# 150gr tungsten point for easton X10 by TopHat



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

For anyone looking for a heavier point and / or better FOC with easton X10 shafts, TopHAT is a company in Germany that makes points. They make a tungsten point that is 130-140-150 breakoff. 

These are currently being used in Europe. You can order them direct from TopHAT in Germany www.tophatarchery.com ( but the shipping will be $50)

Or two Archery shops in the USA carry their points. 

Absolute Archery in San francisco www.absolutearcheryllc.com

and Pacific Archery Sales in Las Vegas (the range i shoot at). http://pacificarcherylv.com/pa/Home.html 

here is a photo of one next to a normal tungsten point. 

View attachment 2023886



they are priced the same as the 120gr tungstens from Easton. But these you can by in 6 or 12. 



Chris


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

I wonder if the compound guys will eat those up? FOC seems to rule their game in a lot of ways.

-Grant


----------



## dchan (Jun 29, 2004)

Not San Francisco, 
Shingle Springs is in the Sierra Foothills, about 2.5-3hrs east of San Francisco.


----------



## TomG (Dec 4, 2002)

Mine are finally on their way. Can't wait.


----------



## whiz-Oz (Jul 19, 2007)

grantmac said:


> I wonder if the compound guys will eat those up? FOC seems to rule their game in a lot of ways.
> 
> -Grant


How do you figure that?


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

whiz-Oz said:


> How do you figure that?


Field results the last few years have been very in favor of higher FOC, at least in the US. Target guys also seem to be running 120gr in the Pro-Tour shafts, I can see more being a definite benefit.

-Grant


----------



## whiz-Oz (Jul 19, 2007)

Have you ever seen a heavy arrow that doesn't have the balance point forward?


----------



## TomG (Dec 4, 2002)

Read Vittorio last post (#33) in the following thread and you'll understand. 
http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?p=1070502660


----------



## anmactire (Sep 4, 2012)

I run 140 grain points in my black eagle x-impacts. You notice the extra FOC. So much so I'm trying to get 180 grain points made from tungsten and steel as I have speed to burn. The x-impacts are very light though, similar to a mckinney ii. Getting good FOC on anything above 7 gpi is difficult without resorting to 120 and up points, especially at longer draw lengths.


----------



## whiz-Oz (Jul 19, 2007)

TomG said:


> Read Vittorio last post (#33) in the following thread and you'll understand.
> http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?p=1070502660


I actually DO understand. FOC is a secondary function of a heavy arrow. Heavy arrows are wind resistant REGARDLESS of where the FOC is. 

You guys should research very carefully who actually cares about FOC and who just sticks heavy points in and doesn't care where the FOC is. 

Maybe listen to a aerodynamics professional and get their opinion about stability margins and tail volume coefficients on the flightpath of unguided munitions. 

Then you may actually understand FOC's applications to arrows and accuracy, rather than rely on the opinions of just one person..


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

my current FOC is 22.6% with these points. I havent shot yet at 70 meters to see how this does. 



Chris


----------



## theminoritydude (Feb 11, 2013)

whiz-Oz said:


> I actually DO understand. FOC is a secondary function of a heavy arrow. Heavy arrows are wind resistant REGARDLESS of where the FOC is.
> 
> You guys should research very carefully who actually cares about FOC and who just sticks heavy points in and doesn't care where the FOC is.
> 
> ...


Heavy arrows do not necessarily mean wind resistance, density is the the key, FOC helps in the initial "cocking in" to the wind, minimizing the form drag by reducing the cross section area seen by the airflow. Once the alignment is established, FOC is no longer required until a change in wind direction, which happens pretty often, and is often very irregular, which makes a good solid point weight so much of an asset.


----------



## Joe T (Apr 5, 2003)

theminoritydude said:


> Heavy arrows do not necessarily mean wind resistance, density is the the key, FOC helps in the initial "cocking in" to the wind, minimizing the form drag by reducing the cross section area seen by the airflow. Once the alignment is established, FOC is no longer required until a change in wind direction, which happens pretty often, and is often very irregular, which makes a good solid point weight so much of an asset.


Bear in mind that as the arrow is continuously accelerating under gravity (and hence there is always an airflow angle of attack) there is *never* any "established alignment" with or without any wind. Fletching action is a continuously acting property of the arrow whether it comes from bits of plastic or FOC.

Granted that the major effect of FOC on the overall arrow behaviour is in the first 20 meters of flight during the initial (wind or no wind) stabilization period.

PS Whiz is generally ignored as he is an idiot, incapable of any rational discussion.


----------



## whiz-Oz (Jul 19, 2007)

And Joe gets upset because he has never been actually able to prove anything in the real world.
However, he'll make up webpage calculators to offer inaccurate estimates for people that don't know any better.


----------



## Vittorio (Jul 17, 2003)

My practical findings about arrow flight over more than 20 years of top level coaching have ever met Joe T. theories, and viceversa. For sure, there is a lot of people around that think to have better answers, and is of course perfectly free to continue to think so.


----------



## theminoritydude (Feb 11, 2013)

Joe T said:


> Bear in mind that as the arrow is continuously accelerating under gravity (and hence there is always an airflow angle of attack) there is *never* any "established alignment" with or without any wind. Fletching action is a continuously acting property of the arrow whether it comes from bits of plastic or FOC.
> 
> Granted that the major effect of FOC on the overall arrow behaviour is in the first 20 meters of flight during the initial (wind or no wind) stabilization period.
> 
> PS Whiz is generally ignored as he is an idiot, incapable of any rational discussion.


I could get into details of oscillation and how wind only exists if discussed with regards to the ground but that would be meaningless. Coming from rifle discipline, I am aware of the implications of a parabolic trajectory on a spinning mass with some degree of rigidity and how an arrow avoids that situation, so yes, of course there is a constant change in the direction of airflow. Even in nil wind conditions.


----------



## anmactire (Sep 4, 2012)

chrstphr said:


> my current FOC is 22.6% with these points. I havent shot yet at 70 meters to see how this does.
> 
> 
> 
> Chris


Report back when you get a chance! I would love to shoot arrows with that kind of FOC but 29.75 inch draw length is prohibitive.


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

chrstphr said:


> my current FOC is 22.6% with these points. I havent shot yet at 70 meters to see how this does.
> Chris


I bet those bareshaft really easily. What are you running on the back end?

-Grant


----------



## Joe T (Apr 5, 2003)

grantmac said:


> I bet those bareshaft really easily. What are you running on the back end?
> 
> -Grant


FOC and physical fletchings do the same thing. The bare shaft method is based on the difference in fletching action between two arrows. With high FOC value arrows the fletching difference is relatively smaller so the bare shaft method has reduced sensitivity. Seem to remember when carbon arrows came in how people would complain about how much harder it was to bare shaft tune them than with aluminum arrows. People used to bare shaft tune at very short distances with aluminum arrows; waste of time with high FOC carbon arrows.


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

grantmac said:


> I bet those bareshaft really easily. What are you running on the back end?
> 
> -Grant


Eli vanes and easton pin nocks.


Chris


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

ok, i spent the last few days at 20 yards bare shafting and doing basic setup. I discovered with this much FOC, 20 yards tuning is too close to get any real feedback. 

So, not getting good feedback from that, i was able to move outdoors today and get to 30 meters and 50 meters. 

Actually bare shaft tuning is much more touchy and difficult with this high of an FOC. I found that slight changes to centershot made the bare shafts kick left or right. It took a bit of time to get the centershot just right and get the nock position correct. Once i did, arrows flew great and straight. For awhile i had good arrow flight but the bare shafts wanted to cant in the target one way or another. 

Next up adjusting for weak/ stiff with the tiller bolts was also touchy. Small adjustments kept moving my arrows stiff to weak. Small adjustments i would normally make with 120gr tungstens made big differences with the 150gr. 

I finally was able to make more minute adjustments and get a good tune at 30 and 50 meters. This weekend i will move to 70 and then recheck all three distances. Once i got the bare shaft arrows flying without kicking left or right, they flew beautifully and i really didnt lose much sight elevation going from 120gr to 150gr. 

The high FOC made the arrows very sensitive to my release. Good release and bare shafts would stack on each other. Bad release and the arrow might fly 2 feet to the left or right at 50 meters as if stiff or weak. 

These points are not for the beginner or intermediate archer, but i think would benefit more the archer who has a long heavy arrow like 450, 410 or 380. Today wasnt windy ( thank god or i would not have been able to tune at all as these are so sensitive to kick left or right ). 

I am super happy with them, and how the arrow flies. I cant wait to get them tuned out to 70 meters and then get them fletched and see how they do in the wind. 

Here is a photo of my last group at 50 meters. Photo is 5 bare shafts and one fletched. The two in the 9 ring are for sure my release affecting where they went. 

View attachment 2039964



View attachment 2039965


I have to say so far, it is worth the frustration i had to get them tuned. 

my arrow specs, Easton X10 410 spine, 28.75 nock to end of shaft, 150gr Tophat tungsten points. Total arrow weight 404.8gr. FOC 22.4%


Chris


----------



## FlyingWatchmake (Apr 15, 2012)

What poundage? Out of interest... 

Tom


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

FlyingWatchmake said:


> What poundage? Out of interest...
> 
> Tom


Hi, 47 lbs.

Chris


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

Joe T said:


> Seem to remember when carbon arrows came in how people would complain about how much harder it was to bare shaft tune them than with aluminum arrows. People used to bare shaft tune at very short distances with aluminum arrows; waste of time with high FOC carbon arrows.


yes, i found that to be correct over the last few days.


Chris


----------



## Ten_Zen (Dec 5, 2010)

I have never seen a group of bareshafts that tight at that kind of distance. I would love to pick your brain about tuning sometime, it seems like you got a pretty good grasp on the concept.


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

Ten_Zen said:


> I have never seen a group of bareshafts that tight at that kind of distance. I would love to pick your brain about tuning sometime, it seems like you got a pretty good grasp on the concept.


Sure, anytime. I have to admit tuning the bare shafts with this FOC was difficult and tested me and my release. I usually dont have that much trouble tuning X10s out to 70 meters, but today with no wind was trying and took some time. 

I was happy with the results in the end. Now to see how they shoot at 70 and recheck 30 and 50. 


Chris


----------



## Joe T (Apr 5, 2003)

Very interesting stuff Chrstphr. Cheers


----------



## Joe T (Apr 5, 2003)

Don't suppose you have measured the arrow speed out of the bow?


----------



## TomG (Dec 4, 2002)

Chris, 
How did you adjust centershot? Meaning, what direction did you go if the bare shaft kicked right or left? 

Thomas


----------



## anmactire (Sep 4, 2012)

Good information, thank you chris! You seem to have noticed the sane critical behaviour I have seen with heavier points. Fletching would likely have saved those fliers for you


----------



## kshet26 (Dec 20, 2010)

In my head this makes sense. Maybe heavy points need to be tuned on the weaker side?


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

Joe T said:


> Don't suppose you have measured the arrow speed out of the bow?



I havent yet, but i will once i know im at the right poundage for the tune. I will post it sometime this weekend. 


Chris


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

TomG said:


> Chris,
> How did you adjust centershot? Meaning, what direction did you go if the bare shaft kicked right or left?
> 
> Thomas


HI,

*this post assumes your arrow is ballpark for being tuned*. Too stiff or too weak ( bare shaft cant) is not a centershot issue, but a spine issue which none of this will fix aside from tiller bolt adjustments. That is different from a bareshaft cant with correct spine arrow and centershot is not correct for the arrow.

1. First i adjusted nocking point to get bare shafts and fletched on the same plane in height. Then i looked at the cant of the bare shafts. 

2. i adjusted centershot for fletched being straight in the target, and bare shafts being tail left or tail right. Always follow the tail. if arrow was tail left, i moved centershot to left. If bareshaft was tail right i moved centershot to right. 

3. Once i had bare shaft and fletched both going in straight, i looked at stiff / weak. I adjusted tiller bolts to bring bare and fletched together. 

4. As i watch flight during this, i look for tail kick left or right. I adjust plunger strength to fix tail kick. always follow arrow tail. If tail kicks left in mid air, then i make plunger setting stronger, it tail kicks right in mid air, then i weaken plunger. (* again, if your arrow is not spined for your poundage, then you cant fix arrow kick with the plunger.*) 

5. Once arrow flies straight to target, and groups bare and fletched. I shoot 30 meter and 50 meters. I look for where group is on target. for me both groups were 9 oclock Xring. So i moved sight slightly so i'm in line both targets. I have several whitetail targets, so i was able to have two setup side by side. One at 30 and one at 50. I could shoot 5 bare and 1 fletched at each with only a step to the side. made tuning much easier. If i am left of yellow at 30 and right of yellow at 50 etc then i know my centershot/ plunger is not correct. ( of course this also assumes you are shooting very consistent). You can only tune as well as you can shoot. 

I will now shoot 70 meters this weekend and see if group is centered or left/ right. I will adjust centershot slightly to correct any left or right, but this is micro steps. Most adjustment has already been done. 

Then i will go to 20 and check tune. Usually i have a tight group slightly left or right, which i adjust with sight if i shoot 20. 

Also as a note, When you are looking at the cant in the target in step 2, if the bareshaft tail is high ( but even with fletched, then i lower top tiller bolt. If the bare shaft tail is low, then i lower bottom tiller bolt. ( of course this changes nocking point, so you must readjust this, and it changes poundage slightly). 

when adjusting centershot for cant in target, or adjusting plunger for tail kick in mid air, you always need to push or pull the point to get it in line with the tail. Thus you follow the tail for any adjustments. 

much like adjusting your sight for arrow on the target. Follow the arrow. 


Chris


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Ten_Zen said:


> I have never seen a group of bareshafts that tight at that kind of distance. I would love to pick your brain about tuning sometime, it seems like you got a pretty good grasp on the concept.


Not to hijack the thread, but I'll try to find the photo of the bare shaft CX Nano's I shot at 70 meters back in 2007 for you.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Ah yes, here it is. A dozen bare shafts (Nano XR's) at 70 meters.


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

60yards last year (3 bare shafts at 11 o'clock) ... that I shot my best scores ever with this tune is not a coincidence ...


----------



## jmvargas (Oct 21, 2004)

lksseven said:


> 60yards last year (3 bare shafts at 11 o'clock) ... that I shot my best scores ever with this tune is not a coincidence ...
> 
> View attachment 2040478


...IIRC michele frangilli has similar results at 70M--ie--more than 90% in the gold...

our olympian also does the same thing with regular weight tungsten points...

...i can do it----at 25 meters!!!...

you guys are good!!!


----------



## rat4go (Apr 14, 2011)

I can do that too....at 30m ;-)


----------



## rat4go (Apr 14, 2011)

Wasn't trying to outdo JMVARGAS with my 30m comment...i just didn't see his 25m comment until after I posted. 

I officially rescind my 30m comment and replace it with a more realistic 20m.


----------



## rasyad (Nov 22, 2005)

chrstphr said:


> HI,
> 
> *this post assumes your arrow is ballpark for being tuned*. Too stiff or too weak ( bare shaft cant) is not a centershot issue, but a spine issue which none of this will fix aside from tiller bolt adjustments. That is different from a bareshaft cant with correct spine arrow and centershot is not correct for the arrow.
> 
> ...


Chris, 

Great post. I really like the clarity of following the tail by pushing more or less on the point. Sort of like balancing a stick on one's hand, the hand moves the bottom of the stick following the motion of the top of the stick. 

How do you prioritize brace height adjustments vs, tiller adjustments? 

Last and most general question. I thought the arrows that tune the easiest, (fly okay with the broadest range of tuning) would be the most forgiving. I know little of what makes a difference to a top tier archer. One way of thinking about forgiveness would be a set up that produced better average groups by lessening the impact of form breaks. This thread suggests that a more critical set up could be better for advanced or top tier archers if it yielded a better group for one's best efforts. 

Rasyad


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

My bow was already shooting the quietest with the best brace height before i started tuning outdoors. The same for stabs/ balance and dampners. 

I set my brace height by the bow being the quietest. I start with the low of the manufacturers recommendation and shoot it through the high of the manufacturers recommendation. Somewhere in there is the bow's sweet spot for the arrow. ( Generally i have found over the years, that i will have about 0.75 inch of limb groove showing under the string). That is the first thing i do. For my MK bow, the brace height recommendation is 22-24 cm. Its not a large range. 

I dont use brace height to change spine/ poundage. Only tiller bolt adjustments. I usually tune for tightest group, not most forgiving as that group is usually wider. I dont know what Brady and some of those level shooters tune. But i would rather have my good shots slamming into each other as my poor shots are a much smaller percentage. 2 years ago, i would tune for most forgiving and have a larger group. But i had more bad shots then. 

Chris


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

Joe T said:


> Don't suppose you have measured the arrow speed out of the bow?



Shot the bow through the chrono four times tonight. Got 198,197,196, and 197. I would guess that 197 is the speed and average. 

Its about what i guessed it would be (195-200) . But not bad for a 404gr arrow at 47 pounds. 


Chris


----------



## Joe T (Apr 5, 2003)

Thanks for that.
The archery equivalent of an elephant gun


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

Joe T said:


> Thanks for that.
> The archery equivalent of an elephant gun


let me know if you run any calculations and changing point weight to 140gr or 130gr would be better or worse etc. 

Im in uncharted territory for me as i usually have a 16% FOC and know what to expect with the arrow. This heavy an arrow point, i dont have any info from any other shooters using them. 


Chris


----------



## julle (Mar 1, 2009)

my x10's weigh 408 gr and have a FOC of 11% :') I never really have trouble with wind


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Chris, your spec's are pretty close to my own. ~400 grain arrow at 200 fps.


----------



## Joe T (Apr 5, 2003)

chrstphr said:


> let me know if you run any calculations and changing point weight to 140gr or 130gr would be better or worse etc.
> 
> Im in uncharted territory for me as i usually have a 16% FOC and know what to expect with the arrow. This heavy an arrow point, i dont have any info from any other shooters using them.
> 
> ...


As far as arrow flight itself goes the higher the FOC the better with the only limitation being arrow speed.
e.g.

Arrow WT gr........Speed FPS...........Point wt gr..............FOC %	

435......................190......................181...................19.61
404......................197......................150...................17.33
392......................200......................138...................16.33
384......................202......................130...................15.7

If in theory you define the minimum arrow speed at 190 fps then you could run with an 180 grain point.

In practice the limit (as you found out) with a heavy point may not be the arrow speed but the stability of the arrow during the power stroke. Imagine trying to shoot an arrow made of jelly, it wobbles everywhere and impossible to control. Here, as regards modelling goes, your stuck as the current arrow models can't handle the buckling of the arrow. (what basically happens I think is that the arrow buckling moves the arrow cog sideways and generates string torque. The heavier the point the more the arrow bends). With a heavy point factors like center shot and response to the release become more critical maybe outweighing any flight benefit.

Only way forward here is testing. Group tune with varying point weights and compare no/wind performance. As you said , in uncharted territory here afaik.


----------



## gster123 (Dec 17, 2012)

Joe, could you not model the bend of the arrow as a series of joints? I have some software at work that may be able to do the job.


----------



## Joe T (Apr 5, 2003)

gster123 said:


> Joe, could you not model the bend of the arrow as a series of joints? I have some software at work that may be able to do the job.


As regards bending beams, never got beyond straightforward finite difference. (course' it was all done handraulically in them days, when computers where only marginally more powerful than a slide rule). Dynamic buckling above my pay grade. There's a reason arrow modeling uses a vibrating beam model :wink:


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

I redid my FOC calculations and got 19% and 18.9956 using online calculators. 

28 5/8 nock to end of shaft, ( 28.625) and 19.75 to balance point. 

Im am not sure how i got the first FOC readings of 22.4% and 22.6%. I was using one of the online calculators. Who knows. 

If you include the point, i get 17.3773 %. ( 29.3125 nock to point). 


Were you including the point Joe? 


Chris


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

Joe T said:


> In practice the limit (as you found out) with a heavy point may not be the arrow speed but the stability of the arrow during the power stroke. Imagine trying to shoot an arrow made of jelly, it wobbles everywhere and impossible to control. Here, as regards modelling goes, your stuck as the current arrow models can't handle the buckling of the arrow. (what basically happens I think is that the arrow buckling moves the arrow cog sideways and generates string torque. The heavier the point the more the arrow bends). With a heavy point factors like center shot and response to the release become more critical maybe outweighing any flight benefit.
> 
> Only way forward here is testing. Group tune with varying point weights and compare no/wind performance. As you said , in uncharted territory here afaik.


I think this is why the bareshafts were so sensitive to release. 

Chris


----------



## Joe T (Apr 5, 2003)

All sorts of approximations in my FOC calc (even had a different shaft length) let alone guessing about nock & fletchings. FOC based on nock to shaft end. (Bear in mind that FOC is just a definition - my own preference would be just to use shaft and and balance point distance from nock i.e. your arrows would be 69% FOC) . The point weight in my calculation is assumed to be at the end of the shaft so doesn't allow for point and insert geometry & weight distribution.

( To clarify my preferred FOC is nock to COG times 100 divided by nock to shaft end distance. So FOC runs from 0-100 and you don't have all this confusion about where you measure to. It's unlikely that the balance point would be in front of the shaft end. )


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

Chris, have you had enough testing now to reach any performance conclusions on that monster FOC/150gn point?


----------



## theminoritydude (Feb 11, 2013)

chrstphr said:


> I think this is why the bareshafts were so sensitive to release.
> 
> Chris


Hello Chris. Try adding one 3/4 ounce weight to your original (before you switched to the Fibrebow) stabilizer configuration, add it to the long stabilizer, and try that bare shaft test again. You might like what you will see.


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

theminoritydude said:


> Hello Chris. Try adding one 3/4 ounce weight to your original (before you switched to the Fibrebow) stabilizer configuration, add it to the long stabilizer, and try that bare shaft test again. You might like what you will see.


I was already shooting with 6 ounces on front stab and 5 ounces on each back stab with the Fuse setup. With the Fiberbow config, i have 3 ounces on front and 2 on each stab. The entire stab weight is much less with better balance and dampening. Much better dampening. 


I figured out what the problem was for the sensitivity. My new limbs were not exactly on plane and the bow wasnt quite shooting the arrow straight. Once i corrected that everything is good. 


Here is bare shaft and fletched at 30 meters from Saturday my last end before calling it a day. Shot 150-200 arrows. 

View attachment 2047211
View attachment 2047212






Here is bare shaft and fletched at 50 meters on my last end of the day. Shot approx 250 arrows. I was alittle more tired this time on my last end. Still the grouping is very good for me. 

View attachment 2047213
View attachment 2047214






lksseven said:


> Chris, have you had enough testing now to reach any performance conclusions on that monster FOC/150gn point?


Next weekend, i pick back up at 50 and then 70 and compare grouping of the two. I think i am pretty much finished tuning with these unless 70 is a complete shotgun group. I am very happy with the results. We have not had any wind to speak of the past two weekends so i can't say yet how they do in the wind, but i expect they will do better than the arrows did with the 120gr tungsten points. I have listed my 120grs tungsten points for sale as i am not going back. My groups are tighter at 30 and at 50 with the better FOC. 


Chris


----------



## theminoritydude (Feb 11, 2013)

I'll begin my test with 130gr with my NPX based on your findings. My wife didn't like the idea of using anymore than 120gr before, even after I assured her that it is ok. I'll show her your groups.


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

theminoritydude said:


> I'll begin my test with 130gr with my NPX based on your findings. My wife didn't like the idea of using anymore than 120gr before, even after I assured her that it is ok. I'll show her your groups.


Since higher spine X10 is heavy arrow, you need heavier point. If i shot 900 or 800 spine X10, 120 would be fine, But 450, 410, 380 is heavy and if you shoot long arrow even worse. 

17.3 FOC is flying very nice and grouping really well. In wind this will surely keep me closer to center and aim off less as arrow will be pulled to target by the point. I am staying with 150gr. It is much better than 100-120 gr for me. 


Chris


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

the second set of photos bare and fletched at 50meters is from my last end on Sunday. The 30 meter photos are from Saturday. 



Chris


----------



## Mombo59 (May 3, 2013)

Hey Chris, I wasn't sure if you received a private email from me about this thread.
No confirmation that I can find.
Just wanted you to know I'm interested in finding out how are these heavy points working for you after the last few months
of testing.

Mombo59


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

Mombo59 said:


> Hey Chris, I wasn't sure if you received a private email from me about this thread.
> No confirmation that I can find.
> Just wanted you to know I'm interested in finding out how are these heavy points working for you after the last few months
> of testing.
> ...


yes, i received your email and i replied. let me know if you did not get it.

Chris


----------

