# Opinions on Minimum GPP



## Kali4 (Jan 3, 2016)

I was looking for opinions on the importance of GPP. I have recently made up some arrows and I have read that you need to be in the 10gpp range to prevent a "dry fire" type of scenario. I have looked up my arrow weights on Stu's Calculator and my arrow set ups are closer to the 9gpp range. Is this okay in the long run on my equipment or should I look to eventually select stiffer spine weight arrows and increase the point weight to tune them? I am just 3-D and stump shooting so I am less concerned with penetration and more concerned with a flatter shooting arrow but I dont want to compromise the integrity of my equipment in the process.


----------



## Easykeeper (Jan 2, 2003)

You should be fine. Some bow manufacturers don't recommend or warrantee for less than 8gpp so that's considered a conservatively safe minimum. Lots of people go lower than 8gpp though and don't have any trouble with their risers or limbs. 

I've always considered 9-12gpp a good weight for me and my bows. I'm usually in the 10-12gpp but that's mainly because I'm a hunter and like the broadhead selection in heavier than normal points weights. I also like the quieting effect of the heavier arrow and can live with the extra drop as range gets longer since bowhunting is a short range sport.

If I were just shooting targets I would work to stay on the lighter side of arrow weight since extra weight will only make your trajectory more parabolic. I'll let target shooters comment on whether your 9gpp is a good weight, but I can at least say it's a safe weight.


----------



## Kali4 (Jan 3, 2016)

Thanks Easykeeper. I recently determined that I need to reduce my point weight to get a better flight from the shafts I have purchased and doing this will move me from a close 10gpp to just above 9. I feel better about doing this now! I wont be hunting for a few years until my kids move out, where I live now going hunting is not as simple as walking out in the back yard anymore, its more like a major event! For now its stumps and hopefully one of those ground squirrels that keeps chewing up my lawn is stupid enough to poke his head out.


----------



## rmansberger (Feb 9, 2016)

OK, I will ask, what is GPP?

Thanks.

Rick out


----------



## Easykeeper (Jan 2, 2003)

rmansberger said:


> OK, I will ask, what is GPP?
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Rick out


Total arrow weight in grains per pound of bow draw weight (grains per pound). A 500 grain arrow and a 50# bow is 10 gpp.


----------



## Viper1 (Aug 21, 2003)

k -

Depends on the bow and manufacturer's confidence in his builds. 

Most modern production bows are more than safe in the 7 gpp range, even lower is usually possible. 
Vintage bows and bows made by "custom" bowyers may vary. 
I like 7 - 9 gpp, but that's me. 

Viper1 out.


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

Viper1 said:


> k -
> 
> Depends on the bow and manufacturer's confidence in his builds.
> 
> ...


It is not a indicator of the confidence in the build in most cases.
In some the manufacturer might not want the user to experience the harshness of the shooting experience associated with lighter arrows. 
It might also be that they dont want to attract the speedfreek crowd. So 8gpp makes them look else where.
It might also be that GPP is an assumption that all bows store the same energy.

Lets take a 100lbs bow for example. (Only because the numbers are easy.
If one bow stores 0.8se/pdf. And another 1.25 both at 28"
Then one bow will generate 80ft/lbs of energy at 28" while the other 125ft/lbs

So the flip side to this is that for the 125ftlbs bow to store the same 80ftlbs as the other bow. It would need to be holding 64lbs opposed to the 100lbs of the other.
So 7gpp from the 100lbs bow would equate to a 700 grain arrow. Would be 10.9grains from another. Even though both store 80ft/lbs. 

The proximity to dry fire is defined by stores energy. Which is crudely defined by poundage.

Poundage is not an indicator of stored energy these days.
(Used to be. But not now)


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

Bit like putting remould tyres on you 80bhp 2.0ltr car.
Then assuming that those remoulds will fit your new 2.0ltr car. Ooops 250bhp. Then saying the new car is just being overly cautious on tyre recomendations as the remoulds have worked on all your other old 2.0liter engined cars in the past!


----------



## Keeshond (Sep 13, 2016)

Borderbows said:


> It is not a indicator of the confidence in the build in most cases.
> In some the manufacturer might not want the user to experience the harshness of the shooting experience associated with lighter arrows.
> It might also be that they dont want to attract the speedfreek crowd. So 8gpp makes them look else where.
> It might also be that GPP is an assumption that all bows store the same energy.
> ...


^^^ Huh?......Too much of an answer that doesn't answer anything.

Any decent ILF limb can survive 6gpp easily and I've shot down to 5gpp with no issues. It just happens that a little heavier arrow gives me better groups. I never worry about harshness of shot or the noise. I don't hear a thing when a bow goes off. I'm not paying any attention to that. Have shot ILF limbs since they first appeared and I've never had a limb failure of any kind. I've seen them break at matches but never had one let go on me and I have always used very light arrows since carbon appeared.

One piece wood bows tend to be a bit more fragile. Maybe you should stay above 7gpp with them?


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

I used to concern myself with such trivialities to stir discussion and increase my knowledge base from others but a few years back?...

I decided to let the bow tell me how light was just right or too light.

For instance?...I had a late model 64" Bear Super Kodiak that would start barking at anything less than 9GPP...so I shot 10GPP and loved that bow.

Conversely?...I had a DAS Elite riser wearing Robertfishes Custom built amberboo core & black glass limbs that would shoot 6.4GPP arrows quieter than my Bear Super Kodiak mentioned above but then again?...I also had a Bear Greenstripe TD riser with Brandon Stahls limbs that would shoot 6GPP just as quietly as my DAS Elite rig previously mentioned.

But I go by Volume and let the bow tell me...after all?...what causes sound is vibrations....so between what I hear?...hence what I feel?....

I listen too the bow.


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

Keeshond said:


> ^^^ Huh?......Too much of an answer that doesn't answer anything.
> 
> Any decent ILF limb can survive 6gpp easily and I've shot down to 5gpp with no issues. It just happens that a little heavier arrow gives me better groups. I never worry about harshness of shot or the noise. I don't hear a thing when a bow goes off. I'm not paying any attention to that. Have shot ILF limbs since they first appeared and I've never had a limb failure of any kind. I've seen them break at matches but never had one let go on me and I have always used very light arrows since carbon appeared.
> 
> One piece wood bows tend to be a bit more fragile. Maybe you should stay above 7gpp with them?


You sound just like KPC.

But fair play. Your entitled to your opinion.
99% of all ILF limbs are within 5% of each other. So no wonder they all have the same settings that work and none really go over 50lbs. 
Now. If you store 30% more energy than another design
Should they both have the same minimums?


----------



## SteveB (Dec 18, 2003)

I wouldn't own a bow that the minimum was above 8 gpp.


----------



## Keeshond (Sep 13, 2016)

SteveB said:


> I wouldn't own a bow that the minimum was above 8 gpp.


Ditto.


----------



## Keeshond (Sep 13, 2016)

Borderbows said:


> You sound just like KPC.
> 
> But fair play. Your entitled to your opinion.
> 99% of all ILF limbs are within 5% of each other. So no wonder they all have the same settings that work and none really go over 50lbs.
> ...


You seem to indicate your limbs store almost a third more energy than ordinary limbs but only return about 5-8 fps increase in velocity for mid-weight arrows. Nothing to sneeze at but not enough to get excited about given many people, like me, find them a bit fussy to shoot for their best scores. 

I think you've gone beyond the best design parameters for accuracy in a recurve limb. Your product is very interesting and I hunt with hex 6 limbs because they are the fastest but not the most shootable. If they were, if they were all you say they were, all the top shooters in the world would be beating down your door. Win & Win would have copied your limb profile. Fivics would have copied your limb. Everybody who makes limbs would have copied your idea. But that hasn't happened. Only a handful of custom makers offer your idea of what a recurve limb should be and not a single Olympian toed the line (ever) shooting a Border limb at 70 meters shooting for the gold metal. When that happens I'll start paying attention to what you are saying. Otherwise you're just a cottage industry custom limb maker of very nice craftsmanship with a curious limb that shoots very fast but cannot keep up with a good WW or Hoyt limb at 70 meters for grouping. And in the end, only score counts, not speed.


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

Keeshond said:


> You seem to indicate your limbs store almost a third more energy than ordinary limbs but only return about 5-8 fps increase in velocity for mid-weight arrows. Nothing to sneeze at but not enough to get excited about given many people, like me, find them a bit fussy to shoot for their best scores.
> 
> I think you've gone beyond the best design parameters for accuracy in a recurve limb. Your product is very interesting and I hunt with hex 6 limbs because they are the fastest but not the most shootable. If they were, if they were all you say they were, all the top shooters in the world would be beating down your door. Win & Win would have copied your limb profile. Fivics would have copied your limb. Everybody who makes limbs would have copied your idea. But that hasn't happened. Only a handful of custom makers offer your idea of what a recurve limb should be and not a single Olympian toed the line (ever) shooting a Border limb at 70 meters shooting for the gold metal. When that happens I'll start paying attention to what you are saying. Otherwise you're just a cottage industry custom limb maker of very nice craftsmanship with a curious limb that shoots very fast but cannot keep up with a good WW or Hoyt limb at 70 meters for grouping. And in the end, only score counts, not speed.


Only company to have produced an idea that everyone else now copies.

But anyhow. Thanks for your opinions. 
Im sure barebow gents gold was a utter accident then.


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

If somebody wants to select their bows based on minimum gpp allowed, and that's meaningful to them, that's fine.

If you're actually looking at relative stress, even using the same limbs, that actual limit is going to depend not on mass proportional to holding weight, but on the energy left over in the bow. I.e., if you take the same bow, and pull it to 32", and weight the arrow to be the same holding weight as if that bow were drawn to say, 26", the 32" bow is going to get that arrow moving faster, even though the gpp indication would suggest both scenarios are equally near the operating limits of the bow. They are not. My kids had a browning discovery compound bow. They shot arrows through it, no problem. I tried it at my draw length, the thing flew apart in pieces. Each situation, same GPP, totally different results.

Ultimately, it comes down to, how fast can the bow move the arrow before the residual kinetic energy imparted into the limbs (and to some degree the string) before it becomes problematic, either in terms of long term structural integrity, noise levels, or discomfort with vibration. It's a complex relationship. You've got not only the strength of the limbs, but the mass of the limbs, the mass distribution, the actual distribution and timing of motion (and stopping) of the limbs, and then you subject all of that to the speed, its traveling when it stops, the forces imparted by the string itself (which will vary depending on the material).

The gpp metric is fine as a rough suggestion and maybe starting point, and if the manufacturer uses is, a boundary for the sake of warranty, but it doesn't actually describe the functional side of it very well. That's kind of like saying, what should a good bow's brace height be?


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

Bugatti added 200 horse power to their car just to get 16mph more.


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

Borderbows said:


> Bugatti added 200 horse power to their car just to get 16mph more.


and then there's those nitro burning dragsters but then?...

"Drive-Ability"...takes a nosedive.

Much like some of my fastest shooting rigs were also my nastiest shooting, loud at the shot and more squirrely handling rigs but then?...just add a GPP or two?....(maybe even 3)...and viola...back to a well behaved smooth shooter it went.

Much like racing?...folks often times overlook the fact that except for straight line drag racing?...it's rarely the vehicle with the most horse power that wins races and if it does?...it's because it's suspension, brakes and overall handling and drive-ability were better as well.


----------



## GEREP (May 6, 2003)

Borderbows said:


> You sound just like KPC.


If you don't mind, please leave me out of your arguments with...virtually everyone that doesn't happen to see things your way. 

Your reaction to anyone who happens to see things differently than you borders on paranoia. (no pun intended)

As to the OP's question.

Even though the limbs I use are warranted down to 5gpp, I personally like between 8 and 9 gpp for everything. I'm primarily a hunter, and that's just what seems to work best for me.

In regard to warranties.

Bowyers don't warrant products for feel or performance. That is way too subjective. They warrant them against the likelihood of failure. They set the parameters based on what they feel comfortable with in terms of how many they are going to get back and have to repair or replace, or what they feel is safe in terms of liability.

In my opinion, warranties are a dollars and sense, quantifiable, profit and loss business decision. Insinuating that a certain gpp stipulation is there to insure a certain level of performance or feel is no different than saying the warranty term (months or years) is designed to do the same. The notion is ridiculous on it's face.

KPC


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

GEREP said:


> If you don't mind, please leave me out of your arguments with...virtually everyone that doesn't happen to see things your way.
> 
> Your reaction to anyone who happens to see things differently than you borders on paranoia. (no pun intended)
> 
> ...


Along these lines?...much depends on what it is any particular archer (as an individual) is looking for out of a bow...for instance?...

Master Class Bowyers often times built "Flight Bows" that in an attempt to break and/or set new world flight records?...it was not uncommon that the bows designed, made and used to achieve this "Extremely Mission Specific Task" would in fact....blow up after 2-3 shots.

So?....is it any wonder why high end limbs built to eek out every last fps possible at very specific DL's in hopes of offering up that slight bit of razors edge advantage to inch out a competitor at the highest levels of competition that?...these are the same sort of limbs that exhibit the highest per capita failure rate?

If so?...wouldn't that be kind of like expecting to get 5 years of service and 100K miles out of using a NASCAR as your "Daily Driver"?

But?....steps and measures can be taken to "De-Tune" in an effort to increase longevity...but of course come at a cost to performance...things like using a stretchier (hence more elastic and shock absorbing) string material....and/or?...piling on more GPP.....and/or?...reducing pre-load by backing out limb bolts...which in turn may prolong the life expectancy of these cutting edge high performance limbs...but now what are we back too?...oh...right....a well behaved...smooth shooting....shock free....quieter albeit lower performance bow....that's back to being a sweet shooter that won't blow the limbs off the riser.

I've concluded that the best way to greatly enhance the performance level of even the lowliest of bows is to...





simply attach a well skilled archer to it. LOL!


----------



## Chris Hill (Aug 26, 2005)

I don't chase that speed some people do. I like a rig that shoots about 190 fps as that works for my gaps and is the most accurate for me. I am not a good enough shot to shoot much over 200 fps. I like a higher performance rig so I can drop weight and still shoot the same arrows I was at 5-7# heavier. Or shoot the same weight and a higher gpp the same speed with more foot pounds and a heavier foc as I have found a heavier foc is more accurate with broadheads and windy conditions that I run into hunting.


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

Chris Hill said:


> I don't chase that speed some people do. I like a rig that shoots about 190 fps as that works for my gaps and is the most accurate for me. I am not a good enough shot to shoot much over 200 fps. I like a higher performance rig so I can drop weight and still shoot the same arrows I was at 5-7# heavier. Or shoot the same weight and a higher gpp the same speed with more foot pounds and a heavier foc as I have found a heavier foc is more accurate with broadheads and windy conditions that I run into hunting.


I agree Chris...I could give a flip about shooting over the same speeds you mention and by far prefer more smooth power than any ill purchased gains in velocity over the use of extremely light GPP as to me?...a heavy arrow moving at nominal speeds carries the distance better and in a far more predictable fashion which makes me a more successful archer and besides?...who wants to shoot a loud bow riddled with shock and vibes?...and for what?...10-20fps more velocity?...now yes...some would argue that as a lot and a big difference but guess what?...by the time you put enough fletching on a light squirrel of an arrow to stabilize it consistently?....that same fletching will act like air-brakes at downrange distances...no advantage there and worse yet?..."Predictability"?...hits the sewer as they suddenly (and unexpectedly) drop out of the sky.

Where the heavier arrows shot with more power?...are up too the task of dragging a stabilizing amount of fletching with authority and predictability.

It's quite ironic to me that one of my best shooting bows is my 68"/46# Timberpoint Kraken Longbow launching 435gr/9.5GPP Cedars w/ 3X4" feathers...shooting woodies...and is literally my 2nd most accurate bow bested only by my 68" Black Thunderstorm BB rig shooting 7.8GPP VAP's....imagine that! LOL!

I imagine a lot can be subject to what sort of aiming system one employs as well...which makes all these topics deep, diverse, interesting and?...Fun!

even to just discuss.


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

Chris Hill said:


> I don't chase that speed some people do. I like a rig that shoots about 190 fps as that works for my gaps and is the most accurate for me. I am not a good enough shot to shoot much over 200 fps. I like a higher performance rig so I can drop weight and still shoot the same arrows I was at 5-7# heavier. Or shoot the same weight and a higher gpp the same speed with more foot pounds and a heavier foc as I have found a heavier foc is more accurate with broadheads and windy conditions that I run into hunting.



This is pretty much exactly what I'm looking for in a limb 

I like arrows at 9 to 10 Gpp for my hunting and have no need to shoot lighter or heavier 

I'd like some day to go back and shoot some more Cape Buffalo and use a recurve this time and at that time I would shift my arrows to more GPP than I'm using now 

I have no reason to go lower in GPP for any of my uses 

I can tell the OP that by using the Hex 7 and up limbs I have gotten speeds at 10 GPP from my bows that I'd need a bow to be 10 or so pounds more to equal in a conventional design 

I can tell the OP that I do enjoy shooting a bow that is 60 inches in length but has the shooting envelope of a 56 or less inch bow 

I hunt from tree stands and on the ground where a shorter more maneuverable bow rules the day


----------



## Chris Hill (Aug 26, 2005)

Cape Buffalo now that sounds like fun. I think it could be done with a 60-65# CH.


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

Chris Hill said:


> Cape Buffalo now that sounds like fun. I think it could be done with a 60-65# CH.


I think so to 

There is a minimum weight requirement but I would just have the weight marking omitted from the limbs


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

JINKSTER said:


> Master Class Bowyers often times built "Flight Bows" that in an attempt to break and/or set new world flight records?...it was not uncommon that the bows designed, made and used to achieve this "Extremely Mission Specific Task" would in fact....blow up after 2-3 shots.


Wow, that's some pretty serious commitment to the score!


----------



## GEREP (May 6, 2003)

GEREP said:


> In my opinion, warranties are a *dollars and sense,* quantifiable, profit and loss business decision. Insinuating that a certain gpp stipulation is there to insure a certain level of performance or feel is no different than saying the warranty term (months or years) is designed to do the same. The notion is ridiculous on it's face.
> 
> KPC


That should read *dollars and cents*, not *dollars and sense.*

Must have been a Freudian slip. Having a warranty for any other reason doesn't really make much *sense.*

:wink:

KPC


----------



## Keeshond (Sep 13, 2016)

High speed in a limb is not bad. It's good. What's bad is the things you have to do to a limb shape here on earth to make it shoot much over 200 fps or so. If my W&W limbs would shoot 350 fps, like a compound, and not get all squirrely, I'd love that. Once you curl a limb tip past a certain point in order to get that nice unwinding payout of energy, it definitely does something to bow geometry that tends to punish anything but a perfect release. Really superb shooters can better get away with a super curve. Less able shooters like me get truly punished when we do something wrong.

The top Olympic shooters do not care so much about speed. They only need to reach 70 meters with decent time in the air for their arrows. The present conventional limb profile does this and it's also the most stable shape. In most things in life like airplanes and sailboats and race cars, eventually the top maker's products all eventually assume the same "look" because there is only one best design. Look at the world's best fighter jets. They all look exactly alike if the job they are designed for is the same. Only one shape slips through the air the best. Only one sailboat mono-hull is the best. So everybody who makes a racing hull has arrived at basically the same design. Bobsleds and luge in winter sports. All look essentially the same because fighting the apparent wind is the key to going fast in that game. Only one shape is best and all makers have found it.

Race cars, same thing. (within the same race type and rules) Archery is no different. The old Hoyt shape does everything pretty doggone good. It's the best shape we have arrived at with some very slight variations that Earl wouldn't even notice today if he could see them all. The super curves are fun and very fast. They just have not shown themselves to be more capable of grouping as well as the Hoyt design. I don't think they ever will. It's a geometry problem not a personal thing with Border or Uukha or whoever else makes an extreme limb.

When the Korean national teams start marching out with super curves after being beaten by Americans and Europeans shooting same, I'll start paying attention to Border. But not until then. If you want to be the best, shoot what the best shoot and know you failed because you're not up to the task, not your equipment.


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

JINKSTER said:


> But?....steps and measures can be taken to "De-Tune" in an effort to increase longevity...


I think I agree with what you're saying, though I think I'd use different language, differentiating De-Tune, which is often done for various barebow aiming reasons, as opposed to backing away from the operating limits of the system.

I would say that it is mostly a matter of knowing your envelope. Different designs will have different envelopes. It's not a matter of superiority or inferiority, but knowing how to work with what is to get what you want, and knowing when your goals are outside of the available parameters. You want a durable 'traditional' design that will consistently and reliably launch arrows for you at 300 fps? Good luck. It's going to take some massive advances in material technology, so far as I know. Shoot a compound, and you're already there, no problem.

But, if you're chasing 'performace', that really matters on your performance criteria. I.e., what does that even mean?

If it's accuracy, it might mean de-tuning for the sake of aiming, or it may not. It might mean tuning optimally for the sake of precision conducive, 'forgiving' shooting. The application of that will depend on the kind of shooting you do, and what kind of shooter you are. Different shooters/events will have different answers.

If you're looking to maximize KE, momentum, penetration, etc., you're probably going to load up on arrow weight, where the only limits on the envelope are the arc of the trajectory you're willing to accept for the diminishing returns.

If it's speed, you'll probably drop arrow weight towards the limits of what the bow will tolerate, whatever the conditions, or the behavior of the system through the shot, at the possible expense of other factors.

In any case, it's kind of a balancing act.

As it regards the original question, I think that Kali4 has probably gotten more than enough information, possibly to the point of confusion. The short answer is, it depends. 9 GPP with either of those bows is probably safe. If you really want to know as it regards warranty, ask the respective manufacturers, mentioning your draw length in the process.

Aside of warranty issues, the bottom line is, does it shoot well for you? Does it feel good? If you've got clearance from the person providing the warranty, and it's working, I'd say good to go.


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

Keeshond said:


> High speed in a limb is not bad. It's good. What's bad is the things you have to do to a limb shape here on earth to make it shoot much over 200 fps or so.
> If my W&W limbs would shoot 350 fps, like a compound, and not get all squirrely, I'd love that.


Very much agreed 



> Once you curl a limb tip past a certain point in order to get that nice unwinding payout of energy, it definitely does something to bow geometry that tends to punish anything but a perfect release. Really superb shooters can better get away with a super curve. Less able shooters like me get truly punished when we do something wrong.


I think there's something to the geometry issue, with certain shooters and setups, though I also think it's very specific, and pretty hard to predict. I can't say anything definitively either way for anybody other than myself.

I also think that something gets kind of confused. If you're talking about 'Super' recurves, I think that often we get mislead into thinking that they are designed to be, and are in fact, 'faster.' Speaking very generally, what they do very well, is at a given holding weight, get a heavier arrow going at the _same_ speed. There are possible advantages to this. However, if you actually shoot the same arrow weight, and the arrow weight was in the lower optimal range for the conventional limbs, it'll be outside of the optimal range for the deeper hooks, and I can certainly see why this would cause lots of things to go wrong, including the squirrely behavior you're referencing.



> The top Olympic shooters do not care so much about speed. They only need to reach 70 meters with decent time in the air for their arrows. The present conventional limb profile does this and it's also the most stable shape.


It would seem that they must care something about speed, because they're shooting arrows that aren't exactly heavy. However, I think you've got a really good point, in that with their application, they don't really benefit that much from a heavier arrow, or for that matter, a draw force curve that makes expansion 'easy'. They have clickers. They have minimal drag fletching. They have skinny dense shafts. They have no broad heads to steer. They score no more for penetration. They are athletes who have no issues competing with holding weight required with conventional designs. In short, speaking categorically, the potential design advantages of the super recurve offer them, from a technical standpoint, something pretty close to nothing. At that point, even if you could adjust to shoot the limbs with a different feel just as well, why would you bother? I can't see a reason to even try.


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

Keeshond said:


> High speed in a limb is not bad. It's good. What's bad is the things you have to do to a limb shape here on earth to make it shoot much over 200 fps or so. If my W&W limbs would shoot 350 fps, like a compound, and not get all squirrely, I'd love that. Once you curl a limb tip past a certain point in order to get that nice unwinding payout of energy, it definitely does something to bow geometry that tends to punish anything but a perfect release. Really superb shooters can better get away with a super curve. Less able shooters like me get truly punished when we do something wrong.
> 
> The top Olympic shooters do not care so much about speed. They only need to reach 70 meters with decent time in the air for their arrows. The present conventional limb profile does this and it's also the most stable shape. In most things in life like airplanes and sailboats and race cars, eventually the top maker's products all eventually assume the same "look" because there is only one best design. Look at the world's best fighter jets. They all look exactly alike if the job they are designed for is the same. Only one shape slips through the air the best. Only one sailboat mono-hull is the best. So everybody who makes a racing hull has arrived at basically the same design. Bobsleds and luge in winter sports. All look essentially the same because fighting the apparent wind is the key to going fast in that game. Only one shape is best and all makers have found it.
> 
> ...


In some of the sports your mentioning rules and regulations come into play also so design is limited


----------



## GEREP (May 6, 2003)

BarneySlayer said:


> 9 GPP with either of those bows is probably safe.


*"Probably safe?"* I don't know of a manufacturer that does not warranty their bows or limbs down to 9gpp. If there is one, not only would I be asking why, I'd surely never consider purchasing one

KPC


----------



## Chris Hill (Aug 26, 2005)

Don't forget sponsorship has something to do with what people shoot.


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

Chris Hill said:


> Don't forget sponsorship has something to do with what people shoot.


No Chris ..... rules, regulations , sponsorship etc have no bearing on sports  

Especially at the olympics


----------



## Keeshond (Sep 13, 2016)

JP, I understand One-Type racing. You have parameters to stay within, but it's very telling in sailboat racing how every boat under the waterline is identical when variation is allowed. Same for Indy cars. If they were all painted black with no markings nobody would be able to tell one car from another. That's all I meant.


----------



## Keeshond (Sep 13, 2016)

Chris Hill said:


> Don't forget sponsorship has something to do with what people shoot.


Border should sponsor the best UK Oly shooters but I doubt any shooters would stake their careers on that limb.

It's more telling that countries only use a sponsor who makes a conventional limb. Like the old Samick or WW or Hoyt. France and the Uukha is a noteworthy exception but I could be wrong. I'm not sure what the French team shoots. And who cares? They never win at the Olympics or Worlds anyway.


----------



## GEREP (May 6, 2003)

Chris Hill said:


> Don't forget sponsorship has something to do with what people shoot.


There is a certain amount of truth to this Chris. 

Which, when you think about it, only reinforces the notion that the cream will rise to the top regardless of what they shoot, and actually undermines the notion that one particular design is superior in any demonstrable way. 

KPC


----------



## Chris Hill (Aug 26, 2005)

Why doesn't Brady shoot Samick or W&W or whatever the best Korean shooters shoot since they seem to be at the top more. Border is so much smaller and less money they can't compete.


----------



## DDSHOOTER (Aug 22, 2005)

"Bow and Arrow Dynamics.

For an inextensible string the efficiency of a bow and arrow system has been shown to the arrow mass plus one- third the mass of the string. For a typical arrow and string mass, this efficiency is 91%, ie., the arrow carries off 91%of the energy initially stored in the bow to full draw. 

For the same arrow, bow limb, and bow string combination, but with an elastic string, the portion of the energy involved in the arrow flight is only 78% of the energy stored in the bow limbs and string at full draw; 11% is bound up in kinetic energy of the limbs at arrow exit, 9% is in kinetic of the string at arrow exit, and 2% is stored at arrow exit is potential energy in the string and limbs system. The effect of air resistance is estimated to be less than 2% of the total energy a full draw. "
By W. Marlow

So as you can see it's not just gpp or energy storage. It's about energy transference. It's been suggested that this happens better with heavy arrows. But, I think the above statement indicates the string being a part. 
Dan


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

GEREP said:


> *"Probably safe?"* I don't know of a manufacturer that does not warranty their bows or limbs down to 9gpp. If there is one, not only would I be asking why, I'd surely never consider purchasing one
> 
> KPC


I don't know if you've noticed, but I have a perhaps bad habit of over-qualifying. 

It is my guess that in either case, you're quite right.


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

Keeshond said:


> JP, I understand One-Type racing. You have parameters to stay within, but it's very telling in sailboat racing how every boat under the waterline is identical when variation is allowed. Same for Indy cars. If they were all painted black with no markings nobody would be able to tell one car from another. That's all I meant.


 No worries I understand your point 

We all know that the rules and regs to a certain degree dictate which design will lend itself to the best performance 

This keeps racing competitive and in a sense evens the field 

I'm a big moto go fan and I re bet the days of the 500 cc two strokes and how the rules and regs played out when they brought in the 4 strokes 

Now I'm not saying archery rules don't let SR's compete on the same playing field ...... that's sponsorship etc 

I'm not a competitive target archer but I'd bet that someone like Brady or Jake were given time to get dialed in with Amy limb they would shoot well 

Hell they are shooting Quattro and before that F7's and I have and or had both and they are no better than any other middle of the road limb from WW or Samick etc 

In truth I fold the f7's to a well known bowyer who I don't drag into this and it was not the Sid's and he said they were marginally better performance wise than the stock Buffalo limb 

I'm not saying SR's will ever be dominate in the Olympic archery format .....sponsorship and politics will hold that at bay but in time and time will tell I think the world of archery will look back and remember a small group of Bowyers from Scotland that tried to push the envelope and step away from the norm 

What will hold them back to a large degree is that people are hard to except change ..... anything new in such an age old sport is certainly going to take a very long time to prove itself 

I have seen it time and time again people when exposed to a SR will not step away from what they know in their conventional tuning the fore they do not operate the limbs with in their design parameters and hence are not happy with the results 

Those that scrap to dome degree their prior tuning preconceived notions fair better 

Imho......In time the other than conventional limb designs will show their merit. lets be honest a small companies like Ukha and Border need to Develop advanced prouducts to stay alive 

Conventional limb design (earl Hoyt ) only advances thru materials 

We will see over the next few decades how much design aLso comes into play ...... I think Border will be remembered and possibly still pushing the envelope 

Either way it's a great time for limbs out there 

Plenty of choices for all tastes and budgets......... that makes me happy  

For me I have walls of recurves and the only bows I'm interested in shooting are the SR's 

I like a short hunting bow that feels long and chucks an arrow like a bow that's 1o + pounds heavier 

I have heard that Hoyt has interest in SR design and I think the big companies all have their eye out on every design but they are also producing a Mass production item not a limited custom item that takes more time and skill to produce ....they have a bottom dollar 

What wins on Sunday sells on Monday 

If you don't think building an SR takes more skill and time don't take my word for it ask a Bowyer 

I had the fun privilege to show the very first Hex 7 to many bowyers over here and All said WOW 

Time will, sorry to get off track 

My answer no matter what bow I'm shooting is 8 to 10 GPP anyway


----------



## Keeshond (Sep 13, 2016)

Chris Hill said:


> Why doesn't Brady shoot Samick or W&W or whatever the best Korean shooters shoot since they seem to be at the top more. Border is so much smaller and less money they can't compete.


The best Hoyt limbs are equal to the best of WW or Samick. They copied Hoyt.


----------



## Keeshond (Sep 13, 2016)

JP, I shoot hex 6 limbs for hunting because they are the fastest thing I've ever used. And they are accurate enough at 25 yards for me. I wouldn't take a shot past that.

My best 300 scores at 20 yards are in the 260s. I've never once shot over 258 with the hex 6 limbs I've got. I can measure a difference in accuracy. It's only a few points but every point counts. I do hunt deer. It makes no difference to the deer my hex 6 limbs miss the hair I was aiming at by a quarter inch. It does matter to me I get nice pass though shots with light poundage the hex 6 allows. I only shoot 38 pounds, under my state's legal requirement, but nobody ever checks that in the woods. Besides, I have heavier limbs that don't shoot as fast. So screw state hunting regs is my motto. 

BTW. I love your new dogs. It's awful to lose a dog. I'd rather lose most people I know over my own Keeshonds. A Dutch/German breed that looks like a furry elkhound if you're not familiar with the breed. A spitz family animal. I've had 8 of them over the years. I have a pair now.


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

I'll admit to this... as much as I love high performance bows like the next guy?... sometimes I have to step back and ask myself what is it I'm trying to achieve because when I can buy one heck of a nice compound bow for the cost of one set of super recurve limbs?.... I'm left asking myself....

Where the heck is it that I'm trying to go with this?


----------



## Chris Hill (Aug 26, 2005)

Keeshond said:


> The best Hoyt limbs are equal to the best of WW or Samick. They copied Hoyt.


I think They all copied Border in construction with cross weave carbon.


----------



## Chris Hill (Aug 26, 2005)

But this is about gpp and if you want to push the limits that is great. I like a heavier arrow that will hold its line in the wind and carry as much energy as I can because it allows me to have a good gap at reasonably longer shots. And it is quieter and less shock and vibration.


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

Keeshond said:


> JP, I shoot hex 6 limbs for hunting because they are the fastest thing I've ever used. And they are accurate enough at 25 yards for me. I wouldn't take a shot past that.
> 
> My best 300 scores at 20 yards are in the 260s. I've never once shot over 258 with the hex 6 limbs I've got. I can measure a difference in accuracy. It's only a few points but every point counts. I do hunt deer. It makes no difference to the deer my hex 6 limbs miss the hair I was aiming at by a quarter inch. It does matter to me I get nice pass though shots with light poundage the hex 6 allows. I only shoot 38 pounds, under my state's legal requirement, but nobody ever checks that in the woods. Besides, I have heavier limbs that don't shoot as fast. So screw state hunting regs is my motto.
> 
> BTW. I love your new dogs. It's awful to lose a dog. I'd rather lose most people I know over my own Keeshonds. A Dutch/German breed that looks like a furry elkhound if you're not familiar with the breed. A spitz family animal. I've had 8 of them over the years. I have a pair now.


I'd love to see your dogs so post them up .... I'm a big dog fan .... all breeds 

Thank you the pups are doing very well 



I took them CAMPING and on the river with the airboat and they were awesome in the woods 

at 8 weeks the mail sniffed out and killed the allusive ground mole  and the female is so drivey she whines in the woods to get going 

At 10 weeks they could do Mike mile loop trail in back of the house which is 50 % up hill 

I'm pleased  

I've read ou hunt with the Hex 6's and like them 

I really liked my 6's 

I have a set of 5's that are good too 

The 6's are to the 5's what 7's are to the 6's ....if that makes sense 

The 7.5's incrementally improved again 

The small tweaks and steps the Sids do take their design to different levels 

Is it a better mouse trap ? For some .....for some not 

I'm not a long range shooter so my opinion is just one of a guy who sets up for 25 yard and under ambush style shots. I believe you when you say you can get a few more points with the conventional limbs and I respect that but it sounds like for hunting your sold on the Hex format to a certain degree

I bet ya with a set of Hex 7.5's ya might get those points back ........ just give it time to really get used too  remember we have all been shooting what we think a recurve should feel like for a long time and different feels ......... well different


----------



## Keeshond (Sep 13, 2016)

Chris Hill said:


> I think They all copied Border in construction with cross weave carbon.


So what? It's the limb profile I was talking about. I get it, you love Border. No problem. I own Border limbs myself. Not a bad product, just not the best design for accuracy in my hands.


----------



## Keeshond (Sep 13, 2016)

JP, I have always felt if you have to really struggle and work to get a limb to perform accuracy-wise to the level you want, you have the wrong limb. You need wiggle room of tolerance in a limb when shooting under stress. Not sure I'm stating that correctly. I mean a tolerant limb is better than a touchy limb that needs to be coddled into behaving no matter how fast it is. I string walk, essentially I use a sight. If I guess the range correctly, or if I know the range, top speed is not too important. 

You can make the argument that having a very flat trajectory helps with range errors, and it does. But I don't miss yardage estimates very much to the point I want a faster limb that I know is more sensitive to my shooting flaws. And we all have flaws, even the very best. It is a balance you have to figure out for yourself - how do you want to miss. LOL It just looks to me in the competition world that most shooters have come to the same conclusion I have. A more stable limb that is less difficult to make shoot well is a better choice if points are what you're after.

Meat on the hoof is different. A deer's lungs are a HUGE target inside of 25 yards. The hex 6 is great choice for such a large thing to shoot at. There the speed trumps pinpoint accuracy.

Now what's that little terrier dog doing? Is he yours, too? I like any breed. Unlike limbs.


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

Maybe string walking makes the difference I don't have any expierence there 

The little dog is a year and four months 

Her name is scarlet 

She is my wife's and littlest daughters dog but I like her pretty much  

She's a mini Australian shepherd mixed with a toy poodle 

She's ferocious ....... and I'm not kidding  

Here she is with the 11 week old bull terrier female pup


----------



## Keeshond (Sep 13, 2016)

I think those dogs have a good home.


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

Keeshond said:


> I think you've gone beyond the best design parameters for accuracy in a recurve limb. Your product is very interesting and I hunt with hex 6 limbs because they are the fastest but not the most shootable. .


you missed out Uuhka in this one. in that they seem to be scoring well, yet not featuring highly at the Olympics.
they seem to feature in most aspects of archery where sponsorship doesn't buy the result.

on the flip side.
you cant seem to score with hex6s. yet others can, and there is plenty of them.
So you say things like they cant shoot well, so are left to the ranks of those that don't know any different, yet just the other day, I was told by another internet debater, that they are sensitive to shoot that only the best of the best can get anything out them. and in top shots hands they do very well.

seems to be that the argument put forward on forums flips from one side to the other depending on who is on the other side of the screen.

what cant be argued is that when pitched in national level, international level, where sponsorship seems to ignore. we feature VERY highly.

ive asked those on FB to give themselves a shoutout for their accolades with our bows. I'm sure you can agree that there seems to be a range of archers in the last 2 years done quite well with limbs you deem not accurate.
these guys are shooting beyond 25 yards.
and winning podium places in competitive fields.

the issue I have, is that the list goes further back than 2 years. infact, the list goes back to before we as owners bought the company.
its the latest status I put up about 5 hours ago and is already filling up.

https://www.facebook.com/BorderArchery/

and if you want to go back to hex5 era 
there is more here:
http://www.archeryinterchange.com/f127/tell-us-about-your-achievements-12406/index33.html



So my thoughts are, its not the kit. Its the archer.

how else do you derive a conclusion from someone who cant achive, when plenty of others do, and read these pages, and judge.


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

Keeshond said:


> I think those dogs have a good home.


Thank you 

Dogs deserve it and I'm happy to have the new pups and the little scarlet girl 

It's the people that suck in life  

Here's a video on that trip don't mind the music my 11 and 13 year old daughter picked it out  

Sorry to the op for the derail but ya mention dogs and I'm all in


----------



## Keeshond (Sep 13, 2016)

Sid, I own a set of your limbs but I bought them online used. I bought them used because I've read you for years on this forum before joining. I know your style and I don't like it. I didn't buy limbs directly from you because didn't want to deal with you. You wear people out with a paranoid view of things. Nobody is out to "get" you. They just don't agree with you. Get over it. I wonder how many other potential customers you turn off and turn away. You certainly turned me off. 

I like your limbs. I just would never deal with you on a personal level. Hence I buy your stuff second-hand. If only you could see yourself through the eyes of others, you'd understand why so many find you obnoxious.


----------



## Keeshond (Sep 13, 2016)

JP, I've never been on a airboat. Do you worry about hitting submerged logs and things at 500 mph? Looks like a good way to go swimming. LOL


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

Keeshond said:


> JP, I've never been on a airboat. Do you worry about hitting submerged logs and things at 500 mph? Looks like a good way to go swimming. LOL


The boat has a quarter inch thick aluminum bottom that is covered in 3/4 inch poly 

Then there are extra stringers and gussets so it's rather stout  

I can run dry but I like a few inches of water  

Sid is passionate about his craft and I have found them both......in fact the whole family to be the salt of the earth and very good friends besides being some fantastic originators 

all I can say is that I hope everyone can get along and discuss the true merits and down falls of all things limbs and GPP 

It's a very good discussion


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

So you first attack the product. When i show you alternative info to say you might be wrong. You flip about and attack me by calling me names
Nice fella.


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

JParanee said:


> all I can say is that I hope everyone can get along and discuss the true merits and down falls of all things limbs and GPP
> 
> It's a very good discussion


Sorry JP.

Your right.


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

I'll take easy of tuning over energy storage any day. Fortunately limbs with the former usually have plenty of GPP tolerance and an overall ease of shooting.


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

grantmac said:


> I'll take easy of tuning over energy storage any day. Fortunately limbs with the former usually have plenty of GPP tolerance and an overall ease of shooting.


Once you know how to tune that type of bow. They are all easy to tune.
Its a bit like being a recurve shooter for 20 years then picking up a compound. Shooting your recurve arrows then wondering why it doesnt tune.
If it was hard. And unforgiving. Then all those folks on FB wouldnt be achieving what they do.
Its almost like folks are making a brand of thier own kool aid. While accusing those who like the bows. For drinking border koolaid.

No matter what is said. Some folks are simply out there winning. Winning while others are whinging.

Quite a few winning. And not just once. Years and years of it. Different limb models.
It seems that there is a bunch of folks on some internet forums that have convinced themselves they are right.
While not knowing the full achievements of others who are not part of that select group.

But hey. Thats human nature


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

lets get back on track.
lets have a look at the numbers.

normal recurve/longbow has the following spec [email protected]" storing 0.9se/pdf means it stores 45ft/lbs of energy. minimum grains per pound = 6gpp as an example. meaning a 300 grain arrow. this means a 300 grain arrow is devided by 45ft/lbs of energy = 6.6grains per foot pound of stored energy.

just to illustrate how GPP is a silly way to measure construction quality and how using old rules of thumb for bows that don't fit those rules of thumb gets you in trouble

A super recurve with the same spec. of 50lbs at 28" storing 1.25se/pdf means it stores 62.5 ft/lbs of energy. Minimum grains per pound = 8gpp as an example. this means a 400 grain arrow needs to be shot. this means a 400 grain arrow is devided by 62.5ft/lbs of energy = 6.4grains per foot lbs of stored energy.

so if you abuse the system out of ignorance because its the way its always been. you will shorten the life of your limbs. that's a well known fact of all bows.
so lets see what abuse you can give a super recurve by treating it like a normal recurve/longbow
50lbs at 28" storing 1.25se/dpf stores 62.5ft/lbs of energy. at 6gpp you would be using a 300 grain arrow. this 300 grain arrow when devided by the high energy of 62.5ft/lbs of stored energy means your beating your bow up with 4.8gpp
now abuse your normal recurve with a 4.8gpp arrow and tell me how long you think it would last.

that's proportional. that's scale. that's logic and that's maths.

that's not the manufacturer making a flimsy product. its just engineering.


----------



## GEREP (May 6, 2003)

So it would appear that regardless of how a given manufacturer arrives at their particular math, warranties (specifically minimum gpp of draw weight) are *indeed* about avoiding premature failure, and not about a particular shooting experience, level of performance, or feel.



GEREP said:


> In regard to warranties.
> 
> Bowyers don't warrant products for feel or performance. That is way too subjective. They warrant them against the likelihood of failure. They set the parameters based on what they feel comfortable with in terms of how many they are going to get back and have to repair or replace, or what they feel is safe in terms of liability.
> 
> In my opinion, warranties are a dollars and cents, quantifiable, profit and loss business decision. Insinuating that a certain gpp stipulation is there to insure a certain level of performance or feel is no different than saying the warranty term (months or years) is designed to do the same. The notion is ridiculous on it's face.


I'm perplexed as to why anyone would try to hide from or dance around that. It's logic, it's math, and it's good business.

KPC


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

GEREP said:


> So it would appear that regardless of how a given manufacturer arrives at their particular math, warranties (specifically minimum gpp of draw weight) are *indeed* about avoiding premature failure, and not about a particular shooting experience, level of performance, or feel.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


There are companies out there with bow constructions that can withstant 6gpp. But advertise 8gpp.
It can be any reason they want. It can be simply to put off the speedfreeks.
Your not the one to tell companies what they want from thier product. But im saying there are many reasons. We have ours.


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

Heck. There are companies that offer 30 year warrenties with apparently no minimum arrow weights.
So from a business point of view. That could mean that 99% of thier customers are expected to have the bow in the loft in two years. Or expected to sell very few bows to long draw high poundage bows.
Or have very very low stored energy.

So make what you will of it.

Could be a business statement based on the customer base. Could just be a publicity stunt.
Could be that they are making soooooo much margin on thier bows that they can afford to replace 90% of them 2x over.
So what does that mean?


----------



## GEREP (May 6, 2003)

Borderbows said:


> So what does that mean?



My opinion hasn't changed from my original post on this thread.




GEREP said:


> In regard to warranties.
> 
> Bowyers don't warrant products for feel or performance. That is way too subjective. They warrant them against the likelihood of failure. They set the parameters based on what they feel comfortable with in terms of how many they are going to get back and have to repair or replace, or what they feel is safe in terms of liability.
> 
> In my opinion, warranties are a dollars and cents, quantifiable, profit and loss business decision. Insinuating that a certain gpp stipulation is there to insure a certain level of performance or feel is no different than saying the warranty term (months or years) is designed to do the same. The notion is ridiculous on it's face.


Auto manufacturers don't put a maximum towing capacity on their vehicles because they're concerned about how the vehicle might ride. 

It's all about safety (liability), and burning up components.

KPC


----------



## Bender (Dec 6, 2006)

Borderbows said:


> so if you abuse the system out of ignorance because its the way its always been. you will shorten the life of your limbs. that's a well known fact of all bows.
> so lets see what abuse you can give a super recurve by treating it like a normal recurve/longbow
> 50lbs at 28" storing 1.25se/dpf stores 62.5ft/lbs of energy. at 6gpp you would be using a 300 grain arrow. this 300 grain arrow when devided by the high energy of 62.5ft/lbs of stored energy means your beating your bow up with 4.8gpp
> now abuse your normal recurve with a 4.8gpp arrow and tell me how long you think it would last.


The math isn't working as stated.

You need to redefine your terms to reestablish clarity so that a true comparison can be made.

Arrow weight/Draw weight = gpp

That is NOT the same thing as

Arrow weight/Stored energy.


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

Good for you KPC. Still doesnt stop the fact that you dont know the rational of the company.
You also dont know if the number chosen has nothing to do with logic other than. Me too. Ill have my number the same as thiers.

Now thats a safety consideration.

Customer asks. Whats your minimum GPP. Bowyer replies, same as everyone elses. Whats that? Asks the customer (bowyer googles)
Afterall how many bows does it take to work out what your product is capable of..... more than most bowyers make???
How do you define it? 

If its a thumb suck. Then its not really for safety.
If its based on some of the rational on forums. Then im more right than you. I simply shoot what sounds right! 

I really dont think baysian statistics is in the average bowyers vocab, or business model???


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

Bender said:


> The math isn't working as stated.
> 
> You need to redefine your terms to reestablish clarity so that a true comparison can be made.
> 
> ...


that is 200% my point.
GPP is flawed as a method of compairing two bows for durability.

saying one bow is better construction because it can withstand 6gpp is utter rubbish.
since GPP doesnt consider energy stored. it used to. when all bows stored within 5% of each other.
but they dont now and thats shown the GPP minimum to be a poor discription


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

the other issue with considering GPP if we use KPCs point. if we work on pure maths.
if i make beginners bows. and max out at 25lbs of draw weight. i dont care what GPP is shot, since my bows can be dry fired all day long. the energy available in them is low enough that it wont harm the bow.
i will sell 3 bows a year at 30lbs which might give me a warrenty issue, but i can eat that up, so that i dont cause complication in my newbie customer base.

If on the other hand i make bows that specialise in taking Buffalo. then all my bows are going to be very high energy, and very high poundge.
this means i will need to really take note of GPP. since one dry fire is likely to cause damage to the bow. if i had no minumim GPP then you would have a statistic that would bust my company

so lets assume that bow these bows are made exactly the same, same glue, same materials, same everything, but the intended audiance means one looks critical, while the other looks robust.

when infact, its got nothing to do with build quality. its about business and its intended audiance.


so i dont agree that GPP is a quality measurement of the bow.
it could mean that statistically the comapny doesnt need to concern itself due to other factors.

its not a safety issue that dirrived the gpp value, its the busness model


----------



## GEREP (May 6, 2003)

Borderbows said:


> Good for you KPC. Still doesnt stop the fact that you dont know the rational of the company.
> You also dont know if the number chosen has nothing to do with logic other than. Me too. Ill have my number the same as thiers.
> 
> Now thats a safety consideration.
> ...



So starts the verbal diarrhea. 

I'm not the one that tried to imply that gpp of bow weight, as it pertains to warranties, had anything to do with someone's shooting experience, performance, or feel.

You are now arguing my argument, which is in direct opposition to your original argument.

I'll stick with:

*"Bowyers don't warrant products for feel or performance. That is way too subjective. They warrant them against the likelihood of failure. They set the parameters based on what they feel comfortable with in terms of how many they are going to get back and have to repair or replace, or what they feel is safe in terms of liability.

In my opinion, warranties are a dollars and cents, quantifiable, profit and loss business decision. Insinuating that a certain gpp stipulation is there to insure a certain level of performance or feel is no different than saying the warranty term (months or years) is designed to do the same. The notion is ridiculous on it's face."*


With that, I'm finished discussing this with you. You are welcome to continue to try to convince others of whatever you choose based on how it suits you at the time. Been there, done that. I'd rather kick myself in the testicles. 

I had no intention whatsoever of even getting involved in this discussion...until your paranoid tendencies caused you to lash out, using my name, at anyone that happens to disagree with you. In this case it was Keeshond, who I don't know from a cake of soap, but is spot on with his assessment. 

Have a nice day, and keep on sellin'.

KPC


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

GEREP said:


> So starts the verbal diarrhea.
> 
> I'm not the one that tried to imply that gpp of bow weight, as it pertains to warranties, had anything to do with someone's shooting experience, performance, or feel.
> 
> ...


My point is you dont know the rational.
It could be anything. To which you wont be privi to.
In some cases there is probably no logic other than to sound profesional. In other cases its to deter the boy racers. And in others its pounds shillings and pence.

You dont know.
To assume otherwise is wrong.

And in the mean time. Gpp is not an indicator of the quality of a build.

I can and will choose any point i need to to say. You dont know what the rational is in that company. The rest is just an assumption the same as the one you made about zentron S.

No matter what logic i threw at you. You ignored it. Taking the words of another over logic.

So lets just leave it that logic has been known to walk buy even the likes of you KPC.

If we are going to get more personal about it....

And yes i am smiling


----------



## Beendare (Jan 31, 2006)

Kali4,
Aren't you glad you asked? grin

I've had the pleasure to shoot with a lot of top 3D shooters and many shoot a lower GPP. Many 3D guys trying to shoot high scores shoot an arrow on the light side. It makes sense, they want flatter trajectory from the lighter arrow and don't care about the other factors that make a good hunting setup. I think these top guys are in the 7-8 GPP range. 
In discussions on GPP with the best shooters I know commented; if you go too light....... they don't get the repeatable accuracy. Noise is subjective and an inaccurate measure....but I agree with Jinks, it tells you what the bow likes. Many of these fast 3D rigs at the shoots are too noisy for hunting IMO. I think that 8GPP range +/- will be a good happy medium for 3D shooting. 

Personally, I shoot my hunting rig which is in the 10-12 GPP range as I want it whisper quiet...but it hurts score big time on the longer 40,50,60 yd targets.


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

Beendare. Its possible to shoot x10 arrows as fast as aces.

Which puts you at 8.5gpp opposed to 6.5gpp.
That way you get repeatability by avoiding lighter arrows
Gpp is a number based on poundage. Not whats under the hood.


----------



## GEREP (May 6, 2003)

Borderbows said:


> So lets just leave it that logic has been known to walk buy even the likes of you KPC.
> 
> 
> 
> And yes i am smiling


I'm sure it has, but not in this case. Nor has consistency.

You started out by saying:



Borderbows said:


> It is not a indicator of the confidence in the build in most cases.
> In some the manufacturer might not want the user to experience the harshness of the shooting experience associated with lighter arrows.
> It might also be that they dont want to attract the speedfreek crowd. So 8gpp makes them look else where.
> It might also be that GPP is an assumption that all bows store the same energy.


Then it became:



Borderbows said:


> ...this means i will need to really take note of GPP. since one dry fire is likely to cause damage to the bow. if i had no minumim GPP then you would have a statistic that would bust my company.


First your gpp min, was about feel, now it's about failure rate and not wanting to bust your company (which is of course what I was saying all along).

It's only logical.

KPC

By the way, that was *keep on "sellin",* not *"smiling."*


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

Kali4 said:


> I was looking for opinions on the importance of GPP. I have recently made up some arrows and I have read that you need to be in the 10gpp range to prevent a "dry fire" type of scenario. I have looked up my arrow weights on Stu's Calculator and my arrow set ups are closer to the 9gpp range. Is this okay in the long run on my equipment or should I look to eventually select stiffer spine weight arrows and increase the point weight to tune them? I am just 3-D and stump shooting so I am less concerned with penetration and more concerned with a flatter shooting arrow but I dont want to compromise the integrity of my equipment in the process.


Your Omega Imperial is warrantied down to 8 g.p.p. You're good!


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

GEREP said:


> I'm sure it has, but not in this case. Nor has consistency.
> 
> You started out by saying:
> 
> ...


You have always assumed everything is about me.
Maybe no. Maybe i change my view point in a rhitoric kinda way. Maybe its just a thought provoking post. 
Im not known for my provication.... am i now.
May be i was just pointing out all the different reasons for a minimum GPP. Maybe i was just putting thoughts out there.


But na. Keep biting. Ill keep posting ideas for you to wrestle with.

Come on man. Reasons for a minimum GPP. Lets brain storm. Or is it all about the money due to you being a finacial advisor or something like that.

May be its about more than that. Maybe its about selling enjoyment. Not selling bows. Maybe its not about being part of the rat race that folks make bows. 
Anyhow. Not having shareholders means we can enjoy making bows. To our own ambitions. To our own end.

Its not all about the world according to KPC.
Maybe im not selling bows. Im selling a thought provoking experience.


----------



## GEREP (May 6, 2003)

Maybe, but I'm not biting.

:set1_fishing:


KPC


----------



## berzerk64 (Nov 27, 2013)

kegan said:


> Your Omega Imperial is warrantied down to 8 g.p.p. You're good!


There ya go. Hard to argue with the guy who made it. I'd rather argue about the proper spices in taco meat with my latina GF than argue with a bowyer about a bow he built.


----------



## Keeshond (Sep 13, 2016)

Borderbows said:


> So you first attack the product. When i show you alternative info to say you might be wrong. You flip about and attack me by calling me names
> Nice fella.


I never attacked your product. I own your product. I think they are terrific for my purpose. Good enough? I've been saying that all along but you're paranoid because I don't like or use them for competition. 

And I'm not really a nice fella. You're right about that at least.


----------



## Kali4 (Jan 3, 2016)

kegan said:


> Your Omega Imperial is warrantied down to 8 g.p.p. You're good!


Perfect! Just wanted to make sure I wasn't pushing it by going down to the low 9's


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

Kali4 said:


> Perfect! Just wanted to make sure I wasn't pushing it by going down to the low 9's


Can't speak for your Bear but your Omega is good to go!


----------



## DDSHOOTER (Aug 22, 2005)

kegan said:


> Can't speak for your Bear but your Omega is good to go!


Kegan, do you recommend a string minimum?
Dan


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

Borderbows said:


> Once you know how to tune that type of bow. They are all easy to tune.



What, specifically, is different about the tuning process?


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

GEREP said:


> So it would appear that regardless of how a given manufacturer arrives at their particular math, warranties (specifically minimum gpp of draw weight) are *indeed* about avoiding premature failure, and not about a particular shooting experience, level of performance, or feel.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Warranty is as you describe, somewhat.

It is also about perceived value. If you make the warranty more extensive, either in duration, or in circumstances, it implies a better product. It makes that product easier to sell, regardless of what the product is, or the quality of it. I.e., there is a marketing benefit. There is also a cost. More extensive warranties mean that more products will require repair under warranty terms. This means that there is a cost associated with making and selling the product, on average. This cost gets built into the product. As such, if you're providing a better warranty, you have to charge more for your product. The inevitable result is that the end user pays more for a given widget of a given quality level, or pays the same for a widget of a _lower_ quality level. 

If the buyer's product never fails, either because they never really used it much, they didn't push it near/beyond the operating limits, or they just didn't keep it long enough, they think it it implies superior build quality, as implied by the warranty.

If the buyer's product does fail (but not repeatedly), and it's under warranty, and the company handles the repair promptly, courteously, and painlessly, this may be seen as just bad luck, and puts the company in a good light as offering outstanding service.

I used to be into fairly high end audio equipment, though I shopped in the value range.

One amplifier sold for $3,000, actual selling price.

Second amplifier sold for $2,500, actual selling price.

First amplifier had a 20 year warranty, was a quality product.

Second amplifier had a 2 year warranty, was an astoundingly good product.

If you actually compared the amplifiers, objectively, both in terms of performance and caliber of parts used, the second, cheaper amplifier was a substantially better performer, had more value in plain hardware. 

Actually, you could say the same thing about the $2,000 version of the second amplifier.


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

Don't know how I double posted....

SOrry


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

Borderbows said:


> since GPP doesnt consider energy stored. it used to. when all bows stored within 5% of each other.


Even then it was flawed. Different draw lengths, different stored energy, and even if the gpp takes into account the relationship of holding weight versus draw length, the relationship with stored energy to draw length is exponential.


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

kegan said:


> Can't speak for your Bear but your Omega is good to go!


Not to call Kegan a horse, but it's good to know the horse!

If it were me, I'd check with Bear just in case, if only to feel good about it.

Martin once told me that my wife's X-200 shouldn't go below 10 gpp, even with her short 26" draw and a Dacron string. They were probably being conservative, and hers was an older model, like 18 years old now, I think, but still. It's only one phone call 

Sorry about hijacking your thread. Aside from some unpleasant deviation from etiquette and not so awesome communication skills, you brushed on an interesting topic  Thanks for that part.


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

BarneySlayer said:


> Even then it was flawed. Different draw lengths, different stored energy, and even if the gpp takes into account the relationship of holding weight versus draw length, the relationship with stored energy to draw length is exponential.


yes. fully agree. we have a chart of draw length VS poundage to gor minimums. long arms high poundage have higher GPP needs than Low poundage short arms.
dont see why the short draw folks with low poundage should be limited.


----------



## GEREP (May 6, 2003)

BarneySlayer said:


> It is also about perceived value. If you make the warranty more extensive, either in duration, or in circumstances, it implies a better product. It makes that product easier to sell, regardless of what the product is, or the quality of it. I.e., there is a marketing benefit. There is also a cost. More extensive warranties mean that more products will require repair under warranty terms. This means that there is a cost associated with making and selling the product, on average. This cost gets built into the product. As such, if you're providing a better warranty, you have to charge more for your product.


You are absolutely right Barney, and I couldn't agree more. Even so, it is still a *"quantifiable, profit and loss business decision"* for the manufacturer (bowyer) Length of warranty can indeed be used for marketing, just like an ad in a magazine, a commercial on TV, or the sponsorship of an archer. The cost of which must be added to the price of each bow.

That doesn't take away from what I originally said which was that warranties have nothing to do with insuring a particular shooting experience, level of performance, or feel. 

As I said before, that notion is ridiculous on it's face.

KPC


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

berzerk64 said:


> There ya go. Hard to argue with the guy who made it. I'd rather argue about the proper spices in taco meat with my latina GF than argue with a bowyer about a bow he built.


I LOVE SPICES!

What are your favorites? Love me some habanero mixed with serano in the deer chili!


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

GEREP said:


> You are absolutely right Barney, and I couldn't agree more. Even so, it is still a *"quantifiable, profit and loss business decision"* for the manufacturer (bowyer) Length of warranty can indeed be used for marketing, just like an ad in a magazine, a commercial on TV, or the sponsorship of an archer. The cost of which must be added to the price of each bow.
> 
> That doesn't take away from what I originally said which was that warranties have nothing to do with insuring a particular shooting experience, level of performance, or feel.
> 
> ...


Kevin, I think I do not disagree with anything you're saying 

Thanks for letting me clarify my thoughts anyway


----------



## berzerk64 (Nov 27, 2013)

BarneySlayer said:


> I LOVE SPICES!
> 
> What are your favorites? Love me some habanero mixed with serano in the deer chili!


Cumin, cayenne, with ground garlic and onion, serranos occasionally. Living 10 miles from the border, I'm sorta burned out on a lot of spiciness. Had potato soup yesterday that had cayenne in it. Habaneros aren't actually popular down here, but cayenne is used like black pepper.


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

DDSHOOTER said:


> Kegan, do you recommend a string minimum?
> Dan


By string minimum do you mean like string weight or strand count?

Only issues I've had with small strings (besides tuning) is when the loops aren't sufficiently padded they can cut through tips.


----------



## DDSHOOTER (Aug 22, 2005)

kegan said:


> By string minimum do you mean like string weight or strand count?
> 
> Only issues I've had with small strings (besides tuning) is when the loops aren't sufficiently padded they can cut through tips.


Yep, like compound cable material with low strand count for light weight, no creep type. As stated by Sid above.
I can see were padding is needed for loops and nocks, but other wise is there a min and why?
Dan


----------



## berzerk64 (Nov 27, 2013)

DDSHOOTER said:


> Yep, like compound cable material with low strand count for light weight, no creep type. As stated by Sid above.
> I can see were padding is needed for loops and nocks, but other wise is there a min and why?
> Dan


Mainly dependent on the per strand strength of the string material used, outside of thickness considerations. You can get by with far fewer strands in 8125 material than B50, due to the much higher strength. 

That said, a thicker string of even the newer, stronger materials is heavier and slower. Honestly, though, I've made 12 strand D97 strings and shot them next to the 16 strand D97, and the speed gain was minimal enough (I could hardly tell the difference at 10 GPP) to not warrant it the extra work I have to do to make a thicker center serving and loops. The narrower string also made a more noticeable noise. I'd rather just make four more runs on the string jig and call it a day.


----------



## DDSHOOTER (Aug 22, 2005)

Just saying. You should read this, then and add 20 gr to the nock end of your arrow.
http://basciuk.strzelec.legnica.pl/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/WA_Coach_Seminar_London_GT20111.pdf
Dan


----------



## Bender (Dec 6, 2006)

Off topic but thank you DDSHOOTER. Nice to see some validation of what some of us have been saying for years about tuning coming from a source that carries a little more credibility than an internet discussion forum.


----------



## GEREP (May 6, 2003)

I agree with Bender, that is an excellent link and resource DDSHOOTER. Thank you for posting.

As it pertains to the original topic, I found the following slide quite interesting:









One has to wonder what this means in terms of our obsession and hypersensitivity regarding minimum gpp of draw weight. 

KPC


----------



## DDSHOOTER (Aug 22, 2005)

GEREP said:


> I agree with Bender, that is an excellent link and resource DDSHOOTER. Thank you for posting.
> 
> As it pertains to the original topic, I found the following slide quite interesting:
> 
> ...


Kevin, that's why I posted it. To stay within the scope of the topic. Dry fire is 0 gpp or 100% gpp, don't do it. Kind of like paying taxes. I am not sure which way to look at it. Lol.
Dan


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

DDSHOOTER said:


> Yep, like compound cable material with low strand count for light weight, no creep type. As stated by Sid above.
> I can see were padding is needed for loops and nocks, but other wise is there a min and why?
> Dan


I have destroyed early Originals shooting arrows under 8 gpp, but have only had issues with string-related failures when using strings of too-small diameter in heavy weight bows (60+#). For the most part, I use the least stretchy materials possible in a size that provides good nock fit/feel and have not had any issues with light weight strings.

Although, this is all referencing fiberglass and hardwood longbows. Not exactly the most sensitive style of equipment! :lol:


----------

