# stabilizer effects on arrows?



## nezach (Dec 23, 2011)

No, stabilizers do not change dynamic spine of the arrow.


----------



## Seattlepop (Dec 8, 2003)

It will weaken it. Simple paper test - one with, one without. I used an arrow that is known to be stiff. The tip was marked w/ red marker.

View attachment 1353552


----------



## 81bimmerguy (Apr 28, 2008)

How long of a stab? I can't see it making a difference. Maybe you torque the bow more without the stab, causing the tear.


----------



## Seattlepop (Dec 8, 2003)

Yep, I think you guys may have it right. I quickly did two more with two different bows and acknowledge my first test was misleading. The subsequent two tests (long rod only, 32") showed very little to no difference, slight variations expected shooting through paper.


----------



## icehaven (Nov 30, 2010)

stabilizers have a giant effect on the direction your bow rolls and turns. if a stabilizer makes your bow roll forward, it would in turn cause the bow to push more n the arrow (increase the string travel distance) by a little more. this effect by itself is minimal, but if your hand holds it differently with or without a stabilizer, then the effect can be dramatic.

if you shot with a bow shooting machine, whatever they're called, then a stabilizer will have absolutely no effect.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

A long stabilier will have a definite stiffening affect on the dynamic spine of an arrow.

My Nano pro 500's tune at 46# with a full Olympic rig, but at 44# when I shoot barebow. And my barebow draw length is at least an inch shorter than when I shoot Olympic style.

John


----------



## TomG (Dec 4, 2002)

John,

Wouldn't the difference you see between your Olympic rig and your barebow due to the finger position on the string?

TomG


----------



## kshet26 (Dec 20, 2010)

I would have thought that adding a stabilizer would appear to have a weakening effect.

With a barebow, when the string is released, the energy of the string oscillation is able to more greatly affect the rotation of the riser. So some of the energy of the string is lost as its transferred into the motion of the riser.

With a stabilizer, the string can't as easily act on riser, meaning that more of the string energy stays in the string and therefore gets transferred to the arrow making it appear to act weaker.

However, the effect limbwalker might be seeing is due to the fact that the left/right travel of the string with a finger release might be greater on a barebow, artificially weakening the arrow by introducing greater arrow flex.


----------



## Seattlepop (Dec 8, 2003)

limbwalker said:


> A long stabilier will have a definite stiffening affect on the dynamic spine of an arrow.
> 
> My Nano pro 500's tune at 46# with a full Olympic rig, but at 44# when I shoot barebow. And my barebow draw length is at least an inch shorter than when I shoot Olympic style.
> 
> John


Interesting because I got my first test shot above reversed, the right tear was w/ the stab, so it would show stiffening. Interesting that I did that first test with the presumption (unfounded) that a stabilizer would have a weakening affect on an arrow, but must have remembered the test order incorrectly, confirming my bias. Subsequent two shots were less compelling, with the second shot being identical, although the third shot shows a 1/4" difference toward stiffening.


----------



## DIV (Apr 12, 2012)

Seattlepop said:


> Yep, I think you guys may have it right. I quickly did two more with two different bows and acknowledge my first test was misleading. The subsequent two tests (long rod only, 32") showed very little to no difference, slight variations expected shooting through paper.


That's too bad, because when I did my testing yesterday I had no stab on my bow and as you know, my arrows were stiffer than hoped...I was hoping that a stab could've helped weaken...but as expected no effect...


----------



## jhinaz (Mar 1, 2003)

DIV said:


> ...I was hoping that a stab could've helped weaken...but as expected no effect...


If you want to 'effectively' weaken the spine you can move your plunger to the back hole (away from the bowstring). - John


----------



## Vittorio (Jul 17, 2003)

limbwalker said:


> A long stabilier will have a definite stiffening affect on the dynamic spine of an arrow.
> ...


Fully agree... To understand easily why, think to the arrow pressing the button in at the release. I does not press the button only, but also moves the bow to the same lateral direction. Heavier the bow, less the the movement, more the reaction to the opposite side (stiff dynamic side). And, longer the long rod, even less the movement and more the "stiff" reaction.


----------



## Seattlepop (Dec 8, 2003)

Vittorio said:


> Fully agree... To understand easily why, think to the arrow pressing the button in at the release. I does not press the button only, but also moves the bow to the same lateral direction. Heavier the bow, less the the movement, more the reaction to the opposite side (stiff dynamic side). And, longer the long rod, even less the movement and more the "stiff" reaction.


It is that increased resistance that led me to think the arrow would have to bend more, thus weakening it. Tests showed otherwise. Interesting stuff.


----------



## Rick McKinney (Mar 4, 2008)

I believe that it will depend on the archer. If you shoot a bow without stabilizers and your bow does not move around then chances are the tune will be very similar with a stabilizer. If the bow moves around a lot then the stabilizer will cut down on this movement and therefore the tune will be different. Barebow archers normally have to shoot one size larger than archers who shoot with sights due to finger placement on the string. Also, when you add weight to the end of the stabilizer it will normally cause you to have to adjust your nocking point.


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

Rick,

"Also, when you add weight to the end of the stabilizer it will normally cause you to have to adjust your nocking point."

I'm curious to know the reasons that make this so. Could you expand on that?


----------



## Rick McKinney (Mar 4, 2008)

Iksseven,
I will do my best to explain why it changes the nocking point but I have tested it quite a bit over the years and found it to be consistent. However, I think a lot has to do with grip pressure. When you have a very low grip pressure you are putting extra stress on the lower limb. Although the nocking point is basically getting the right place to where the limb tips are at their apex forward equally thus allowing the arrow to fly straight and not moving up and down, the stabilizer will kick up (usually) upon release, thus causing the limbs to not be perfectly matched. The more weight you add to the stabilizer the more violent the reaction will be. I don’t think we knew this in the beginning and it was probably less prevalent until the Italians came out with the 2”-3” rubber hose between the long stabilizer and end weight years ago. You can see many high speed shots of the weight flipping up vertically upon the shot thus showing you there is a dynamic reaction going on between the limbs and the grip pressure. 

I was tuning one day with only 2 weights on the end and then I added one extra weight to see if there was a difference and sure enough I had to change my nocking point. It surprised me to think just a simple weight could cause a change in tune. However, I am one to not argue with getting 10’s. ☺ After that I tried it a few times more and found it to be fairly consistent but for the life of me I cannot remember if it causes the nocking point to go up or down. And it wasn’t a lot but enough to take note. 

Someone mentioned that the riser moves forward upon the shot. That is true but after the riser moves backward into your hand then it moves forward away from your hand. This is due to the flex the riser has at full draw. It is very minute but since the riser is slightly flexed at full draw and once the pressure is taken off of the riser upon release it automatically comes back into the hand (something to do with physics I think). That is one of the reasons why I have always felt it was so important to not move the hand/grip in any way upon release due to the possibility of it becoming extremely critical.


----------



## Vittorio (Jul 17, 2003)

Seattlepop said:


> It is that increased resistance that led me to think the arrow would have to bend more, thus weakening it. Tests showed otherwise. Interesting stuff.


As bare shaft is just an amplifier of the lateral movement of the fletched arrows, that is influenced by the lateral movement of the bow at the release, if you don't change anything but the mass of the bow, , the difference in impact between bare shaft and fletched arrows will also be proportional to the increased lateral resistance of the bow. 

Same thing when you move the clicker in from the optimal position. Bare shaft will move to the stiff side, not to the weak one, as adding a lateral force to the left (right hand people) will make the bare shaft amplifying the difference in the direction of the force ...(easier to test than to explain ..) 

Yes, nocking point is effected by weight and distribution of stabilizers, of course. Is an automatic result of the change of the pressure point on the grip generated by said changes. 

I have written a lot in the years about the necessity to eliminate as many variables as possible when tuning a bow, as otherwise it is very easy to enter in infinite loops without tuning solutions... But archers seem to like said situations...


----------



## gig'em 99 (Feb 1, 2008)

Rick,

I've always believed, and tell me if this fits into your explanation at all, that as more weight is added to the end of the front stabilizer, it in effect is pulling more on the top limb. Or, loading up the top limb more, as your fingers resist the rotation of the bow at hold. In effect, this is having a dynamic impact on the limb balance (or as we like to say "tiller"). 

Brian


----------



## Rick McKinney (Mar 4, 2008)

Gig’em, Not sure. It makes sense but maybe Vittorio could explain better than I can. It appears he has spent a lot of time on this.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Of course, the ******* in me would just shoot the bare shaft and adjust accordingly after any changes in my setup... 

I don't always need to know why something reacts the way it does. At some point, you have to switch off the "why" and just focus on executing a shot. A brain that is too busy with details is not one you can calm down at full draw. 

Last week at the trials, I ended up relying on my backup bow for the second and third day of the event. I had not spent nearly as much time tuning that bow as I had my primary bow, and I knew full well it wasn't as finely tuned as I would like. However, when I committed to using it, I switched off the "bow technician" in my head and engaged the "athlete" in my body and just shot the dang bow. Well enough in fact to beat two of the top 4 ranked archers, and shoot a 114 12-arrow pass against another archer (who just happened to shoot out of his mind with a 118 for the same 12 arrows!). So even with just a decent basic tune, an archer can still achieve excellent results so long as they can make the switch mentally and just commit to what they have in their hands 100%.

John


----------



## ButchD (Nov 11, 2006)

"So even with just a decent basic tune, an archer can still achieve excellent results so long as they can make the switch mentally and just commit to what they have in their hands 100%."
I really need to pay attention to this. LOL


----------

