (Mar 25, 2005)

rattlinman said:


> Good Lord!
> 
> As others have already stated, thank you Nuts and Bolts for giving a thorough explanation of this new cam system. For many, including me, it is truly appreciated. :thumbs_up
> 
> As far as the DVD, you do know eventually you will have to stop adding stuff and proclaim it as complete....right? I want my DVD :wink:


Yup.

Wife was a rocket scientist. They have a saying in defense.

"there comes a time when you have to SHOOT the engineer"...design has to stop, and gotta get going on production.

Standard Missile 1. She was involved in the fin design.


----------



## bownazi (Mar 8, 2009)




----------



## bownazi (Mar 8, 2009)




----------



## bownazi (Mar 8, 2009)




----------



## sneak1413 (Aug 15, 2007)

bownazi said:


> View attachment 2098929
> View attachment 2098930
> View attachment 2098931


Well we stand corrected, load bearing bushings.....this is the only part of this bow that is 30+ year old technology. Those will oval out and become wore out just like bushings in cams of years past. May take thousands of shots but being load bearing on a plastic bushing is a big downfall in my personal opinion.


----------



## weekender21 (Jan 27, 2012)

bownazi, Chill x in first picture?


----------



## ron w (Jan 5, 2013)

not ever seeing one of those bows yet, I just wonder, is there maybe a bushing between the axle and the inner race of the bearing for the cable wheel ?. could that be the "load bearing" bushing that he's talking about. sometimes bearings that are the right outside diameter for the application, need an inner bushing, if the OD is large, but the axle is small. they may be using a large gearing to spread load and reduce shock that destroys the bearing, but need to have a bushing to reduce the ID to axle diameter, because no bearing is made with both the right OD and the right ID .
just a thought that might explain the confusion.


----------



## shamlin (Aug 18, 2007)

Hey Nuts and Bolts, if you think the engineering is so awesome on this one, what was your take on the engineering on the Prime cam systems? To me, they cannot compare.


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

bownazi said:


> View attachment 2098929
> View attachment 2098930
> View attachment 2098931


Thanks bownazi. I didn't realize the shims were built into the bushings. Regardless, the varying thickness of the shim portions are how you would adjust cam lean....the load bearing portion of the bushing doesn't change.

Hmmm, I wonder why they'd effectively sleeve the inside of the limb?


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

sneak1413 said:


> Well we stand corrected, load bearing bushings.....this is the only part of this bow that is 30+ year old technology. Those will oval out and become wore out just like bushings in cams of years past. May take thousands of shots but being load bearing on a plastic bushing is a big downfall in my personal opinion.


Yep, I'm eating crow. 

Sorry Vince.... kinda. And that's just me being honest 

I didn't realize we were talking about INSIDE the limb....not between the limbs.


----------



## ron w (Jan 5, 2013)

forget that post, the above pictures clearly show the bearing . it was being posted as I was typing. 
those bushings are in the limb bores.


----------



## nuts&bolts (Mar 25, 2005)

sneak1413 said:


> Well we stand corrected, load bearing bushings.....this is the only part of this bow that is 30+ year old technology. Those will oval out and become wore out just like bushings in cams of years past. May take thousands of shots but being load bearing on a plastic bushing is a big downfall in my personal opinion.


Materials science has come a REALLY REALLY long ways.
Polymer chemistry 30 years ago, versus now, is very different now.


----------



## ron w (Jan 5, 2013)

Hmmm, I wonder why they'd effectively sleeve the inside of the limb? 

shock.


----------



## vince71969 (Apr 17, 2004)

tmorelli said:


> Yep, I'm eating crow.
> 
> Sorry Vince.... kinda. And that's just me being honest
> 
> I didn't realize we were talking about INSIDE the limb....not between the limbs.


No problem. I don't have any issue with you at all. In fact, I like it when people are wrapping their heads around new concepts and ideas. 

Have a great holiday season.


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

ron w said:


> Hmmm, I wonder why they'd effectively sleeve the inside of the limb?
> 
> shock.


Shock? I don't follow you.

Why would they sleeve the limb?


----------



## bownazi (Mar 8, 2009)

weekender21 said:


> bownazi, Chill x in first picture?


2014 ChillR


----------



## Bow Me (Sep 30, 2010)

goodoleboy11 said:


> This thread is probably going to get trolled hard. But I would definitely be interested to see what he thinks about it.





goodoleboy11 said:


> Damn right!





goodoleboy11 said:


> Haha wow, hopefully the idiots spewing all their bs read this thread. This is probably the most accurate bow I've shot. Just can't get used to the draw. Thanks for your info again Alan





goodoleboy11 said:


> It's for a reason lol. Majority of members on this site have some kind of strong, hateful vendetta against mathews. They've actually came out with the only game changing bow out of everyone this year and the haters/fanboys are rabid over it. Well they are rabid over every mathews release but especially this one lol


Calm down, Francis.

Only one troll so far one this thread.


----------



## sneak1413 (Aug 15, 2007)

nuts&bolts said:


> Materials science has come a REALLY REALLY long ways.
> Polymer chemistry 30 years ago, versus now, is very different now.


Very true but I have my doubts that it will strain less or crack less compared to the typical hole in the limb. Not only that but it creates a larger hole in the limb therefore needing more limb material at the tip, creating more mass to retain stretch, or keeping equal mass but reducing durability and increasing the odds of limb failure through the axle holes. Like I have stated in the past, the no cam is nothing new or ground breaking from an industry standpoint, but it was a huge jump from the typical reflexed riser single cam line mathews typically produces. The geometry is proven to be stable by browning/pse and the binary cam is very popular industry wide. Kudos to mathews in those regards but I'm still not sold on plastic bushings being load bearing.


----------



## bownazi (Mar 8, 2009)

sneak1413 said:


> Well we stand corrected, load bearing bushings.....this is the only part of this bow that is 30+ year old technology. Those will oval out and become wore out just like bushings in cams of years past. May take thousands of shots but being load bearing on a plastic bushing is a big downfall in my personal opinion.


They are not plastic...they are aluminum


----------



## goodoleboy11 (Apr 23, 2013)

Bow Me said:


> Calm down, Francis.
> 
> Only one troll so far one this thread.


Luckily you are on my idiot- err ignore list


----------



## TheTracker (Sep 11, 2009)

Bow Me said:


> Calm down, Francis.
> 
> Only one troll so far one this thread.


Congratulations you just trolled him, Now you're a troll.


----------



## bownazi (Mar 8, 2009)

The button head screws in the axles are tightened into the bushings...bushings are tightened into the inner bearing race on both sides...it is O (zero) tolerance... as in no play... as in solid from one screw to the other...when broken down in a bow press....cam is solid with about O end play


----------



## BowhunterCliffy (Feb 19, 2007)

bownazi said:


> View attachment 2098929
> View attachment 2098930
> View attachment 2098931


What is the reasoning behind building the bow with aluminum spacers inside the limbs like this? I guess I am just wondering why Mathews decided to build it this way.
Any advantages or disadvantages? Honest question for those on here who are WAY more knowledgeable than a novice like me.


----------



## bownazi (Mar 8, 2009)

BowhunterCliffy said:


> What is the reasoning behind building the bow with aluminum spacers inside the limbs like this? I guess I am just wondering why Mathews decided to build it this way.
> Any advantages or disadvantages? Honest question for those on here who are WAY more knowledgeable than a novice like me.


It is a split limb that is more solid on the limb tips then a solid limb bow


----------



## LeEarl (Jun 1, 2002)

On the No Cam if one cable stretches more then the other the nock point will change throwing nock travel off. I have found that there is more movement then with standard 2 cam bows. Still an issue as with all other bows. The No Cam is not a 'Perfect' system but there really is nothing out there that is perfect. They all shoot great.


----------



## sneak1413 (Aug 15, 2007)

bownazi said:


> They are not plastic...they are aluminum


Why didn't someone specify that? That eases my mind. Much easier to keep tighter tolerances with a machined aluminum part.


----------



## sneak1413 (Aug 15, 2007)

LeEarl said:


> On the No Cam if one cable stretches more then the other the nock point will change throwing nock travel off. I have found that there is more movement then with standard 2 cam bows. Still an issue as with all other bows. The No Cam is not a 'Perfect' system but there really is nothing out there that is perfect. They all shoot great.


I believe this. With the cables attached closer to the axle, the same amount of stretch will change the cam rotation more. Same thing goes with a larger outside diameter of the cam.


----------



## bownazi (Mar 8, 2009)

tmorelli said:


> Thanks bownazi. I didn't realize the shims were built into the bushings. Regardless, the varying thickness of the shim portions are how you would adjust cam lean....the load bearing portion of the bushing doesn't change.
> 
> Hmmm, I wonder why they'd effectively sleeve the inside of the limb?


You are moving the string track to mirror the top and bottom wheels....and yes it does work...Mathews is also flexing and matching all limbs after flow jet, CNC and robot checking process


----------



## KS Bow Hunter (Nov 22, 2013)

Good thread, and informative.


----------



## nuts&bolts (Mar 25, 2005)

BowhunterCliffy said:


> What is the reasoning behind building the bow with aluminum spacers inside the limbs like this? I guess I am just wondering why Mathews decided to build it this way.
> Any advantages or disadvantages? Honest question for those on here who are WAY more knowledgeable than a novice like me.


IT's a post tensioned system with zero tolerance....

button head screw, so you can SQUEEZE the split limbs and post tension the axle system.
As long as the shoulders have a low friction surface,
a post tensioned beam is lighter in weight, and MUCH stronger than a beam not in tension.

Smart engineering.
I have not seen that before in a bow.

Post tensioned structural systems,
in other industries.


----------



## goodoleboy11 (Apr 23, 2013)

TheTracker said:


> Congratulations you just trolled him, Now you're a troll.


And I'm curious how anything I said was trolling?


----------



## Boubou (May 15, 2010)

Wow, with all the bow engineers and designers on AT, we could make the bow to rule them all, amazing.
Nah, will never happen, people would never stop arguing long enough to actually do something.
Anyways, it's entertaining.


----------



## bownazi (Mar 8, 2009)

weekender21 said:


> bownazi, Chill x in first picture?


I meant 2015 ChillR


----------



## bownazi (Mar 8, 2009)

nuts&bolts said:


> IT's a post tensioned system with zero tolerance....
> 
> button head screw, so you can SQUEEZE the split limbs and post tension the axle system.
> As long as the shoulders have a low friction surface,
> ...



May 2014 ChillX and SDX were the first


----------



## nuts&bolts (Mar 25, 2005)

bownazi said:


> May 2014 ChillX and SDX were the first


Appears Mathews is the first manufacturer to use a tensioned axle.
Impressive.


----------



## FEDIE316 (Dec 27, 2006)

How's the posi-trac in a Plymouth work? It just does. - Joe Dirt
Seriously, I'm sure every part put into this bow went through much R&D, I don't see the point of trying to overthink things.


----------



## bownazi (Mar 8, 2009)

It's funny how Matt's first Mathews bows did not even have Eclips....one side of the axle was knurled...axle ends flush with the outside edge of the limbs and they never came out while shooting...now they are screwed together


----------



## bownazi (Mar 8, 2009)

nuts&bolts said:


> Appears Mathews is the first manufacturer to use a tensioned axle.
> Impressive.


What do you think...I think that the new 2'' AVS system or larger ...along with O tolerance axles... might replace the floating yoke on the DYAD cam....hummmm


----------



## sneak1413 (Aug 15, 2007)

nuts&bolts said:


> Appears Mathews is the first manufacturer to use a tensioned axle.
> Impressive.


Bowtech admiral had it many years ago. And Fyi I'm not a huge bowtech fanboy there are just a ton of similarities.


----------



## nuts&bolts (Mar 25, 2005)

bownazi said:


> What do you think...I think that the new 2'' AVS system or larger ...along with O tolerance axles... might replace the floating yoke on the DYAD cam....hummmm


Much better than an e-clip system. Incremental improvements advancing the industry.


----------



## Bow Me (Sep 30, 2010)

TheTracker said:


> Congratulations you just trolled him, Now you're a troll.


If that is what you think trolling means, that means you trolled me. Troll.


----------



## IRISH_11 (Mar 13, 2004)

Just picked up my HTR today. Local shop has sold 7 now in one week. And the calls keep coming. Even sold a lefty. 

I personally set 2 HTR's up today. The one thing that really stuck out was when I pressed them in the ezy-press. Anyone who has used an ezy-press before has seen bow risers twist and flex when the limbs are compressed. The HTR had no flex at all. I was surprised. 

So mine is a 70# - 28" with 85% rock mods. At 70# with a 353 grain arrow and the 28" 85% let off rock mods the HTR shot 297 fps when ran through the chrono.


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

Can enough tension be applied to this axle (while also compressing the limbs?) to tap into the benefits of a post tension beam type system? What is the torque spec?

It seems the bushings/sleeves, contradict the intent by causing a bore diameter increase without an axle diameter increase. What role do the bushings play? At what benefit vs having more limb material surrounding the bore?


----------



## rhodeislandhntr (Jul 3, 2006)

A quick question on arrows for the nocam, do these cams prefer a weaker or stiffer spine? If I was to shoot a 60# at 27in DL would it tune better with a 400 or 500 spine. I use to shoot an elite judge with more aggressive cams at these specs and used 400s, being a smoother cam is the reason for my question, thanks


----------



## Alpha Burnt (Sep 12, 2005)

tmorelli said:


> Can enough tension be applied to this axle (while also compressing the limbs?) to tap into the benefits of a post tension beam type system? What is the torque spec?
> 
> It seems the bushings/sleeves, contradict the intent by causing a bore diameter increase without an axle diameter increase. What role do the bushings play? At what benefit vs having more limb material surrounding the bore?


I am not sure on the axle torque spec or the tensioning aspect talked about. The advantages of using aluminum bushings and a smaller axle diameter would be weight savings in my opinion. Smaller diameter ball bearings would be another advantage. The lighter the limb tips are, should result in more speed. I would have to think they would be quicker if one was to remove the strengthening "pillow blocks" on the end of each limb as well.


----------



## griffwar (Nov 15, 2012)

frog gigger said:


> It's routine for him to ask those questions. Shop name and phone number will be next.


Yeah froggie proved you were not being very truthful.


----------



## IRISH_11 (Mar 13, 2004)

tmorelli said:


> Can enough tension be applied to this axle (while also compressing the limbs?) to tap into the benefits of a post tension beam type system? What is the torque spec?
> 
> It seems the bushings/sleeves, contradict the intent by causing a bore diameter increase without an axle diameter increase. What role do the bushings play? At what benefit vs having more limb material surrounding the bore?



Beats the heck out of me T. All I can say is I have shot every manufacturers products at one time or another in my days. I am an experienced archer who knows what I like in a bow. I like a bow that aims well. I like a bow that tunes well. The HTR thus far seems to have these qualities. Only time will tell. The super long stiff riser design does something. What that something is and how it works is beyond my feable mind. To me it aims better than most target bows I have shot and I have shot them all. The bow seems to like just about any arrow you throw at it. The bow seems to hold solid well after the shot meaning I have not experienced any of bobs and weaves with this bow. For myself the bow has more positives than negatives. Will I shoot better scores with this bow or tighter groups? Who know? Do I expect to shoot better because I have this bow? Absolutely not. Again I liked the draw cycle and how well the bow points as well as the little to no bow reaction when the shot breaks.


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

Alpha Burnt said:


> I am not sure on the axle torque spec or the tensioning aspect talked about. The advantages of using aluminum bushings and a smaller axle diameter would be weight savings in my opinion. Smaller diameter ball bearings would be another advantage. The lighter the limb tips are, should result in more speed. I would have to think they would be quicker if one was to remove the strengthening "pillow blocks" on the end of each limb as well.


Yep...but vs no bushing, no over-bore, standard axle, no pillar block?.... I'm left thinking those pillar blocks are playing more of a role in strengthening the limb tip than I realized. 

I'm intrigued anyway. Props to Mathews for making me think about it.

Irish, I thought they did a good job overall. And the bow did seem very stable and definitely quiet. I'm not sure that the round string tracks provide any real benefit though.


----------



## TheTracker (Sep 11, 2009)

Bow Me said:


> If that is what you think trolling means, that means you trolled me. Troll.


Trolling is instigating and harrassing someone or posting useless **** which is exactly what you did. Congrats.


----------



## IRISH_11 (Mar 13, 2004)

tmorelli said:


> Yep...but vs no bushing, no over-bore, standard axle, no pillar block?.... I'm left thinking those pillar blocks are playing more of a role in strengthening the limb tip than I realized.
> 
> I'm intrigued anyway. Props to Mathews for making me think about it.
> 
> Irish, I thought they did a good job overall. And the bow did seem very stable and definitely quiet. I'm not sure that the round string tracks provide any real benefit though.


I you get a chance set one up and shoot a Vegas round. Let me know what you think. I'm with you on the round string tracks. I think the riser geometry and the grip in relation to where the limb bolts are located has more to do with what I am noticing.


----------



## Bow Me (Sep 30, 2010)

TheTracker said:


> Trolling is instigating and harrassing someone or posting useless **** which is exactly what you did. Congrats.


And what he and yourself are doing is different? Please explain.

I am enjoying this thread otherwise, though. Lots of information.


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

IRISH_11 said:


> I you get a chance set one up and shoot a Vegas round. Let me know what you think. I'm with you on the round string tracks. I think the riser geometry and the grip in relation to where the limb bolts are located has more to do with what I am noticing.


Yeah, I've always valued riser geometry over the brace height spec itself. Ive shot the HTR enough to know that the riser is exceptionally rigid. 

I'd have to have a very dark, very secluded basement or a vacant field range in a state where no one knows me and a friend with a TRG in 30" draw to make any real judgments


----------



## griffwar (Nov 15, 2012)

Park-N-Sons Archery said:


> Hell
> Nuts and bolts was asked to assess the bow and give his theory without ever shooting it , seeing it, measuring it , touching it
> 
> And no one ever questioned his theory on the bow and how it works ..
> ...


Yeah but nut's&bolts was not arrogant about it, and he had to eat a big plateful of crow.


----------



## TheTracker (Sep 11, 2009)

Bow Me said:


> And what he and yourself are doing is different? Please explain.
> 
> I am enjoying this thread otherwise, though. Lots of information.


Its very simple, You were saying remarks which you knew would draw a arguement or backlash out of him and were none the less calling him a troll, What you failed to realize is that you yourself were trolling him without even being aware you were doing it, Pot calling the kettle black.


----------



## Hidden Danger (Mar 13, 2008)

Man , some of you guys got "SERVED". Epic!!


----------



## IRISH_11 (Mar 13, 2004)

tmorelli said:


> Yeah, I've always valued riser geometry over the brace height spec itself. Ive shot the HTR enough to know that the riser is exceptionally rigid.
> 
> I'd have to have a very dark, very secluded basement or a vacant field range in a state where no one knows me and a friend with a TRG in 30" draw to make any real judgments


I have heard Reyes is liking his TRG.


----------



## griffwar (Nov 15, 2012)

hidden danger said:


> man , some of you guys got "served". Epic!!


lol


----------



## kanga (Dec 8, 2009)

sneak1413 said:


> Well we stand corrected, load bearing bushings.....this is the only part of this bow that is 30+ year old technology. Those will oval out and become wore out just like bushings in cams of years past. May take thousands of shots but being load bearing on a plastic bushing is a big downfall in my personal opinion.


No offence, but you give the impression you'd be happy to see this bow explode into a thousand pieces.


----------



## frog gigger (May 4, 2007)

griffwar said:


> Yeah froggie proved you were not being very truthful.


:nono::nono: Sorry you feel that way griffie. I'm not the one that posted speeds from the HTR @ 70# and 14 grains light. 
Think I'll add that quote to my sig line just for you.


----------



## TheTracker (Sep 11, 2009)

kanga said:


> no offence, but you give the impression you'd be happy to see this bow explode into a thousand pieces.


x2.....


----------



## Hidden Danger (Mar 13, 2008)

TheTracker said:


> x2.....


Some people just can't stand to see Mathews succeed.


----------



## sneak1413 (Aug 15, 2007)

kanga said:


> No offence, but you give the impression you'd be happy to see this bow explode into a thousand pieces.


Not meant that way at all. I'm just looking at what is posted, thinking about it and analyzing it. The bow is a huge step for mathews and I think it is great they are pursuing a different design. They took a lot of really good technology and wrapped it into one bow. If the performance was there and the grip was not so low wrist I would be interested in one. Due to an old wrist injury I cannot shoot a lie wrist grip without severe pain after a decent amount of shooting. I love the rider/limb geometry, love the fact that the cables run on both sides of the cam to minimize cam lean due to cable load, I like that it is modular adjustable. It is very quiet and vibe free. Tons of great aspects of the bow and with new info on the bushings being aluminum instead of plastic, that part of the bow does not bother me anymore. They took a great pse platform, used bowtechs bolt in axle system, combined their own avs system to a binary cam and split the cable track on either side of the string like bowtech did and made a sweet shooting bow. Now if they make one shoot a legit 345+ ibo and give it a more high wrist grip next year and I may be looking at my first mathews since 2006.


----------



## nontypical (Jan 4, 2004)

Isn't the simple answer that its an eccentric and thus not a cam. Round wheels with the axle not dead center is an eccentric. New way to do old technology.


----------



## mikehoyme (Nov 3, 2012)

nontypical said:


> Isn't the simple answer that its an eccentric and thus not a cam. Round wheels with the axle not dead center is an eccentric. New way to do old technology.


Seriously? We're back to this again?


----------



## griffwar (Nov 15, 2012)

frog gigger said:


> :nono::nono: Sorry you feel that way griffie. I'm not the one that posted speeds from the HTR @ 70# and 14 grains light.
> Think I'll add that quote to my sig line just for you.


Really froggie after I shut you down that one thing is all you got after you lied to Me I told you the speed I got with a 410 grain arrow. I gave you all the specs you said you could do that at 55# i called you on it, then you say o i meant with a 335 grain arrow well duh, apples to apples frog man. Then you say this bow better be great I'm going to shoot it tomorrow, O did I forget to mention that you had not even shot it yet and your kicking it in the dirt, like anyone would take anything you say about it seriously after you bad mouthed it from day one. Yeah I told you the speed shooting a 14 grain arrow under ibo I see it on here all the time, I also told you what it shot at 28 inch draw 85% let off 70# with a 410 grain arrow if you forgot 284 7 times 283 once. Someone finally told Me what you shoot and there is no way in hell it would do 285 with everything you said it had on the string not even close. After I posted My findings you get on there and post 276 lol I doubt it's getting that. So froggie whatever I don't like people who are not truthful so I'm threw talking with you. O I forgot I asked for the spec's on your bow like 11 times and you would not tell Me, because you knew it could not do what you said it was doing. It took someone else to tell Me what bow you were shooting, and then you get on there and say 276 lol, untruthful.


----------



## fletched (May 10, 2006)

IRISH_11 said:


> Beats the heck out of me T. All I can say is I have shot every manufacturers products at one time or another in my days. I am an experienced archer who knows what I like in a bow. I like a bow that aims well. I like a bow that tunes well. The HTR thus far seems to have these qualities. Only time will tell. The super long stiff riser design does something. What that something is and how it works is beyond my feable mind. To me it aims better than most target bows I have shot and I have shot them all. The bow seems to like just about any arrow you throw at it. The bow seems to hold solid well after the shot meaning I have not experienced any of bobs and weaves with this bow. For myself the bow has more positives than negatives. Will I shoot better scores with this bow or tighter groups? Who know? Do I expect to shoot better because I have this bow? Absolutely not. Again I liked the draw cycle and how well the bow points as well as the little to no bow reaction when the shot breaks.


Have you measured the ata at brace height and then at full draw? I am curious to know how much the limbs move.


----------



## kanga (Dec 8, 2009)

sneak1413 said:


> Not meant that way at all. I'm just looking at what is posted, thinking about it and analyzing it. The bow is a huge step for mathews and I think it is great they are pursuing a different design. They took a lot of really good technology and wrapped it into one bow. If the performance was there and the grip was not so low wrist I would be interested in one. Due to an old wrist injury I cannot shoot a lie wrist grip without severe pain after a decent amount of shooting. I love the rider/limb geometry, love the fact that the cables run on both sides of the cam to minimize cam lean due to cable load, I like that it is modular adjustable. It is very quiet and vibe free. Tons of great aspects of the bow and with new info on the bushings being aluminum instead of plastic, that part of the bow does not bother me anymore. They took a great pse platform, used bowtechs bolt in axle system, combined their own avs system to a binary cam and split the cable track on either side of the string like bowtech did and made a sweet shooting bow. Now if they make one shoot a legit 345+ ibo and give it a more high wrist grip next year and I may be looking at my first mathews since 2006.


Now I feel better. Seriously, for me this bow has virtually blown me out of the water. I know for some it lacks speed and there's that friction thing, which I don't think is any concern at all, but the ease of tuning (really didn't have to do any at all), and I bare-shaft out to 30, and the way it holds so steady on target, and the effortless draw - the bow is just out and out superb! And let's not forget the silence and no-vibe at the shot. I can't wait to get this thing out on a hunt! 

No, I'm not a MFB, as I shoot Bowtech, Hoyt PSE, Elite and Martin.


----------



## Sagittarius (May 22, 2002)

IRISH_11 said:


> Just picked up my HTR today. Local shop has sold 7 now in one week. And the calls keep coming. Even sold a lefty.
> 
> I personally set 2 HTR's up today. The one thing that really stuck out was when I pressed them in the ezy-press. Anyone who has used an ezy-press before has seen bow risers twist and flex when the limbs are compressed. The HTR had no flex at all. I was surprised.
> 
> So mine is a 70# - 28" with 85% rock mods. At 70# with a 353 grain arrow and the 28" 85% let off rock mods the HTR shot 297 fps when ran through the chrono.



Mathews might be using 7000 series aluminum in the riser which might explain your "no flex at all" experience.
They use 7000 series in the Safari and never announced it; I heard rumors they may use it in other models.
You know how rumors go, may or may not be true.


----------



## Hidden Danger (Mar 13, 2008)

All B.S aside , I've learned a lot from this thread and I have a much better understanding of what Mathews has accomplished with this design. I'm more into faster bows and I'm not real crazy about the cable sleeve but I will definitely have to shoot one before I make a final decision. The No Cam definitely has my attention.


----------



## Mathias (Mar 21, 2005)

Thank goodness for intelligent people. Nice explanation N&B.


----------



## frog gigger (May 4, 2007)

griffwar said:


> Really froggie after I shut you down that one thing is all you got after you lied to Me I told you the speed I got with a 410 grain arrow. I gave you all the specs you said you could do that at 55# i called you on it, then you say o i meant with a 335 grain arrow well duh, apples to apples frog man. Then you say this bow better be great I'm going to shoot it tomorrow, O did I forget to mention that you had not even shot it yet and your kicking it in the dirt, like anyone would take anything you say about it seriously after you bad mouthed it from day one. Yeah I told you the speed shooting a 14 grain arrow under ibo I see it on here all the time, I also told you what it shot at 28 inch draw 85% let off 70# with a 410 grain arrow if you forgot 284 7 times 283 once. Someone finally told Me what you shoot and there is no way in hell it would do 285 with everything you said it had on the string not even close. After I posted My findings you get on there and post 276 lol I doubt it's getting that. So froggie whatever I don't like people who are not truthful so I'm threw talking with you. O I forgot I asked for the spec's on your bow like 11 times and you would not tell Me, because you knew it could not do what you said it was doing. It took someone else to tell Me what bow you were shooting, and then you get on there and say 276 lol, untruthful.


You're as dim as a fluorescent light with a bad starter. Reading leads to comprehension.
In your case, phonics would be a good start.


----------



## bghunter7777 (Aug 14, 2014)

Mathews really got this design right amazing bow just flat out holds on target and puts arrows where you aim with no noise or vibe absolutely awesome hunting bow these will be. I can understand if the specs are not what you look for but for those bashing this design I can not even begin to understand that thinking.


----------



## shamlin (Aug 18, 2007)

Regardless of what NB says this is a round wheel bow design with minor tweaks to cable travel. This general tech has been around for 30 plus years! Anyone that has shot archery that long will tell you, regardless of new improved cam designs, round wheel bows are smoother and much more forgiving. Look at the bare bow class in tournaments, most all are shooting round wheel bows made in the early 80's. You can add all the frosting you want to this cake, it's still a cake that been baked the same way for a long time, maybe with a better new improved frosting. I love it when engineers spit out tech jargon to justify why new designs are better when In reality it's move a hole here, add a spacer there, and whala you'll be shooting 300 60 x's tomorrow........not gonna happen!


----------



## sneak1413 (Aug 15, 2007)

bghunter7777 said:


> Mathews really got this design right amazing bow just flat out holds on target and puts arrows where you aim with no noise or vibe absolutely awesome hunting bow these will be. I can understand if the specs are not what you look for but for those bashing this design I can not even begin to understand that thinking.


Agreed. There really isn't anything new about the bow but it's current technology wrapped up in a different look/way. Those calling it a wheel bow or 30 year old technology are wrong. Nothing about it is more than 10 years old. Riser/limb geometry was proven quiet, forgiving, and accurate. The split cable binary is what made bowtech really take off and they even had a long riser short limb system that shot amazing. They just did it with a center pivot limb instead of a short limb and traditional limb pocket. Mathews hit a home run for guys that don't care about speed or ke. For guys that want more speed there are many other great options for bows on the market. Make the no cam into a 350 ibo with a smooth draw, adjustable letoff, adjustable/interchangeable grip, smooth mods and speed mods and have it perform really good even down to 24" draw and be under 4 lbs mass weight and maybe, just maybe that would be a bow that most of at would like.


----------



## fletched (May 10, 2006)

shamlin said:


> Regardless of what NB says this is a round wheel bow design with minor tweaks to cable travel. This general tech has been around for 30 plus years! Anyone that has shot archery that long will tell you, regardless of new improved cam designs, round wheel bows are smoother and much more forgiving. Look at the bare bow class in tournaments, most all are shooting round wheel bows made in the early 80's. You can add all the frosting you want to this cake, it's still a cake that been baked the same way for a long time, maybe with a better new improved frosting. I love it when engineers spit out tech jargon to justify why new designs are better when In reality it's move a hole here, add a spacer there, and whala you'll be shooting 300 60 x's tomorrow........not gonna happen!


Can you name any bows that the base cam had the axle right in the middle and worked as an idler? Any round wheel bow I have seen in the past had the axle offset from center giving it cam action.


----------



## ex-wolverine (Dec 31, 2004)

shamlin said:


> Regardless of what NB says this is a round wheel bow design with minor tweaks to cable travel. This general tech has been around for 30 plus years! Anyone that has shot archery that long will tell you, regardless of new improved cam designs, round wheel bows are smoother and much more forgiving. Look at the bare bow class in tournaments, most all are shooting round wheel bows made in the early 80's. You can add all the frosting you want to this cake, it's still a cake that been baked the same way for a long time, maybe with a better new improved frosting. I love it when engineers spit out tech jargon to justify why new designs are better when In reality it's move a hole here, add a spacer there, and whala you'll be shooting 300 60 x's tomorrow........not gonna happen!


Rumor on the street Henry Bsss is posting up some nice numbers with his new TRG ...

We shall see soon enough


----------



## griffwar (Nov 15, 2012)

frog gigger said:


> You're as dim as a fluorescent light with a bad starter. Reading leads to comprehension.
> In your case, phonics would be a good start.


You're not very bright for a untruthful individual and I think, maybe not? You know what I'm calling you when I say untruthful.


----------



## nontypical (Jan 4, 2004)

fletched said:


> Can you name any bows that the base cam had the axle right in the middle and worked as an idler? Any round wheel bow I have seen in the past had the axle offset from center giving it cam action.


Might be time for a new prescription. Right in the center, lol.


----------



## mtn3531 (Mar 6, 2009)

hidden danger said:


> .
> I know I have never seen anything quite like it before. Vince posted a graph of the draw force curve and I don't see how it could be anything but smooth.


I posted up a pic of the DFC the day it came in to the shop. Still think it has a weird draw cycle for the way it's designed. Speed isn't there either. They'll sell a ton of them I'm sure but not to me. Plenty of other good bows out there that are smoother on the draw and significantly faster. The offset axle design is nothing new. Just a different take on it. If you break a cable with this system your limbs are toast. Those mod stops are going to slam into the limbs and that will be the end of that shooting session.


----------



## Hidden Danger (Mar 13, 2008)

shamlin said:


> Regardless of what NB says this is a round wheel bow design with minor tweaks to cable travel. This general tech has been around for 30 plus years! Anyone that has shot archery that long will tell you, regardless of new improved cam designs, round wheel bows are smoother and much more forgiving. Look at the bare bow class in tournaments, most all are shooting round wheel bows made in the early 80's. You can add all the frosting you want to this cake, it's still a cake that been baked the same way for a long time, maybe with a better new improved frosting. I love it when engineers spit out tech jargon to justify why new designs are better when In reality it's move a hole here, add a spacer there, and whala you'll be shooting 300 60 x's tomorrow........not gonna happen!


Please , by all means post your credentials. What made you come to this conclusion?.......................................... don't tell me it's because you're on a pro staff. I've never heard of you.

I think you just suffer from small bow company syndrome.


----------



## mikehoyme (Nov 3, 2012)

nontypical said:


> Might be time for a new prescription. Right in the center, lol.


Are you sure about that?


----------



## MNDan (Nov 24, 2004)

I'm impressed - it's been a long time since Mathew's has innovated, and even then it's been weird stuff like the vibration dampener which is silly (odd to see them still using it - proven to do nothing). Otherwise they have mostly just copied others while trying to stick to their single cam design due to image. Still, I think it would only be fair to compare the No Cam to the other top bows setup to shoot the same speeds at a given arrow weight/true draw length. Otherwise obviously the No Cam is going to be "smoother" - it's slower!? I love the Nuts and Bolts explanation of the tech going into the No Cam - makes me think we might see other companies copy Mathews in the future! It's been a LONG time since that has happened.


----------



## nontypical (Jan 4, 2004)

Positive! If that was your car tire you think it would roll true? Look at the rotation of the bushing.


----------



## fletched (May 10, 2006)

mikehoyme said:


> are you sure about that?
> View attachment 2099365


 bam!!!


----------



## shamlin (Aug 18, 2007)

hidden danger said:


> Please , by all means post your credentials. What made you come to this conclusion?.......................................... don't tell me it's because you're on a pro staff. I've never heard of you.
> 
> I think you just suffer from small bow company syndrome.


No don't suffer from any syndrome, just have shot archery for 30 plus years and have shot most of the bows in that time frame. Don't have, nor said I had any ground breaking credentials. And I am glad you haven't heard of me, I don't want to be that important to people. But it drives me crazy when a company comes out and claims they reinvented the wheel!! Pun intended. When companies like bow tech and their flex cable guard design and even Hoyt's new cable guard this year, now those are new revolutionary designs that warranted a 4 minute commercial!!!


----------



## frog gigger (May 4, 2007)

griffwar said:


> You're not very bright for a untruthful individual and I think, maybe not, you know what I'm calling you when I say untruthful.


This is about all I've seen you do on every thread you post on.
You find a quote, in this thread it was tmorelli, that states an opinion of a bow, then your diaper is dirty over it. Just like all the other threads. 

You've defended this cam rub religiously, as though it doesn't exist, just because you saw one that doesn't. 
You jumped on my wagon from day one because I was one of the first to draw attention to that. Never bashed, just observed, stated my opinion. 

You really should let go of the apron strings, and try acting like a mature adult, if possible.


----------



## Hidden Danger (Mar 13, 2008)

MNDan said:


> I'm impressed - it's been a long time since Mathew's has innovated, and even then it's been weird stuff like the vibration dampener which is silly (odd to see them still using it - proven to do nothing). Otherwise they have mostly just copied others while trying to stick to their single cam design due to image. Still, I think it would only be fair to compare the No Cam to the other top bows setup to shoot the same speeds at a given arrow weight/true draw length. Otherwise obviously the No Cam is going to be "smoother" - it's slower!? I love the Nuts and Bolts explanation of the tech going into the No Cam - makes me think we might see other companies copy Mathews in the future! It's been a LONG time since that has happened.


Proven to do nothing? Better not let NASA and the companies that have incorporated them into their products like sights , stabilizers , rests and quivers in on your little secret.


----------



## fletched (May 10, 2006)

nontypical said:


> Positive! If that was your car tire you think it would roll true? Look at the rotation of the bushing.


The base cam is centered and acts like an idler. The avs wheel is offset and has cam action. Just like a choo choo train.


----------



## Hidden Danger (Mar 13, 2008)

shamlin said:


> No don't suffer from any syndrome, just have shot archery for 30 plus years and have shot most of the bows in that time frame. Don't have, nor said I had any ground breaking credentials. And I am glad you haven't heard of me, I don't want to be that important to people. But it drives me crazy when a company comes out and claims they reinvented the wheel!! Pun intended. When companies like bow tech and their flex cable guard design and even Hoyt's new cable guard this year, now those are new revolutionary designs that warranted a 4 minute commercial!!!


Shooting a bow is not the same as designing/engineering a bow. I think the way you threw Nuts&Bolts name out there like that was tasteless. Noone is perfect but I assure you he has probably forgotten more about bow designs and technology than most of us know put together.


----------



## Hidden Danger (Mar 13, 2008)

fletched said:


> The base cam is centered and acts like an idler. The avs wheel is offset and has cam action. Just like a choo choo train.


It's no use fletched , some people just don't get it.


----------



## nontypical (Jan 4, 2004)

fletched said:


> The base cam is centered and acts like an idler. The avs wheel is offset and has cam action. Just like a choo choo train.


Yep. You have to have an engineering degree. You truly are Mensa like.


----------



## griffwar (Nov 15, 2012)

frog gigger said:


> This is about all I've seen you do on every thread you post on.
> You find a quote, in this thread it was tmorelli, that states an opinion of a bow, then your diaper is dirty over it. Just like all the other threads.
> 
> You've defended this cam rub religiously, as though it doesn't exist, just because you saw one that doesn't.
> ...


No frogman lets get it right, someone said it rubbed you got on there and said i'm out without even laying eyes on the bow. I asked you're out without even seeing the bow and finding out if it was true for yourself. Then you got all b-hurt and started your self justification about why you did not like the bow. I forgot all about it until you jumped on another thread I posted in about how I did not care about speed because it shot way faster then the bow's I shot way back at 80#. That is when you started telling your little untruths on that thread, now you're on this thread. I never thought about it you're a stalking troll following Me from thread to thread are you, nice I have a follower.


----------



## deadquiet (Jan 25, 2005)

Arrowflingr said:


> Then I wouldn't be surprised to see them do this next year. The first thing all the guys I know, who are not on AT by the way, asked me when I bought my new bow was "how fast does it shoot"? I'll bet if archery shops did a poll asking what is the first spec you look at on a bow....IBO speed would be #1


Yes, for novice archers speed is all they think about.


----------



## Whaack (Apr 2, 2006)

And a perfectly good thread has once again devolved into a pissing match of lack luster whits.


----------



## Olink (Jan 10, 2003)

fletched said:


> Have you measured the ata at brace height and then at full draw? I am curious to know how much the limbs move.


I wish every manufacturer would publish ATA at full draw. That is the number that really matters.


----------



## bownazi (Mar 8, 2009)

fletched said:


> have you measured the ata at brace height and then at full draw? I am curious to know how much the limbs move.


2" @ 28'' dl

bow turned down 2.5 turns from 69.5 down to 59.4 W 3/64 increase in brace

5 turn down 50.6 lbs W/1/8'' increase in brace

Large roller on outside of roller guard 1.136 diam....inside is standard .9985 same as ChillR

Limb bolts 5/16x18


----------



## stehawk (Aug 28, 2004)

Whaack said:


> And a perfectly good thread has once again devolved into a pissing match of lack luster whits.


Even though some of the posts have turned into a pissing contest----I've learned more about the No Cam on this thread than any yet. It seems to me that even though innovative, very smooth, and very low vibe its still a bow and has pros and cons. Some will like it and some will not. I personally still don't like the BH, string stops, and speed, but thats just me. Would I take one hunting? Hell yes!I wonder just how vibe free and quiet a bow has to be to punch paper or go hunting with. Its just a bow and will require tuning and shooting reqardless. After reading this thread I find it hard to believe its the Holy Grail of bows that will shatter all records and outperform all bows from all companies. Its going to take much more than this thread to make me give up my E32. With that being said, congrats and good luck to Mathews for the new 2015 No Cam it looks like an awesome bow. :darkbeer:


----------



## jim p (Oct 29, 2003)

From the pictures it looks like one end of the cable has a loop that goes around the offset smaller round wheel. How do you get this cable end attached?

I would like to see more pictures of the no cams. I know that there are several pictures already on here but I need to see more pictures at different angles so that I can understand more.



vince71969 said:


> You do not have to remove the string tracks to replace anything.


----------



## stehawk (Aug 28, 2004)

jim p said:


> From the pictures it looks like one end of the cable has a loop that goes around the offset smaller round wheel. How do you get this cable end attached?
> 
> QUOTE]
> 
> Remove the other end of the cable first run it back through the loop and just take it off. Its basically put back on the same way---put the large loop around the avs and run the end of it through the loop. :darkbeer: I've been wondering about the wear of the loop/cable as it slides/rotates on the AVS. Time will tell I guess. :wink:


----------



## ex-wolverine (Dec 31, 2004)

jim p said:


> From the pictures it looks like one end of the cable has a loop that goes around the offset smaller round wheel. How do you get this cable end attached?
> 
> I would like to see more pictures of the no cams. I know that there are several pictures already on here but I need to see more pictures at different angles so that I can understand more.


couple of when I tore the bow apart to measure strings and cables


----------



## Mathias (Mar 21, 2005)

Whaack said:


> And a perfectly good thread has once again devolved into a pissing match of lack luster whits.


Gets worse here every day, truly a shame.


----------



## jim p (Oct 29, 2003)

Maybe the small axle would put too much pressure on the limb so you spread the pressure by using a bigger bushing. If you made the axle small enough it would act like a knife and cut the limb. Just a guess.



tmorelli said:


> Shock? I don't follow you.
> 
> Why would they sleeve the limb?


----------



## jim p (Oct 29, 2003)

Wow! I like the way that cable is attached. It was puzzling me how it was done.

Thanks for the picture.



Park-N-Sons Archery said:


> couple of when I tore the bow apart to measure strings and cables


----------



## bghunter7777 (Aug 14, 2014)

Park-N-Sons Archery said:


> couple of when I tore the bow apart to measure strings and cables


Thats a nice looking bow definately class


----------



## ElkFetish (Aug 12, 2007)

hidden danger said:


> Most of the guys I know are not trying to shoot as fast as possible. Speed bows gives us the ability to shoot heavier arrows faster than bows whose ibo is much less.


Yes, This!!!! Simple concept that so many don't get!


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

jim p said:


> Maybe the small axle would put too much pressure on the limb so you spread the pressure by using a bigger bushing. If you made the axle small enough it would act like a knife and cut the limb. Just a guess.


Hmm. I'm not sure. 

I'm thinking that the axles themselves are approximately a standard diameter like we see on Hoyt, PSE and others without sleeves or reinforcing the limb.


----------



## rattlinman (Dec 30, 2004)

stehawk said:


> jim p said:
> 
> 
> > From the pictures it looks like one end of the cable has a loop that goes around the offset smaller round wheel. How do you get this cable end attached?
> ...


----------



## rattlinman (Dec 30, 2004)

tmorelli said:


> Hmm. I'm not sure.
> 
> I'm thinking that the axles themselves are approximately a standard diameter like we see on Hoyt, PSE and others without sleeves or reinforcing the limb.


Now see, there ya go comparing it to a Hoyt or PSE! That's why your not sure, like comparing a Ferrari to a Yugo! lol, just messing with ya, I'm sure Mathews had a good answer for why, but I doubt we will be privy to it.

Tourney season will be here soon! Are you staying in A?


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

I think Mathews would be smart to put the bearing on one cam on the opposite side, make a shoot through riser with 2 cable slides and have one cable on each side of the arrow. That would be a great option for their target shooters. It would also eliminate rubbing on the cables and cam lean.


----------



## stehawk (Aug 28, 2004)

rattlinman said:


> stehawk said:
> 
> 
> > Don't quote me, but I believe the wheel has bearings that allow it to rotate as the bow is drawn, so the cable loop does not move or slide, it is stationary. What is nice on this that differs from the Chill cam system is you can remove and adjust the cable without removing the cam completely.
> ...


----------



## bownazi (Mar 8, 2009)

tmorelli said:


> Hmm. I'm not sure.
> 
> I'm thinking that the axles themselves are approximately a standard diameter like we see on Hoyt, PSE and others without sleeves or reinforcing the limb.


Axles are 3/16....limbs are drilled 1/4''...button heads are 6/32 x 5/16 and use a 5/64 allen wrench...axle screw holes are 5/8 deep and threaded 9/16 deep..also the top hat bushings are anodized

Hope this helps


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

bownazi said:


> Axles are 3/16....limbs are drilled 1/4''...button heads are 6/32 x 5/16 and use a 5/64 allen wrench...axle screw holes are 5/8 deep and threaded 9/16 deep..also the top hat bushings are anodized
> 
> Hope this helps


I grabbed a couple axles and measured them at .185"... so the No-Cam's axle is approximately standard. 

What is the purpose of over-boring the limb and then using the bushing if the end game was simply to add tension to the axle (and compression to the assembly)? Other systems seem to function well with the limbs bored to axle diameter... and the over-bore/bushings don't seem to be mandated by the addition of the button head screws. Is the pillar block then required to re-strengthen the limb due to the over bore?


----------



## bghunter7777 (Aug 14, 2014)

I think many of you on AT should design and engineer a bow you seem to have all the answers and a far superior grasp on the concept of bow design then the engineers at these bow companies.


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

bghunter7777 said:


> I think many of you on AT should design and engineer a bow you seem to have all the answers and a far superior grasp on the concept of bow design then the engineers at these bow companies.


Heaven forbid we ask questions.


----------



## bghunter7777 (Aug 14, 2014)

tmorelli said:


> Heaven forbid we ask questions.


was not necessarily referring to you but I think my statement holds true for many.


----------



## rattlinman (Dec 30, 2004)

tmorelli said:


> I grabbed a couple axles and measured them at .185"... so the No-Cam's axle is approximately standard.
> 
> What is the purpose of over-boring the limb and then using the bushing if the end game was simply to add tension to the axle (and compression to the assembly)? Other systems seem to function well with the limbs bored to axle diameter... and the over-bore/bushings don't seem to be mandated by the addition of the button head screws. Is the pillar block then required to re-strengthen the limb due to the over bore?


Could be, or they may have seen the axle hole itself become worn or "ovaled" over time on previous models, resulting in this type of change. Possibly alleviating future issues in advance? Or maybe they are able to achieve tighter tolerances?


----------



## Sagittarius (May 22, 2002)

Only Nuts&Bolts (Alan) should answer questions or post technical information on this thread :exclaim:
Everyone else combined can't compare to Alan and shouldn't even attempt to. :zip:


----------



## goodoleboy11 (Apr 23, 2013)

bghunter7777 said:


> I think many of you on AT should design and engineer a bow you seem to have all the answers and a far superior grasp on the concept of bow design then the engineers at these bow companies.


They could make a bow with 100 percent efficiency, any let off you want, 400 Fps with an 8 inch brace height and draws like an E35 and the AT "pro" know it alls would tear it apart and act like they know better than the engineers that made it. It's hilarious to read some of these comments. This post was NOT directed to Alan, he's the man. Lol I enjoy all of his opinions and posts.


----------



## bowfisher (Jan 21, 2003)

Sagittarius said:


> Only Nuts&Bolts (Alan) should answer questions or post technical information on this thread :exclaim:
> Everyone else combined can't compare to Alan and shouldn't even attempt to. :zip:


LOL!!! I guess you didn't see the thread where he explained the new Hoyt cable guard.


----------



## sneak1413 (Aug 15, 2007)

Sagittarius said:


> Only Nuts&Bolts (Alan) should answer questions or post technical information on this thread :exclaim:
> Everyone else combined can't compare to Alan and shouldn't even attempt to. :zip:


Other engineers and designers even in the archery industry should not respond to technical advise when they may know even better than Alan on a few topics? Alan is one of the best or the best at giving advice especially on form and technique and on most bows as far as tuning.


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

Sagittarius said:


> Only Nuts&Bolts (Alan) should answer questions or post technical information on this thread :exclaim:
> Everyone else combined can't compare to Alan and shouldn't even attempt to. :zip:


Haha I think your whole face is a little brown after that comment. You may want to go get cleaned up.


----------



## bownazi (Mar 8, 2009)

tmorelli said:


> I grabbed a couple axles and measured them at .185"... so the No-Cam's axle is approximately standard.
> 
> What is the purpose of over-boring the limb and then using the bushing if the end game was simply to add tension to the axle (and compression to the assembly)? Other systems seem to function well with the limbs bored to axle diameter... and the over-bore/bushings don't seem to be mandated by the addition of the button head screws. Is the pillar block then required to re-strengthen the limb due to the over bore?


Well I didn't design it... does it need to be OB...probably not but I could see many structural reasons to do it the way he did it metal on metal from one end to the other... strength, tension, limb tip torque, lateral nock travel,.... wear ( is something that I have never seen with over 20 of working on Mathews) but my favorite reason for TH bushings is when taking cams of and on I don't have to look for shims on the floor and doing the job twice to make sure of what shim went where......no matter how I look at it ...it is better the way he did it.

I am not an engineer ...but I did sleep at a Holiday Inn a few years ago..lol

Now the question that I ask is why not do it that way


----------



## Sagittarius (May 22, 2002)

Huntinsker said:


> Haha I think your whole face is a little brown after that comment. You may want to go get cleaned up.


I don't ever remember reading anything that you posted on this site that impressed me.
Who are you and what do you know ?
Let's hear it !


----------



## reylamb (Feb 5, 2003)

goodoleboy11 said:


> They could make a bow with 100 percent efficiency, any let off you want, 400 Fps with an 8 inch brace height and draws like an E35 and the AT "pro" know it alls would tear it apart and act like they know better than the engineers that made it. It's hilarious to read some of these comments. This post was NOT directed to Alan, he's the man. Lol I enjoy all of his opinions and posts.


Yes, if they claimed 100% efficiency I would call them out on it!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## BowhunterCliffy (Feb 19, 2007)

Sagittarius said:


> I don't ever remember reading anything that you posted on this site that impressed me.
> Who are you and what do you know ?
> Let's hear it !


I've read a number of Huntinsker's posts on many different threads. Very knowledgeable. nuts&bolts also very knowledgeable, yes, but he's not the only one on here that knows his stuff when it comes to bows.


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

Sagittarius said:


> Only Nuts&Bolts (Alan) should answer questions or post technical information on this thread :exclaim:
> Everyone else combined can't compare to Alan and shouldn't even attempt to. :zip:


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

Sagittarius said:


> I don't ever remember reading anything that you posted on this site that impressed me.
> Who are you and what do you know ?
> Let's hear it !


Well considering I'm not trying to impress you, I really couldn't care less if you've been impressed or not. I'm just a guy that shoots a lot and works on bows a lot. I have a mechanical mind and my wheels keep turning. I offer advice when I have it and I read and learn when I don't. I appreciate your concern though.


----------



## Sagittarius (May 22, 2002)

Huntinsker said:


> Well considering I'm not trying to impress you, I really couldn't care less if you've been impressed or not. I'm just a guy that shoots a lot and works on bows a lot. I have a mechanical mind and my wheels keep turning. I offer advice when I have it and I read and learn when I don't. I appreciate your concern though.




Okay, sounds like you have some good knowledge; kudos to you.
Perhaps I was over the top with my praise of Alan but the OP asked Alan specifically about the "no cam system" and a lot of guys turned it into a piss-fest, as mentioned above, and ruined the whole thread.
The thread started off good and now has gone to hell in a bucket !!! :thumbs_do
I, actually, said that about Alan just to piss some of those guys off because they have destroyed the thread.


----------



## vince71969 (Apr 17, 2004)

rattlinman said:


> stehawk said:
> 
> 
> > Don't quote me, but I believe the wheel has bearings that allow it to rotate as the bow is drawn, so the cable loop does not move or slide, it is stationary. What is nice on this that differs from the Chill cam system is you can remove and adjust the cable without removing the cam completely.
> ...


----------



## ingvay (Oct 22, 2014)

hidden danger said:


> Thanks for taking the time to explain this Mr. Alan. Your response puts to rest the incorrect info that some are willing to post about this design so that they may proceed with their own agendas. I'm pretty sure there were/are a few misinformed archers out there that have been led to believe that this was not new tech or that it was strictly a marketing ploy. I may just have to get one.


So what was the berger hole when Mathews was toting their One-cam design ? Not on center?


----------



## TDS (Nov 26, 2008)

I think the thread was asking for Nuts and Bolts thoughts on the no cam. Why? Credibility?


----------



## sneak1413 (Aug 15, 2007)

TDS said:


> I think the thread was asking for Nuts and Bolts thoughts on the no cam. Why? Credibility?


If he only wanted nuts and bolts opinion he would have private messages him. By posting an open thread he opened it up to anyone and everyone.


----------



## LeEarl (Jun 1, 2002)

Sagittarius said:


> Only Nuts&Bolts (Alan) should answer questions or post technical information on this thread :exclaim:
> Everyone else combined can't compare to Alan and shouldn't even attempt to. :zip:


Sag FTW :wink:


----------



## TDS (Nov 26, 2008)

sneak1413 said:


> If he only wanted nuts and bolts opinion he would have private messages him. By posting an open thread he opened it up to anyone and everyone.


Or maybe he thought others might be interested on his take.


----------



## JPR79 (May 18, 2010)

goodoleboy11 said:


> Haha wow, *hopefully the idiots spewing all their bs read this thread.* This is probably the most accurate bow I've shot. Just can't get used to the draw. Thanks for your info again Alan


With posts like this, it makes you NO BETTER than the haters bashing the product. You are just feeding them what they want.

To both groups, please grow up.

Alan - thank you for your input, interesting read.


----------



## JPR79 (May 18, 2010)

TDS said:


> I think the thread was asking for Nuts and Bolts thoughts on the no cam. Why? Credibility?


People have to justify their expensive purchases.

I'm not a Mathews hater and it's not the tech that I could hate against, I find it an interesting concept, but I will never own this bow because of the overwhelming price tag. Sorry but no thanks, I shoot just fine with $400-$700 bows. I also don't need to feel justified in my purchase by getting an expert talk fancy about it.


----------



## TDS (Nov 26, 2008)

JPR79 said:


> People have to justify their expensive purchases.
> 
> I'm not a Mathews hater and it's not the tech that I could hate against, I find it an interesting concept, but I will never own this bow because of the overwhelming price tag. Sorry but no thanks, *I shoot just fine with $400-$700 bows*. I also don't need to feel justified in my purchase by getting an expert talk fancy about it.


Great, thats all that really matters. I am not planning on a no-cam purchase but it appeared to be an honest review of the technology by someone who is well respected on this board.


----------



## Sagittarius (May 22, 2002)

LeEarl said:


> Sag FTW :wink:



No doubt about it, LeEarl. 
I will say, I've always respected your knowledge here on AT.
You seldom post much, anymore, here on good ol' AT but can't blame you there.
I remember, you were the first to do the how to bow tuning videos !
...and good ones they were!


----------



## ukslinger (Dec 1, 2012)

Gonna shoot one this weekend along with the Synergy if all goes to plan

Seems to be a love/hate relationship with the draw-cycle

I'm more interested in the longer riser and how well it hopefully holds


----------



## Hidden Danger (Mar 13, 2008)

TDS said:


> Or maybe he thought others might be interested on his take.


We have a winner. The main reason I asked N&B for his opinion is because I know for a fact that he understands a bow's dynamics better than I probably ever will. Does this mean that I think he is the world's greatest bow designer/engineer? No , I simply trust the fact that he will give it to you straight without any agendas or loyalties.

Thank God Bownazi actually took the no cam apart and posted pics or some of you would still be arguing with Vince about the axle bushings and how they functioned. You'd still be wrong but you'd still be arguing. I don't know Vince personally and we've never even talked but I can tell you one thing about the guy from all his posts , he knows a Mathews inside and out........all of them probably.


----------



## griffwar (Nov 15, 2012)

hidden danger said:


> We have a winner. The main reason I asked N&B for his opinion is because I know for a fact that he understands a bow's dynamics better than I probably ever will. Does this mean that I think he is the world's greatest bow designer/engineer? No , I simply trust the fact that he will give it to you straight without any agendas or loyalties.
> 
> Thank God Bownazi actually took the no cam apart and posted pics or some of you would still be arguing with Vince about the axle bushings and how they functioned. You'd still be wrong but you'd still be arguing. I don't know Vince personally and we've never even talked but I can tell you one thing about the guy from all his posts , he knows a Mathews inside and out........all of them probably.


I wish they had a like button.


----------



## coltd65 (Aug 1, 2012)

Tagged


----------



## kanga (Dec 8, 2009)

JPR79 said:


> People have to justify their expensive purchases.
> 
> I'm not a Mathews hater and it's not the tech that I could hate against, I find it an interesting concept, but I will never own this bow because of the overwhelming price tag. Sorry but no thanks, I shoot just fine with $400-$700 bows. I also don't need to feel justified in my purchase by getting an expert talk fancy about it.


Maybe you could consider keeping a $600 bow for a longer period of time whilst saving some $'s, then purchase a more expensive model? There's not THAT much difference in the price of a $900 bow and a $700 one.


----------



## LeEarl (Jun 1, 2002)

Sagittarius said:


> No doubt about it, LeEarl.
> I will say, I've always respected your knowledge here on AT.
> You seldom post much, anymore, here on good ol' AT but can't blame you there.
> I remember, you were the first to do the how to bow tuning videos !
> ...and good ones they were!


Good ol' AT...... Where did you go :noidea:

Maybe one day we can bring it back.


----------



## TheTracker (Sep 11, 2009)

bowfisher said:


> LOL!!! I guess you didn't see the thread where he explained the new Hoyt cable guard.


He was 100% right on the hoyt cable guard.


----------



## Hidden Danger (Mar 13, 2008)

LeEarl said:


> Good ol' AT...... Where did you go :noidea:
> 
> Maybe one day we can bring it back.


What event set the current state of AT in motion? Does anyone even know?


----------



## TwoInch (Oct 30, 2013)

hidden danger said:


> What event set the current state of AT in motion? Does anyone even know?


the internet, and peoples interactions behind the veil of anonymity is what has caused AT, along with most other forum/board sites to end up in the current state of perpetual piss matches. everyone is an internet expert. look at the current events in the "real world"... its like people are slowly but surely losing their collective minds... everyone knows they are right, when most all of them are as wrong as can be. 

i have watched a number of forums of vastly different subject bases go to crap over the last 5 or 6 years. they all start out as amazing places...


----------



## BtwchInvasion (Mar 16, 2014)

IRISH_11 said:


> Sad but true. Speed does sell and yes the masses want speed. This is what is so unfortunate about archery. The masses just don't know a darn thing when it comes to shooting a bow. The top archers in the world have made their money shooting 290 fps or less. Speed is something the manufacturers conjured up and brain washed everyone into thinking it would help them shoot better. The simpletons in archery don't realize that physics will never be denied. To get speed you have to compromise something. Rather you compromise brace height or force draw curve you are sacrificing something.
> 
> Nuts and bolts please explain to the feable minds of AT about transfer of energy from the bow to the arrow and that just because a particular arrow is shooting faster out of the bow at point blank range that there is loss off energy dependent on the mass of the arrow. The same arrow that shot 330 at point blank may be down to 270 at 40 yards where as a different bow with a different arrow shooting 310 at point blank may still be 280 at 40yards. Don't hold me to these numbers they are just for examples. But I digress to having shot hundreds if not thousands of arrows through chronographs at 40 and 50 yards. And yes my chronograph has the arrow holes to prove it. Lol. I know that just because one bow is faster at point blank does not mean that a bow that chronos slower at point blank is not faster down range or should I say decelerates at a slower rate than the one that was faster.


The target shooters you speak of don't shoot there 40 pound target bows at bug game. I am by no means a speed freak but if I'm getting a bow I don't want it to be slow. I want arrow that's can break through a couple rib and maybe a shoulder. I want the least amount of suffering as possible and that means two holes on each side


----------



## Norwegian Woods (Apr 23, 2006)

BtwchInvasion said:


> The target shooters you speak of don't shoot there 40 pound target bows at bug game. I am by no means a speed freak but if I'm getting a bow I don't want it to be slow. I want arrow that's can break through a couple rib and maybe a shoulder. I want the least amount of suffering as possible and that means two holes on each side


What I find funny is that so many of the people buying a not so fast bow and claiming that speed is not important to them and yet they use very light arrows for hunting.


----------



## bghunter7777 (Aug 14, 2014)

hidden danger said:


> What event set the current state of AT in motion? Does anyone even know?


The Mods don't always moderate on an even playing field and allow things to go if they agree or the guy has 3000 posts and has made internet buddys with them or is a supporting archer it leads to individuals with certain brand loyalty or opinions simply being forced out or losing desire to contribute to the cult like attacks sorrounding some issues.


----------



## IRISH_11 (Mar 13, 2004)

BtwchInvasion said:


> The target shooters you speak of don't shoot there 40 pound target bows at bug game. I am by no means a speed freak but if I'm getting a bow I don't want it to be slow. I want arrow that's can break through a couple rib and maybe a shoulder. I want the least amount of suffering as possible and that means two holes on each side




My HTR at 28" (85%) draw and set at 70 pounds shoots a 353 grain arrow at 297 fps. This equates to 69.16 ft lbs of kinetic energy according to the gold tip KE calculator.

KINETIC ENERGY
Hunting Usage

< 25 ft. lbs.
Small Game (rabbit, groundhog, etc.)
25-41 ft. lbs.
Medium Game (deer, antelope, etc.)
42-65 ft. lbs.
Large Game (elk, black bear, wild boar, etc.)
> 65 ft. lbs.

So unless your hunting cape buffalo the 69.16 ft lbs of KE is more than sufficient to take any North American game animal. 


Riddle me this what was the speed of a native american longbow? Somehow they managed to kill animals.


----------



## sneak1413 (Aug 15, 2007)

TheTracker said:


> He was 100% right on the hoyt cable guard.


After he admittedly missed a big part of it. He didn't have a bow in hand to measure anything, others did and it showed substantially different measurements than he used....


----------



## BtwchInvasion (Mar 16, 2014)

IRISH_11 said:


> My HTR at 28" (85%) draw and set at 70 pounds shoots a 353 grain arrow at 297 fps. This equates to 69.16 ft lbs of kinetic energy according to the gold tip KE calculator.
> 
> KINETIC ENERGY
> Hunting Usage
> ...


I don't think the point is to go the bare minimum... with today's technology we should be able to vastly surpass the 65 ft. Lbs.. Yes you can take it down but I would rather have less suffering then being able to pull it back a little easier but that's just me


----------



## IRISH_11 (Mar 13, 2004)

BtwchInvasion said:


> I don't think the point is to go the bare minimum... with today's technology we should be able to vastly surpass the 65 ft. Lbs.. Yes you can take it down but I would rather have less suffering then being able to pull it back a little easier but that's just me



Maybe you need to get your eyes checked. The minimum for deer is 42. Unless my math has failed me 69.19 far exceeds the 42 minimum. And i'm willing to bet the farm that 95% of all deer hunters fall into the 42-65 lb range.


----------



## sneak1413 (Aug 15, 2007)

IRISH_11 said:


> Maybe you need to get your eyes checked. The minimum for deer is 42. Unless my math has failed me 69.19 far exceeds the 42 minimum. And i'm willing to bet the farm that 95% of all deer hunters fall into the 42-65 lb range.


For starters your speed is a bit faster than most have posted, knowing that either you are pencil pushing or have a fast chrono. I have seen 30" no cams not do much better than that. If I shot my bow through your chrono I'd probably come up with almost 80 ke at 59 lbs.... So yes I would say your bow is slow for today's standards.


----------



## THE ELKMAN (Jan 2, 2013)

Yeah... I'm not seein this one...v



sneak1413 said:


> So Alan I have not read but only the first page on this thread, but how much different as far as setup, tuning, and shooting is this system compared to the bowtech admiral and captain? Both have crisscrossing cables on either side of cam, both have very near round string track, both have no yokes. The take up cable track is bigger(takes up more string) due to the let out side of the cable letting out more than the avs system does. Am I correct in seeing two very similar cam systems with one being slightly modified for looks of a no cam and slight modification of the cable tracks to accommodate a different limb angle, deflection and preload?


----------



## THE ELKMAN (Jan 2, 2013)

No he wasn't! LOL! Not even close.



TheTracker said:


> He was 100% right on the hoyt cable guard.


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

THE ELKMAN said:


> No he wasn't! LOL! Not even close.


Someone link this thread please. My curiosity is up.


----------



## IRISH_11 (Mar 13, 2004)

Here are some pics for the doubters as to my HTR speed. 

Think what you will sneak I can't fix stupid. My bow was fired across 2 chronographs. The shops and mine which is calibrated with a certificate stating such. Gets done every 12 mos just for guys like you. 

Some will doubt the pics. There were several witnesses at the shop who seen it. I guess in the end I may have to fire every HTR at the shop across the chrono on video and post it on you tube for all the morons on AT.


----------



## rattlinman (Dec 30, 2004)

Well, before this thread turns into a typical Mathews thread, I want to thank N & B for the input and the OP (HD) for openly asking the question.

There is more valuable information in this thread about this product than in the last 50 Mathews threads, so kudos! 

Unfortunately, it also appears that we are now going to start second-guessing the engineers that spent a tremendous amount of time designing it and even questioning the opinion of a respected member of AT that has always been willing to offer help and unbiased opinions. The problem is when something is obviously waaaay over folks heads, the masses will attempt to "dumb it down" so they can glorify their own opinions.

Now everyone can go back to arguing if it's fast enough, copied technology, or just over-priced and not worth it.......Irish, congrats on your bow, but you're wasting you're time.


----------



## IRISH_11 (Mar 13, 2004)

sneak1413 said:


> For starters your speed is a bit faster than most have posted, knowing that either you are pencil pushing or have a fast chrono. I have seen 30" no cams not do much better than that. If I shot my bow through your chrono I'd probably come up with almost 80 ke at 59 lbs.... So yes I would say your bow is slow for today's standards.


Ignorance truly is bliss.


----------



## rattlinman (Dec 30, 2004)

IRISH_11 said:


> Here are some pics for the doubters as to my HTR speed.
> 
> Think what you will sneak I can't fix stupid. My bow was fired across 2 chronographs. The shops and mine which is calibrated with a certificate stating such. Gets done every 12 mos just for guys like you.
> 
> Some will doubt the pics. There were several witnesses at the shop who seen it. I guess in the end I may have to fire every HTR at the shop across the chrono on video and post it on you tube for all the morons on AT.


Plenty fast for hunting....maybe too fast! I like 280's myself.:wink:

I agree with your post above....AT is a very bliss-ful place!!


----------



## griffwar (Nov 15, 2012)

rattlinman said:


> Well, before this thread turns into a typical Mathews thread, I want to thank N & B for the input and the OP (HD) for openly asking the question.
> 
> There is more valuable information in this thread about this product than in the last 50 Mathews threads, so kudos!
> 
> ...


Amen


----------



## nuts&bolts (Mar 25, 2005)

THE ELKMAN said:


> Yeah... I'm not seein this one...v




BowTech Admiral.
NOT round, as far as I can tell.

*Quote Originally Posted by sneak1413 View Post
So Alan I have not read but only the first page on this thread, but how much different as far as setup, tuning, and shooting is this system compared to the bowtech admiral and captain? Both have crisscrossing cables on either side of cam, both have very near round string track, both have no yokes. The take up cable track is bigger(takes up more string) due to the let out side of the cable letting out more than the avs system does. Am I correct in seeing two very similar cam systems with one being slightly modified for looks of a no cam and slight modification of the cable tracks to accommodate a different limb angle, deflection and preload?*


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

tmorelli said:


> Someone link this thread please. My curiosity is up.


http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2343359


----------



## nuts&bolts (Mar 25, 2005)

griffwar said:


> Amen


I get tired sometimes, folks.

Spent 25 years in engineering,
managed the west coast ops for a large engineering company,
dabbled in experimental medical devices...super high precision medical grade machine work and design...checking the polish on metal parts with a scanning electron microscope

thats kinda CRAZY, if you think about it for a second.

So,
you could say I have SOME familiarity with design, build, manufacturing, etc.

For folks who have never prototyped a new design...sketch on a piece of paper, back of a napkin, then 
then build the bloody thing, again and again and again, until it JUST WORKS

then the destructive testing, the finite element analysis work (will it crack? when will it BEND? can we make it LIGHTER, stronger, faster?)

GOTTA live it, go through the process,
building something that NO one has done before...

sure,
it's JUST a pulley
like a clothes line pulley it the NO CAM system, or the SINGLE cam system, or the HYBRID cam system, or the OverDrive Binary(tm) Dual Cam system.

Center drilled bearings
OFFset drilled bearings

The LIGHT bulb was and IS a simple idea...

but,
to come up with the LIGHT bulb, the ENDLESS experimentation,
the failed designs, that was GENIUS...to come up with the FIRST WHAT IF and carry it through.

There are ENGINEERS who come up with ideas and BUILD you the first prototype.
There are MANUFACTURING engineers who take the PROTOTYPE and give you a PRODUCTION model.

Then,
there are folks who say 
"THIS is easy....it's JUST a pulley...ANYBODY can do THAT."


HINT. It's not as EASY as it LOOKS to do.
My compliments to the folks at Mathews.

I have a VERY good idea how much work it was,
to come up with the circle within a circle CAM profile
and
end up with a draw force curve
that resembles a classic cam profile (tear drop/oblong shape).


----------



## bghunter7777 (Aug 14, 2014)

nuts&bolts said:


> I get tired sometimes, folks.
> 
> Spent 25 years in engineering,
> managed the west coast ops for a large engineering company,
> ...


Can't be true N and B Mathews obviously only knows marketing and people who buy their products are dumb the good ole boys on AT told me so because their small town archery shop told them so.


----------



## sittingbull (Jan 19, 2003)

hidden danger said:


> We have a winner. The main reason I asked N&B for his opinion is because I know for a fact that he understands a bow's dynamics better than I probably ever will. Does this mean that I think he is the world's greatest bow designer/engineer? No , I simply trust the fact that he will give it to you straight without any agendas or loyalties.
> 
> Thank God Bownazi actually took the no cam apart and posted pics or some of you would still be arguing with Vince about the axle bushings and how they functioned. You'd still be wrong but you'd still be arguing. I don't know Vince personally and we've never even talked but I can tell you one thing about the guy from all his posts , he knows a Mathews inside and out........all of them probably.


hidden danger...yes, this is all your fault, since your the one who started this thread...lol.

NutsnBolts has earned the respect of most on this board because #1, he knows what he is talking about and #2 his willingness to help others minus an agenda.

Yes, Bownazi kind of let the air out the balloon over on pg 5 when he posted pictures (post #137) of a disassembled NoCam showing the 4 bushings that the axle rides in, so the doubters could see that Vince "did know" what he was talking about concerning how the NoCam was mounted. 

Some make the mistake of giving opinions and passing judgement without the proper hands on experience. It became obvious that the doubters had never taken a NoCam system apart to see how the NoCam was mounted in the limbs.

This thread has been very educational thread...


----------



## TwoInch (Oct 30, 2013)

i still dont understand the fascination with the concentric string track.... or why anyone thinks it means anything in the draw force curve. im curious how you would end up with anything other than a traditional shaped DFC...? all of that is controlled by the cable tracks.

i agree that its very similar to the admiral... and the fact that the admiral cams were not perfectly round or concentric means nothing. they were very close, and the axle was very close to the center. if some of the mechanical advantage isnt made on the string track(elliptical), it will just be made up for on the cable track. 

visually shocking. technically pretty simple. 

and i still dont see how N&B was wrong on the torque guard thread.


----------



## IRISH_11 (Mar 13, 2004)

TwoInch said:


> i still dont understand the fascination with the concentric string track.... or why anyone thinks it means anything in the draw force curve. im curious how you would end up with anything other than a traditional shaped DFC...? all of that is controlled by the cable tracks.
> 
> i agree that its very similar to the admiral... and the fact that the admiral cams were not perfectly round or concentric means nothing. they were very close, and the axle was very close to the center. if some of the mechanical advantage isnt made on the string track(elliptical), it will just be made up for on the cable track.
> 
> ...


Go back to the torque guard thread I sketched it up for you. If you want I can get some basla wood and do a video showing that both systems have the same effect as far as the riser torquing. Or you can go outside and get a twig. Shave off a 2" splinter so it replicates the bendy stick on the ZT system. Now hold the opposite end off the twig in one hand and pull on the splinter. The whole twig will move in the same direction as you are pulling the splinter because there is no fulcrum or geometry shift at the side where the splinter is. It is a free end. The fulcrum on both systems is where the ZT bracket attaches to the riser.


----------



## sneak1413 (Aug 15, 2007)

TwoInch said:


> i still dont understand the fascination with the concentric string track.... or why anyone thinks it means anything in the draw force curve. im curious how you would end up with anything other than a traditional shaped DFC...? all of that is controlled by the cable tracks.
> 
> i agree that its very similar to the admiral... and the fact that the admiral cams were not perfectly round or concentric means nothing. they were very close, and the axle was very close to the center. if some of the mechanical advantage isnt made on the string track(elliptical), it will just be made up for on the cable track.
> 
> ...


Alan was not seeing the compressional load on the zt system initially. This is where he was wrong. That along with his force directions showing more inward pressure than rearward pressure. He did figure out by the end of the thread that there is compression(rearward force) on the zt system by the cables. If I remember correctly there is almost twice as much rearward force as side force on the system at full draw.


----------



## sneak1413 (Aug 15, 2007)

IRISH_11 said:


> Here are some pics for the doubters as to my HTR speed.
> 
> Think what you will sneak I can't fix stupid. My bow was fired across 2 chronographs. The shops and mine which is calibrated with a certificate stating such. Gets done every 12 mos just for guys like you.
> 
> Some will doubt the pics. There were several witnesses at the shop who seen it. I guess in the end I may have to fire every HTR at the shop across the chrono on video and post it on you tube for all the morons on AT.


Never said your chrono was not calibrated, I said most chronographed read differently so you can't really compare across the Internet. I know for a fact that our chrono reads 8 fps slower than the pro chrono at a local shop. If you truly think the no cam is as fast as any other bow on the market, especially with 85% mods, you really need to test a few more bows. It is not. There is a video somewhere of one shop shooting one at 30" and it was within a couple fps if I remember correctly of 300 fps at 5 gpp. And no they where not mathews haters they where promoting the bow.


----------



## IRISH_11 (Mar 13, 2004)

sneak1413 said:


> Never said your chrono was not calibrated, I said most chronographed read differently so you can't really compare across the Internet. I know for a fact that our chrono reads 8 fps slower than the pro chrono at a local shop. If you truly think the no cam is as fast as any other bow on the market, especially with 85% mods, you really need to test a few more bows. It is not. There is a video somewhere of one shop shooting one at 30" and it was within a couple fps if I remember correctly of 300 fps at 5 gpp. And no they where not mathews haters they where promoting the bow.


I never said it was as fast as other bows on the market. I merely conveyed what my HTR shoots and what every other HTR the shop has set up shot. Shop has sold 7 in less than a week. All have been within a couple feet of what they should be. I can only state the facts.

I am also curious as to when 69.16 ft lbs of kinetic energy was not enough to kill whitetail when I would the farm that 95% of all Bowhunters in North America are less than that.


----------



## griffwar (Nov 15, 2012)

sneak1413 said:


> Never said your chrono was not calibrated, I said most chronographed read differently so you can't really compare across the Internet. I know for a fact that our chrono reads 8 fps slower than the pro chrono at a local shop. If you truly think the no cam is as fast as any other bow on the market, especially with 85% mods, you really need to test a few more bows. It is not. There is a video somewhere of one shop shooting one at 30" and it was within a couple fps if I remember correctly of 300 fps at 5 gpp. And no they where not mathews haters they where promoting the bow.


The one infamous video that all go to, watch some more by other people that also have no agenda showing the bow making it's stated ibo. The one I shot did, and a lot of people on here stating there's does to, but no got to go to the one video to prove your point when a lot of people are saying it does in fact make ibo.


----------



## sneak1413 (Aug 15, 2007)

IRISH_11 said:


> I never said it was as fast as other bows on the market. I merely conveyed what my HTR shoots and what every other HTR the shop has set up shot. Shop has sold 7 in less than a week. All have been within a couple feet of what they should be. I can only state the facts.
> 
> I am also curious as to when 69.16 ft lbs of kinetic energy was not enough to kill whitetail when I would the farm that 95% of all Bowhunters in North America are less than that.


I never said it wasn't enough. Why do we have bows that shoot a 275 fps ibo? That would still be enough to shoot whitetails? Oh wait, probably because nobody would buy it.


----------



## sneak1413 (Aug 15, 2007)

griffwar said:


> The one infamous video that all go to, watch some more by other people that also have no agenda showing the bow making it's stated ibo. The one I shot did, and a lot of people on here stating there's does to, but no got to go to the one video to prove your point when a lot of people are saying it does in fact make ibo.


I never stated it did not make ibo I stated it was considerably slower than average especially with 85% letoff mods. Read my posts, all of them and you will see that I have stated numerous times that it is a good bow and a great change for mathews why do you feel the need to try to come after me as if I was saying it is junk 30 year old technology? I am stating facts. I can bet the farm I have way more design and archery background than 99.99% of folks on here


----------



## IRISH_11 (Mar 13, 2004)

sneak1413 said:


> I never said it wasn't enough. Why do we have bows that shoot a 275 fps ibo? That would still be enough to shoot whitetails? Oh wait, probably because nobody would buy it.


You are correct you never said it wasn't enough. Some other troll did. Matters not. I wish we had 100 HTR's in the shop because we would sell them all.


----------



## bghunter7777 (Aug 14, 2014)

You can not believe a chrono unless it supports my agenda if its a pse then it is spot on if its a Mathews then you are an idiot and its wrong unless it says its slower then ibo then it is spot on.


----------



## sneak1413 (Aug 15, 2007)

bghunter7777 said:


> You can not believe a chrono unless it supports my agenda if its a pse then it is spot on if its a Mathews then you are an idiot and its wrong unless it says its slower then ibo then it is spot on.


Not at all. The only way to really compare is to shoot all bows through the same chrono after checking timing, measuring draw length, measuring weight, and shooting the same arrows. It is the only fair comparison. All our bows in our shop on our chrono come in 6-14 fps under ibo with a loop and peep set at manufacturers 30" draw.


----------



## Cold Weather (Dec 17, 2008)

I've always wondered how exactly a chronograph is "calibrated"

for mine there is no adjustment-and it duplicates exactly my shops chronograph and that is from a different manufacturer.

the speed of the new Mathews is more than adequate for hunting. Truth be told, razor sharp broadhead, and good arrow flight will equal success in the field.

and a lot use laser rangefinders so they know the exact distance. Combined with a slider sight and results can be excellent.


----------



## rhodeislandhntr (Jul 3, 2006)

i tested the prodigy at 63lbs, and 28in dl, nice bow but i would need a 50lb model for some injuries i have, it draws nice, nice wall, and doesnt want to take off on you even being an inch long in DL, i also tried the nocam on 2 different occasions, both times set at 63lbs, once with a 28.5 in mod and it drew and held perfectly, i didnt feel a hump or anything, just the wall which is solid, i also tried it at 26in, an inch to short but still had the same feeling. I feel i can draw more poundage with the nocam than i can with the prodigy. Its a tuff desicion for me because i can get the prodigy with 50lb limbs or the nocam with 60lb limbs and be shooting about the same speed, i know it comes down to feel, and i am leaning towards the nocam because of the after shot experience, dead quiet an no vibe, the prodigy was quiet but not as quiet as the nocam and the prodigy had noticeable vibe compared to the nocam. I was also wondering about string for the nocam, forgot tot ask but are they still using those zebra or barracuda strings, forgot which ones they where but i do remember i didnt like them.


----------



## Whaack (Apr 2, 2006)

nuts&bolts said:


> I get tired sometimes, folks.
> 
> Spent 25 years in engineering,
> managed the west coast ops for a large engineering company,
> ...


Alan,

Thank you again for your selfless contribution to AT to make this place great. Your post above is full of information and considerations, yet it won't stop those that wish to belittle and pick apart someone's design.

Be it Mathews, Hoyt, Elite, PSE, whatever. 

My response to them would be the same if they were standing in front of me. "Think you can build it better Mr. Genius? Knock yourself out".


----------



## vince71969 (Apr 17, 2004)

Cold Weather said:


> I've always wondered how exactly a chronograph is "calibrated"
> 
> for mine there is no adjustment-and it duplicates exactly my shops chronograph and that is from a different manufacturer.
> 
> ...


High end chronographs are calibrated with, if memory serves, radio waves. Mathews uses one of these. Not practical for home use. They cost approx. $8000.00


----------



## fletched (May 10, 2006)

Cold Weather said:


> I've always wondered how exactly a chronograph is "calibrated"
> 
> for mine there is no adjustment-and it duplicates exactly my shops chronograph and that is from a different manufacturer.
> 
> ...


If you want to know how accurate a chrono is, shoot it against a custom chronograph speedtach. I have one and those were know to be the most accurate chronographs made.


----------



## BtwchInvasion (Mar 16, 2014)

IRISH_11 said:


> Maybe you need to get your eyes checked. The minimum for deer is 42. Unless my math has failed me 69.19 far exceeds the 42 minimum. And i'm willing to bet the farm that 95% of all deer hunters fall into the 42-65 lb range.


I thought you were talking about KE. Relax bro just because someone doesn't like your bow doesn't mean you have to get cranky all I'm saying is some people like speed not because marketing brainwashes them like you assume maybe some people want a fast bow to make the cleanest kill possible! Isn't that our duty as hunters? To make clean kills??


----------



## Hidden Danger (Mar 13, 2008)

nuts&bolts said:


> I get tired sometimes, folks.
> 
> Spent 25 years in engineering,
> managed the west coast ops for a large engineering company,
> ...


Trust me , you don't have to explain anything . For those of us who have followed your posts for years now , we know what's what. Thank you for contributing to this thread in a manner that so few are actually capable of and with more class than some of these trolls , haters and wannabes deserve.


----------



## 0nepin (Sep 16, 2009)

Great thread . After shooting the nocam I was very very impressed at the shot .crazy quiet and dead .the bow holds on target extremely well.if archery talk every starts handing out MVP awards (most valuable poster ) N & B would have that on wraps every year.btw Great job mathews .not my kind of bow but man it's sweet.there does seem to be This need breed of want to be bow tuner that like to argue with n&b lately and I find it comical they don't even know enuff to know they don't know.


----------



## SCFox (Dec 11, 2005)

rhodeislandhntr said:


> i tested the prodigy at 63lbs, and 28in dl, nice bow but i would need a 50lb model for some injuries i have, it draws nice, nice wall, and doesnt want to take off on you even being an inch long in DL, i also tried the nocam on 2 different occasions, both times set at 63lbs, once with a 28.5 in mod and it drew and held perfectly, i didnt feel a hump or anything, just the wall which is solid, i also tried it at 26in, an inch to short but still had the same feeling. I feel i can draw more poundage with the nocam than i can with the prodigy. Its a tuff desicion for me because i can get the prodigy with 50lb limbs or the nocam with 60lb limbs and be shooting about the same speed, i know it comes down to feel, and i am leaning towards the nocam because of the after shot experience, dead quiet an no vibe, the prodigy was quiet but not as quiet as the nocam and the prodigy had noticeable vibe compared to the nocam. I was also wondering about string for the nocam, forgot tot ask but are they still using those zebra or barracuda strings, forgot which ones they where but i do remember i didnt like them.


Mathews new strings are the Trophy line. Far better than the old Barraccuda strings. 

SCFox


----------



## ridgehunter70 (Sep 30, 2012)

hidden danger said:


> Hahahahahaha..................I actually had myself banned on purpose. I snapped on those low life's and I went on a vulgar rant for over 3 hours before someone actually gained permission to boot me off for life. I guess they had to wake up mom and dad and get the ok.


Yeah and I have lost all kinds of sleep over it also. Hahahaha


----------



## ridgehunter70 (Sep 30, 2012)

fletched said:


> I am a lefty. Shooting one won't be an option for a while. But the brace height is still lower than I like for a hunting bow. The reason I would shoot a sub 7 brace height is to gain more performance. I typically stay above 7 inches. I have a near 30 inch draw so I don't suffer in performance. I would be interested in how I would get along with the lower grip design as well.


Wow. 
Please explain to all of us enquiring minds how someone is so perfect that they can tell the difference in performance between 3/8" in brace height just by shooting it. 
All this (paper figures) has a lot of guys missing out on a truly great shooting bow. Not just the mathews but a lot of other brands as well.


----------



## alks456 (Apr 21, 2010)

nuts&bolts said:


> the cables are in a X-configuration.
> You have a double pulley, on each axle.
> Pulley on the left side of the cams is for the TRAPPED end loop...with the sleeve.
> Pulley on the right side of the cams, same diameter, is for the PEG END of the control cables (#1 and #2).
> ...


Hell, way simple even for me, a ******* with high education... So the lever ratio can be varied by
the main wheel/pully diameter.


----------



## THE ELKMAN (Jan 2, 2013)

It DOESN'T make IBO, nor does any other Mathews bow, and that is with them being flat out fraudulent about their draw length. This is all common knowledge for those outside "the sheep herd"...



griffwar said:


> The one infamous video that all go to, watch some more by other people that also have no agenda showing the bow making it's stated ibo. The one I shot did, and a lot of people on here stating there's does to, but no got to go to the one video to prove your point when a lot of people are saying it does in fact make ibo.


----------



## THE ELKMAN (Jan 2, 2013)

Yeah... Thats exactly what I said. You sir may want to re-read... LOL:mg:



nuts&bolts said:


> BowTech Admiral.
> NOT round, as far as I can tell.
> 
> *Quote Originally Posted by sneak1413 View Post
> So Alan I have not read but only the first page on this thread, but how much different as far as setup, tuning, and shooting is this system compared to the bowtech admiral and captain? Both have crisscrossing cables on either side of cam, both have very near round string track, both have no yokes. The take up cable track is bigger(takes up more string) due to the let out side of the cable letting out more than the avs system does. Am I correct in seeing two very similar cam systems with one being slightly modified for looks of a no cam and slight modification of the cable tracks to accommodate a different limb angle, deflection and preload?*


----------



## WVaBuckHunter (Sep 30, 2010)

THE ELKMAN said:


> It DOESN'T make IBO, nor does any other Mathews bow, and that is with them being flat out fraudulent about their draw length. This is all common knowledge for those outside "the sheep herd"...


No Mathews bow hits IBO?


----------



## seiowabow (Dec 19, 2010)

WVaBuckHunter said:


> No Mathews bow hits IBO?


Their fastest bows, the mr series, are close to 3/4" long on dl. So if you correct the dl.... I think that's what he is saying


----------



## SCFox (Dec 11, 2005)

THE ELKMAN said:


> It DOESN'T make IBO, nor does any other Mathews bow, and that is with them being flat out fraudulent about their draw length. This is all common knowledge for those outside "the sheep herd"...


It makes IBO no problem. Its DL is running 1/4". If you can't get one to hit IBO, learn how to tune a bow or ask for help. 

SCFox


----------



## goodoleboy11 (Apr 23, 2013)

SCFox said:


> It makes IBO no problem. Its DL is running 1/4". If you can't get one to hit IBO, learn how to tune a bow or ask for help.
> 
> SCFox


It's elkman. Don't even bother, if it ain't hoyt, he will be making up all kinds of hateful crap


----------



## griffwar (Nov 15, 2012)

THE ELKMAN said:


> It DOESN'T make IBO, nor does any other Mathews bow, and that is with them being flat out fraudulent about their draw length. This is all common knowledge for those outside "the sheep herd"...


I am elkman i know all even though i have not shot it i don't care if people who shot say's it makes ibo, because i am elkman i know everything.
What a joke if you don't like the bow fine, but get a life and quit bashing.


----------



## alks456 (Apr 21, 2010)

They get advantage as I was told in my archery club, with their measurements over others, so Elkman is right.


----------



## goodoleboy11 (Apr 23, 2013)

alks456 said:


> They get advantage as I was told in my archery club, with their measurements over others, so Elkman is right.


Your dreaming if you think Mathews is the only company that runs long in DL. I've seen every brand run long.


----------



## griffwar (Nov 15, 2012)

alks456 said:


> They get advantage as I was told in my archery club, with their measurements over others, so Elkman is right.


All bows run long not just Mathews, there was a independent study it's on here somewhere, that checked that out. Only one company I think it was Obsession come in at it's stated draw length, so they all run long.


----------



## alks456 (Apr 21, 2010)

My Bowtechs are not long - or suppose both them and Martin I shoot also, are long to presicely the same fugure.
Which is strange.


----------



## SCFox (Dec 11, 2005)

alks456 said:


> They get advantage as I was told in my archery club, with their measurements over others, so Elkman is right.


Well, my archery club said they don't, so now what?

SCFox


----------



## alks456 (Apr 21, 2010)

Personally not interested in who does what.


----------



## alks456 (Apr 21, 2010)

So they may have it right - or wrong.


----------



## goodoleboy11 (Apr 23, 2013)

alks456 said:


> So they may have it right - or wrong.


Well if I were you I would find a new club lol they sound like biased children


----------



## Mathias (Mar 21, 2005)

THE ELKMAN said:


> It DOESN'T make IBO, nor does any other Mathews bow, and that is with them being flat out fraudulent about their draw length. This is all common knowledge for those outside "the sheep herd"...


Life of the party ccasion16:


----------



## griffwar (Nov 15, 2012)

alks456 said:


> Personally not interested in who does what.


Then why get on here and state that they do because your archery club say's so??


----------



## WVaBuckHunter (Sep 30, 2010)

It's a rare thing not to see a bow come in a little long on draw length. Mathews, in the past, have came in longer than most, with Bear being right there with them. I think both have improved a little in recent years. A lot of bow companies inflate their IBO, as has Mathews over the years, but again they have gotten better. I have tuned several Chill X's and recently bought one. So far every Chill X that I have done has hit IBO.


----------



## alks456 (Apr 21, 2010)

goodoleboy11 said:


> Well if I were you I would find a new club lol they sound like biased children


See the reply above - what if they are right and you wrong?
You're doing the same.


----------



## alks456 (Apr 21, 2010)

griffwar said:


> Then why get on here and state that they do because your archery club say's so??


Because I wanted to leave a reply. This is forum, if you didn't know that before.


----------



## griffwar (Nov 15, 2012)

alks456 said:


> Because I wanted to leave a reply. This is forum, if you didn't know that before.


Just wanted to stir the pot a little?


----------



## alks456 (Apr 21, 2010)

Sharing what I know. The same you do, - no?
Or why such stir for this topic - maybe this indicates there's smth Mathews fans doesn't like to be discussed?..hah-hah.


----------



## goodoleboy11 (Apr 23, 2013)

alks456 said:


> See the reply above - what if they are right and you wrong?
> You're doing the same.


I'm not doing remotely the same. If your club said that, they are biased and immature. I have worked on and owned many bows, and ALL of them have been long, and ALL of them have been spot on. Do you have experience with testing bows like this? It purely depends on how the bow is tuned, if it is at maxed poundage or backed off many turns, there are so many things that can throw off DL. If you are new into archery or maybe you aren't new and just haven't really gotten into the tech side of it, I suggest you form your opinions off of real world results and experience and not off the silly bias of your club. I can tell you 100 percent that if your club told you this, they are very biased.


----------



## Padgett (Feb 5, 2010)

I agree with nuts and bolts, matthews has done their work and found a way to produce a really good system. I have noticed over the last few years that the shape of the cams are getting bigger and more offset. The fact that matthews has found a way to produce good speed out of a set of cams where the outside is a round circle to me is really cool. To me of all the things going on with this cam system this is the most profound that as the bow is drawn and shot the string doesnt jerked around a weird shaped cam, it gets to follow a nice circle from start to finish and the only up and down movement is how much the limbs compressed during the drawing of the bow.

My speed freak days are over and to me I am glad that I am now looking for bows that are well made and shootable and this looks to be a solid offering from matthews.


----------



## alks456 (Apr 21, 2010)

I personally don't care and choose what I like to shoot. I also don't doubt their knowledge as they're not only servicing and tuning bows, but also reparing things. So your words are of equal value, whatever you present to support your words.


----------



## norsemen (Feb 22, 2011)

FWIW..... I've only had one bow that was ever correct on DL. Elite E35. Everything else has been long. I can only assume, most are guilty of that. It doesn't bother me though. I just get the 27.5" mods to go with my 28" draw length.


----------



## griffwar (Nov 15, 2012)

alks456 said:


> Sharing what I know. The same you do, - no?
> Or why such stir for this topic - maybe this indicates there's smth Mathews fans doesn't like to be discussed?..hah-hah.


Not a Mathews fan, I shoot all bows, I shoot a Prime Alloy right now. I do have a HTR on order because it was the bow for Me this year, after I shot all the big names, I liked it best. Have you shot it? are you just jumping on the band wagon because it seems cool to bash Mathews?? I own bows by all the big names, I want to try Obsession but it's a 4 hour one way trip for me to try it, so to assume I'm a Mathews fan, well let's just say about people that assume.


----------



## alks456 (Apr 21, 2010)

I was also fascinated in engineering sense, how 100% round cams can produce the lever effect - this is wonderful.
So the thorough comparison is great thing to have.


----------



## THE ELKMAN (Jan 2, 2013)

Never one we have tested, and not even close if they are forced to a true draw length. They are running a SOLID 1/2" to 5/8" long these days depending on model....



WVaBuckHunter said:


> No Mathews bow hits IBO?


----------



## alks456 (Apr 21, 2010)

griffwar said:


> Not a Mathews fan, I shoot all bows, I shoot a Prime Alloy right now. I do have a HTR on order because it was the bow for Me this year, after I shot all the big names, I liked it best. Have you shot it? are you just jumping on the band wagon because it seems cool to bash Mathews?? I own bows by all the big names, I want to try Obsession but it's a 4 hour one way trip for me to try it, so to assume I'm a Mathews fan, well let's just say about people that assume.


I also "defend" Mathews occacionally in the all-Bowtech surrounding for example, as I no problem shoot solocam and some Bowetch
guys have allergy for it.


----------



## THE ELKMAN (Jan 2, 2013)

Its not 1/4" long. Its 1/2" long on the HTR with 85%, and thats being generous. Mathews hasn't made a bow that was only a 1/4" over from the factory since the SQ2...



SCFox said:


> It makes IBO no problem. Its DL is running 1/4". If you can't get one to hit IBO, learn how to tune a bow or ask for help.
> 
> SCFox


----------



## goodoleboy11 (Apr 23, 2013)

THE ELKMAN said:


> Never one we have tested, and not even close if they are forced to a true draw length. They are running a SOLID 1/2" to 5/8" long these days depending on model....


Lmao! Learn how to tune bro! That is insane, not even remotely true on any modern Mathews I've seen with draw stops, even the chill without draw stops is not even close to that long


----------



## griffwar (Nov 15, 2012)

THE ELKMAN said:


> Its not 1/4" long. Its 1/2" long on the HTR with 85%, and thats being generous. Mathews hasn't made a bow that was only a 1/4" over from the factory since the SQ2...


The elkman say's it's got to be true!!! What A JOKE.


----------



## goodoleboy11 (Apr 23, 2013)

alks456 said:


> I personally don't care and choose what I like to shoot. I also don't doubt their knowledge as they're not only servicing and tuning bows, but also reparing things. So your words are of equal value, whatever you present to support your words.


Right, I'm sure they have knowledge. But they also have bias if they said that. I know very knowledgeable techs that have bias and that gets the best of them. What it boils down to is take anything you hear with a grain of salt and verify yourself to form an opinion. All the companies run long, I have not worked on any obsession or new breed or any of the newest bow companies lines so I can't speak on behalf of them. Elkman here is the one of the biggest hoyt fanboys on AT. Cool dude, very biased though. His claims are simply not even close to true. And his beloved Hoyt's I have seen run long.


----------



## alks456 (Apr 21, 2010)

griffwar said:


> Not a Mathews fan, I shoot all bows, I shoot a Prime Alloy right now. I do have a HTR on order because it was the bow for Me this year, after I shot all the big names, I liked it best. Have you shot it? are you just jumping on the band wagon because it seems cool to bash Mathews?? I own bows by all the big names, I want to try Obsession but it's a 4 hour one way trip for me to try it, so to assume I'm a Mathews fan, well let's just say about people that assume.


4 hours seem not such a big issue - if no ice on the roads?...
I didn't bash Mathews - the discussed matters were different, don't you see.
I didn't try Obsession, - there's pretty narrow choice of brands in my archery club and in others they won't even let you draw smth, let alone shoot.
Of rare brands, I got very mixed feelings about Strother's one model - not the flagship, but it was so unusual at drawing and firing, that I can't even make feelings accounted. But I'd not take this bow anyway...too slow.


----------



## alks456 (Apr 21, 2010)

THE ELKMAN said:


> Never one we have tested, and not even close if they are forced to a true draw length. They are running a SOLID 1/2" to 5/8" long these days depending on model....


I was told about 3/4 " of gain for their mesurements over others.
Seems heck of a lot - if there's such expression in English.


----------



## THE ELKMAN (Jan 2, 2013)

Not true. I love the Prime line, the new Elites, and certain models of the newer Bowtechs, PSE BowSadness is a great line, Darton is very under rated, and I could even live with a new Chill X to play with. They all have their strengths, and their weaknesses, and I don't mind debating them. I can shoot what ever bow I choose for no cost, I make a decision every year, not based on brand but who has least amount of weaknesses. Right now that is the Hoyt Nitrum for me, based purely in type A personality facts, nothing else. Next year Mathews may change the archery world, and you can bet I will be holding one in my next picture with a Bull, or getting a trophy at the podium. Until then all in good fun, and debate... 



goodoleboy11 said:


> It's elkman. Don't even bother, if it ain't hoyt, he will be making up all kinds of hateful crap


----------



## THE ELKMAN (Jan 2, 2013)

Ask ANY question you want in regard to ANY tuning and lets see who knows what??? That is a DIRECT challenge. (You realize I do this for a living right?)



goodoleboy11 said:


> Lmao! Learn how to tune bro! That is insane, not even remotely true on any modern Mathews I've seen with draw stops, even the chill without draw stops is not even close to that long


----------



## goodoleboy11 (Apr 23, 2013)

THE ELKMAN said:


> Not true. I love the Prime line, the new Elites, and certain models of the newer Bowtechs, PSE BowSadness is a great line, Darton is very under rated, and I could even live with a new Chill X to play with. They all have their strengths, and their weaknesses, and I don't mind debating them. I can shoot what ever bow I choose for no cost, I make a decision every year, not based on brand but who has least amount of weaknesses. Right now that is the Hoyt Nitrum for me, based purely in type A personality facts, nothing else. Next year Mathews may change the archery world, and you can bet I will be holding one in my next picture with a Bull, or getting a trophy at the podium. Until then all in good fun, and debate...


This is the most reasonable thing I've heard from you. You know you will almost always have a hoyt though. You know it! Lol


----------



## Padgett (Feb 5, 2010)

This whole draw length thing is interesting, just last night I spent 30 minutes twisting a old string that has tens of thousands of shots in it because my draw length had grown. My cables were on the outer edge of the timing marks and the bow is synced and capable of shooting awesome arrow flight but I put a bunch of twists in it and I put the cables on the inside of the timing marks closer to the other timing dot making the draw length over a quarter inch shorter. I could have twisted a little more and brought the draw length down a little more and had the cables on top of that dot which it the other extreme.

When you guys pull a bow out of the box it is in a mod setting from the factory and it really hasn't been tuned, each mod setting gives you a general draw length and then you can custom twist the string set to time and sync and get rid of cam lean and adjust your brace height and your draw length.


----------



## goodoleboy11 (Apr 23, 2013)

THE ELKMAN said:


> Ask ANY question you want in regard to ANY tuning and lets see who knows what??? That is a DIRECT challenge. (You realize I do this for a living right?)


I have messed with so many Mathews and if the limbs are maxed, I have never seen over 1/4 inch long. That's just insane. My chill R was actually even less than that long. It was almost spot on. The Hoyt's I've messed with are all around 1/4 inch to spot on. I don't care if you do it for a living! That's just not what I have ever seen.


----------



## goodoleboy11 (Apr 23, 2013)

alks456 said:


> I was told about 3/4 " of gain for their mesurements over others.
> Seems heck of a lot - if there's such expression in English.


No way in hell. Lol your club has lost their credibility with me haha they seem very biased


----------



## THE ELKMAN (Jan 2, 2013)

What's in this picture...^ --- By far the best pure hunting bow made at the time.(Won a bunch of tournys with it too) As long as Hoyt keeps doing what their doing with advancements in shootability, holding and tunability, blended with best quality control in the industry, their going to be hard to beat, but I'm hoping somebody steps up and crushes em!


----------



## THE ELKMAN (Jan 2, 2013)

Horrible pic quality. LOL! If you can't tell thats my beloved MQ1...(Still Matt's bow of choice)


----------



## goodoleboy11 (Apr 23, 2013)

I'm on tapatalk, I can't make it out very well. I think hoyt has been rather bland, only thing I'm impressed with is the CST ZT. Even though any Mathews or Elite has less vibe TO ME. I'm a picky SOB though


----------



## alks456 (Apr 21, 2010)

goodoleboy11 said:


> No way in hell. Lol your club has lost their credibility with me haha they seem very biased


Wonder if there's a video with the procedure of DL determination. Then one may take a bow and repeat to get the figures.


----------



## goodoleboy11 (Apr 23, 2013)

THE ELKMAN said:


> Horrible pic quality. LOL! If you can't tell thats my beloved MQ1...(Still Matt's bow of choice)


Ahh okay, see I was a fan of the feather max. Really liked that bow! My girlfriends dad is still using one! Lol amazing bull btw. A late congrats to you!


----------



## THE ELKMAN (Jan 2, 2013)

I'm just curious, you tell me: What is the proper method for measuring AMO standard draw length? (Your version)



goodoleboy11 said:


> I have messed with so many Mathews and if the limbs are maxed, I have never seen over 1/4 inch long. That's just insane. My chill R was actually even less than that long. It was almost spot on. The Hoyt's I've messed with are all around 1/4 inch to spot on. I don't care if you do it for a living! That's just not what I have ever seen.


----------



## alks456 (Apr 21, 2010)

The guys were explaining this on a bow, not just words.
So one may seek a reference of a standard procedure.


----------



## goodoleboy11 (Apr 23, 2013)

THE ELKMAN said:


> What is proper method for measuring AMO standard draw length? (Your version)


All I use is my buddy's draw board. It's been pretty accurate, I never really do the whole AMO measurement, I'm not a tech I'm more a picky bow hunter that does my own work


----------



## THE ELKMAN (Jan 2, 2013)

Well then how IN THEE HELL are you arguing this point! LMFAO! Hard too!!!! I love you man!:darkbeer: Time to work....:zip:


----------



## goodoleboy11 (Apr 23, 2013)

THE ELKMAN said:


> Well then how IN THEE HELL are you arguing this point! LMFAO! Hard too!!!! I love you man!:darkbeer: Time to work....:zip:


I know the method and have done it, I'm talking real world measuring the dang bow on a draw board and getting it ready to shoot! I've never had any of the bows I've messed with come under ibo either. That's all I worry about for the most part, good bareshafts and Broadheads and ibo. It's done me well!


----------



## WVaBuckHunter (Sep 30, 2010)

THE ELKMAN said:


> Never one we have tested, and not even close if they are forced to a true draw length. They are running a SOLID 1/2" to 5/8" long these days depending on model....


Every Chill X that I have done has hit IBO.



THE ELKMAN said:


> Ask ANY question you want in regard to ANY tuning and lets see who knows what??? That is a DIRECT challenge. (You realize I do this for a living right?)


If you're broadhead tuning a binary cam bow, and the broadheads hit 6" to the left of field points, what do you do to fix it?


----------



## SCFox (Dec 11, 2005)

THE ELKMAN said:


> Its not 1/4" long. Its 1/2" long on the HTR with 85%, and thats being generous. Mathews hasn't made a bow that was only a 1/4" over from the factory since the SQ2...


ChillR with 75% let off 1/4" long, ChillX with 85's is an 1/8 long. HTR's at max poundage are around 1/4" long. I'm not disputing that some of the earlier solo cams were running long, but I've never seen one go 5/8" over. 

SCFox


----------



## goodoleboy11 (Apr 23, 2013)

SCFox said:


> ChillR with 75% let off 1/4" long, ChillX with 85's is an 1/8 long. HTR's at max poundage are around 1/4" long. I'm not disputing that some of the earlier solo cams were running long, but I've never seen one go 5/8" over.
> 
> SCFox


This exactly.


----------



## outdoorsmannc (Sep 12, 2011)

Hey Irish 11, or anyone else with a 28" draw length,

Would you mind shooting a 430 grain +/- arrow out of the no cam and let me know the speed. That is my arrow weight that I prefer to hunt with and like to stay in the 280' range if possible. I really like the design of this bow and just curious of what its potential is with the heavier arrow and shorter draw.

I wish all of these reverse geniuses on here that ruin a great thread would design us short armed people 300 fps tack driver!!!!

Thanks in advance to you guys that provide credible information on here.


----------



## outdoorsmannc (Sep 12, 2011)

OOPs Meant "A 300 fps tack driver"


----------



## sneak1413 (Aug 15, 2007)

outdoorsmannc said:


> Hey Irish 11, or anyone else with a 28" draw length,
> 
> Would you mind shooting a 430 grain +/- arrow out of the no cam and let me know the speed. That is my arrow weight that I prefer to hunt with and like to stay in the 280' range if possible. I really like the design of this bow and just curious of what its potential is with the heavier arrow and shorter draw.
> 
> ...


I built one....36" ata, pretty neutral riser 6" brace height and shoots well over 300 fps at 27.75" amo draw it can be done and be shootable.


----------



## vince71969 (Apr 17, 2004)

THE ELKMAN said:


> Its not 1/4" long. Its 1/2" long on the HTR with 85%, and thats being generous. Mathews hasn't made a bow that was only a 1/4" over from the factory since the SQ2...


Here's a sampling of bows and their measured draw length:

These aren't my measurements. These were all done by Anthony Barnum for his yearly bow evaluations in ArcheryTrade Magazine

APA Mamba MX2: 1 1/8" over
APA Pit Viper: 13/16" over
Bear Anarchy: 1/8" under
Bear Attack: 7/16" over
Bear Carnage: 1/8" over
Bear Motive 6: even
Bear Truth II: 3/8" over
BowTech Admiral: 1/4" over
BowTech Destroyer 350: 1/2" over
BowTech Experience: 1/4" over
Bowtech Insanity CPX: 3/16" over
Bowtech Invasion CPX: 1/2" over
C.P. Oneida Eagle Kestrel: 1/4" over
Diamond Dead Eye: 1/4" over
Diamond IceMan: 7/32" over 
Diamond IceMan FLX: 1/4" over
Elite Answer: 1/8" over
Elite Hunter 2013: 1/8" over
Elite Hunter 2011: 3/16" over
Elite Z28 2009: even
Elite Z28 2010: 5/16" over
Hoyt Alphamax: 3/16" over
Hoyt Carbon Element: 1/4" over
Hoyt Maxxis 31: 1/8" under
Hoyt Spyder: even
Hoyt Vector 32: 1/4" over
Maitland Halo 34: 1/4" over
Martin Bengal Pro: 5/8" over
Martin Firecat 400: 3/8" over
Martin Nemesis 35: 5/8" over 
Mathews HeliM: 1/4" over
Mathews Reezen: 1/4" over
Mathews Z7: 3/8" over 
Mathews Z7 Xtreme: 1/4" over
Mathews Creed: 1/4" over
Mission Maniac: 1/8" over
Mission Venture: 1/4" over
New Breed Eclipse: 1/8" under
Obsession Lethal Force: 3/16" over
Obsession Nightmare: 1/8" under
Parker Viking: 1/4" over
Parker Inferno: 1/4" over
Parker Python: 1/8" under
PSE Bowmadness XL: 3/8" over 
PSE X-Force Axe 6: 1/8" over
Prime Centroid: 1/8" over 
Prime Impact: 1/4" over
Prime Shift: 7/16" over
Quest XPB: 1/4" over
Ross Carnivore: 7/32" over
Ross Crave DRT 31.5: 3/4" over
Strother SX-1: 1/8" over
Quest Drive: 3/16" over
Strother SX-1: 1/8" over
Strother Wrath: even
Strother Wrath SHO: even
Xpedition X-Ring IV: even


----------



## griffwar (Nov 15, 2012)

vince71969 said:


> Here's a sampling of bows and their measured draw length:
> 
> These aren't my measurements. These were all done by Anthony Barnum for his yearly bow evaluations in ArcheryTrade Magazine
> 
> ...


Nice Vince.


----------



## Whaack (Apr 2, 2006)

vince71969 said:


> Here's a sampling of bows and their measured draw length:
> 
> These aren't my measurements. These were all done by Anthony Barnum for his yearly bow evaluations in ArcheryTrade Magazine
> 
> ...


That is really interesting to see. Looks like they all come a bit long for the most part.


----------



## vince71969 (Apr 17, 2004)

Updated list;




APA Mamba MX2: 1 1/8" over
APA Pit Viper: 13/16" over
Athens Khrios LD: 1/8" under
Bear Agenda 6: even
Bear Anarchy: 1/8" under
Bear Attack: 7/16" over
Bear Carnage: 1/8" over
Bear Domain: 5/8" under
Bear Method: 3/16" over
Bear Motive 6: even
Bear Truth II: 3/8" over
BowTech Admiral: 1/4" over
BowTech Assassin: 1/8" over
BowTech Destroyer 350: 1/2" over
BowTech Experience: 1/4" over
Bowtech Insanity CPX: 3/16" over
Bowtech Invasion CPX: 1/2" over
C.P. Oneida Eagle Kestrel: 1/4" over
Darton DS-700: 3/8" over
Diamond Core: even
Diamond Dead Eye: 1/4" over
Diamond IceMan: 7/32" over 
Diamond IceMan FLX: 1/4" over
Elite Answer: 1/8" over
Elite Energy 32: 1/4" over
Elite Hunter 2013: 1/8" over
Elite Hunter 2011: 3/16" over
Elite Z28 2009: even
Elite Z28 2010: 5/16" over
Hoyt Alphamax: 3/16" over
Hoyt Charger: 1/8" under
Hoyt Carbon Element: 1/4" over
Hoyt Faktor 30: 1/8" over
Hoyt Maxxis 31: 1/8" under
Hoyt Spyder: even
Hoyt Vector 32: 1/4" over
Limbsaver Proton DT: 3/16" over
Maitland Halo 34: 1/4" over
Martin Bengal Pro: 5/8" over
Martin Firecat 400: 3/8" over
Martin Nemesis 35: 5/8" over 
Mathews HeliM: 1/4" over
Mathews Monster ChillR: 1/4" over
Mathews Reezen: 1/4" over
Mathews Z7: 3/8" over 
Mathews Z7 Xtreme: 1/4" over
Mathews Creed: 1/4" over
Mission Ballistic: 1/4" over
Mission Blaze: 1/2" over
Mission Maniac: 1/8" over
Mission Venture: 1/4" over
New Breed Eclipse: 1/8" under
Obsession Evolution: even
Obsession Lethal Force: 3/16" over
Obsession Nightmare: 1/8" under
Parker Viking: 1/4" over
Parker Inferno: 1/4" over
Parker Kodiak: 3/8" over
Parker Python: 1/8" under
Prime Alloy: 1/4" over
PSE Bowmadness XL: 3/8" over 
PSE DNA SP: 1/8" over
PSE Momentum: 1/4" over
PSE X-Force Axe 6: 1/8" over
Prime Centroid: 1/8" over 
Prime Impact: 1/4" over
Prime Shift: 7/16" over
Quest Rogue: 3/8" over
Quest XPB: 1/4" over
Ross Carnivore: 7/32" over
Ross Headhunter: 9/16" over
Ross Crave DRT 31.5: 3/4" over
Ross XD: 1/4" over
Strother SX-1: 1/8" over
Quest Drive: 3/16" over
Strother SX-1: 1/8" over
Strother Vital: even
Strother Wrath: even
Strother Wrath SHO: even
Winchester Black Horse SST: even
Xpedition X-Ring IV: even
Xpedition Xcentric: even
Xpedition XR6S: even


----------



## SCFox (Dec 11, 2005)

outdoorsmannc said:


> Hey Irish 11, or anyone else with a 28" draw length,
> 
> Would you mind shooting a 430 grain +/- arrow out of the no cam and let me know the speed. That is my arrow weight that I prefer to hunt with and like to stay in the 280' range if possible. I really like the design of this bow and just curious of what its potential is with the heavier arrow and shorter draw.
> 
> ...


I shot a 28", 70lb with 85% mods through the chrono when we got our preview bow in. 265, 264, and 265. That was with a 470gr arrow. With a 430gr arrow, you should pick up 12-13 fps, putting you in the high 270's. Based on 278 fps, that will give you over 73 ft-lbs of KE. 

SCFox


----------



## TwoInch (Oct 30, 2013)

IRISH_11 said:


> Go back to the torque guard thread I sketched it up for you. If you want I can get some basla wood and do a video showing that both systems have the same effect as far as the riser torquing. Or you can go outside and get a twig. Shave off a 2" splinter so it replicates the bendy stick on the ZT system. Now hold the opposite end off the twig in one hand and pull on the splinter. The whole twig will move in the same direction as you are pulling the splinter because there is no fulcrum or geometry shift at the side where the splinter is. It is a free end. The fulcrum on both systems is where the ZT bracket attaches to the riser.


what does this have to do with how alan was wrong? 

i understand the system. and my assessment on that thread was not incorrect.


----------



## griffwar (Nov 15, 2012)

vince71969 said:


> Updated list;
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Cool I love when you do stuff like this.


----------



## outdoorsmannc (Sep 12, 2011)

SCFox said:


> I shot a 28", 70lb with 85% mods through the chrono when we got our preview bow in. 265, 264, and 265. That was with a 470gr arrow. With a 430gr arrow, you should pick up 12-13 fps, putting you in the high 270's. Based on 278 fps, that will give you over 73 ft-lbs of KE.
> 
> SCFox


SCFox,
Thanks for the info,,,really helpful. One last question, how much speed will you pick up going to the 75% and 65% mods respectively or are they even available yet?


----------



## ron w (Jan 5, 2013)

it's almost rudimentary that any bow with any specific module, would produce a longer than listed draw length. 
consider the guy that orders a specific module because he knows his draw length is "X". the modules he orders is for that drawlength, so they dang better produce "at least" that draw length. it would be far worse for the manufacturer's reputation that the modules you order from them, are always shorter than you need, considereing not everyone that owns a bow, wants to fool around with string and cable lengths to fit the bow to them.
in that list, it's interesting that other than Strother, which is a small manufacturer of high end bows, the more "mass produced and commercialized" the manufacturer is, the more frequently their bows test out long.


----------



## TwoInch (Oct 30, 2013)

sneak1413 said:


> Alan was not seeing the compressional load on the zt system initially. This is where he was wrong. That along with his force directions showing more inward pressure than rearward pressure. He did figure out by the end of the thread that there is compression(rearward force) on the zt system by the cables. If I remember correctly there is almost twice as much rearward force as side force on the system at full draw.


i get that he didnt notice the cables being held forward, at first. but his understanding, and explanation of the system, and the fact that it will not cancel the torque, or relieve it completely was correct. the bendy stick is the part that reduced the torque at draw, not that the bendy stick is backwards. compression or not. there is no "counter clockwise" torque or force.


----------



## SCFox (Dec 11, 2005)

outdoorsmannc said:


> SCFox,
> Thanks for the info,,,really helpful. One last question, how much speed will you pick up going to the 75% and 65% mods respectively or are they even available yet?


Although I haven't had a chance to shoot one with the 75's, I'm hoping I get a set next week. Word has it that they are 5-6 fps faster. I'm currently shooting a ChillR with 75's and like the feel of the DC with them. I ordered my HTR with 75's based on my ChillR. 

SCFox


----------



## FeelMyWrathSHO (Oct 27, 2014)

Mathew's did something right. Seems like whether people love it or hate it, they're still talking about it. 

This thread has some decent info on the bow and cams but only after you sift through all the savage's with their puffy little ego's spoutin' their nonsense from behind the safety of their computer's and smarty phones lol and then that is where you will find the humble minds sprinkled throughout this thread (and website) that actually have some useful knowledge worth retaining. Seems like everyone nowadays knows everything about nothing. Where's the common courtesy and respect for our fellow man today people? We all shoot, isn't that what matters? Who cares what people shoot as long as they do.

When I first saw this bow I was like "*** is that thing lol". After reading about the design and how it works, I gotta say that it is a pretty clever design. I would definitely try one out and get a feel for it but I don't think I'd ever buy it. I'm sure it's super stable, draw cycle's smooth as a circle and it shoots great but man that thing is ugly as a mug lol. I do think it would be a great bow for target/3d though, probably not the best choice for hunting but like with anything it can be done.


----------



## goodoleboy11 (Apr 23, 2013)

outdoorsmannc said:


> SCFox,
> Thanks for the info,,,really helpful. One last question, how much speed will you pick up going to the 75% and 65% mods respectively or are they even available yet?


325 IBO with 75 and 330 with 65


----------



## nochance (Nov 27, 2008)

ron w said:


> it's almost rudimentary that any bow with any specific module, would produce a longer than listed draw length.
> consider the guy that orders a specific module because he knows his draw length is "X". the modules he orders is for that drawlength, so they dang better produce "at least" that draw length. it would be far worse for the manufacturer's reputation that the modules you order from them, are always shorter than you need, considereing not everyone that owns a bow, wants to fool around with string and cable lengths to fit the bow to them.
> in that list, it's interesting that other than Strother, which is a small manufacturer of high end bows, the more "mass produced and commercialized" the manufacturer is, the more frequently their bows test out long.


I guess i would rather have it test out at the exact draw length, then i could fine tune either way with twists, but i understand what your saying


----------



## FeelMyWrathSHO (Oct 27, 2014)

Yeah, Strother Archery knows what their doing, not that no one else does but S.A.'s attention to detail is impeccable.



ron w said:


> it's almost rudimentary that any bow with any specific module, would produce a longer than listed draw length.
> consider the guy that orders a specific module because he knows his draw length is "X". the modules he orders is for that drawlength, so they dang better produce "at least" that draw length. it would be far worse for the manufacturer's reputation that the modules you order from them, are always shorter than you need, considereing not everyone that owns a bow, wants to fool around with string and cable lengths to fit the bow to them.
> in that list, it's interesting that other than Strother, which is a small manufacturer of high end bows, the more "mass produced and commercialized" the manufacturer is, the more frequently their bows test out long.


----------



## ex-wolverine (Dec 31, 2004)

Like I had mentioned in this thread earlier...

Although Alan has a big heart and helps people out here as much as he can...He has not had the Nitrum in his hands to do OT&E (Operation Test, and Evaluation)...Nor has he Had the No cam in his position for OT&E...Like any engineer ( and this is what engineers do) I know for a fact as I have worked with them for every day of my adult life (34 years) in the aerospace industry, they put it down on paper and theorize how something works or is supposed to work...Then its grunts like me who do the test and evaluation, or what we call VAL/VER...Validation/Verification 

The only reason I bring this up (Alan knows for a fact if he is truly an engineer), that you can really only speculate how a system works unless you have the product in your hands while doing operational ,testing and measuring....

With that said, On paper , and in theory he may be 100% right....But guys like vince and sneak have physically done testing/measuring and applied loads and math to back it up

What really baffles my mind on this entire thread and the Hoyt NT (this isn't a slam on anyone) How can we *discredit those that have physically taken measurements and applied science* over those who have only seen a picture of the subject??

My above question can be applied on any subject on this forum when people dog out a product or try and speculate how something works with out ever seeing it or touching it in person...

Finally, I will be very interested in Alans findings when he finally gets his grubby little hands on both bows...

just trying to put things into perspective, 

Thanks 



TwoInch said:


> i get that he didnt notice the cables being held forward, at first. but his understanding, and explanation of the system, and the fact that it will not cancel the torque, or relieve it completely was correct. the bendy stick is the part that reduced the torque at draw, not that the bendy stick is backwards. compression or not. there is no "counter clockwise" torque or force.


----------



## NoDeerInIowa (Mar 5, 2012)

Good post Tom. Spot on


----------



## Hidden Danger (Mar 13, 2008)

vince71969 said:


> Updated list;
> 
> 
> 
> ...


There you go again , posting "FACTS"!!


----------



## griffwar (Nov 15, 2012)

alks456 said:


> 4 hours seem not such a big issue - if no ice on the roads?...
> I didn't bash Mathews - the discussed matters were different, don't you see.
> I didn't try Obsession, - there's pretty narrow choice of brands in my archery club and in others they won't even let you draw smth, let alone shoot.
> Of rare brands, I got very mixed feelings about Strother's one model - not the flagship, but it was so unusual at drawing and firing, that I can't even make feelings accounted. But I'd not take this bow anyway...too slow.


8 hour round trip to shoot a bow is a long trip add in a couple hours at the shop = very long day. Not starting anything but what do you need speed for, if you're just punching targets? I don't know if you hunt, but if you're just shooting targets why worry about speed and just shoot a low poundage target bow.


----------



## sneak1413 (Aug 15, 2007)

TwoInch said:


> i get that he didnt notice the cables being held forward, at first. but his understanding, and explanation of the system, and the fact that it will not cancel the torque, or relieve it completely was correct. the bendy stick is the part that reduced the torque at draw, not that the bendy stick is backwards. compression or not. there is no "counter clockwise" torque or force.


Read the whole thread even Alan agrees that there is a portion of the force that does create a counterclockwise moment. The net on the two x and y force vectors do result in a small clockwise torque. But there is a counterclockwise torque in the system and that is the big difference. Again not saying the end result is necessarily counterclockwise but there is a counteracting moment being created do to the rearward pulling of the cables


----------



## Sagittarius (May 22, 2002)

I started off really liking this thread. :thumbs_up
Now, I despise it with a passion and wish the OP would ask a mod to delete it ! :thumbs_do


----------



## Hidden Danger (Mar 13, 2008)

Sagittarius said:


> I started off really liking this thread. :thumbs_up
> Now, I despise it with a passion and wish the OP would ask a mod to delete it ! :thumbs_do


Wish granted........................................Will a Mod please close this thread? It has turned into yet another AT bash fest. Thanks.


----------



## sneak1413 (Aug 15, 2007)

hidden danger said:


> Wish granted........................................Will a Mod please close this thread? It has turned into yet another AT bash fest. Thanks.


There is a ton of great info in this thread. I learned a couple things from it myself that I did not realize before hand. Most of the bashing is over and if this one gets deleted another will just get started and more bashing will happen no matter what. Bottom line across the whole thread is that the bow has a lot of known technology from a few manufacturers wrapped up into a one great bow. It's a very stable, vibe free, quiet bow that should tune relatively easy and shoot very well. It's not a speed demon by any means and maybe slow compared to many bows but what it lacks in speed it makes up for in forgiveness and lack of noise and vibration.


----------



## vince71969 (Apr 17, 2004)

Just a thought. A mod can also clean the thread up of nonsense and keep it on the boards.


----------



## Hidden Danger (Mar 13, 2008)

Good idea guys. Instead of deleting maybe a Mod could clean it up instead? Remove some of the off-topic BS. Thanks.


----------



## nuts&bolts (Mar 25, 2005)

sneak1413 said:


> Read the whole thread even Alan agrees that there is a portion of the force that does create a counterclockwise moment. The net on the two x and y force vectors do result in a small clockwise torque. But there is a counterclockwise torque in the system and that is the big difference. Again not saying the end result is necessarily counterclockwise but there is a counteracting moment being created do to the rearward pulling of the cables


It's a good system, the ZT.

Brilliant idea.

My compliments to the folks at Hoyt.


----------



## Sagittarius (May 22, 2002)

hidden danger said:


> Good idea guys. Instead of deleting maybe a Mod could clean it up instead? Remove some of the off-topic BS. Thanks.





That would be great, HD. :thumbs_up
My apologies, I shouldn't have said it should be deleted.
It's your thread, not mine !


----------



## THE ELKMAN (Jan 2, 2013)

That questions to vague to even answer, but I'll clean it up for you. First it depends on which so called "binary" you are refering to, second you must assume that all other aspects of the tune are perfect: No clearance or contact issues, correct arrow spine, the shooter knows how to properly grip a bow, broadhead alignment is done, the rest set up correctly in both alignment vertically and horizontally and the timing is correct. Also cam rotation and timing are done. Those are the basics that must be correct on any bow regardless of model. Back to your original question. The answer is that if its a single track, throw it in that garbage, unless you want to play with shimming and jackin around with alignment issues there is no way to correct in a way that would satisfy me, then throw it away. If its and Overdrive system you can play with yokes and really affect lateral tears. I don't believe false tuning a bow by moving a rest around following arrows. I will take a rest no more than 1/16" of center or level to tune. If that doesn't get the desired result the bow/arrows, or the shooter are not tuned correctly somewhere else, or defective in design or materials and you are compensating to acheive a false tune. Don't have time or desire to go deeper right now, but thats enough of my time anyway.:wink:



WVaBuckHunter said:


> Every Chill X that I have done has hit IBO.
> 
> 
> 
> If you're broadhead tuning a binary cam bow, and the broadheads hit 6" to the left of field points, what do you do to fix it?


----------



## THE ELKMAN (Jan 2, 2013)

Truth...v



Park-N-Sons Archery said:


> Like I had mentioned in this thread earlier...
> 
> Although Alan has a big heart and helps people out here as much as he can...He has not had the Nitrum in his hands to do OT&E (Operation Test, and Evaluation)...Nor has he Had the No cam in his position for OT&E...Like any engineer ( and this is what engineers do) I know for a fact as I have worked with them for every day of my adult life (34 years) in the aerospace industry, they put it down on paper and theorize how something works or is supposed to work...Then its grunts like me who do the test and evaluation, or what we call VAL/VER...Validation/Verification
> 
> ...


----------



## THE ELKMAN (Jan 2, 2013)

This is a GOOD thread. A lot of healthy debate, and no name calling, just some questioning of the facts and their sources. Productive learning happens on these kinds of threads. I think you guys calling this a "bad thread" are way off base. Its been interesting IMHO...



Sagittarius said:


> I started off really liking this thread. :thumbs_up
> Now, I despise it with a passion and wish the OP would ask a mod to delete it ! :thumbs_do


----------



## WVaBuckHunter (Sep 30, 2010)

THE ELKMAN said:


> That questions to vague to even answer, but I'll clean it up for you. First it depends on which so called "binary" you are refering to, second you must assume that all other aspects of the tune are perfect: No clearance or contact issues, correct arrow spine, the shooter knows how to properly grip a bow, broadhead alignment is done, the rest set up correctly in both alignment vertically and horizontally and the timing is correct. Also cam rotation and timing are done. Those are the basics that must be correct on any bow regardless of model. Back to your original question. The answer is that if its a single track, throw it in that garbage, unless you want to play with shimming and jackin around with alignment issues there is no way to correct in a way that would satisfy me, then throw it away. If its and Overdrive system you can play with yokes and really affect lateral tears. I don't believe false tuning a bow by moving a rest around following arrows. I will take a rest no more than 1/16" of center or level to tune. If that doesn't get the desired result the bow/arrows, or the shooter are not tuned correctly somewhere else, or defective in design or materials and you are compensating to acheive a false tune. Don't have time or desire to go deeper right now, but thats enough of my time anyway.:wink:


Oh, ok. That let's me know what I wanted to know.

The thread got so far off topic that I thought we were now playing bow tuning trivia or something. So I thought I'd play, and you let me know what I wanted to know.

Now, back on topic.


----------



## Fury90flier (Jun 27, 2012)

Sagittarius said:


> I started off really liking this thread. :thumbs_up
> Now, I despise it with a passion and wish the OP would ask a mod to delete it ! :thumbs_do


I don't like that you want something deleted so you should be banned....yep- your request is just as silly

what is it with people today thinking that stuff should be deleted, reporting "trolling" simply because of a counter argument etc? There is a simple solution...in one ear and out the other OR just don't visit the thread.


----------



## Fury90flier (Jun 27, 2012)

I had a chance to finally look a bit more closely at this system last night. After shooting it I can say it's a nice draw but nothing to write home about. Comparing it to my Supra, Vantage pro and Oneida bows I've shot...it's nothing special.

I'd like to look a bit closer and see if it can be setup as a shoot through system....though with the current rigging it may not be necessary


----------



## Sagittarius (May 22, 2002)

Fury90flier said:


> I don't like that you want something deleted so you should be banned....yep- your request is just as silly
> 
> what is it with people today thinking that stuff should be deleted, reporting "trolling" simply because of a counter argument etc? There is a simple solution...in one ear and out the other OR just don't visit the thread.




Well, then, you should ask a mod to ban me. 
I already apologized to the OP but owe you nothing.
You should pay more attention.
Yes, this thread does need some posts cleaned up for sure. 
...including yours and mine !


----------



## HAvok33 (Dec 6, 2014)

I had a chance to shoot the NO CAM nice shooting bow the only thing I didn't care for was the draw cycle it felt like i was pulling 70lbs through the entire draw cycle with very little valley but held on the target real well, quiet, and zero hand shock. Guess every one likes different things though, mathews will do real well with this bow.


----------



## TDS (Nov 26, 2008)

I shot the no cam for the first time yesterday.. It felt like I was drawing a 25-30 pound recurve through the whole draw cycle even though it was 60 pounds Didn't feel any hump just smooth from the beginning to the end.


----------



## MIKEY CUSTOM-G (Oct 5, 2002)

This is what caught my eye. The inner module is not round and has an egg shape to it. This has to affect the draw cycle when the strings puts it into play.


----------



## Hidden Danger (Mar 13, 2008)

MIKEY CUSTOM-G said:


> This is what caught my eye. The inner module is not round and has an egg shape to it. This has to affect the draw cycle when the strings puts it into play.


Looks like the sleeve is real close to touching the wheel on that one .


----------



## Fury90flier (Jun 27, 2012)

Sagittarius said:


> Well, then, you should ask a mod to ban me.
> I already apologized to the OP but owe you nothing.
> You should pay more attention.
> Yes, this thread does need some posts cleaned up for sure.
> ...including yours and mine !


you're completely wrong. 

no ones post need any cleaning...gloss over it and move on.


My first thought on this style cam was that it would be nice for a target shooter. Interesting how they offered the hunting version first. I'd have changed the cam a bit for the hunting version to get a few FPS more...have the current version specifically for target shooting.

I will have to say that this is the fist Mathews I've ever thought of purchasing. Sadly it is way over priced....I'll stick with the supra and maybe by one of these when the buy it now crowd lets it go for about 400 bucks...if it retailed for about 700 I'd probably get one.


----------



## Straight Arrow (Feb 22, 2003)

Condemnation without investigation is the height of ignorance-quote "Albert Einstein".


----------



## Fury90flier (Jun 27, 2012)

let us know when you completely comprehend "spooky action at a distance".


----------



## Hidden Danger (Mar 13, 2008)

Fury90flier said:


> you're completely wrong.
> 
> no ones post need any cleaning...gloss over it and move on.
> 
> ...


I think the posts about Ford's and Gm's financial issues were off topic and should be cleaned.


----------



## JimmyP (Feb 11, 2006)

I can't wait till mine gets here ,the test I put it through will be my deciding factor .can I win with it


----------



## B3AV3R (Apr 19, 2006)

Technical stuff aside, the way the No Cam works from a dealers standpoint is that nealry everyone who shoots one either orders one or buys it on the spot. I haven't seen customers this excited about a Mathews bow since the late 90's.


----------



## va MTN MAN (Jan 24, 2003)

Hey Vince
Did that artical happen to also show the axel axel lengths on the bows. I would bet that the ones that are 1/4 to 3/8ths long on draw also are a little long on axel to axel. new strings and cables take a few days to settle in:wink:


vince71969 said:


> Here's a sampling of bows and their measured draw length:
> 
> These aren't my measurements. These were all done by Anthony Barnum for his yearly bow evaluations in ArcheryTrade Magazine
> 
> ...


----------



## NoDeerInIowa (Mar 5, 2012)

Don Beaver said:


> Technical stuff aside, the way the No Cam works from a dealers standpoint is that nealry everyone who shoots one either orders one or buys it on the spot. I haven't seen customers this excited about a Mathews bow since the late 90's.


I shot it twice and handed it back to the salesperson. Not for me. That store also told me they have not sold even one yet.


----------



## Fury90flier (Jun 27, 2012)

I'm wondering if it's a location issue? The shop down the road from me has sold quite a few. That's to say they have been in the process of writing up a sale each time I've been there.

What is it that you don't like about the draw cycle?


----------



## THE ELKMAN (Jan 2, 2013)

Gee... Ya think? I vote this...v - by far the best post on here!



MIKEY CUSTOM-G said:


> This is what caught my eye. The inner module is not round and has an egg shape to it. This has to affect the draw cycle when the strings puts it into play.


----------



## griffwar (Nov 15, 2012)

vince71969 said:


> Updated list;
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I really like this post for all the people that get on here and claim Mathews run's way long. I like fact's not hot air that people spew as fact, like i always said almost all run long. Good one Vince shut them down with fact's and then they got no way to argue, but i'm sure they still will no matter what.,


----------



## THE ELKMAN (Jan 2, 2013)

Yeah, your right, cause that list IS INCORRECT...



griffwar said:


> I really like this post for all the people that get on here and claim Mathews run's way long. I like fact's not hot air that people spew as fact, like i always said almost all run long. Good one Vince shut them down with fact's and then they got no way to argue, but i'm sure they still will no matter what.,


----------



## griffwar (Nov 15, 2012)

THE ELKMAN said:


> Yeah, your right, cause that list IS INCORRECT...


Yep it's wrong must be you say so.


----------



## norsemen (Feb 22, 2011)

griffwar said:


> Yep it's wrong must be you say so.


Probably not because he says so. Probably because he has experience in owning several bows and has measured them. Vince's list does not match what I have experienced as well. So I'm with ELKMAN. Vince's list is inaccurate.


----------



## griffwar (Nov 15, 2012)

norsemen said:


> Probably not because he says so. Probably because he has experience in owning several bows and has measured them. Vince's list does not match what I have experienced as well. So I'm with ELKMAN. Vince's list is inaccurate.


So he got the list's from Archery Trade Magazine they have no dog in the fight, this is there independent list of bows draw lengths. You are telling Me they're wrong?? I'm sorry but I will take the magazine review over your guy's, I owned a bunch of bows and I work part time at a archery shop, any day of the week!! I also have owned many bow's and I still own many bow's.


----------



## tsilvers (Nov 16, 2002)

Holy smokes... I just perused through this thread as quickly as I could... Wow.. lol... Who is this nuts and bolts? Engineer? former bow designer? Sheesh.. just tell them what it is.. another slaved binary cam system... revolutionary.. no... different?... a little... better?.. subjective... until "better" is clearly defined... what a complete waste of 18 pages... lol... 

Carry on... and not trying to rag on the nuts and bolts guy...

I mean he gotta be somewhat bright as I seen he is using a product I designed on his own set up...

Curious about his background.. seemingly some of you bow jockeys got him perched high atop ur totem poles... lol..



and yea... I've seen his seemingly endless posts on form and find them highly entertaining...

And fwiw.... I did shoot one of these bows few times yesterday... solid feeling bow... I liked it..


----------



## goodoleboy11 (Apr 23, 2013)

Don Beaver said:


> Technical stuff aside, the way the No Cam works from a dealers standpoint is that nealry everyone who shoots one either orders one or buys it on the spot. I haven't seen customers this excited about a Mathews bow since the late 90's.


My buddy who owns a shop had 30 of them and there's only a few left after a couple weeks. Pretty impressive


----------



## NoDeerInIowa (Mar 5, 2012)

Fury90flier said:


> I'm wondering if it's a location issue? The shop down the road from me has sold quite a few. That's to say they have been in the process of writing up a sale each time I've been there.
> 
> What is it that you don't like about the draw cycle?


I went back and shot it again. I like almost everything about the bow, with the exception of the draw cycle. It balances very well. It is indeed very quiet and vibe free. I'm sure I could get used to it. It is a very stable platform with the long riser. 
the draw, to me, and what I didn't care for, is that it seems, mushy? at the beginning of the draw. I'm not sure if that's the right desription. Kind of reminds me of pulling a boat anchor. How it starts out pulling all the slack out and then the rope gets taut.
Other than that, the only thing that bugged me just a little, and it may have just been with that one bow, was that it seemed like the bottom kicked forward on the shot.


----------



## Bow Predator (Oct 19, 2010)

NoDeerInIowa said:


> I went back and shot it again. I like almost everything about the bow, with the exception of the draw cycle. It balances very well. It is indeed very quiet and vibe free. I'm sure I could get used to it. It is a very stable platform with the long riser.
> the draw, to me, and what I didn't care for, is that it seems, mushy? at the beginning of the draw. I'm not sure if that's the right desription. Kind of reminds me of pulling a boat anchor. How it starts out pulling all the slack out and then the rope gets taut.
> Other than that, the only thing that bugged me just a little, and it may have just been with that one bow, was that it seemed like the bottom kicked forward on the shot.


Personally tired of half of this knowledgable thread being garbage from butt hurt posters... But as to the quote above I do agree. I never shot the HTR model but did draw it back and play with it some. From my little experience with the bow, I like it. Holds fairly steady, draw was easier than expected at 70 lbs, smooth, solid back wall. I did notice that when I held it by the string (cams facing up) the string gave some. Not sure why this is but like described above, it is spongy to start with, which I personally like. I shot the Chill X Pro while playing with the HTR. Both solid bows, draw was fairly similar to me (Chill X at 60 lbs, HTR at 70 lbs). The owner has a TRG 7 coming in that I will put through the paces. From a physics, engineering and also a shooters stand point I am very interested in the NoCam and how it works/tunes. I hope to have more time behind both of these platforms soon. Also, thank you to Nuts & Bolts for the insight! But from my limited experience I would like to have the Chill X and TRG in my bow case for 2015...


----------



## nuts&bolts (Mar 25, 2005)

Bow Predator said:


> Personally tired of half of this knowledgable thread being garbage from butt hurt posters... But as to the quote above I do agree. I never shot the HTR model but did draw it back and play with it some. From my little experience with the bow, I like it. Holds fairly steady, draw was easier than expected at 70 lbs, smooth, solid back wall. I did notice that when I held it by the string (cams facing up) the string gave some. Not sure why this is but like described above, it is spongy to start with, which I personally like. I shot the Chill X Pro while playing with the HTR. Both solid bows, draw was fairly similar to me (Chill X at 60 lbs, HTR at 70 lbs). The owner has a TRG 7 coming in that I will put through the paces. From a physics, engineering and also a shooters stand point I am very interested in the NoCam and how it works/tunes. I hope to have more time behind both of these platforms soon. Also, thank you to Nuts & Bolts for the insight! But from my limited experience I would like to have the Chill X and TRG in my bow case for 2015...



the No CAM is interesting.

Wonder how it responds
to a little "tweaking".


----------



## saskhic (Aug 14, 2011)

Seems to me most people are saying bottom left cable is touching the the cam.maybe a little bend in it would fix that guess that would depend if fetching gets in the way.


----------



## saskhic (Aug 14, 2011)

I mean a little bend in the cable slide


----------



## Bow Predator (Oct 19, 2010)

nuts&bolts said:


> the No CAM is interesting.
> 
> Wonder how it responds
> to a little "tweaking".


You and me both..


----------



## fletched (May 10, 2006)

Bow Predator said:


> You and me both..


With the base cam being an idler, I don't figure tweaking will give much change to the performance. BEAR FOOT has done a little tuning on the bow and got a little more juice out of it. He dropped 2 pounds and kept the speed the same as what it was.
http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2371389&highlight=bear+foot


----------



## alks456 (Apr 21, 2010)

NoDeerInIowa said:


> I went back and shot it again. I like almost everything about the bow, with the exception of the draw cycle. It balances very well. It is indeed very quiet and vibe free. I'm sure I could get used to it. It is a very stable platform with the long riser.
> the draw, to me, and what I didn't care for, is that it seems, mushy? at the beginning of the draw. I'm not sure if that's the right desription. Kind of reminds me of pulling a boat anchor. How it starts out pulling all the slack out and then the rope gets taut.
> Other than that, the only thing that bugged me just a little, and it may have just been with that one bow, was that it seemed like the bottom kicked forward on the shot.


I found myself the same for several Mathews I tried, as some weird things about draw cycle, in different phases, felt like sudden unexplainable rigidity? coarseness even - or a mushy zones to lower the might-be speed as a result - which in fact shouldn't be there considering they're positioning themselves as top manufacturer.
Not for the whole draw cycle, but some zones. The reason I don't shoot it. In other aspects, can't tell anything compromising this brand.


----------



## alks456 (Apr 21, 2010)

But No Cam is certainly fascinating idea.


----------



## Fury90flier (Jun 27, 2012)

Why is a longbow, recurve etc fascinating?

if you want to see a "no cam" compound bow, look at the Oneida Discovery, EA bows, Monster bow etc.


----------



## THE ELKMAN (Jan 2, 2013)

It would be if it was a "No Cam"... No cams not possible if unless you want 0% let off....



alks456 said:


> But No Cam is certainly fascinating idea.


----------



## norsemen (Feb 22, 2011)

alks456 said:


> But No Cam is certainly fascinating idea.


Well, its a "No Cam String Track" which is fascinating to me also, but I wasn't that impressed when I shot it. A lot of people do like it, and I can see why.


----------



## Bow Predator (Oct 19, 2010)

fletched said:


> With the base cam being an idler, I don't figure tweaking will give much change to the performance. BEAR FOOT has done a little tuning on the bow and got a little more juice out of it. He dropped 2 pounds and kept the speed the same as what it was.
> http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2371389&highlight=bear+foot


I am excited to get a chance to play with it and try to do the same as Bear Foot. I am not expecting a lot of change but every little bit counts. I wonder if the TRG will react similar to the HTR. Time will tell


----------



## Fury90flier (Jun 27, 2012)

norsemen said:


> Well, its a "No Cam String Track" which is fascinating to me also, but I wasn't that impressed when I shot it. A lot of people do like it, and I can see why.


Seems to me that it's actually a 3 track...there is the eccentric moveing wheel on one side, there is the string track rotating around the axle, there is the takeup track. If there was no actual caming action then there would be no letoff...which might actually be kind of cool for those that like trad bows.


I'll try one out when they are selling for the real value--about 600. 1800- what a joke. Though I will say I might see about putting that cam on a Dominator...would be easy to do a shoot through rigging...but I'm guessing the cam is too wide.


----------



## norsemen (Feb 22, 2011)

Fury90flier said:


> Seems to me that it's actually a 3 track...there is the eccentric moveing wheel on one side, there is the string track rotating around the axle, there is the takeup track. If there was no actual caming action then there would be no letoff...which might actually be kind of cool for those that like trad bows.


Yes.....The string track is no cam, the cable tracks have cams.


----------



## alks456 (Apr 21, 2010)

THE ELKMAN said:


> It would be if it was a "No Cam"... No cams not possible if unless you want 0% let off....


Sure,


----------



## FeelMyWrathSHO (Oct 27, 2014)

va MTN MAN said:


> Hey Vince
> Did that artical happen to also show the axel axel lengths on the bows. I would bet that the ones that are 1/4 to 3/8ths long on draw also are a little long on axel to axel. new strings and cables take a few days to settle in:wink:


I agree, they could have been out of spec.
If they came from the factory out of spec or it's in spec and still not measuring up, that's definitely not good. Could be human error too though (measure twice, shoot once lol).
Glad to see Strother Archery's measuring up though. Smaller company based in Michigan, but one that takes their time with a design and won't rush anything just to get it out there and will always ensures one hundred percent quality from product design to final assembly. The people behind S.A. are also 'Industrial Automated Designs', in which they design, make, and assemble some of the highest quality automated machines and services for the automotive industry and other customers and companies around the world. 
I think that kinda speaks for itself when it comes to the smallest of the smallest details in design and machining.


----------



## Mathias (Mar 21, 2005)

I like the bow, the draw is somewhat peculiar. At one shop they had 3, one we shot, and 2 hanging. The 2 hanging had the guard touching the cable. Not sure if it was a set up issue or not.


----------



## Mathias (Mar 21, 2005)




----------



## vince71969 (Apr 17, 2004)

If that's touching (can't tell on my phone) then it needs to be adjusted.


----------



## Ryjax (Mar 3, 2014)

Mine touches... Any ideas how to fix it?


----------



## Mathias (Mar 21, 2005)

vince71969 said:


> If that's touching (can't tell on my phone) then it needs to be adjusted.


Trust me Vince, 2 were touching. The one we shot not. Not posting as a bash, because I liked the bow and may well own one someday (need to see the Lost OT).


----------



## vince71969 (Apr 17, 2004)

Mathias said:


> Trust me Vince, 2 were touching. The one we shot not. Not posting as a bash, because I liked the bow and may well own one someday.


There's inner bushings that the axle rides on. Different thicknesses are used to adjust the lean.


----------



## Mathias (Mar 21, 2005)

Thanks


----------



## THE ELKMAN (Jan 2, 2013)

Mathews is REALLY struggling with Limb Quality over the last 4 or 5 years. Their quality control and tolerances have just gone right out the window...



Mathias said:


> I like the bow, the draw is somewhat peculiar. At one shop they had 3, one we shot, and 2 hanging. The 2 hanging had the guard touching the cable. Not sure if it was a set up issue or not.


----------



## bghunter7777 (Aug 14, 2014)

THE ELKMAN said:


> Mathews is REALLY struggling with Limb Quality over the last 4 or 5 years. Their quality control and tolerances have just gone right out the window...


How did you draw that conclusion?


----------



## THE ELKMAN (Jan 2, 2013)

This right here is a direct results of mismatched limb deflections, or poor execution in build or setting and drilling....v (One limb stronger than the other) Which is at like a 50/50 rate on the split Mathews bows right now. And their solids are just made poorly, with sub-par tolerances on both material and process...



Mathias said:


>


----------



## THE ELKMAN (Jan 2, 2013)

Not to mention the absolute debacle of their's... called a "Slim Limb"...


----------



## blackout24 (Dec 14, 2014)

*first compound bow*



IRISH_11 said:


> Sad but true. Speed does sell and yes the masses want speed. This is what is so unfortunate about archery. The masses just don't know a darn thing when it comes to shooting a bow. The top archers in the world have made their money shooting 290 fps or less. Speed is something the manufacturers conjured up and brain washed everyone into thinking it would help them shoot better. The simpletons in archery don't realize that physics will never be denied. To get speed you have to compromise something. Rather you compromise brace height or force draw curve you are sacrificing something.
> 
> Nuts and bolts please explain to the feable minds of AT about transfer of energy from the bow to the arrow and that just because a particular arrow is shooting faster out of the bow at point blank range that there is loss off energy dependent on the mass of the arrow. The same arrow that shot 330 at point blank may be down to 270 at 40 yards where as a different bow with a different arrow shooting 310 at point blank may still be 280 at 40yards. Don't hold me to these numbers they are just for examples. But I digress to having shot hundreds if not thousands of arrows through chronographs at 40 and 50 yards. And yes my chronograph has the arrow holes to prove it. Lol. I know that just because one bow is faster at point blank does not mean that a bow that chronos slower at point blank is not faster down range or should I say decelerates at a slower rate than the one that was faster.


This really helps buying my first bow really like the no cam because it's different. I'm a business major and it's So true about how companies have certain selling points to push products. I have shot this bow and several others and the no cam at first felt funny but after a few shots I loved it. Loved what's was said about the chronograph as well so true. It's physics.


----------



## TargetOz (Jan 16, 2013)

goodoleboy11 said:


> Haha wow, hopefully the idiots spewing all their bs read this thread. This is probably the most accurate bow I've shot. Just can't get used to the draw. Thanks for your info again Alan


Hi goodoleboy what do you mean by not getting used to the draw?


----------



## goodoleboy11 (Apr 23, 2013)

TargetOz said:


> Hi goodoleboy what do you mean by not getting used to the draw?


Basically the draw cycle is the opposite of what I'm used to shooting. First half of the draw cycle you are literally pulling nothing, peak weight stacks later but smoothly. It makes it feel like a bow with a large brace height. The more I shoot it the more I like it. It's so easy to let down too


----------



## TargetOz (Jan 16, 2013)

How does the no cam stack up against the ok Renegade and prime one for knock travel and accuracy?


----------



## TargetOz (Jan 16, 2013)

goodoleboy11 said:


> Basically the draw cycle is the opposite of what I'm used to shooting. First half of the draw cycle you are literally pulling nothing, peak weight stacks later but smoothly. It makes it feel like a bow with a large brace height. The more I shoot it the more I like it. It's so easy to let down too


Thanks for that. It almost sounds like a recurve with a string stop and now has me thinking of trading my Apex 8 on one. Cheers.


----------



## goodoleboy11 (Apr 23, 2013)

TargetOz said:


> Thanks for that. It almost sounds like a recurve with a string stop and now has me thinking of trading my Apex 8 on one. Cheers.


That's a great way to put it. It reminds me of an oneida, it's as close to a compound recurve as it gets besides an Oneida, that is my opinion.


----------



## XxOHIOARCHERxX (Jul 17, 2013)

THE ELKMAN said:


> Not to mention the absolute debacle of their's... called a "Slim Limb"...


I've had a dxt, reezen, z7 and never had one single issue withe limbs.


----------



## Jabovi (May 30, 2009)

^ Not a single problem with my old Switchback XT, but two limbs issues (splinters) on the same DXT, plus a cam lean on my new Creed (therefore the cable rub against the cam) caused by a canted drilling in the right bottom limb or a mismatched limb deflection - need to check that much further.

I'm far for being a Mathews hater : my three and only bows came from them and I'm so used to shoot Mathews that I honestly don't feel comfortable shooting other brands (and that's what makes my misfortune since the Switchback glorious days). Alas, I feel that to catch up other market players, on last years Mathews tried desperately to impress the audience with "innovations" which contribute nothing and/or were not sufficiently accomplished. Not to mention their slim limbs which are clearly less reliable than the wilder, the last example which comes to mind is their carbon rod cable guard. A not-so-bad idea (for reducing how much weight exactly?...) sadly failed by the poor design of the fastening : the two screws cracks the rod if you tighten them a LITTLE BIT too hard (and NO, I'm not the only one in this case). Why not have embedded/glued the carbon rod into an aluminum bushing which would have supported the tighten force far better? It's not rocket science, for the average engineer, just simple reasoning...


----------



## kirktink (Jul 15, 2011)

*no cam*

This is a wheel bow, with dead straight nock travel according to the mathews video.. the cam on the back side of the wheel is like our old Martin "flite wheels of the late 80's through the 90's... For several years. Myself and Dee Wilde won more tournaments (target archery) with this type wheel bow than any other bow made.. The video is the first admission i had heard of the "cam" bows not having a straight nock travel. When excellent pro target shooters went to single cam bows , grouping was from 12-6 o'clock with all things being equal, the misses (indoor for example) were high and low.. I shot the 1st, 2nd 3rd and 4th perfect indoor rounds with this type wheel bow, not big cams but 1.5 inch wheels.. (1988,1989, 1991, 1992) John Taylor did in 1991 also. perfect scores did not become common until quite some time after my retirement from competition in 2000. 

one can tell the inexperienced target shooter by the 1st question about a bow is "how fast is it?", This is irrelavent in a target (bullseye shooting) bow. The rules in 3-d have virtually eliminated the "I have the fastest bow" syndrome... This also is equilibrated with the development of the numerous excellent carbon target arrows available.

My hat is off for Matthews for attempting to develop the ultimate target bow... dead straight nock travel being of paramount importance. If i bought one it would be 9 inch brace height... It will be the dominate bow in target archery when they lengthen the axle to axle to 43-44 or so, which will ameliorate the acute string angle that puts the peep so far in front of the eye and is another detriment to accuracy... 

In any event, not even shooting this bow, my bet is this style bow will dominate target archery within a couple of years. The "wheel has come full circle!" pun intended..

I wish i had a 9 inch brace height one myself for my comeback as a Senior shooter! When the few little kinks are worked out,,, it will be an [email protected]# kicker for sure!

yours in archery,

Kirk Ethridge (10 time national champion (indoor, field, outdoor target) and 1993 world indoor Gold medalist)


----------



## istuffanimals (Jun 29, 2008)

kirktink said:


> This is a wheel bow, with dead straight nock travel according to the mathews video.. the cam on the back side of the wheel is like our old Martin "flite wheels of the late 80's through the 90's... For several years. Myself and Dee Wilde won more tournaments (target archery) with this type wheel bow than any other bow made.. The video is the first admission i had heard of the "cam" bows not having a straight nock travel. When excellent pro target shooters went to single cam bows , grouping was from 12-6 o'clock with all things being equal, the misses (indoor for example) were high and low.. I shot the 1st, 2nd 3rd and 4th perfect indoor rounds with this type wheel bow, not big cams but 1.5 inch wheels.. (1988,1989, 1991, 1992) John Taylor did in 1991 also. perfect scores did not become common until quite some time after my retirement from competition in 2000.
> 
> one can tell the inexperienced target shooter by the 1st question about a bow is "how fast is it?", This is irrelavent in a target (bullseye shooting) bow. The rules in 3-d have virtually eliminated the "I have the fastest bow" syndrome... This also is equilibrated with the development of the numerous excellent carbon target arrows available.
> 
> ...


Thanks for sharing.


----------



## bowfisher (Jan 21, 2003)

kirktink said:


> This is a wheel bow, with dead straight nock travel according to the mathews video.. the cam on the back side of the wheel is like our old Martin "flite wheels of the late 80's through the 90's... For several years. Myself and Dee Wilde won more tournaments (target archery) with this type wheel bow than any other bow made.. The video is the first admission i had heard of the "cam" bows not having a straight nock travel. When excellent pro target shooters went to single cam bows , grouping was from 12-6 o'clock with all things being equal, the misses (indoor for example) were high and low.. I shot the 1st, 2nd 3rd and 4th perfect indoor rounds with this type wheel bow, not big cams but 1.5 inch wheels.. (1988,1989, 1991, 1992) John Taylor did in 1991 also. perfect scores did not become common until quite some time after my retirement from competition in 2000.
> 
> one can tell the inexperienced target shooter by the 1st question about a bow is "how fast is it?", This is irrelavent in a target (bullseye shooting) bow. The rules in 3-d have virtually eliminated the "I have the fastest bow" syndrome... This also is equilibrated with the development of the numerous excellent carbon target arrows available.
> 
> ...


:thumbs_up


----------



## griffwar (Nov 15, 2012)

kirktink said:


> This is a wheel bow, with dead straight nock travel according to the mathews video.. the cam on the back side of the wheel is like our old Martin "flite wheels of the late 80's through the 90's... For several years. Myself and Dee Wilde won more tournaments (target archery) with this type wheel bow than any other bow made.. The video is the first admission i had heard of the "cam" bows not having a straight nock travel. When excellent pro target shooters went to single cam bows , grouping was from 12-6 o'clock with all things being equal, the misses (indoor for example) were high and low.. I shot the 1st, 2nd 3rd and 4th perfect indoor rounds with this type wheel bow, not big cams but 1.5 inch wheels.. (1988,1989, 1991, 1992) John Taylor did in 1991 also. perfect scores did not become common until quite some time after my retirement from competition in 2000.
> 
> one can tell the inexperienced target shooter by the 1st question about a bow is "how fast is it?", This is irrelavent in a target (bullseye shooting) bow. The rules in 3-d have virtually eliminated the "I have the fastest bow" syndrome... This also is equilibrated with the development of the numerous excellent carbon target arrows available.
> 
> ...


I saw you shoot way back then, DEADLY!!!!!


----------



## EverestWC (Sep 5, 2010)

Great thread. Thanks for the excellent comments and archery wisdom.


----------



## Kahkon (Jul 22, 2009)

EverestWC said:


> Great thread. Thanks for the excellent comments and archery wisdom.


agree 100%


----------



## THE ELKMAN (Jan 2, 2013)

I agree 100% It looks like a great "target bow" if they change almost all the geometry... ;-)


----------



## griffwar (Nov 15, 2012)

THE ELKMAN said:


> I agree 100% It looks like a great "target bow" if they change almost all the geometry... ;-)


The way you hate on Mathews they must of told you that you weren't good enough to shoot for them!


----------



## THE ELKMAN (Jan 2, 2013)

Is what I said true?



griffwar said:


> The way you hate on Mathews they must of told you that you weren't good enough to shoot for them!


----------



## griffwar (Nov 15, 2012)

THE ELKMAN said:


> Is what I said true?


Nope you're just a basher.


----------



## THE ELKMAN (Jan 2, 2013)

So your saying it wouldn't make a great target bow if you changed the ATA and Brace?



griffwar said:


> Nope you're just a basher.


----------



## griffwar (Nov 15, 2012)

THE ELKMAN said:


> So your saying it wouldn't make a great target bow if you changed the ATA and Brace?


Don't twist My words, no matter what I say you will just twist it around to fit into your bash fest somehow. I don't know why you hate Mathews so much but it must be hard on your blood pressure to get so twisted up about a bow brand. I will leave now I don't want you to blow a gasket I would feel bad.


----------



## THE ELKMAN (Jan 2, 2013)

As you can see I do not hate Mathews, as illustrated in above photo...



griffwar said:


> Don't twist My words, no matter what I say you will just twist it around to fit into your bash fest somehow. I don't know why you hate Mathews so much but it must be hard on your blood pressure to get so twisted up about a bow brand. I will leave now I don't want you to blow a gasket I would feel bad.


----------



## griffwar (Nov 15, 2012)

THE ELKMAN said:


> View attachment 2122366
> 
> As you can see I do not hate Mathews, as illustrated in above photo...


That was a back a few years right? You liked them then but your hate for them now runs deep all you have to do is look at your posts.


----------



## THE ELKMAN (Jan 2, 2013)

It was quite awhile ago, but at that time they were making the best product. I ALWAYS choose the best product period. A lot of the posts are just poking the bear so to speak.(You might be the bear) Don't let it get you so worked up. Sorry if I offended you.


----------



## Whaack (Apr 2, 2006)

kirktink said:


> This is a wheel bow, with dead straight nock travel according to the mathews video.. the cam on the back side of the wheel is like our old Martin "flite wheels of the late 80's through the 90's... For several years. Myself and Dee Wilde won more tournaments (target archery) with this type wheel bow than any other bow made.. The video is the first admission i had heard of the "cam" bows not having a straight nock travel. When excellent pro target shooters went to single cam bows , grouping was from 12-6 o'clock with all things being equal, the misses (indoor for example) were high and low.. I shot the 1st, 2nd 3rd and 4th perfect indoor rounds with this type wheel bow, not big cams but 1.5 inch wheels.. (1988,1989, 1991, 1992) John Taylor did in 1991 also. perfect scores did not become common until quite some time after my retirement from competition in 2000.
> 
> one can tell the inexperienced target shooter by the 1st question about a bow is "how fast is it?", This is irrelavent in a target (bullseye shooting) bow. The rules in 3-d have virtually eliminated the "I have the fastest bow" syndrome... This also is equilibrated with the development of the numerous excellent carbon target arrows available.
> 
> ...


Very cool insight. I'm not a target shooter other than for fun, but I do know the HTR I have is on if the most stable, vibe free and quietest bows I have shot. And I've owned almost all of them. 

I was shooting 2days ago and the lack of sound coming from my HTR compared to every other now on the line was pretty incredible.


----------



## stanlh (Jul 23, 2010)

kirktink said:


> This is a wheel bow, with dead straight nock travel according to the mathews video.. the cam on the back side of the wheel is like our old Martin "flite wheels of the late 80's through the 90's... For several years. Myself and Dee Wilde won more tournaments (target archery) with this type wheel bow than any other bow made.. The video is the first admission i had heard of the "cam" bows not having a straight nock travel. When excellent pro target shooters went to single cam bows , grouping was from 12-6 o'clock with all things being equal, the misses (indoor for example) were high and low.. I shot the 1st, 2nd 3rd and 4th perfect indoor rounds with this type wheel bow, not big cams but 1.5 inch wheels.. (1988,1989, 1991, 1992) John Taylor did in 1991 also. perfect scores did not become common until quite some time after my retirement from competition in 2000.
> 
> one can tell the inexperienced target shooter by the 1st question about a bow is "how fast is it?", This is irrelavent in a target (bullseye shooting) bow. The rules in 3-d have virtually eliminated the "I have the fastest bow" syndrome... This also is equilibrated with the development of the numerous excellent carbon target arrows available.
> 
> ...


After reading this lengthy thread yours might be the only post that gets what this Mahtews no cam bow design is all about.


----------



## oldbuck (Apr 14, 2006)

*Nuts n Bolts...great explanation...thanks !!*

I want to thanks Nuts n bolts for the very down to earth technical review of the Mathews No Cam. It takes allot of work and dedication to produce this kind of explanation plus an in-depth knowledge of engineering principles…. thanks Alan for all your efforts and dedication 

This review really describes why the new No Cam system works…. 

After reading his review then view the laser bow torque test results and the video and you will clearly see that the review and the actual bow torque test results are in lock step with each other, one proves the other.

Thanks
oldbuck


No Cam TRG test results
http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2394550 

Laser Bow Torque Test Videos
http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2393303


----------



## KS Bow Hunter (Nov 22, 2013)

Great thread...


----------



## Veni Vidi Vici (Jan 23, 2011)

nuts&bolts said:


> I get tired sometimes, folks.
> 
> Spent 25 years in engineering,
> managed the west coast ops for a large engineering company,
> ...


Couldn't agree more with this statement! I work in design, and it is unreal how many people come up to you and ask, "Why didn't you just ..." as if the team who has spent months working on the design didn't think of that! My phrase to describe this is, "The solution is always obvious to the ignorant."


----------



## ctownshooter (Jun 6, 2013)

Tagged


----------

