# Spin vanes: whatbarebthe pros and cons?



## DIV (Apr 12, 2012)

Darn iPad keyboard!
"What are the pros and cons"


----------



## midwayarcherywi (Sep 24, 2006)

http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=813260&highlight=spin+wings+mckinney

Search is your friend


----------



## DIV (Apr 12, 2012)

thanks


----------



## icehaven (Nov 30, 2010)

These are from personal experience

Pros - more forgiving, especially when you get better and more consistent
- easier to put on any time since no glue is required (need a steady hand though)
- they're pretty

Cons - fragile, easy to break off or slice off with clicker
- take more concentration to put on (can't just let it sit with glue)
- more expensive

I currently use Eli Vanes. They're a stiffer, more durable type of spin wing. (similar to Gas Pro vanes). I really, really, really recommend them instead of spin wings. they're a little less than twice the price, but they don't break! i bought a set of large ones for indoor and a small set for indoor. When indoor season was over, i pulled off the large vanes and put them in storage, to be used next year. i could never do that with spin wings as they would be so damaged by the end of the season that there was no point in using them again. lancaster sells them too.


----------



## skunklover (Aug 4, 2011)

I'll echo what Alan said.
Another pro is that you can do field repairs easily. If you're line on your shaft is still visible, you can stick another one on there while you're taking a break at the range.

I'm also shooting Eli Vanes, and they look nice too. I really recommend them, but I don't have as good of an experience with them, I get mine damaged, mostly because I shoot into bales that sometimes get partial pass through. But they still are way more durable than Spinwings. However, I think there's a slight design flaw, in that in their untaped state, they are pretty curled up. What straightens them out is the taping onto the shaft. This means that sometimes they have a bit of a tendency to pull off a bit on the ends, and if you don't notice it, they'll fly noticeably off. I'm currently looking into other tapes, because the Eli Vane tape is definitely not as good as the spinwing tape.


----------



## bowgal (Jun 12, 2003)

skunklover,

Have you tried some pin stripe from an auto parts store? I use the smallest size and it works well. Im not sure if your talking about the double stick tape or the "wrapping" tape, but I am referring to the wrapping tape.

FWIW


----------



## DIV (Apr 12, 2012)

Ok, for the Eli vanes, the P2 and P3 sizes, are they the same length?...and what is/are their length?
Will I still be able to use my Beiter fletching clip? The biter wing clip accommodates up to 1-3/4"

Please help. Thanks!


----------



## icehaven (Nov 30, 2010)

DIV said:


> Ok, for the Eli vanes, the P2 and P3 sizes, are they the same length?...and what is/are their length?
> Will I still be able to use my Beiter fletching clip? The biter wing clip accommodates up to 1-3/4"
> 
> Please help. Thanks!


Eli Vane dimensions are as followed: P2 - 56mm long, 9.5mm tall. P3 - 56mm long, 10.3mm tall

all the dimensions for these vanes and the rest can be found at

elivanes.com/italiano.html (everything's in italian but the other languages don't have the same info)

at that website, click on the "Profili" tab on the left, and then select the type of vane you want: parabolic, shield, or indoor

I highly recommend the indoor vanes if you're willing to order internationally.


----------



## Arsi (May 14, 2011)

DIV said:


> Ok, for the Eli vanes, the P2 and P3 sizes, are they the same length?...and what is/are their length?
> Will I still be able to use my Beiter fletching clip? The biter wing clip accommodates up to 1-3/4"
> 
> Please help. Thanks!


For the Beiter Wing Holder question, I currently use P3 for my arrows and the wing holder works with the P3s. The tips of the fletches are probably a 1/4" longer than the ends of the wing holder but it doesnt matter. The fletch fits fine inside the wing holder and still fits flush against the lip. Given this, I am pretty sure the P2 will work fine since the P2 is smaller.


----------



## Bean Burrito (Apr 20, 2011)

Pros: Good grouping (though I'll generally group the same with FF187's with a BIG offset on them, practically wrapped around the X10)
Light weight (helps FOC and tuning if your arrow is on the stiff side
Field repairable

Cons: Cost
Not durable in the slightest. If you're missing, then look for points elsewhere. I avoid them because we have soft targets at the club and burying them up to the fletches is not unheard of. Doesn't hurt FF187's, but it will write off spinwings

Potential pros: I think they look good on knitting needle sized shafts, just seem to suit them.

I had no trouble putting them on without a liner or wing holder, worked just fine with a fletching jig to mark 3 lines then placed carefully on by hand


----------



## hwjchan (Oct 24, 2011)

Another vote for the Elivanes as opposed to Spin Wings if you get into that type of curled vane. They're a lot more durable. Was being slightly silly shooting blank bale groups at 10 meters and arrows slapping into each other in ways I really shouldn't be slapping them together, but the vanes survive no problem at all. They do have a tendency to sit a little off because of the extreme curl if you don't apply them just right though.


----------



## whiz-Oz (Jul 19, 2007)

icehaven said:


> Pros - more forgiving, especially when you get better and more consistent


So how do you figure that?

Do you figure that they're more forgiving since you now need less forgiveness?


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Whiz, which ones do you shoot?

As for me, I prefer Elivanes these days. The chief problem I had with spin wings for so many years was durability. Or lack thereof. And the possibility that a vane could come loose because of the tape, rather than glue, used to hold them on (as Jason McKittrick about that someday, if you dare...). But since trying Elivanes, I've found they are plenty durable, forgiving, clear well, group well are lightweight, relatively affordable and low maintenance. I use tape of course to put them on, but I make sure that when I put the end wraps on, I finish with a spot of glue to keep the end wrap tape from coming loose. It only takes a second, and it makes a huge difference in how long you can shoot an arrow before you have to do maintenance.

Because of the extended tails on the Elivanes, their ends stay put much better than spin wings when you do the end wraps. Why spin wings haven't made this simple change is beyond me. 

I've been using Elivanes (S3's on my large and relatively heavy nano pro 450's) since about late March, and have now shot my personal best 70M outdoor score (341) and set two TX state field records with them on my 2nd day (ever) of shooting field. So, I can tell you they group extremely well from 5M all the way out to 70.

I switched my daughter's CX Medallion XR's from AAE vanes to Elivanes (P3's) prior to JOAD Nationals, and on her last JOAD practice, she easily earned her 50M pin by over 30 points. So, she's a believer in her Elivanes now too. And, she thinks they just look cool, which always helps a kid shoot better!

John


----------



## whiz-Oz (Jul 19, 2007)

Flexfletch FFP's I think. 
There's no credible hard evidence that one fletch is better than another in terms of accuracy or forgiveness, so I went for durability. 
There is an incredible amount of confirmational bias involved with the observation of fletch performance. 
This is a positive psychological factor in an archers performance overall, so it's important. 
However, I've always been aware of all the factors involved, so I'm immune to it when it comes to fletches and quite a few other archery myths. 

Smart, targeted dedicated training methods contribute more to an archers performance than believing in the advertising claims of any singular product.


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

Whiz,

Did you have a bad breakup with a spinwing in high school? (please take that in the good natured way I meant it - hey, it's Friday!)


----------



## whiz-Oz (Jul 19, 2007)

Hey, don't get me wrong. There's nothing wrong with spinwings. 
They work just fine. There's just nothing magical about them. Several claims for them on the packing are hilariously false but plausible if you have no clue, yet people regurgitate them endlessly. 

I have nothing against spinwings per se. 

I get very annoyed about the advertising that originally went with them. Some of them are physically impossible and complete lies. 

The "wind drag regulator" is just ludicrous.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Actually whiz, it's not false. One of the advantages of curled mylar vanes is that they DO in fact regulate the amount of drag based on their air speed velocity. In other words, the vanes open up slightly at high velocity, and close a bit (creating a little more drag) at lower velocities, where it's needed more to stabilize the arrow. So yes, there is that single advantage of a curled mylar vane over a standard plastic vane. 

And as for competitive advantage, I think the data would show that mental toughness is the #1 determining factor in success or failure. Not equipment, and not even training methods. 

Ask Brady what his greatest asset is. It won't be his fancy new bow or even (gasp!) his coach. It's his mental toughness, period. That's what seperates him from the rest of the RA's, it's what seperates the past Olympic champions from their peers as well, and they've each had completely different styles of shooting and coaching in the past 3+ Olympic games...

So, while good equipment and technique is very important, for my money, the greatest archery "coach" is actually probably Lanny Bassham. But that's another topic for another thread...

John


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

My apologies to anyone else besides the "great one" here who had to read that...


----------



## DIV (Apr 12, 2012)

Arsi said:


> For the Beiter Wing Holder question, I currently use P3 for my arrows and the wing holder works with the P3s. The tips of the fletches are probably a 1/4" longer than the ends of the wing holder but it doesnt matter. The fletch fits fine inside the wing holder and still fits flush against the lip. Given this, I am pretty sure the P2 will work fine since the P2 is smaller.


thank you (and icehaven) for answering my questions...


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

Just hearsay, buy here's a reference to an actual test using a shooting machine ...

In a previous thread where Rick McKinney had made the comment that most of the record setting performances in the last 20 years have been with spin wings, there was the following post - if true, it's (for me) a compelling nod toward spin wings. 

"Not to steal this thread, but I was intrigued buy your conversion to Spin Wing Vanes. At this years outdoor Nationals the pros&cons of spin vs straight vanes was subject of conversation by the 60+ guys. Doc,David Brandfass, told of a test Easton had done, shooting 100 arrows fletched with spins Vs. 100 fletched with straight vanes, using a shooting machine @ 70M. The spins averaged 9.8, while the straights averaged 8.3. "

Here's the thread ... http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showth...n+wing+records

My big question is - why the heck wouldn't Range-O-Matic (spinwing maker) conduct a shooting test with a shooting machine and, if the results were favorable to spinwings, publish the test? Seems like a no brainer to me.


----------



## rharper (Apr 30, 2012)

Whiz, really? You countered Limbwalker's argument by arguing against his "lack of facts" by doing the same dang thing. Arguing your knowledge yet not showing ANYTHING to back it up. I'll trust the guy that shoots a WHOLE lot more. His knowledge comes from shooting THOUSANDS upon THOUSANDS of arrows over what, 2 decades? How long have you been shooting and how close to that number have you shot? You can take the snooty attitude and put it away, NO ONE here wants to hear it. Present your data and then we'll debate it. Prove to us you are correct. Instead of name dropping imaginary generic figures, drop some real names, person or companies, or institutes of science that prove your facts you say are the absolute truth.


----------



## rharper (Apr 30, 2012)

LKS, can you put that link up again, it shows up shortened.


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

here is the thread http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showt...1053510691&highlight=brandfass#post1053510691

The post is question, by pencarrow, is post #6 of the thread


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> I'm just incredibly lucky that I have spent a lot of my life in the company of brilliant people.


You said it better than I could. Expert by association. 

Here's an idea Whiz. Why don't you write a book. Then you'll really be an expert.

You can't make this stuff up. Thanks for making my day, again, Whiz... LOL!

John


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

Both Darrell and Rick said their groups improved with spin wings. That's Five world championships, 15+ years of the world record, 10+ national championships two olympic gold medals, three silver medals of experience. Works for me


----------



## lizard (Jul 4, 2003)

Ok, so I saw this thread, and being one who actually shoots BAREBOW and enjoys shooting anything that fires a projectile, I thought I'd give my two cents worth on the actual topic of this thread, save all the BS that is on here!
Let me say, archery is a neat sport in which each archer shoots they equipment they choose to shoot, having personally shot and experimented with different arrows, fletchings, etc.

Pro, flight is much better with SPIN WINGS/KURLY VANES/SUPER FLONITE SPIN K VANES. I like the Kurlys best, because of the colors they offer, I like "Day Glo Pink" because i can see them in the grass, IF i happen to hit the green!

Con is the fact that they take more maintenance than plastic vanes.

Honestly, if you shoot, and you try different things you find what works best for you and with YOUR shot. A Shooting machine, such as a Hooter Shooter, cannot duplicate the human release. Spin Wings, and the like work best on OLYMPIC RECURVES, they are more forgiving (as one DP says). Compounds (which I have also shot), IMO are better off shooting plastic vanes, or feathers for indoor. The spins might give a flatter trajectory...HONESTLY, try different things and see what works for YOU, not a machine! That machine isn't going to shoot a tournament for you, so why bother messing with it, except to tune your COMPOUND! HS doesn't work on a recurve!

Tape for the tops and bottoms, you can get stripping tape from auto body supply shops, but I think the tape that comes with them is fine. To fletch, I sometimes like using the BOHNING FEATHER TAPE! It is narrower than the tape that comes with the vanes...but sometimes I like being able to lay the vanes all out on the tape it makes fletching go a bit faster. Thinner and lighter or more convenience?!? Decisions, decisions!

Oh, and BTW, I am in circles with ARCHERY BRILLIANCE, and I will abide by what they say instead of some BS on AT!


----------



## Acehero (Nov 2, 2007)

There is one case where spinwings clearly outperform plastic vanes, and thats when they archer accidentally shoots their arrow through the clicker! No it shouldnt happen, but occasionally for whatever reason it does. An arrow with spin vanes of some type taped on will be more likely to still score, and score better. Therefore, they can be said to be more forgiving of the archers mistakes


----------



## Bean Burrito (Apr 20, 2011)

Acehero said:


> There is one case where spinwings clearly outperform plastic vanes, and thats when they archer accidentally shoots their arrow through the clicker! No it shouldnt happen, but occasionally for whatever reason it does. An arrow with spin vanes of some type taped on will be more likely to still score, and score better. Therefore, they can be said to be more forgiving of the archers mistakes


This is a bit debatable- I'd argue better and more experienced shooters would shoot through the clicker less often, and that newer shooters would be better off with more durable vanes so in the event of misses/shooting through the clicker they aren't refletching all the time.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> it's the same as saying that you're an expert on women because you've been married to one for twenty years.
> Anyone want to put their hand up for that?


Maybe not an expert, but I'll take the advice of a guy who's been married for 20 years over a guy who can't keep a relationship together...  Marriage by association doesn't work either... ha, ha, ha.

The only thing I'm willing to argue on behalf of the spin wing or curled mylar vane here is that they do in fact have the property of changing drag to suit the airspeed. It's simple to see that the curled mylar vanes will open up at max velocity, then gradually close down slightly as the arrow velocity decreases. This is a feature that favors the spin wing, all other things being equal. But of course, rarely are all other things equal, which is why the argument will never be "won" by anyone...

I myself shunned spin wings for years, not even shooting them at the Olympic games, because I saw no real advantage to them vs. the flex-fletch vanes on the ACE's I used, and the vanes were basically zero maintenance compared to the high maintenance spin wings. However, since the advent of Elivanes, I'm using curled mylar vanes again, and have excellent results with them. Primarily because they offer better clearance than my plastic vanes on my Nano Pros - not necessarily because they offer a significant downrange performance difference. If I can get my plastic vanes to clear the rest, they shoot groups on par with the Elivanes. It's just a lot more work to get them to clear everything. So shooting the Elivanes gives me great clearance, low maintenance, and great downrange performance. I've since shot all my personal best outdoor scores (fita and field) with Elivanes this year. 

John


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Bean Burrito said:


> This is a bit debatable- I'd argue better and more experienced shooters would shoot through the clicker less often, and that newer shooters would be better off with more durable vanes so in the event of misses/shooting through the clicker they aren't refletching all the time.


Agreed. I don't put my younger shooters on curled mylar vanes until they 1) won't be shooting through the clicker very often, and 2) won't be missing the bale very often. Otherwise, you're better off having vanes on their arrows. A shot through the clicker with my AAE vanes usually resulted in a 6 for me at 70 meters. A shot through the clicker with a spin wing could have been an 8 on one shot, or a 4 on another, depending on whether the vane tore or folded...


----------



## Bean Burrito (Apr 20, 2011)

John, you sound like you usually have clearance issues- what do you believe is the cause? Stiff arrow? A low deflection release? Long draw?


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Bean, anyone could have clearance issues, depending on their arrow setup. Plastic vanes add a lot of weight to the nock end of an arrow, causing it to react stiffer and not clear as much as if the arrow were fletched with lightweight mylar vanes. So, this is part of the issue with using plastic vanes that you have to be aware of. Part of the reason I was using the Flex-fletch vanes on my ACE's in '04 was because I was trying to tune a 400 ACE at 32.5" and 49# with a custom 125 grain tungsten point. It was at the limits of being able to tune that arrow (weak) and by adding the weight of the plastic vanes, it tuned just fine. Otherwise, I would have had to back off draw weight or go to stiffer arrows, neither of which I wanted to or could afford to do. 

Tapered shafts like the X10 and ACE traditionally have offered better clearance for finger shooters by having a softer nock end that flexes more around the riser. Since I've been using parallel shafts, both indoors and outdoors, I have to be more aware of clearance than before. But it's not a big deal if you just know what to do to take care of it, and gains are being made by parallel shaft manufacturers to provide the clearance needed by finger shooters, so this will be less of an issue in the future. But for now at least, Elivanes give me the best of all three worlds - clearance, grouping and durability.

John


----------



## Vittorio (Jul 17, 2003)

This topic has been discussed many times, but there are several unprcisions in arguments.

1) no one has really demonstrated that curled mylar vanes are better than flat rubber vanes.
Well, 100% of Olympic, World, Continental (all continents) medals have been won in recurve by curled vanes, since their invention by mr. Carella. I can call it statistical demonstration.

2) variable drag and variable side reaction in cross wind of curled mylar vanes have never been demonstrated
They have been tested practically tens of thousand of times by top level recurve archers, and at least Elivanes ( I don't know for others) is testing vanes in development in a wind tunnel to check shapes and reactions for each profile.

3) None in compound is using curled vanes.
May be in USA, but in Europe curled vanes are more and more popular in compound since the arrival of Elivanes, and several top compound shooters have used them already at World cup level too. Among them, Marcella Tonioli, nbr. 2 ranked in the WA World ranking.

I have spent thousand of hours testing vanes in the all shooting conditions with my son, my daughter and other archers of any level, and I have ever found curled vanes much superior to flat vanes in all shooting conditions at all levels of shooting.
May be it is difficult to judge if Elivanes S2 are better than Elivanes P3 up to 70 mt or up to 50 mt only, if wind is N-NE at 10 Mph but changes suddelnly to opposite direction, as this need a lot of shooting and measuring of the grouping, but surely is quite easy for everyone to see that side group size is better with curled vanes compared to flat vanes in cross wind for any well tuned bow.


----------



## TomB (Jan 28, 2003)

I am quite happy with empirical or semi empirical evidence if it appears there is not a pygmallion effect (I think these will shoot better, therefore they do.) Sometimes going back to first principles is not possible or practical. Besides good empirical evidence at least gets you going rather than not doing anything while waiting for the first principles model to be developed and come into effect. Vittorio's and John's (as well as others) observations are good enough for me.


----------



## Rick McKinney (Mar 4, 2008)

I believe that this forum is more of a suggestion, recommendation and opinion forum, not to be confused with a scientific and research forum. We all have our opinions and all should express them, however, this issue appears to come up once a year. One guy continues to state that no scientific evidence is available to prove that spin wings are superior over standard rubber vanes. Fine and good. We all should respect that. However, it would really be nice if the opposite would be true and that those who do not believe should respect those who believe that the spin wings are superior. 

I remember when Easton came out with the ACE and we found out that the arrow was extremely critical. Jim Easton figured it was due to the spin wing that appeared to maybe create too much drag, so he asked Richard Carella if he would come up with a vane to make ACE arrows work better. Thus you see the very light drag vane and the 1 and 9/16" vane. It worked very well with Jim’s approval. Now for those of you, who do not know, Jim Easton has a Mechanical Engineering degree and Richard Carella has one too. Richard was on the engineering team who worked on the original Corvette. It doesn’t mean these guys are Einstein’s but it does give them a bit of credibility.

For those who wonder why compounds do not use the spin wing vane, it had been discussed at Easton meetings years ago. They figured it was either the speed generated by the compound was too fast thus even a more very light drag design was required or maybe just something simple like clearance issues. After all, most compound archers’ arrows travel the full length of the shaft on the arrow rest. The curling of the vanes may pose a problem. However, to be fair I am not sure why compound archers do not use them. When I shoot my compound I do use rubber vanes since I get better clearance and clearance is far more important than anything else. 

Just my humble opinion with no scientific evidence to prove otherwise. However, as a dear friend used to say, if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck and walks like a duck….it’s a duck.


----------



## aaronthesun (Oct 13, 2011)

Rick McKinney said:


> For those who wonder why compounds do not use the spin wing vane, it had been discussed at Easton meetings years ago. They figured it was either the speed generated by the compound was too fast thus even a more very light drag design was required or maybe just something simple like clearance issues. After all, most compound archers’ arrows travel the full length of the shaft on the arrow rest. The curling of the vanes may pose a problem. However, to be fair I am not sure why compound archers do not use them. When I shoot my compound I do use rubber vanes since I get better clearance and clearance is far more important than anything else.
> 
> Just my humble opinion with no scientific evidence to prove otherwise. However, as a dear friend used to say, if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck and walks like a duck….it’s a duck.


Interestingly enough, some of my compound teammates in college DO use Elivanes, which are a little different from spinwings but basically the same concept, and a little tougher than spinwings and kurly vanes in my opinion. I think that beyond the factors you mention, it really just comes down to durability. Spinwing vanes generally don't take beatings as well as ordinary rubber vanes do, and if you group well with a compound, those spinwings get chewed up really quickly... 

They do weaken the arrow a little bit compared to rubber vanes and help FOC, which is nice, but I decided to stick with convention and fletch my compound arrows with the usual rubber vanes isntead.


----------



## yeeha (Nov 23, 2007)

If its works for you it works and if it does not its no good just my thoughts


----------



## Old Newbie (Apr 14, 2011)

Amen.


----------



## Old Newbie (Apr 14, 2011)

http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=1147282


----------



## Cephas (Sep 7, 2010)

And Amen.


----------



## Vittorio (Jul 17, 2003)

> Of one of the things that was discovered was that weight variation at the nock end of the arrow has more of an effect than weight variations at the front.


Is this something "discovered" just now? Really? I learned about this from older archers when I was 25, if I well remember... I can't believe that conclusions in James Parks' papers are just summarized like this... 

Sorry, but but better performance of the curled vanes is not something that has to do with the weight of the vanes but to their reaction during flight in cross wind. 3 6 grains grains of difference distributed on the wing surface don't make any significant change to FOC and arrow parameters. Pin + pin nocks are much heavier than G-Nocks or Beiter Nocks, and influence dynamic spine much more. 

Years ago K-Vanes (flat rigid plastic) have been proposed to the market. As light as Spin Wing, but flat. Clearance problems, very fragile. Then, after some yeras, K-Spin appeared. Rigid, light but curled. After some time, Jang Jong Ho from Korea shot a World record at 90 mt with them (336 if I well remember), and many in the Korean national team and in Europe started to use them. They have ben now almost abandoned, mainly because of their fragility. But for sure, everyone tested the flat ones, but no one used them until the curled version appeared. 

Compound shooters tend to prefer semi-rigid (the white color) Elivanes to the standard type used by recurve archers. Practical test have given evidence of better grouping with them. Oh... but they are few grains heavier than the standard version....


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

spangler said:


> I AM a nice guy. I'm just tired of everyone arguing for the sake of argument. I think it is detracting from the sport as a whole and drives away people who need to stay here and would like to get good information.
> 
> Andrew


Andrew, Whiz has become our local favorite "attractive nuisance" to use a law enforcement term. Like a train wreck that you can't look away from. Unfortunately for him, he drowns whatever intellect he may have in the bottomless argumentative pit so often that nobody really sees him for the authority he wants so badly to be...

He just went on my ignore list. Life is just too short to deal with people like him.

John


----------



## azl (Mar 4, 2012)

*Adding attractive nuisances to your ignore list*



limbwalker said:


> He just went on my ignore list. Life is just too short to deal with people like him.
> 
> John


To add whiz-Oz to your ignore list, click on his name and then select *View* *Profile* from the popup window. On the left side of the profile page, click *Add to Ignore List.*








Click *Yes* to confirm your selection.


----------



## Vittorio (Jul 17, 2003)

whiz-Oz said:


> .........
> (Now it has been shown that arrows can travel with their axis misaligned from their flight direction for up to eighty metres, it has shown walk back tuning to be unreliable) ...


I don't see any correlation between the cause and the effect.
In a well tuned bow arrow must get to flight direction as soon as possible, and this depends from:
1) quality of the release
2) quality of arrow/bow matching and tuning
3) quality of the tuning
4) construction of the arrow

Walk back does not work at short distances ( also this is well know since ages) because arrow :
1) will never get straight in few meters, let say less than 5 mt average
2) difference in height and side placement of two carbon bare shafts at 5 mt difference at less than 20 mt is not significant if bow is not well tuned and bare shafts are not perfectly pre-selected 
So, walk back tuning can't be used for raw tuning since the beginning, as it puts you immediately in a difficult to solve multi solution loop, but is good specifically for fine center shot tuning and has to be done from 35 mt down to 15 mt, not less. Then, it works perfectly.

If you want to tune for 10 mt or less, then you have to use the old "nock position" system in conjunction with vertical and horizontal lines system. I do that sort of tuning for Field archery (or 3D for BB) only, were a lot of points are related to short distance shots. But then you can't use same tuning to shoot 70 mt properly... But this is another story. 

Real conclusion from note should not be related to walk back tuning, but to paper tuning. Paper tuning at less than 10 mt is a waste of time, as the arrow will be very casually straight, and after 10 mt will be useless, as the arrow will be in any case rotating around its line of flight .


----------



## Scott.Barrett (Oct 26, 2008)

azl said:


> To add whiz-Oz to your ignore list, click on his name and then select *View* *Profile* from the popup window. On the left side of the profile page, click *Add to Ignore List.*
> 
> View attachment 1409683
> 
> Click *Yes* to confirm your selection.



I had no idea that you could do this!!!! Awesome!!!!!


----------



## Rick McKinney (Mar 4, 2008)

azl said:


> To add whiz-Oz to your ignore list, click on his name and then select *View* *Profile* from the popup window. On the left side of the profile page, click *Add to Ignore List.*
> 
> View attachment 1409683
> 
> Click *Yes* to confirm your selection.


A very satisfying click for sure.


----------



## Mulcade (Aug 31, 2007)

azl said:


> To add whiz-Oz to your ignore list, click on his name and then select *View* *Profile* from the popup window. On the left side of the profile page, click *Add to Ignore List.*
> 
> View attachment 1409683
> 
> Click *Yes* to confirm your selection.


I find it rather amusing that Wiz's tag line is "Truth is often ignored" and we are sharing the wisdom on how to ignore him.

Thanks, azl. I think that deserves a beer!! :darkbeer:


----------



## whiz-Oz (Jul 19, 2007)

That's okay chaps. 
My self esteem has never relied on people who I don't know, ignoring me.


----------

