# New arrow vanes - pushig technology to the limits



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

Hi,

I just wanted to pop in to show you the progress I have so far designing and building my spinning fletches. I may start marketing them soon to local archery clubs, right now I am scaling up the production so that I can make more than just 1 or 2 per day. I am really happy with the way they are coming - I wanted to share it. They are loads of fun to shoot. People seem to notice that they are very aerodynamic without even seeing them fly. Not me, I am the one with no insights at all, so instead I spent 7 years making them. They are somewhat of an accident none the less. I tried to make vanes that would be so slim, so small and so soft that they would fail to spin the arrow. I failed. Despite all the knowledge and all the hard work I put in them they spin.

Jan Kokes


----------



## Kaveman44 (Aug 29, 2015)

pretty cool, hope it works out for ya


----------



## automan26 (Oct 21, 2002)

I hope they work so well that they revolutionize vane technology, then I can buy them. They look like they may have promise.

(I am the type of archer who believes I am only one purchase away from becoming a perfect shooter. LOL)

Automan


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

Kaveman44 said:


> pretty cool, hope it works out for ya


Thank you Kaveman.



automan26 said:


> I hope they work so well that they revolutionize vane technology, then I can buy them. They look like they may have promise.
> (I am the type of archer who believes I am only one purchase away from becoming a perfect shooter. LOL)
> Automan


Well Automan, if you belive are just one step from being perfect shooter, then you are pretty damned good. I will send you one sample for nothing, just PM me your address. Honestly, I don't know to what extent they will improve your shooting. I have been testing vanes for years, doesens of types, but I am still not good enough archer to tell precision-wise. Try them yourself. Perhaps you can tell me?

This is what I do know: The vanes fly pretty far. Further then straight vanes. They spin very fast. You need no jig, tools or glue to fit them to an arrow. They stretch to fit any arrow. They are bidirectional, you can't put them wrong. There is one feature I am not ready to talk about, I don't want them outlawed. There are also hidden features that only technicians, physicist and mathematitians will appreciate.

I can make only few of them at a time and their price will reflect it. I is in the neighborhood of USD 25. What customers will think about price that high? Losers won't have 'em, perhaps? Speculation. Anyway, high price makes sense. The vanes are very good, and I can't make many of them. There is no production line, the molds have to be filled by hand. By my hand. Even molds are finished by my hand for these early birds.

Jan


----------



## Jimbo44 (Nov 29, 2012)

Interesting. I would be interested to see a video of them being field tested.


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

Jimbo44 said:


> Interesting. I would be interested to see a video of them being field tested.


Thank you for feedback Jimbo. Me too. I don't have one just yet. It is not easy to shoot bow and film it at the same time. Plus I am not sure camera I can get hold of will catch it. I will try it during weekend. So far I have been using naked eye + glasses. How about if I send to some of you testing pieces? Somebody will eventually record it, it will spread. I will meanwhile be physically going to the archeries and the competitions, perhaps I can get someone to record me shooting in high quality and so on. I can't make too many for free, much less so can I ship for free for long, unless I make a sale.

Jan


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

What is the weight? How durable is the material? What arrows do you have them on and what bow are you shooting them from?

Grant


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

grantmac said:


> What is the weight? How durable is the material? What arrows do you have them on and what bow are you shooting them from?


They weight 1 gram. Material is silicone, soft to the touch, flexible, relatively strong, can be extended 5 times without breaking, it doesn't degrade in UV, completely harmless, you could eat them if you wanted to. I have used Easton Jazz 1916, 1214, Easton crossbow arrow, wooden arrow of unknown make, made in China arrows various. I shoot from bamboo pole bow, very weak, maximum range up to 50 yards, effective range unkonwn. I have also tried made in China pistol crossbow and atlatl. I also throw them dart style and free fall them. At the very beginning I was testing in the stream of water. They are turbines after all, I have plans with them, and plan to use arrows + darts as a nice convincing free of charge promo
Jan Kokes

PS: I was thinking about it and I don't thik they will ever be banned as are. The problem with these is that it doesn't matter much if you rotate the arrow at nocks or at the tip or between. I have tested it, it works. So in theory you could fit arrows like that into a muzzle of a rifle, the squid would stay all outside, the arrow shaft stripped of nocks would sit nice and tight in the barrel. This could become a safety concern since arrows shoot further and penetrate deeper than bullets. But I don't think these fletches will withstand shot from a gun, so never mind. The hunting arrows I am planning for the future perhaps might.


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

I think you need to invest in better equipment before making any claims of increased performance. 
Also 1g is 14gr which is rather heavy. Too heavy to be competitive.

Grant


----------



## motoputz (Dec 8, 2015)

pretty cool stuff
have you thought of or used a 3d printer to make the molds? that would certainly save time for you if it's possible
i dig it, hope it works for you
m


----------



## Challenger (Nov 4, 2007)

Three Blazers weigh 18 grains.....



grantmac said:


> I think you need to invest in better equipment before making any claims of increased performance.
> Also 1g is 14gr which is rather heavy. Too heavy to be competitive.
> 
> Grant


----------



## Bownut400 (May 29, 2007)

Thinking out side the box, cool, proto types always change a little. Good luck


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

grantmac said:


> I think you need to invest in better equipment before making any claims of increased performance.
> Also 1g is 14gr which is rather heavy. Too heavy to be competitive.
> Grant


I am not plannig testing with better eqipment right now. It is cost prohibitive. I take different approach. I have some silicone left, it will last up to 100 pieces. I will send one piece for testing to anybody who PMs me and asks for one. I will need to know his/her address. I believe people will give me honest appraisal of the performance in return, and perhaps buy more if they are worth their price.

I don't think the possible increase in weight will outweight the benefits of more aerodyniamic shape.



motoputz said:


> pretty cool stuff
> have you thought of or used a 3d printer to make the molds? that would certainly save time for you if it's possible
> i dig it, hope it works for you
> m


Yes, I use 3D printer for them and finish them by hand. Milling will be better, but I couldn't afford it for the first run. My models consist of tens of thousands of points and triangles calculated up to billionths of a millimeter.



Challenger said:


> Three Blazers weigh 18 grains.....





Bownut400 said:


> Thinking out side the box, cool, proto types always change a little. Good luck


Thank you.
Jan


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

Challenger said:


> Three Blazers weigh 18 grains.....


These aren't going to stabilize a fixed blade broadhead unless I greatly underestimate them.

Grant


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

I have mailed the first piece today. They are likely on they way to the airport by now, heading for South Dacota.
I finished my master mold I will be casting molds out of. I can now make at least 10 pieces a day, and soon I will be able to produce many times more. Anyone else would like to give them a try?
One more thing. It may be unfair to ask you of your addresses unles I give you mine first. So here you go:

Jan Kokes
Pejevove 3121
143 00 Praha 4
Czech Republic



grantmac said:


> These aren't going to stabilize a fixed blade broadhead unless I greatly underestimate them.
> Grant


Thak you Grant. Is Ferrari worthless becauseit doesn't look like you can fit your piano in? I don't know if they will spin a fixed blae broadhead. Nor do I know why should I know. Anyone can try it, FOC, by simply PMing me the address to ship the vanes to.


----------



## Ala_Archer (Nov 1, 2006)

So, are these a ribbed condom for the back of an arrow shaft?

Ala Archer


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

Ala_Archer said:


> So, are these a ribbed condom for the back of an arrow shaft?
> Ala Archer


Yes. Absolutely. Many people have called them condoms before. And they keep doing it, heeelp!!!


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

Am I missing something? I find condoms fascinating. I agree my vanes are very much like them. They just shouldn't be called like that. If I thought it was ok for it to be sex related I would sell them as a sex toy. The blades are so gentle to the touch they tickle like a mild electricity when rubbed against my lips. But I will start up like that only if I have to. It is not very prestigious.

Arrows on the other hand have been around for tens of thousands years. They are as mature as no other shape. Improving them isn't exactly easy. Five centuries ago spinning vanes came to being. It has been the only significant improvement to arrows so far. They fly more consistently. Their drawback is that they are less aerodynamic. With my vanes you don't have to choose between distance and precision. You can have both. Go figure.

This thread has been both encouraging and disappointing to me. I thought that people will break their necks to get these. Well, I shipped some, and will ship some more on Monday. The people who will get them can show them around if they like them. I ask no more. The feedback you all gave me has been fantastic. If you came this late and want to try them you can still PM me, however I may not be so quick to respond any more. I will check once in a while to see what's going on here, but that's about it. I came to a realization this isn't the best way to promote a product. People buy by looking at something in a store. My goal now is to get this to the stores. Thank you for reading. If you got them, enjoy!

Jan Kokes


----------



## B.Hunter (May 4, 2009)

Jan, do not let the "lack of interest" stated on this thread deter you from posting. Whether it's here on this thread or any other. I for 1, have followed this thread of yours and am quite impressed. I did not pm you to ask for 1. Reason being, i feel there are more competent/experienced archers who you should give them to evaluate. I'm speaking of archers who try almost every vane/steering component available. My experience is 2" blazers, 4" plastic & few 4" feathers. My advice, keep experimenting, don't settle for mediocre and never give up.


----------



## automan26 (Oct 21, 2002)

Keep at it my good friend. Don't become discouraged. I teach an 8th grade engineering class and just a couple of days ago I shared with them the fact that EVERY great design has setbacks. One day several years ago I set about the task of designing a string jig that would be affordable, easily built by anyone, yet still able to produce a perfect string. I spent years designing this thing and had several total failures. By the time I had my jig perfected I had spent a couple hundred dollars and I had a box full of failed ideas. Today I have had others, literally all the way around the world, start out with this jig and advance on to build strings for friends and _customers_. I tell my students that if your design does not have failures along the way, your design has not reached its full potential. Failure and setbacks are a vital part of any successful design process. Thomas Edison made thousands of unsuccessful light bulbs before he got his idea perfected, Henry Ford had two automobile companies fail under him before he finally got Ford running successfully, the first plane the Wright Brothers flew was total junk by modern standards, and the list goes on. Your idea is not a bad one at all and I would bet that the day you have it perfected it may look nothing like it does now, but that is how engineering and design works.

You have a lot of enthusiasm and drive which goes a long way. I admire what you are doing very much. Keep going--I still need that one purchase that will make me shoot like Rio Wilde LOL--Your design might be just what I am looking for.

Good Luck

Automan


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

There is nothing in the design that I would change. Craftmenship, yes. Production, yes. Marketing, yes. But not the design. I can't. There is no toying around with pencil. This is math and physics. The blades are calculated by a computer program to follow certain principles. I don't touch the blades once calculated. The program follows the principles correctly, it passed the tests. The principles themselves may be flawed. They don't seem to be. The vanes behave exaclty as expected. Now archers can retest and see for themselves. If their arrows fly further and faster, my principles are either correct, or at the very least more correct than what we have now.

Thank you for encouragement. Terrific. I didn't realize that people can and do follow threads. I don't think I was being clear at one thing. I am not givin up anything. I just want to find more ways to get this to the people and I need to dedicate time into it. Specifically I am searching for business partners now. I could have expected a slow start at a forum. See, the best strategy to offer something is to come up and say: This is what I got, look. Do you like it? You can have it. And that's it. No less, no more. I have been told privately that I have to provide exact testing data if I want to sell. I looked around and I found out I would be the only one who does so. All I found were slogans, such as 'Do you want to be the best? Try doing it differently. Try our vanes. They look different.' There were no hard data at all. I think I give waaay too much info here as is. I sincerely believe that once this is in stores with nothing but price tag the sales will skyrocket. This is forum however, not a store. I have my feedback, both positive and negative, people are asking for samples. I think it's great. Pretty soon people will have recieved them will be taking them to local archeries and people who see them will be all like *** is THAT??? I can hardly wait. I think it's gonna be so much fun for all of us.


----------



## sagecreek (Jul 15, 2003)

Interesting indeed.

I admire your enthusiasm.


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

Little demo of what I do:


----------



## AUSSIEDUDE (Apr 17, 2009)

Good luck with your venture Kokes.

You are tackling a very tough market where you will need to keep your price competitive. As bow tuning knowledge increases we are finding the effect that vanes have on arrow flight becomes less, if you are going to make a real impact with your sales you will need to show that your vanes offer something that the others don't. Increased speed is easily checked through a chrono and increased accuracy is easily checked with a shooting machine. If you can show either of these you may be on a winner.


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

What happened to the turbine vanes? I kept waiting to see them come out so I could try them.


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

I have shipped 4 packages with samples today. Each package contains one ring of vanes. I wish their new owners nice shooting experience. Some packages may also contain additional vanes with bubbles after silicone that seeped out of my imperfect mold. One sample was finished too improperly. One of the fletches came off a mold of unknown origin, somewhere in mid finishing, it looks different, higher quality, but imperfect, marked as beta. All the vanes are best used with thin competition arrows. The edges of vanes may become wavy if fitted to much thicker shaft, ie for hunting. The vanes will still work, but they will be harder to fit and may not perform as perfectly. None of the vanes sent looks perfect by my standards, but they all work well. They will be only getting better from now on. I have better mold comming up next week along with second larger mold for hunting arrows. If you want higher quality samples or vanes for thick shafts let me know next week. The shipping to US should take anywhere between 4-6 business days, 10 days at the most. I ship via air mail exclusively. I will be happy to hear feedback on how long it took actually.


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

AUSSIEDUDE said:


> Good luck with your venture Kokes.
> 
> You are tackling a very tough market where you will need to keep your price competitive. As bow tuning knowledge increases we are finding the effect that vanes have on arrow flight becomes less, if you are going to make a real impact with your sales you will need to show that your vanes offer something that the others don't. Increased speed is easily checked through a chrono and increased accuracy is easily checked with a shooting machine. If you can show either of these you may be on a winner.



Thank you for your input. Very much appreciated. The answers may take a while. Let me start by explaining how I test now. 

I stand at the same spot each time. There is a tree about 10 meters from me. One of its branches grows way sideways. I aim at the tip of that branch. It is about 20° vertically from me. For shooting I use pathetically weak bow I made out of bamboo stick and paracord (using stronger bow outside isn't possible for legal reasons). I equipped my bow with arrow rest both on handle and the string so that my angle is as consistent as possible. I shoot two identical arrows, the only difference being in vanes. I shoot both arrows and watch how they pass around the branch. If my arrow passes higher, I scratch the round and shoot again. Otherwise I check how they landed. My arrows land further none the less.

How does this relate to speed? The difference in distance means my arrow is more aerodynamic. That in turn means it flies not only further but also faster. Let me test it:

I will mark a distance of 5 meters on a floor. I will shoot arrows with my pistol crossbow, record sounds with my laptop, open sound waves in video editing sw and measure time it takes for arrows to get from my crossbow to their target. From time and distance I can calculate speed of each arrow at each shot and compare them. I will ignore Doppler, only compare which one is faster. How is that for a test?

You test any way you like. Your tests work, no doubt. I lack the equipment. So instead I give you an option to try my vanes yourself and test any way you see fit. I will be happy to see the results if you decide to make them public.

I don't think I understand. Can you expand on that a little? From what I understood I've got an impression that you essentially say that physics aren't important any more because we have better equipment/materials. This is probably not what you meant.

The price is set as is. I don't think it's too high at all. Not that I've never heard of a price - demand theory, but I've been to archeries. I've seen what competition archers use. Their arrow shafts cost more than my vanes, and despite the high price every single kid is using them. They can buy more affordable ones, but they don't. See, arrow shafts, no matter how expensive, are still very affordable compared to the bows, other equipment and fees. And so are my vanes. If nothing else my vanes will give the archers more advantage than a bit lighter shafts. If the archers have to choose only one of the two they will buy a dash heavier but much cheaper shafts in order to save up money for my vanes. At least that's what I would do if I were them. 



Huntinsker said:


> What happened to the turbine vanes? I kept waiting to see them come out so I could try them.



How are you? I was thinking of you recently. Nice to see you. The last design went through many changes, they took a wile to implement. I realized that there is no reason to place the airfoils the way I did. They were positioned so that the vanes would spin even if the arrow flew sideways. It is a cool little feature but there is no need for it. Instead I started modelling a new type of vanes that would spin only if the arrow flies inline with its axis. I modelled the vanes by hand, and made many prototypes and their respective molds, and tested all of them. The newer type of vanes still had hollow blades. The last one of these I made this summer, it is the blue thing on the picture in the first post. I verified what the most correct positioning of airfoils was, and then I described the shape mathematically. That was the hardest part by far. Analytic geometry, programming and 3D modelling that came after were all piece of cake compared to the desciptive geometry I had to use for the mathematical modelling. I will remember the moment of my discovery forever. I had internal injuries after fall from a tree. In the moment of my discovery I was on the floor screaming and vomitting from excrutiating pain. I was excited and happy for the new discovery at the same time. New shape was born. I discovered that what I was looking for was actually a whole set of screws of Archimedes. Each one of them may have different length and different radius and different twist and for ideal shape I need infinity of them, but taken one by one as individuals they all are nothing but plain old screws, easy enough to model using analytic geometry and easy enough to calulate using computer. The rest was straigh forward. I started working on a new model as soon as I was able to pick up a pencil. I abandoned the hollow blades for arrows. Hollow blades will be invaluable for electricity generation. I think I wrote about it already in thread on electricity generation I started while ago somewhere at this forum. However the hollow blades need to be made of strong materials, metals ideally, or composites. For arrows I will use full blades instead. They are small and lightweight. They don't wobble in high speeds despite being so soft. I tesed this by listening. They produce no audible hiss even when shot indoor from a crossbow. The shape is now all recalculated. The computer model is very precise. The molds are printed on 3D printer and finished by hand. I plan versions printed on laser 3D printer and also milled versions for future, however I don't think the model as is is going to change one bit.


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

What is the maximum diameter shaft you would recommend?

I'm looking forward to doing some down-range chrono work alongside my existing compound arrows then also doing a bit of forgiveness testing with my barebow. We'll see what the data looks like once I'm done.

-Grant


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

I appologize for late reply. I only get to internet once in a while. Chrono will be awesome. I have tested 19/64ths of an inch diameter with these. They are ok. I can send you larger diameter vanes if you wish. I have spent this weekend molding and finally I seem to get hang of it. I am on my way to a local archery to give out pieces that are not perfect.


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

I am at the local library. New mold is being printed, I keep my eye on it. This one is larger, it will be better suited for hunting arrows. If you want to try these specifically please let me know.

Thank you for all your orders, I am very happy this is starting to move behind the scenes. I will be shipping more packages tomorrow or day after. At least one package has already arrived to its place. Happy shooting!

Jan


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

I finally got my webcam working yesterday after partial reinstall and lots of tuning. Today I made two videos I desperately needed to make. This is the first one, it is about how to fletch an arrow with my vanes:






Here comes my second video, speed testing my vanes vs other vanes:






Both videos contain factual errors.
Fletching:
- diameter of thicker arrow shafts is 19/64 of an inch, not mm
- vanes become wavy only if their edge is dented, ie after shooting from a crossbow
- third method of fletching is essentially the same as second one, only two pieces of tape are used insead of one, it can be easier for beginners, you first make first loop sticky side out and then second loop sticky side in
Testing:
- standard arrow was only shot once, its value was 5.5, not 16.5/3


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

This looks more and more like a blog. Let me add some more info, it has to be somewhere. I am still an ordinary guy, not a merchant. It may not take long, please post questions and ask for specimens before I become one. It will interfere with rules here at the forum once I am. I will start my pages and leave this forum, perhaps visiting it as a paying customer once I start selling, or discussing other stuff, not my vanes.

I am still working on improvements based on your feedback. I have been to friend of mine who has a high precission scale. I had one piece with nice thin blades, unlike my first pieces. My vanes (small ones) weight in at 0.58 grams, or 9.0 grains. The lightest vanes I found so far online weight 5.1 grains. I thought I could do better. I redesigned my mold a little. My master now looks like this:









It looks almost the same. The ring is thinner, however it still has a jet engine shape. The new vanes weight somewhere around 4 grains. This is how it looks with roughly finished mold (notice that the ring is partly transparent now and that I added two additional rings to make fletching easier, they are intended to be cut off with a razor once the vanes are fletched):









There was a feedback on price being too high. I can make it lower, much lower actually. The question is, do you really want it? I mean, right now the vanes fly extremely well, better than yours. They are now skinnier, too. If I make them more affordable at the same time I can easily drive some of the standing vanes producers out of business. Do you think I should do that? I only came to promote my turbines and to make just enough to make them happen. I can set my pricing policy for example like so: I can sell universal vanes (the ones that were competition vanes recently) for lowest price to promote the shape, say for 2 dollars apiece, my hunting vanes for 3 and only my recent competition vanes (lightest) for big buck, say 20 dollars. This way I will make nice profit only out of archers who really know what they want, but hey, if that gets me to where I want to be, why not. Is this what you want?

Jan


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

You really won't sell any for $20/arrow. Not going to happen. $2/arrow is right on the limit of what the market will do.

Keep in mind that the most expensive Mylar vane (your direct conpetitor) is $1.5/arrow and weighs less than 4g per arrow. You can also replace them individually at a cost of $0.50/each in event of damage.
These go on $600/dozen shafts so the people using them aren't cheap but fletching does get damaged and replacement cost is a factor.

I'm looking forward to when the sample arrives so I can do testing on both downrange performance and especially durability. Judging by the size I don't think they will be suitable for recurve use but as a compound vane they show promise if they are as durable as a standard glue-in. 

Grant


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

Thank you for your reply Grant. Very informative, as ever. I am sorry your samples still haven't arrived. Others seem to be getting them on schedule. I will sent you another package on Monday to make sure. I will be so glad for any testing you can do. You seem to have some very interesting ideas. I was looking forward to broadhead spinning, but crash tests seem even more interesting. Show them who the boss is! I hope for a video, but I have to leave that completely up to you.

My understanding of a direct competitor is somewhat different from yours. I assume that you mean competitor in low weight. We shall see about that. Next week I should meet with my friend again. I will check the actual weight of my new type first and make conclusions later.

Otherwise it is hard to talk about competitors. My vanes are completely different from industry standard: 

- I use infinity of screws. I maintain that my shape conforms to the principles of rotational aerodynamics, Archimedes alone doesn't. 

- I use airfoil crossection. I maintain that bird wing (airfoil) is more aerodynamic than a box (rectangle). 

- I can fletch my arrow with hands behind my back and it will come out perfectly.

I understand that price is an issue of utmost importance. Thank you for your numbers, Grant. I will be glad if others join us and share their thoughts on the matter. 

Let me start by asking one important question first: What is a market limit for a guitar? Hundred dollars is too much for some. Ten thousand dollars is not too much for others. If you are a top professional guitarist and guitar for 10 grand will make you play little better, the guitar will pay for itself in no time. Same goes for vanes. It depends on what you want to do with them. Lets say you invested 10+ years commuting to your local archery, paying gas, paying fees, getting lessons, buying multiple bows and piles of equipment. Now assume you can buy vanes that will make you little better. Little better could mean you can win Olympics, little worse could mean you not making it to Olympics at all. How much are you willing to pay for little better? Two dollars? Two hundred dollars? Less? Or way more?

This example was extreme, of course. I understand I will not be able to find Olympic archers exclusively, and they will not find me unless others start using the vanes first. But once they do find me, they will go for the best. Twenty bucks will be nothing to them. To you the price is insane. I give you an alternative which is almost as good and it would cost you 10 times less as is. Is my point clear? Does it make sense? Lowish price for very good vanes, extremely high price for vanes that are just a tiny bit better?

Now for the price in real numbers. Let me start selfishly, from my point of view. I calculated that at present I could make up to 10 vanes an hour. This assumes no breathers, no bubbles, no leaks, all equipment and materials in place. I don't have everything in place, at present I have to discard about 40% of my production due to insufficient equipment (no degassing chamber, molds finished by hand, not milled). If I ask for 1 dollar apiece now, I will be making 6 dollars an hour if I get demand for 60 pcs a day exactly. I mustn't get less, I mustn't get more. I ignore the wholesale, the taxes, the price of my RTV silicone, which isn't exactly cheap, the pigments, the materials for my molds and master molds, and I completely ignore 7 years of development and 20+ years at school atop of that. On the other hand I know I can gear up my production easily. My molds are designed to interlock with each other like a Lego bricks, creating blocks with whole network of chambers all the way through for filling and degassing. I will be able pump at least 1000 pcs at a time if I get the molds right. I will also get less fleshes, making the vanes much easier to finish. I believe I will be able to make at least 100 pcs an hour all by myself. With hundred bucks an hour I can hire some people and get more and more. But I don't have perfect molds, pumps, mixers or cryogenic shakers yet. That is in the future. One dollar at this point will make my start very slow and my living conditions miserable. But the same one dollar in future, once I have fully blown production, could make a millionaire out of me pretty quick.

As you can see, the question of price is by no means easy, and I haven't even started considering customers yet. Their opinion matters the most. I can do with lousy conditions, I can get my molds sooner or later one way or other. But the price once set is hard to change. It is easier to go down with it, so I started high. Two or three dollars don't seem so bad compared to 15 at the beginning, do they? How would 1 dollar look to you? Would a top guitarist perform with 100 dollar guitar? What will happen to people who make other vanes if I beat them in price too? What will they do? Perhaps your opinion on price differs from both mine and that of Grant, or you can second one of us. What do you think the numbers should be like? Let us know!

I plan to mail free replacements if someone from my customers sends me original damaged unit.

Jan

****************************** ********

Testing distance:


----------



## northshoremb (Aug 5, 2003)

You need real testing done on a hooter shooter or Kwik shooter. There is not even a close creditable way to compare or test just pulling back a longbow and firing. 5* difference in angle or 1" longer pull will give you different results. Need to do controlled test with shooting machine at 30, 50, 70, 90m to test drop and drift. I have a modified Kwik Shooter build in the process for doing this to my own arrows but winter won't be gone till late march-April. That way you always have exact same draw length, same alignment and same release to get most accurate data. If they would prove to me that the drift and drop less then comparable 1.75-1.87" vanes from Vantec Superspine or AAE Max then I would consider. I know you are stating the cost to make and your time for what it's worth but in early stages of any production you need to take the hit and get the name out there or you will flop. Ever watch Shark Tank or Dragons Den? If the avg good say "semi-pro" Shooter who shoots top scores out there won't buy tungsten or Tool steel points cause of the cost they will never buy vanes at even $5 and arrow. For top level shooters out there that compete in pro class lots are set in there ways or already get there vanes for free so you won't see them buying them. Unless there is actual proof that they make a big difference it will be hard to get people to spend even 3 times the money let alone $25 an arrows. Just letting you know how people think and spend money here in Canada and USA. 
Compound shooter here in Canada don't get paid anything to attend nationals, provincials, world's it's all on there own dime. Only people who get paid way from government is Olympic Recurve. When Canada has couple of the best shooters in the world it's sad that the Government does cover a single dime for the archers to go compete for there country

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk


----------



## b0w_bender (Apr 30, 2006)

might want to take a look at these, I'm thinking the profile of the vane is the only real difference. 
http://www.bohning.com/blazerr-stretch-fletch/


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

Excellent post, northshoremb, thank you. I thought to ask if there was some sort of central authority to determine aerodynamic properties of an arrow, now your post answers my question before I asked it. I knew about the shooting machines already, but I didnt know what they were like or how they are called. I looked it up. I will use my crossbow in the design, since it already has trigger and same draw length each time. I will make the first one out of my crossbow and tripod and test distance again. It will prove the drop. We are having a warm spell here, it wont take as long. I may not be able to get Superspine or AAE Max here.

Jan


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

Nice to see you, bOw_bender. Why airfoils and all that? Because very efficient turbine will still work this small.

Jan


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

That's pretty good. 3.3 grains is very light for a quick fletch system like this. I'm also looking forwards to grantmac's testing.


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

Huntinsker said:


> That's pretty good. 3.3 grains is very light for a quick fletch system like this. I'm also looking forwards to grantmac's testing.


Thank you Huntinsker. So far I haven't found lighter ones, and if I do, I can easily scale my vanes down again. I am too looking forward to all testing results including but not limited to Grant's.

*************

I apologize for a delay, my molds have new finish now and I cast again, but it took 3 days to get there. Those who wait please stay patient, I will be shipping first package today or tomorrow.

*************

I have my crossbow tuned for slim arrows now. I am on my way to the archery shop to get brand new vanes. If no snow comes during the night I will do more precise distance testing tomorrow.

*************

I have been asked privately about me not being afraid of cheap competition from Asia. I thought my position on the matter may be of interest.

I decided not to file a patent at all. The reason for such unusual approach is the way patents work. They require a very thick wallet - the fees are payed annually, they rise year after year, they are payed for each country individually, including individual European countries, each country has its own patent laws, patent for each country must be specific and it better be done by a patent attorney, patent holder has to discover and sue patent breakers at his own expense. All of this is topped by the fact that patents don't last forever, they expire. Maximum life of a patent is 20 years. After, and more often than not during this period the patents are nothing more than a cookbook for copiers, as everything must be explained clearly in the patent, including pictures, and the patent must be public. For most people excluding super rich the only way to get patent rights is to get an investor who is super rich. Investor always requires a patent, that is how investors work. So if you have a project, you must have an investor, right? No, you don't have to. And frankly, you don't want to. Look at Tesla, how smart he was, how many inventions he had, including AC current we all use every single day, and his investor was none less than Rockefeller. Could anyone ask for more? Well, guess what. Tesla died as a beggar, and most of his inventions died with him. Would you still want an patent? I don't. I choose Coca-Cola approach. Secrecy. The only drawback is that I must be able to get my product up to the point of sales all by myself, which in my case meant geometry and physics, programming, designing, engineering, production and public relations, and I am still not done yet, I haven't made a dime off this up to this point. But once I do no one is going to copy me precisely. Others can approach my precision, but they can't get further. I am the only one who has the exact model. Principles I use are unknown, geometry is unknown, program is undisclosed. There may be copies of my arrows/propellers/turbines out there some day, but if someone requires a guarantee of a quality he will have to address me and none other. 

Well, perhaps not exactly none other. I recently thought it might be a good idea to sell or rent out my molds to the manufacturers instead of selling my vanes to the customers. Nobody will lose job, quite the opposite, I will still make nice profit to continue and expand my production, the price of the vanes can become very competitive, shipping fast, huge amount of vanes can be made very quickly, the copiers will be screwed and everyone else happy. What do you think?

Jan


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

Vanes received, initial impressions tonight after work. 

Grant


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

Awesome. Which package arrived? Were tiny competition vanes in it (2nd from Friday, 4 business days)? I am sad to report very strong winds in my location all day long, I couldn't test. I will post my test once I can. I used little spare time to complete the packages, I sent all but one - Ryan (I didn't know which one to mail).

Jan


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

Yes very small vanes. Swamped at work so a bit slow on really getting into them.

Grant


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

Same here. I went testing twice and each time my crossbow failed on me. I fixed it once again, no promises but perhaps tomorrow I may do a distance test with it.
Jan


----------



## WIHoyt (Nov 22, 2004)

kokes said:


> Thank you Kaveman.
> 
> 
> Well Automan, if you belive are just one step from being perfect shooter, then you are pretty damned good. I will send you one sample for nothing, just PM me your address. Honestly, I don't know to what extent they will improve your shooting. I have been testing vanes for years, doesens of types, but I am still not good enough archer to tell precision-wise. Try them yourself. Perhaps you can tell me?
> ...


I applaud the effort but vanes are working flawless as simple as they are and they dont need to be aerodynamic. They need drag in order to help direct the shaft in a straight line. The larger and heavier the shaft the more drag is needed. If you want to improve something with you arrows but quality arrows and better nocks. The ones on your prototype are junk. Sorry I couldnt figure out how to say that without sounding like a jerk. But quality nocks are much more important than any kind of vane. Heck fetching them with real feathers like the indians did 100 years ago still works perfectly.


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

WIHoyt said:


> I applaud the effort but vanes are working flawless as simple as they are and they dont need to be aerodynamic. They need drag in order to help direct the shaft in a straight line. The larger and heavier the shaft the more drag is needed. If you want to improve something with you arrows but quality arrows and better nocks. The ones on your prototype are junk. Sorry I couldnt figure out how to say that without sounding like a jerk. But quality nocks are much more important than any kind of vane. Heck fetching them with real feathers like the indians did 100 years ago still works perfectly.


Wow. Talk to NASA, they will be happy to hear aerodynamics aren't significant any more. They can use box shaped space shuttles now.

The best nocks are no nocks at all. I already posted that on other thread. Look at the picture. See? The vanes can spin while in bow. They don't have to use precious kinetic energy from flight to make them spin, they consume plentyful energy of a bow instead.

You are right, you do sound like a jerk. Perhaps you should do something about it now that you both know yourself and have it confirmed by others.

*******************************

My testing went horrible. My crossbow failed again. Further testing will not be done by me. I contacted my old pal Jorg Sprave who has gotten famous meanwhile with million subscibers on youtube with his slingshot channel. He will be doing the testing and promotion for me.

Jan


----------



## WIHoyt (Nov 22, 2004)

A NASA Space shuttle and an arrow are completely different. One is under power and can be driven to where it needs to go and thus aerodynamics is important for efficiency. An Arrow on the other hand is no longer under power as soon as it leaves the string and needs drag via vanes to assist in keeping it straight toward the target. 
Secondly the amount of force needed for a nock to leave the string is very insignificant and there is no gain. again vanes work perfectly as is given they have effective drag to maintain straight line flight. P roof in it working perfectly as is... Place bow in a hooter shooter and it will place the arrow in the same hole over and over and over. Some designs just are not worth the effort or the financial loss.


----------



## Garceau (Sep 3, 2010)

kokes said:


> I am not plannig testing with better eqipment right now. It is cost prohibitive. I take different approach. I have some silicone left, it will last up to 100 pieces. I will send one piece for testing to anybody who PMs me and asks for one. I will need to know his/her address. I believe people will give me honest appraisal of the performance in return, and perhaps buy more if they are worth their price.
> 
> I don't think the possible increase in weight will outweight the benefits of more aerodyniamic shape.
> 
> ...


This is a joke right?

A billionth of a millimeter with a makeable material such as silicone?


----------



## WIHoyt (Nov 22, 2004)

lol billionth of a mm? is that a measurable amount? really a billionth?


----------



## Garceau (Sep 3, 2010)

WIHoyt said:


> lol billionth of a mm? is that a measurable amount? really a billionth?



Really?


WIHoyt said:


> lol billionth of a mm? is that a measurable amount? really a billionth?


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

WIHoyt said:


> A NASA Space shuttle and an arrow are completely different. One is under power and can be driven to where it needs to go and thus aerodynamics is important for efficiency. An Arrow on the other hand is no longer under power as soon as it leaves the string and needs drag via vanes to assist in keeping it straight toward the target.
> Secondly the amount of force needed for a nock to leave the string is very insignificant and there is no gain. again vanes work perfectly as is given they have effective drag to maintain straight line flight. P roof in it working perfectly as is... Place bow in a hooter shooter and it will place the arrow in the same hole over and over and over. Some designs just are not worth the effort or the financial loss.


Thank you for your comments WIHoyt. 

1/ Let's forget about aircraft being powered by engine and the arrow by bow. They both need as much efficiency as possible. With more efficient arrow you can shoot further, which means less vertical difference in the target, and thus increased precision of shot.

2/ Yes, I absolutely agree that vanes are there to increase precision. But there are two basic types of vanes, spinning and straight.

2.1 Straight vanes are nothing but a brake at the back, they slow the back down, front wants to go faster, thus arrow flies straight. Well, not excatly straight, it fishtails, due to nature of a bow. Fishtailing is the reason why vast majority of competitive archers don't use straight vanes, they rather go for helical. Fishtailing means tip of the arrow is one inch to the left at one moment and one inch to the right tiny bit later. Competitive archers aren't hooter shooters and their distance changes too. Two inches horizontal difference is way too much. So they prefer spin.

2.2 Spinning vanes create spin, which is different type of stabilization. They too create drag, but it is not their main function, they create drag because they have to, anything that flies through air creates drag. Usually the spinning vanes create both ways of arrow stabilization, they spin + they are in the back.

Now if you look up any book on ballistics where missiles are discussed, you will find out that spinning vanes never fly as far as straight ones. I claim this doesn't have to be the case. Look at my videos. They both show that my arrows spin all while flying further/faster than straight ones. How is this possible? Well, I use only spin, and eliminate the drag part as much as possible. I don't need both forms of stabilization. Straight vanes have only one form, so why not me? The fun part is that for straight vanes you need certain amount of drag, or arrow won't be stabilized sufficiently. This is not case with spin. If the arrow spins it is stabilized. Torque of spin plays no significant role, only speed of spin counts (except for i.e. broadheads which do require some torque). My vanes are extremely weak, barely strong enough to spin, which is exactly what I wanted.

I may have to rephrase the nock part. Bent bow has some energy stored in it. When string is released, part of this energy is passed to the arrow. I say that if arrow is allowed to start spinning while it is powered by a string, it doesn't need to start spinning after it leaves the string. Have you noticed that to start up an engine you need about 10 times more power than to run engine afterwards? Same goes for arrow spin. I say that since energy of bow is never used up completely part of this unused energy can be given to the spin start provided the arrow can spin while in bow. Otherwise the arrow has to use its own kinetic energy to start up the engine, err, the spin. That slows the arrow down, decreasing its precision in effect. Is it clear now?

Yes, most of desings aren't worth the effort and financial loss. That's how it goes. Makers of vanes who won't use my design will feel it pretty hard. My plan is to sell molds to the producers. I am not the price maker, so the chances that these will actually cost 20 bucks is slim, the price will more likely be driven by market, therefore many vanes of the same design can be made and sold easily. Just to give you an idea, 18 million people were shooting bow and arrow last year in US alone. None of them had only one arrow. But if you still fear about my financial well being, let me assure you I am not dependent on arrows. I just need hard data to show off my turbines. I feel I can benefit archers by providing them better vanes and archers can benefit me by showing my turbine around, making it more popular. I can make more money by selling a single turbine than by making vanes for a year.



WIHoyt said:


> lol billionth of a mm? is that a measurable amount? really a billionth?


They were calculated to that precision. JavaScript calculates up to trillionths by default, but last three digits are incorrect due to transmission from binary, so yes, billionths. The molds aren't so precise, of course. Right now they are tenth here or there. The ones I am getting in a week or two will be up to 1 hundredth of a mm. The guy making it works for CERN, so if his machine and skills are good enough for them they should be fine for me too.


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

My initial thoughts on the vanes are that they simply aren't currently consistent enough to be worth extensive testing. Weight variation within the sample was extreme 8gr, 12gr and 13gr respectively.
The vane sections are too flexible to provide correction at compound speeds (think flutter) and their actual area would be similar to glueing just the base of a vane plus 2mm onto the shaft with a hard helical.

The basic concept is good, extreme helical with very small control surfaces. For the size they are very heavy though and the material used is extremely flexible.

The path I could see this taking is a more traditional glue-on vane but with helical molded in rather than the sleeve concept. You simply carry far too much weight and frontal area with that design.

Grant


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

Grant, thank you for your reply. I expected the slight weight variation, these are hand made molds and hand made casts. Have you noticed that the smallest one is actually a competition vane, two are universals and two hunting? I am about to have industrial molds soon, the variation will disappear. As for the rest, why don't you simply shoot them? You wanted to see if they power broadhead and what happens after impact. Does the large one spin a fixed blade broadhead? One shot will tell you. Aren't you interested in how they actually work? I am. Just shoot each one of them once. If they fail to spin with compound and regular tip then I will know for sure and will make them less flexible. I like them flexible, so I do them that way, but if they fail, I will certainly do something about it. Changing the material is least of my worries. Put them to the back of the shaft, it will add no extra weight to the front. I too would prefer simple glue on vanes, but how would you attach them to the arrows correctly? There is no jig suited for that, and if there was it would never give always perfect result as with tape tube method I described in one of my videos. I believe that little extra weight is outweighted by perfect geometry, at least that's what my test show.

Jan


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

OK, I think I am all set with aerodynamics. I may get more results later on from CTU, but I am content already. I also have done my crashtests by shooting my vanes out of a crossbow from 2 meters head on into a concrete. Do not try this yourself! The arrows bounce off the walls pretty quickly and it doesn't feel very good to get hit by one. I know first hand. Anyway, the vanes survived with no dent no scar. All good. I am not all that interested in spinning broadheads. But there is one test that is yet to be done, the one I am perhaps most interested in: a grouping test. I can't do that, and nor can Jörg do that. He is a real genius of a sort if you ask me. Did you see his hand crank operated chain crossbow and his wooden cannon? Did you see him shooting broomsticks and soccer balls? His world record slingshot shot? He is great and amusing and he truly deseves his million subscibers, but he is by no means a competitive archer. One of you has already sent me pictures and description of his grouping test with my vanes, and he seems to be very pleased with the results. But I need a proper test. I will not sell anything that hasn't been properly tested before. I will now concetrate on grouping test exclusively and forget the rest.

Let me make some adjustments. I discontinue mailing single pieces to anybody who asks me. Instead I will send one of you 12 carefully made and weighted pieces free of charge if:

1/ You are willing to try their grouping and post your results here
2/ You are a competition archer with proper experience and equipment
3/ You have sufficient history at this forum

You will be the first person to get the whole set of my vanes. They may get you to the top of the curve for a while, since these are extremely difficult to make.

I will benefit from your results if my vanes are as good as I think they are, and will start producing and selling them eventually.

Jan Kokes


----------



## b-a-maniak (Apr 19, 2014)

Excellent! I admire your passion and persistence. The drive and dedication will see you through. Nicely done so far on a work in progress. :cheers:


----------



## kokes (Sep 25, 2013)

Thank you, b-a-maniak. I am still at it. I finally found a competition archer who is willing to try them, I fixed my crossbow for my own tests, things are looking somewhat better. The mold will not be done by the guy who runs high precision CNC, but I will get it otherwise. Jorg fell silent, too, but I found a high speed camera rentals. Thank you once more, I've really had hard times recently but things seem to improve. Shoot 'em straight!


----------

